Eduardo Portas

Thanks.

Hey! Care to comment about the rolling shutter issues on these cameras? There are very little actual tests online comparing the 1DC to other Canon cameras in that regard. Thanks.

No, just no. Any filmmaker here will understand that actually shooting a decent piece gives actual sensible and intelectual pleasure. That is of course linked to the actual ergonomics of the video camera/DSLR. Phones give you NONE of this real pleasure. In fact, I would call it a pain. They are great for "guerrilla-style" video productions, but little else (and family pics, of course).

Yes. I believe it's the combination of a par focal lens and a dedicated zooming mechanism. Panny has some PZ lenses that you can mount of their mirrorless cameras for a similar effect. I'm sure other forum members can give us a better reason, though.

Well, that's basically the advantage of the lens and focusing system on traditional video cams. Possibly the only reason, as well as good IS, that lots of us still use them in the field. No finicky DSLR or mirrorless AF systems to worry about :]

Seems like that, E :] Thank you, I'll check it out. Guess we'll have to wait until further, more objetive tests come out, B.

I'll take noticeable improvements in reduction of RS and jello any day over improvements in resolution and detail. No prob though, I'm a patient man.

It has already been provided in this thread, Fritz. Check out the DigirectTV video. I'm referring to that. Also, the Panasonic ambassador video of Griffith Hammond shows significant skew when panning. Hey E. I lived the video transition from tape then to digital tape and then to digital cards, so I became accustomed to having very little RS and jello effect in my work. And yes, this was back in the CCD era. In the last decade resolution has improved exponentially at the expense of RS and jello. Guess it's and either/or proposition. Unless I leave the camera static on a tripod, skew and jello affect every kind of shooting I do. It's not aesthetic and I detest it. But deep down I'm an optimist. I'll just have to wait a bit more until a camera maker solves that problem and gives us both a moderate price. Cheers from Latin America

Would be nice. We've reached a plateau in resolution, very hard to tell the difference between sensors. But rolling shutter and jello effect is still ugly.

That jello effect is terrible. For me, it's a deal breaker.

Thanks, checked it out. Sadly RS is still quite notorious. Guess I'll keep browsing until good yet old-ass CCD videocams drop a bit more in price. Ouch, I just saw them. I expected a lot less jello effect and RS, honestly. Guess I'll keep searching.

Has any media outlet posted a video sample that shows rolling is in fact reduced? We saw a train moving for a second during the official product video, but little else. For me, this is the absolute most important aspect of the new camera at this price range. Otherwise, I'm going back to CCDs ;] Thanks.

I agree with what was said above. Marketing departments are catering more and more to what is called the "zealot group". That's the hard-core evangelist kind of consumer. The one that will convince their friends about his awesome new toy. They are absolutely vital to companies now a day, the 24-hour connected era. The key here is that they are consumers, not paid or pampered professionals. Maybe the guys at Canon did not receive the memo with these new practices. The video seems to cater to no one in particular. The absolute worst kind of public you can wish for today.

No young filmmaker is going to spend 4,600 dollars on a 35mm T1.5 Canon Cinema lens, as I noted above. At least they had the decency to leave a shot in the video showing the lens and the whole rig used in the video, which when summed costs far, FAR, more than the 80D with a kit lens. If Canon places clear and readable texts of the lenses used on the videos used to promote other cameras, why did they not do it here? Seems a bit too deceptive, no?

For the sake of transparency, it would be nice to note the lenses the director used to shoot the video. This is common practice I have seen on other Canon videos. This video has a Canon logo on it, so there. And if Canon does not do this, it should be clear in the copy published on DPReview. It would be even nicer if you noted that the director used a huge and expensive Canon cinema lens for the majority of the shots: a 35mm T1.5 that costs 4,600 dollars!!!!

I agree, it's getting harder for review sites to distance themselves from branded content. The reality is practically no one clics on the banner ads and companies are trying different ways to market their products. However, the onus has fallen on news sites (and serious bloggers) to dance around the big money or be regarded as too commercially attached to that brand and its interests. It's a delicate ballet because the stakes are very high. I personally hate these "Sponsored" articles and videos appearing alongside true journalistic work. It degrades all the years the site invested in building trust with its readers. Arguably, that has to change. Right now it's a win for brands only.

