sqm

There is an option for the evf but not for the lcd 

added  Photos:

Hey guys, 

I just bought an a7iii and noticed that if you compare the lcd to the evf there is a shit to magenta in the highlights.

The raw files looking fine, same look on evf and computer. 

I went to a Sony store in Berlin and experienced the same thing on on the exhibited camera.

Did nobody noticed it ? I found just two post on that topic on dpreview.

Cheers

Bought a  c100 mark ii a few weeks ago for 2100€, had kind of the same question here.

Its a breeze to use, super fast, crazy small files but editable enough for me just nail the exposure and thats not hard with the ND´s and awesome Iso performance.

Got the Tamron 24-70 2.8 on it, stabalizes pretty good, everything I need for now.

With a 128gb card you can shoot a whole day and that redundant. I think the camera said around 450 minutes or so, its crazy.

44 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Our new member @Branko Mitic has a blog post on his site comparing the C100 with the 1DXii that has some really useful insights.

https://brankomitic.com/canon-c100-vs-1d-x-mark-ii-video-use/

Nice read, thx

16 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

And you are not going to be able to put the original C100 on a Gimbal, not one we can afford. With the GH5 you don't even need a Gimbal a lot of times.

Body without accessories is around 200g more then the 5d Mark iii (1125g), the limit is 3,6 kg so you have plenty of room.

10 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Another thread full of white noise and unrelated information. I hope the OP did find something useful among those.

I´m making my way through it ?

Wednesday I have a client meeting, if it going well it will be kind of instantly paid of. I know spec wise there are many other better options, but like with the 5d iii its joy tu use und I love the pictures coming out of it sooc.

Thanks for all your opinions

10 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Depends entirely on the kind of work you do. If it is fast paced, quick turn around, limited/no post, then a C100 can be a good choice. 

However the C100mk2 sells at a hefty premium over the C100mk1, and what do you really gain? Not much, most notably 1080 60fps. If you don't  need that, then go for a C100mk1 DPAF instead (or even an older C100 without DPAF if you don't need and won't to get a real bargain bargain).

And is worthwhile checking the "superior" Sony PMW-F3 and Sony FS700 which sell for even cheaper prices. 

And depending on your line of work you do, is worthwhile keeping an eye out for a C300mk1 or C500, which sell for a massive discount over their original prices. 

Sadly 50/60p is a must have for me. Never shot with the F3 but with the fs700 but was not that happy with the image,  a big thing is that I have to put so much more work in grading with the Sonys, while Canon just looks awesome right out of the box.

Its funny were all bashing Canon for the lack of features but at the end I buy them anyway. 

3 Years ago I was in for a ne FF stills camera, bought a Nikon D750 liked it but then tried the old 5d iii and was totally sold.

Even if the Nikon is the better camera  on so many levels, its just the easy of use und the colors out of the box that are worth it.

5 hours ago, jhnkng said:

I shoot Fuji for stills so I have an X-T2 which goes on the gimbal, but a GH5s is certainly an excellent option that I would consider as a gimbal cam if I needed it.

I also bought an X-T2 a few months ago as a small hybrid for privat and travel stuff. I also shoot weddings here and then (stills) and use the X-T2 as a second cam to my 5D iii just on a modded Acros Profile. Never liked black and white that much but with that camera its mind blowing, its making shooting fun again.

27 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:

I owned the 5d iii and the c 100 back then and I shot 90% 5d iii raw, the 5d iii image just blows everything away

5d Raw is crazy no question, but the workflow is a pain and on paid jobs I´m to scared something will fuck up (drop frames and so on) but I totally can see myself using it for small shorts.

Can someone maybe send me a 50/60p clog file to play around with ? Didn't saw any interesting downloadable files on google.

1 hour ago, DaveAltizer said:

I’d say no to the c100 mkii today. It’s too big. Under performer. Much better options. Gh5s comes to mind. 

GH5/S is not an option for me, i dont like the image that much, just saw a few "filmic" videos that i really liked. In my eyes its to "Video".

Bigger (not a red one ? ) is a Plus for me, clients are blindet by big cameras.

29 minutes ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

The GH5s with a speedbooster and XLR-1 gives you 90% of the functionality of the C100ii plus the added benefits of smaller size, 4k, slo-mo, HLG, dual native ISO, and more. If AF is a dealmaker/breaker, then you already know your answer.

leave the fact that i dont like the Gh5, this package would be almost double the price. But thanks for your reply

1 hour ago, JordanWright said:

I think the C100 Mark 2 would be a great camera for low-middle end corporate work where image quality isn't as important as ergonomics. Its a great all in one solution that just works. Great battery life, XLR, DPAF, internal ND. Although, I do agree that for the money, the image isn't the best avaliable 

 

Thats the work i do, if i do something bigger i will rent a RED.

Plan for this Camera would be, image films, music videos and shortfilms... maybe a doc someday.

Sorry i should gave you guys the infos earlier

Hey Guys, 

I got an offer, 2000€ for the C100 Mark ii.

You guys think its still relevant today?

I know the Pocket is right around the corner but damn, there is something about the c series.

Crazy battery life, build in ND+ XLR, ergonomics, AF and just the ease of use.

What do you think ?

