crevice

Do the Burana and the A1 really share the same sensor? I ask because the A1 has some of the best looking footage of any mirrorless I have seen and I could never quite put my finger on it. It always looked a bit different to me than their other cameras. The A1 uses their IMX610AQL sensor, which was the only one of their cameras that were using it from what I know.  Most "YouTubers" only talked about specs, but none seemed to discuss or show real comparisons of how the actual A1 footage looks of compared to their other cameras, including the fx6/9. I have seen just one video, where someone used a shitty lut to compare an A1 to an A7S3, but most others are the typical YouTube trash where they talk specs and never really shoot or show anything worth a damn. 

If the Burana and the A1 really do share the same sensor, that would make sense, since the footage of the Burana also looks great. 

On 1/27/2021 at 11:32 AM, omega1978 said:

A friend own the canon c70 with Rf 28-70 2.0 and we have made some testshots with other Canon lenses. He is waiting the Canon Speedbooster..

Nice camera, little heavy, very big on a gimbal..

4K h265 4.2.0 10 bit Clog2 50 & 100p all handheld 

What do you think ?

 

 

looks great. i am contemplating the 24-70 2.8 or the 28-70 - how is the 28-70 with no IS or did you use it on a gimbal here?

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

It's killed the C70

It’s statements like this that have made me step away form this forum. It seems every forum post is some over dramatic hyperbole reaction or continuous anti canon pitchforks (I wonder why?). How can we have a serious conversation when people like you are saying the pocket 6k destroys the c70? It is the same camera as the pocket 6k - with a tilt screen and 6 stops of ND. That’s all it takes to “kill the C70”, which was being hailed 24 hours ago?  The pocket 6k has BRAW over the c70. The c70 for the 20th time has a better sensor with more DR. The c70 has a better battery. The c70 has significantly better auto focus. The c70 records to dual SD cards. The c70 has a significantly better mount, with a speed booster that turns it into full frame. Wether any of these points mean anything to you or not, is besides the point. Even if you find the pocket 6k better for you because it has BRAW is besides the point. The point is that saying the pocket 6k “kills” the c70 is ridiculous. We live in a time where none of these cameras kill each other. A7s3, pocket 6k, c70, etc. are all amazing tools and in the right hands you’d be hard pressed to find folks that can even tell difference. I’m out. 

Just now, TomTheDP said:

Have you compared the two side by side? I was speaking of the C300 mk2 not mk3. I would hope the C70 destroys both those older cameras. 

 

C200 and C70? Yes I have

31 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

The C70 is $3000 more with no RAW of any kind. The built in monitor on the Pocket 6k Pro is also a lot nicer. An optional view finder is quite nice too. 

I doubt you'll get more dynamic range out of a C70 than a P6K. I've heard C200/C300 owners say they don't think the C70 footage is any better. Not saying the C70 isn't great but its not the best by any means especially at its price point. 

10 stop ND's, RF mount, and 3+ hr battery life is awesome tho. 

Every time I tell myself to step away, I get sucked back in. Yes you will get more DR out of the C70. Let me tell you straight from the horses mouth. I have owned a C200, pocket 4k, pocket 6k, and ursa mini. I now own a C70 and it has more DR than all of them. The C70 is far superior to my C200, CLOG 2 and color grading 10 bit footage is way better than 8 bit footage or canons heavy raw lite - which is not lite at all. Your statement says C200/C300  users say they dont think the image is better, but that statement itself is confusing. The C300 is the same sensor so of course it isnt any better... The c70 destroys my c200. I am not saying its the best camera for everyone and I am not trying to fanboy all over this thread by saying all other cameras suck. But some of the comments on here are underselling a true workhorse of a camera in the C70 and are kinda downplaying how amazing the DGO sensor is.

1 minute ago, Robert Patts said:

More DR does not make an image look better, as there is so much more that goes into it. The entire Lumix line has more DR than all the BM line, yet Blackmagic looks better.

