I can appreciate the tenor of the article seeing as I benefited from insane depreciation when I got a Sony F35, but I just can't help to comment on a few things I noticed while reading:
Quote
The 4096 x 1080 (which was added in a firmware update) on the other hand is a 1:1 crop – a cinematic wide aspect ratio, which should yield the better image and would allow for pan-and-scan 1920 x 1080 in post. Who needs a dolly?!
Is the bit about pan+scan and not needing a dolly part of the overall satire? If so that's... hilarious.
Quote
Remember the Sony F35? This with its uncompressed 2K RGB recording from a lovely CCD sensor before the wonky colour of CMOS took over, was a cinematic powerhouse. Pink Floyd to 2016’s bunch of bearded Mumford & Sons wannabes.
The F35 will only output 1920x1080, not 2k. I absolutely prefer the CCD for various reasons but clearly more expensive CMOS chips with the right backend can produce strikingly accurate and pleasing colors as well.
Quote
To be honest I was never blown away by the C300’s internal recording in 1080p, but it’s nice to have the sheep in there when I’m doing something incredibly boring.
For 50Mbps, the internal MXFs out of the C300 are astonishingly competent and devoid of most artifacts that plague other higher bitrate systems- even those that shoot "RAW" (ahem... blackmagic....). I remember when I first got my C300- this was coming off shooting on a 7D for years- I was blown away. A 4K cmos churning out gorgeously crisp 1080 rgb images. Honestly too crisp, looking back. A few soft fx filters help when needed.
Quote
They [Canon Log] are far superior looking to Sony’s anaemic standard Rec.709 profile, Cine profiles or S-LOG.
How so? Log is log. The gammas may differ but what metrics or evaluations lead you to believe canon log is better than s-log? Smells of nonsense.
Quote
And that, my friends, is democracy manifest.
Eh, perhaps economic democracy but we can also thank our audiences for continuing to not give a shit about pretty pictures. Let's all bow to CONTENT, the authoritarian king of the universe.
4K RAW 120fps for £3k?! Say hello to the second-hand Canon C500
In: Cameras
Posted
I can appreciate the tenor of the article seeing as I benefited from insane depreciation when I got a Sony F35, but I just can't help to comment on a few things I noticed while reading:
Is the bit about pan+scan and not needing a dolly part of the overall satire? If so that's... hilarious.
The F35 will only output 1920x1080, not 2k. I absolutely prefer the CCD for various reasons but clearly more expensive CMOS chips with the right backend can produce strikingly accurate and pleasing colors as well.
For 50Mbps, the internal MXFs out of the C300 are astonishingly competent and devoid of most artifacts that plague other higher bitrate systems- even those that shoot "RAW" (ahem... blackmagic....). I remember when I first got my C300- this was coming off shooting on a 7D for years- I was blown away. A 4K cmos churning out gorgeously crisp 1080 rgb images. Honestly too crisp, looking back. A few soft fx filters help when needed.
How so? Log is log. The gammas may differ but what metrics or evaluations lead you to believe canon log is better than s-log? Smells of nonsense.
Eh, perhaps economic democracy but we can also thank our audiences for continuing to not give a shit about pretty pictures. Let's all bow to CONTENT, the authoritarian king of the universe.