I noticed that one of the writers on DPReview did something similar a few months ago. Canon also sponsored that video and was, not strangely enough, about the 80D. It features some kayak building. https://***URL removed***/videos/0287044739/canon-eos-80d-field-test-barney-builds-a-boat At least this time the "Sponsored" tag was clearly visible.

I try to shoot old style to keep a certain look through the whole product. That is, full Manual control with 180º shutter at 24fps. Aperture is cemented at F8. And yes, I really like deep DOF. For me, only ISO is variable. I don't mind a grainy shot. But if I'm indoors, I'll ad some light myself or move my subject to available light. I've found that keeping variables fixed, save for ISO, saves a lot of time in the field. (Setting with APS-C sized cameras. Could change with other sensors)

Really good points all around. However, there's one aspect that everyone seems to have forgotten: ergonomics and haptics. I absolutely love to take pictures through the visor with my Canon gear. It just feels right. That same feeling is shared with all the Canon gear I've owned: T4i, 6D and now the 7D mark II. I can't say the same about my iPhone. I hate taping on the screen, placing it away from my eyes to focus, etc, juts to snap a pic. The final quality of the pic may be superior on the iPhone, but the experience just ain't there. Now I teach various university courses to people in their early 20. The subjects I teach are media studies, journalism and media theory. These kids can not live without their phone. Their level of media consumption with their phone is insane, round the clock, 24/7. But the same can not be said of their level of media production. The consume a lot, but they do not produce in the same quantity. When I place them in front of any kind of camera, video camera or NLE most of the are completely dumbfounded. Our profesional tools are not relevant to the vast majority of them and they don't seem in the least interested. Also, when pressed, they seem to crack under technical pressure. I can squeeze good results from them, but they naturally gravitate towards their phones again. So yes, the original post hit the nail on the head: cameras will become more expensive and feature rich, but the market is not massive. Dedicated cameras and video cameras will be for purists only and the masses with get another iPhone and be content with it.

Trump has already affected Mexico's economy. Badly. Investors are lost about his intentions to protect American manufacturers. Right now, no one really knows if he will keep his campaign premisses or not. That speculation has lead to huge dollar/peso shifts since the campaign started and now continues after Trump has already won. Can you imagine when he assumes office?

Cheers, I hear you can get pretty good results out of the diminutive EOS-M10. At least that's what my wedding-filming buddies use day-in-day-out and are still in bussinnes ;]

Finally had the time to post some results. Here are some before and after shots using Andrew's C-Log. This was shot incorrectly, though. I used very high ISOs to brighten the image. Instead, in his included guide Andrew recommends using a very low ISO and exposing for the highlights. Afterwards, ideally, you can bring up the shadows in post. Gear used: 7D Mark II, 17-50 F2.8 at F8, 30 fps and ISOs in the 8000 range (lots of mosquito noise when seen at fullscreen size) In post I just used a bit of Film Convert and bumped up the saturation. Notice the shadows below the tree trunks. Those would never be visible with Canon's standard profiles. So overall very happy with the results, taking into account this is a bit of a torture test for an 8-bit codec.

If you intend to buy you should do it now. Canon and other foreign companies will have to adjust their prices upwards in the UK to compensate for the lower value of the pound vs. the US dollar. Having said that, if you really want to help them, you should buy products that are MANUFACTURED in the UK or spend some time as a tourist in the UK. Otherwise, your help is minimal.

I don't see it, even though it may be attractive from a financial point of view. You are forgetting something really important in photography: the pleasure of taking a picture. This has been true for 100 years. There is a real, tactile, physical pleasure in the act. Same goes for the pencil, I suppose: it's older than dirt, apparently useless, but people still use them because they are simple, practical, and give us joy when writing with our own hand.

The masses will need buying Canon Rebels and 70D-80Ds because the are reliable and ubiquitous. If used correctly, they can produce good images. And, most importantly, they don't requiere excessive fiddling to capture what is needed because their ergonomics are the best in the business. Nice editorial piece. I too believe Canon is overcharging their most loyal customers. Hope the guys over at DPreview give it a good read (DPreview is owned by Amazon).