cameraeye

But other videos from other cameras on YouTube don’t look thin. I agree YouTube degrades videos but, it doesn’t take away from the overall look of a video in my experience.

23 minutes ago, scotchtape said:

On the other hand

So by hand you mean person.

I agree to an extent that IQ is paramount. However, how something gets that IQ is also important.

I watched Philip Blooms sequel film, and I came to the exact same conclusion- it looks thin. Same as the sII. At the right fingers any footage can be fixed and improved, I'm just not convinced Sony have made the leap into 'doesn't need to be touched and it looks right' territory.

Now... I am interested. I honestly think when companies try to balance two products in one i.e. still and video it's easier to trip up and make a bad design decision. If this is real it's spot on for my use case. I'll just use my 5Diii for stills and share glass between them.

19 hours ago, kye said:

I understood you were referring to the editing workspace, and so was I as well.  The modern NLE has many conventions - if someone completely new to video came in and designed their own it would look completely different.  Even things like calling folders "bins" because of the physical objects used to store and manage strips of celluloid is part of those conventions.  And inn the context of things being easy to understand and useful, it's great that they do all look similar.

Funnily enough FCPX doesn’t use the term ‘bins’ since its redesign. And the convention changes (other than missing features) were what caused the uproar with its initial release. I agree there are conventions in everything especially software, but Premiere for example is much more steeped in old conventions vs FCPX (think magnetic timeline), and Resolve is somewhere in between in my experience.

I am also glad we have (good) conventions.

I thought it was a bit strange the Tilta being ready so fast- with promo material too. Canon knew 100%. What they didn't know was people would not accept it. It's hilarious. The internet actually helped this time!

51 minutes ago, kye said:

Imagine if every screen in a program had the menu options somewhere different instead of them staying in the same place, or every dialog box had the buttons in a different location or different order rather than OK/Cancel.  Or someone abandoned the File - Edit - View - .... - Window - Help style menu structure and went with their own one.  I remember custom software like that, and every time you clicked something you had to stare at it like you were trying to understand a treasure map!

This is my pet-peeve with the occasional software, especially when it uses its own file browser and doesn't hook into the Mac OS one. With Resolve I was more referring to the look and feel of the editing workspace.

I heard somewhere that (I think) the CEO of BM is a big fan of FCPX and that's why there are similarities between it and Resolve. I'm glad there's someone in the film world considering both sides of the filmmaking process. Clearly Canon didn't even test-edit even the 4K on the R5 given the reports of how impossible it is to edit without transcoding.

1 minute ago, Simon Young said:

They put the heat sink on the IBIS mech.

I was wondering yesterday if this was a technical possibility.

4 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I really do wish they would sort out an internal ND filter one day though.

This was one of the things I WAS most excited about with the R5 and using ef glass and their adapter. Native AF with variable ND for all my lenses.

(edit: don't mean to go off topic)

I'm impressed by all the small improvements that add up to what seem to be a very competent camera. Often when something is boring, it's because it's good. The excitement comes from the project you're working on. If Sony's colour science has improved as much as people say, recording to a ProRes Raw recorder in the future would be nice. I just don't think I could jump back to Sony after the absolute nightmare that was their colour- in my own humble experience.

Perhaps a car analogy along the lines of this is pertinent: If you put a 16 cylinder engine in a mini- be grateful you can go 300 MPH but crash and burn? But no-one else is doing it so its innovation?! It's ok because if you only press the accelerator 10% you won't crash. Theres really no point. You either have a bigger car for the engine or you put a smaller engine in the car. Or perhaps technology hasn't got to a point yet where the heat generation is low enough to design it the way Canon have- either way they knew what they were doing.

Yeah, I never give too much credence to promotional material anyway. I just think Canon decided to follow Sony's lead rather than Nikon's because that's where the market was heading. But they didn't really change their stripes.

4 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

The issue is that the marketed, heavily, the video capabilities. IF they had just marketed as the best professional photo mirrorless camera from Canon with class leading AF then I don’t think there would have been much of feeling of disgust with what they did. You don’t have to buy the camera, of course! But many people were excited with what they marketed to us and then...this.

Yeah, I wouldn't mind so much if the 8K and 120 4K weren't front and centre in their advertisements. The annoying thing is, given the 8K Raw, if the camera had no overheating it had the potential for very good longevity as an investment and tool.

At this stage it's glaringly obvious Canon allowed this to protect their C line. It's just their cripple hammer in disguise. I think they tried to take a page from Sony to appease the ones asking for better specs. This camera would be absolutely amazing if not for this issue.

14 hours ago, Logan said:

lol, this clown is going through my post history and downvoting everything. What a cesspool.

Yeah someone did that to me too. It’s pathetic. I didn’t know 3 year olds were allowed to create accounts on here.

Ouch, Resolve leans heavily on graphics as well so can't blame it like Premiere.

10 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

My god the playback performance of 5.5K Canon RAW in Resolve is shoddy. Can barely get above 5fps.

What computer?

From looking at the cameras (at a distance online- I have none of them), it seems like Canon have at least done a good job separating the R5, 1DXIII and your pick of one of their cinema cameras. You have good A, B and C cameras. Cinema camera for big shoots- when full cinema usability and quality are needed, the 1DXIII for quality but slightly more agility, and the R5 for the lightest use like smaller gimbals and more accessible screen etc.

I'm glad there is a spiritual successor to the 1DC and that in the future I won't have to wait for Magic Lantern because when you need it, RAW is absolutely incredible, especially for VFX work.

@Trek of Joy it's worth it. There's also something about it that reminds me of shooting still photos on celluloid. The high quality and fact that when you unpack each clip its just thousands of raw images. Grading with it is a dream coming from a stills background. Makes me only ever want a RAW cinema camera in the future.

On 1/10/2020 at 5:24 PM, mercer said:

I probably need to be happy with what I have, put my head down and get some work done.

I feel the same. So many capable cameras out now and then the 1Dx III on the horizon but 1080 RAW on the 5d III is so good that I just want more cinema lenses and to make more films.

I'm hoping that because of the $6000 price range they'll not cripple it on the video side. I read somewhere on here I think from Andrew that the 1Dx II was considered the 1Dc successor, so if thats true maybe we can expect the III to be the baby cine camera with more video features than the 5D series.

...but it is a first impression. And it is quite comprehensive...

Anyway, I'm excited by this camera.

Great news. Can anyone comment, for a non-user of the pocket 4K, how BRAW stacks up against ML raw in the grade? Apologies if google would give me the answer.

I really don't understand why apple dropped Aperture. It's still faster than the latest Lightroom and hasn't been updated for years. They have music, film but no pro photo software.

@pbetancourt Agree about FCPX. I decided to go back to Premiere for a project (for the dynamic link with AE) and it's like using a relic. They have the features but they're wrapped in a horrible user experience.