Even the first pocket camera with it's 10 stops beat out many cameras that came after it.

Not going to argue that. But in this case, the C70 sensor is fantastic. The DGO sensor is proven and if you know anybody has used it in the C300, they will back that claim up. I am not going debate further as both cameras are fantastic. Pick one that works in your budget. For me the C70 works best. For others the Pocket 6k will. I am just happy we have so many damn cameras to choose, its insane.

1 minute ago, newfoundmass said:

It costs over 2x as much and lacks tons of cine features that the Pocket 6K Pro has. Writing off one of the biggest ones, and one that is most beneficial to actual productions (RAW) really doesn't help your case. But if the sensor is what's most important to you then by all means go that route. 

It lacks a ton of cine features? It lacks BRAW. There is 1 feature. What else does it lack? It has dual xlr with phantom power, 10 stop ND, better internal battery, dual SD card recording, 4:2:2 10 bit, 4k 120, tracking auto focus, and dual gain 16 stop sensor.

Just now, MurtlandPhoto said:

Taking away a major internal feature from the P6K to make your argument doesn't really work, though. For my money, two P6K Pros are worth more than one C70. You may feel differently. Everyone has a different balance they need to reach.

For sure. I understand BRAW is a killer and in some cases decision making feature. But DR is such an important feature for the "look" of the camera and I think that is something a lot of people don't discuss enough with the c70. Pocket 6k is great, but it is still using a Sony based sensor that has less DR. Regardless, you are right and for many people a pocket 6k makes more sense for the money. For me, I am a solo shooter on a gimbal who has invested in RF glass shared with my R5. So auto focus and RF are very important for me. But, I still think if you are ok paying more - the sensor, auto focus, and battery life without a need for a grip, could make it worth it. Also, though there is no raw, the CLOG 2 out of the C70 is mind blowing.

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

It really is remarkable how opposite their body designs are from their OS. One is ugly as sin, the other is truly elegant. 

Unless you need auto focus it's hard to justify getting the C70 over this. There's A LOT of value in this. $2,500 for all of that is a tremendous value. 

Do we not care anymore about the actual inside of cameras anymore? Last I checked the C70 has a 16 stop DGO sensor found in a $10k cinema camera. It also has 10 stop of ND vs 6 stop. 3 hour battery life with no need for a battery grip. Far superior mount in the RF. It also has a button for every single thing you could want. I would pay more just for the DGO sensor alone. Pocket 6k pro is an amazing deal. But, minus BRAW, C70 is better in almost every single way.

@Andrew Reid we are getting close with these tests, but I think the final way to test is what others have mentioned. We need to absolutely blast the R5 with cold air while the physical backing of the camera is removed and then placing the camera in a fridge/freezer/cooler the entire time. This would mean heat isn’t getting trapped inside and cold air is blasting the components. I would suggest no usage or recording at all before the test, so it’s a truly fresh start. Hit record, place it in an absolutely frigid condition with the back of the camera open, and we watch what happens. If it shuts down there is nothing else to explore - we have our answer once and for all. There is no way that a camera with its backing physically open, with cold air around 1-30 degrees reaching It’s components would overheat unless it’s software limitations. If you don’t own the R5 or don’t want to destroy yours, you could prob create a fund page and you’ll get enough money to fund an R5 for these specific and slightly destructive tests in less than 24 hours. A lot of people have eyes on you and not just on here, I have seen your tests mentioned on several Facebook groups, Twitter, etc. 

3 hours ago, wolf33d said:

And I will be one of them. I could not care less about Canon, Sony or any other business and how they treat their customers. 
If Canon give me the camera I want which NO other manufacturer can offer me, I'll buy it even if they initially lied about overheating. It's not like they killed children in Africa. 
They are little bastards trying to make us buy their big Cine cameras by crippling the R5 but that's about it. If they offer the best I'll buy the best. I am not gonna buy a much inferior A7S III just to punish Canon lol. 

