Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by independent

  1. I agree, but I reiterate there are some understandable reasons why canon would not. For one, they might want to protect the higher models (such as the 1DXIII and possibly the R5). They did this in the Canon C200 to distinguish it from more professional, broadcast-ready C300II. 

    Second, this could be a physical limitation. The EOS R is a very small body. The added processing for 10-bit 422 might exceed those  limits. I’m not an engineer, but the DPAF that’s unavailable in the higher frame rates of the 1DXII implies there is an added burden of that feature. Add in-body stabilization? It might just be too much.

    I’d take internal full frame raw as a compromise with precedent.



  2. Atomos Ninja star. If you need 4k, then no. 

    Another reason why the EOS R's HDMI out was so goofy; the Ninja V is almost as big as the camera itself. So you need to get a cage to rig it up, SSDs w/ caddies, a gimbal and tripod because the rolling shutter was so bad, and it's more trouble than it's worth. 


  3. The lower specced R6 model has great potential to be a goldilocks indie filmmaker's camera.

    But some key features would require the right kind of compromises.

    20 MP full frame sensor = Raw 12-bit 5.5K @ up to 30

    Internal recording is key. Nobody wants the burden of rigging an extra Atomos monitor. The flip touchscreen is functional and convenient. The 1DXIII showed Canon's willingness to finally put internal recording in a DSLR. They can do it in mirrorless with some adjustments:

    The camera should be bigger to accommodate for heat dissipation and IBIS. The original R is a small camera. No need to cut important features to prioritize a tiny body for filmmakers, especially when the added features preclude the necessity of a rig.

    10-bit 422 processing is demanding, which is going to be an issue with a full frame stabilized sensor. Offer it via HDMI. Or Canon can pull a C200 move and omit it for higher models.

    Take out 10-bit processing out of the equation. 4K60 can stay 8-bit. Make the camera bigger.

    Offer the core features for the increasing number of independent content creators: full frame, internal raw, IBIS, DPAF, and reasonable rolling shutter. 


  4. At the same camera position and the same framing, of course the 6K will have more detail than the 4K. That's the obvious advantage of having more pixels. 

    If you have the 4K and want more detail in your subject, get a tighter shot! 

    On the other hand, the 4K w/ speedbooster has remarkable advantages (until the aforementioned 6K adapter becomes viable). The 1.22x crop offers a field of view that exceeds nearly every raw camera except the top end large format Arris and Reds (and canon c700). That offers much more flexibility, and in some cases the wider FOV is very handy in tight interiors such as cars and bathrooms. 

    And the extra stop can be critical. Especially while maintaining the deeper depth of field, thanks to the smaller image sensor. That offers a very good combination; it can help get shots in challenging situations, i.e., keeping focus in low light. 

    Also, the ability to take sips of bootleg CinemaDNG in the 4K...mmm.

  5. So far this looks like more of a wireless focus system, without need for a external focus unit. Kudos! 

    However, for continuous autofocus, I seemed to have missed it. This looks like a straightforward rack focus between two set points. 

    If you’ve in fact developed continuous autofocus, is it happening within the center frame or is tracking a particular focus point (presumably through touchscreen)?

    Great work either way.


  6. 40 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

    It’s not out yet, but the Peak design travel Tripod looks very nice if you are going to be lugging it around.

    Very slim profile and some nifty features. 

    Looks great for photographers. I like the leveling ball-head, but I wonder how stable it would be with a fluid head and camera setup. I had a similar combination with the gitzo cf traveler and arca Swiss P0 ball head, but I didn't feel confident putting a fluid head on top of all that. But weights on hook and legs should help. 

    1 hour ago, mercer said:

    Do you have any experience with the Miller Solo monopod? And does carbon fiber really absorb vibrations a lot more than aluminum?

    With my Benro monopod, I was using it handheld by putting the base into a tape measure pouch I have clipped onto my belt... it actually works great and maybe I shouldn’t second guess myself. 