Did you guys so this one ? Love the colors, but 120p looking pretty soft and what happened to her hat starting at 01.00min.

2 hours ago, sqm said:

Renting for sure.

Every project needs other equipment the only thing that I´m renting almost every time ist the Panther u-bangi. 

I own a 5d Mark iii that is fine for photos and small video like event stuff, but renting is pretty cheap here in Berlin, I don't know about the US Tho.

You pay like 3 € for a 1kw Arri tungsten a day... c100 + 15kw light and a slider for around 200 a day, so a now brainer to rent it.

Downside: you have to check the equipment every time and it takes me around a day to pick it, check it and bring it back.

should have read your post more carefully haha. I don't find a way to delete that post.

I´m thinking about buying the a7iii

I know, nobody tested the 7iii yet but it should be identical to the 7riii on video quality right?

I had the original a7s back in the days, it was great for video but not that much on the stills side. 

How you guys think the a7riii stacks up to the old original great 1080p?

Looks like the camera ticking a lot of boxes for me as a hybrid cam.

Cheers

Renting for sure.

Every project needs other equipment the only thing that I´m renting almost every time ist the Panther u-bangi. 

I own a 5d Mark iii that is fine for photos and small video like event stuff, but renting is pretty cheap here in Berlin, I don't know about the US Tho.

You pay like 3 € for a 1kw Arri tungsten a day... c100 + 15kw light and a slider for around 200 a day, so a now brainer to rent it.

Downside: you have to check the equipment every time and it takes me around a day to pick it, check it and bring it back.

This camera would tick a lot of boxes for me.

Coming from the 5d mark iii 70%stills 30%video this looks superb.

Is here any photographer that uses L lenses with the Metabones on a Sony? Would you say its reliable enough for professional work?

Don´t want to sell my L lenses

5 minutes ago, mercer said:

That looks pretty good. I was trying to keep a little detail in the actor’s jacket, but I like what you did there. 

That’s really nice too. Thanks. You guys are giving me some good reference ideas. Btw, the site won’t show tiffs, only jpegs.

thank you for the jpeg info

S-curve, slightly desaturated and secondary skin tone correction towards orange.

eoshdii.tif

Paid upgrade or not, lets see it as a step in to the right direction.

45 minutes ago, JazzBox said:

I tried on my G7 with my VA, and after the bad experience I tried with the same units from a colleague, also changing HDMI cable.
When recorded on the VA the G7 had a strong noise pattern. Not on the Atomos. But I cannot afford the Atomos, so I'm recording on SD and I'm very happy with the G7 (the only drawback is that you cannot use HDMI for monitoring, you can only record, while with GH4 you can do it). 

Anyway I'm a big fan of Lumix quality, even if I love the BlackMagic ProRes from Micro Cinema Camera, which I sold for the unpractical (for me) workflow. 

For the way I work, GH4 (which I sold in order to buy the GH5), G7 etc... are the best way and I love them.

I think that shooting with @andy lee settings you have the freedom to do pretty much what you want in post.

I tried to match G7 files with BlackMagic Micro (straight from the card) files in 5 minutes
. 
I just can imagine what you can do with the new GH5 and a solid V-Log!

p.s.: Andy, what about GH5's 24p ProRes files playback/preview without transcoding? I tried Luke Neumann's files and I cannot played them in preview. Thank you!

 

 

Nice test, i guess A is the BM

Love the bmmcc, shoot with it most of the time, but the handling sucks!

Thats why i have an eye on the gh5.

7 minutes ago, JazzBox said:

I sold my 5inch Video Assist after ecording both GH4 and G7 on it.
The files from GH4 were not really better then internal, the G7's were a lot worst. I tried on a second unity, same results. Not the same thing on an Atomos... so I sold it... (just my personal experience, nothing scientific).  

I´m not looking for the better quality, i just love prores and how smooth it is to edit and i don´t want to add a render step to my post.

Bad to hear that it is worse with the G7, anyone also noticed something like this?

Thank you for your info JazzBox

7 minutes ago, Chrad said:

I would just record 10 bit 1080p60 through the HDMI, because this time around it looks like quality will be exactly the same. The videodslr.pl tests show the exact same rolling shutter for UHD and HD, which suggests the 1080p image is simply an in camera downscale. The resolution to my eyes looks identical in 1080p. 

Thank you, nice info

Hey Guys,

The gh4 had an option to send downscaled 4k to HD through HDMI, im curious if its possible with gh5 from 4k 60p to HD.

I´d like to record Prores on the 5 inch VideoAssist.

40 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

I don't know if it is the same thing, but a while back I found out a similar difference between Premiere, Resolve and FCPX:

 

I dont know how exposure, gain and curves relate but i think i discovered the same thing as you.

Booth of them handle color while exposure changes different.

Thank you

Hey Guys,

every footage i try to correct seems to have something like a green cast on it. 

Every time i have to pull down the green curve in the midtones.

Is it just me or did someone else discovered this?

Today i tried a basic color correction on Phillip Neumanns GH5 Footage in Both DaVinci and Premiere.

Same workflow for both, just simple s-curve and saturation adjustments.

I'm in the same situation, today i can buy a mark iii that i will use 90% for photos but my question is, with ML is there a way to have h.264 60p in 1080p? No need for raw.