Now that's if they make it the best, which means removing that software limit. If they keep it as is, the R5 is then the inferior product and is good for a return and other companies can take my money. 
Consumers have no mercy. I can tell you that if they don't change that they will loose all video shooters on the R5. Maybe they don't care and won't change it, if they want that money they will change it and people will buy it. Maybe 2 or 3 people won't for punishing the bad Canon but ultimately they are punishing themselves from not using the superior product. 

There is no way around it. Fix the god damn camera so we can buy it, or sell it to photographers only and go F yourself Canon. 

My thoughts exactly. Fix the issue and I honestly won't give a shit. I prefer RF mount, I prefer RF lenses, I prefer Canon colors, I prefer their dual pixel autofocus for video and I just prefer how canon footage looks compared to Sony. So like you said, me putting my foot down and going to another brand to "teach them a lesson!" only screws me over, since I would be switching to a camera that I personally do not want and in my eyes is inferior compared to the R5 as a true hybrid 50/50 photos and stills camera. Though to be honest, if they just leave the external recording at near unlimited - I am prob fine as is. Still, they need to say something and do something - they are getting absolutely roasted by everyone and rightfully so. I am hoping soon we see a firmware fix, because at the end of the day, I just care about my camera working to its potential. The crazy thing is Canon has so much going for them, but they keep shooting themselves in the foot. RF mount is already being adapted by folks like Red and it is a mount that can be used for years to come. Their RF lenses are absolutely incredible, with the 50 1.2 RF being the best prime lens I have ever used. Their rumored RF cinema cameras seem amazing and with great price points. And on paper the R5 is the best hybrid mirrorless camera ever made.

But yet, here we are because of their bullshit and because of this they once again are losing business. Canon seem to think folks are going to buy the R5 if its too good instead of their cinema cameras , but now they are just losing business all together, with folks avoiding ALL of their cameras in general. I wish I could just shake them and tell them to quit worrying about their damn cinema line, it has absolutely ruined their brand to a large growing group of filmmakers who are very very vocal. This is the same thing apple did when they turned their back on the pro community, hate started to grow and grow by creative folks and their brand took a huge hit with the people that actually influenced who bought their computers and made them popular to begin with - creative folks. Luckily, apple have slowly started to rebuild their image in creative circles with better Macs. So with Canon, they need to realize the people that are going to buy their cinema line are going to buy it no matter what, because they need ND, better DR, XLR, a fan, etc. 

26 minutes ago, Mandalorian said:

I guess it depends on whether this rumored R300 is just a box or if it comes with everything the C300 has as well (except RAW): an adjustable touch monitor, a handle, full size XLRs, HDMI/SDI ports, internal NDs, plenty of customizeable buttons, etc.

If it is just a box, then at $6,299.00 it is now competing with the RED Komodo (which is around $6,000.00 for the black colored version).

I guess we will get more details as time goes on.

That point is valid and I also want to clarify my other point. I am in no way bashing the A7S, I have owned every single Alpha series camera minus the A9. They are great, but they are great for what they are. I don't think you could ever replace a true cinema camera that has internal ND, a fan, great pre-amps, XLR, etc. That is what you need for high end shoots and no mirrorless camera can replace that. On top of that, the new C300 sensor is REALLY good and the images out of it are on another level compared to mirrorless cameras. But, like you said, it will be interesting what else it comes with. Though to be fair, the Komodo doesn't really come with many accessories either - but it does have the advantage of having raw internal, a top monitor and great wireless monitoring to a phone. Though canon also has another big advantage with their dual pixel autofocus. I do think canon needs to include internal RAW for BOTH of these new rumored cameras. I will take that one step further, every single cinema camera from here on out needs to offer RAW video. There is no excuse not to have RAW video anymore in cameras at this price range, just like every stills camera shoots RAW photos now days - every mid to high end video camera needs to shoot RAW video. The advantages are just too great for it not to be standard. If it has to be uncompressed, then let it be uncompressed. 