    But I may upgrade my monopod and attach a “decent” head to it. Right now, I have a Manfrotto RC tilt head attached. It actually works fairly well, but if I want to use the monopod more traditionally, it may help to have a panning head attached.

    Right now, I’m curious about the aforementioned Miller Solo and the cheap alternative is the Benro 38C.

    No experience w/ the Millers, but I used Sachtler aluminum tripods before. They were OK, but a little fiddly with a bit of play due to the mediocre locking mechanisms for the legs. Ronford Baker makes rock solid alum tripods, but they are heavy. CF itself is much more rigid for the size/weight. Gitzo has very reliable locks, but they're not fast (like sachtler flow tech) and they're expensive. I just carry my Gitzo as a monopod though, it's that light.

  7. A decade ago when I shot on RED, Mark Toia extensively (exclusively?) shot on a monopod. Those Red Epic setups were fairly hefty, yet he got great results. He shot outdoors in exotic locations with rough terrain, and I think he was a major proponent of the monopod's suitability. I myself used a Monostat monopod with a manfrotto 701 head. I upgraded to the Gizto CF traveler tripod because it was nearly as light (2 pounds?) and maneuverable but obviously much more stable and flexible in use, and I've used that tripod more than any one camera, lens, etc. 

  8. True IMAX is the only way to see it. Lincoln center here in NY. 

    Of course the cinematography was superb. Deakins did a great job of keeping the overall look consistent with the original while introducing some interesting stuff as he always does. Not too much groundbreaking stuff, but Deakins is the utmost pro and storyteller - he does whatever fits the story. 

    Except he was let down. The story had some promising plots and subplots, but it seems as if they condensed a trilogy into one. Harrison Ford showing up at the third act? That was a mistake, undermining K/Joe's character arc by replacing it with the daughter subplot. Too fast, too cheap. The Sean Young resurrection was fast and cheap.  In the end, it felt like a mashup of themes from the original, Star Wars, Alien Covenant, etc., all on a Christopher Nolan soundtrack. 

    It never broke through. Never had that moment. I doubt it becomes a masterpiece - they didn't break new ground nor effectively till old ones. They should have just focused on one major plot, K/Joe's character study, and settle for beautiful and elegiac, like Assassination of Jesse James. 

    So no, not transcendent. In the end, a DP can be better than the story, but it won't be enough.

    This movie was already done, but better, in Metropolis, the 2001 animated film. Deakins would have murdered that remake. 


  9. 9 hours ago, Shirozina said:

    Keep your delusions in check - 'full frame' is just another format and not a new standard.

    Again, reading comprehension: I said “Will be.” I don’t need to repeat all the reasons why I think it will; just read these posts a couple times before responding.

    Also, how is it that you have a medium format camera? Damn, what a waste. 

  10. 4 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

    Lol! You really think s35 was a standard created by Red? It was a standard film size for decades before that! DECADES.

    And ask your focus puller whether micro four thirds is easier to pull focus on than full frame. Go ahead, I'll wait.

    Keep your panties on. The question was video not film. Reading comprehension is tough, I know. Third grade was tough, but I made it.

    I don’t ask my focus puller shit. We both know how to work within technical constraints. The issue in question is whether full frame digital will be a standard. I’m saying yes. It doesn’t even matter if I get to be right...because it’s happening. The argument is over. Also nobody cares about m43. If you work with it, great. But no, it’s not a standard right now. Get over it. 

  11. Shallow DOF doesn’t have any drawbacks in of itself. It depends on the intended effect and the technical contingencies. 

    Also, you might find your aperture control affects your depth of field more than sensor size. Try it.

    And, yes, historically, video camera sensors have been increasing in size. Right now it’s at super 35mm, which wasn’t a standard a decade ago (Red One came out 10 years ago).

    Alexa 65 and Red 8k are already full frame. It’s definitely going to happen in less than 10 years, and on the horizon are medium format sensors.

  • Create New...