30 minutes ago, Mandalorian said:

Shame.

These updated rumors sound a lot less tempting than the earlier one.

Looks like the R200 at $3,499.00 will be severely handicapped and the R300 will the better one, but at $6,299.00 USD it is a bit too steep in price for something that essentially just matches the specs of the A7sIII but isn't Full Frame or has IBIS and has an RF mount and internal NDs.

Some of these comments are just hard to fathom. These comparison on spec sheet vs spec sheet are getting a little out of control. The C300 absolutely destroys the A7s3. One is a cinema camera, the other is a small mirrorless. The R300 at $6,299 Is a steal. I’m assuming people here have never used a canon cinema camera, because visually and ergonomically, it’s night and day. Add XLR, ND filter, better color, better actual DR (not spec sheet DR), a cooling fan, etc. On top of that the new sensor in the c300 is absolutely fantastic. Not everything can be compared in a spec sheet. There are phones that do 4K 60 and they still look like a phone shot the footage. An A7s3 is great for what it is, but it is not a cinema camera 

On 8/4/2020 at 10:39 AM, DFason said:

I am lurking for a used micro but wanted to ask a few questions. 

With the SD card issue did anyone find something that works now? Currently August 2020? 

If I buy a BM recorder, could I record to it instead of the SD card? 

Thanks in advance! If anyone knows someone selling, I would love to buy! 

-Dave

I might have an extra micro package for sale, as I have a couple laying around. The one I have for sale is a more premium kit though. It comes with the micro, smallrig cage, metabones speedbooster "T" version, rawlite OLPF (already installed) , NPF battery bridge, and sandisk SD cards that work with the micro (all tested). PM me if interested.

43 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

Don't know how this wouldn't severely undercut C300 III sales if the only thing missing was raw internal

The new C300 has 16 stops of dynamic range, to go with that raw internal, so I think it will hold its place with the folks that it is targeted at. I thought the R5 sounded too good to be true as a hybrid shooter, but it ended up living up to the hype for me. Yeah I know, overheat gate - but that does not affect me as I only shoot in bursts for video and when I need longer I can do regular 4K or 4K HQ unlimited to an Atomos Ninja. But if this new camera has killer DR it would be awesome to pair with an R5, especially with no need to buy new lenses or batteries. If its similar quality video and just longer record times with no overheating, I will stick to the R5 as again I can just record as long as I want in HQ 4K with an atomos or bursts internal. 

9 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Actually really nice looking image. The auto focus was a tad slow, but I assume that could be tweaked in settings. If it was a Fuji it would be jumping and pulsing to no end. 

The audio was off though...... 

Was not autofocus. It was clearly a manual focus lens with a horrible focus puller. They would have been better off using an auto focus lens. 

2 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The bad publicity from the article is one thing, and deserved. But zero useful feedback? No timing data? THAT is how Canon end up in situations like this in the first place.

You nailed that on the head. If this is an actual issue that is not performing as advertised...how could you NOT reach out to Canon? Wouldn't you tell the company that just handed you a pre-production camera that something is wrong with the unit so they can fix the issue? If it performed as advertised, then why did it overheat and at what point of pressing record did things fall apart? Everyone loses with articles like these and they spread like wildfire. 

Just now, Andrew Reid said:

Behiri's motto seems to be Professional filmmaking is what you do, not what it looks like!

It is funny how someone that describes themselves as a professional filmmaker in Japan filming something that they claim is important would rely on a pre-production hybrid mirrorless camera with no back up. All of this while not having any sort of concrete statistics of what went wrong, how long, which mode, etc. in an article and video labeled "review". How can you be a professional site and review something without "stopwatch" tests or some sort of record of when and how long things went wrong? Isn't that your job to do the tedious work for people who want to spend money? His excuse of it not working the way he shot and thats not good enough for him is fine for a blog post, but I just don't see how that can fly for a proper review article. If you are doing a review, you first off need to do timed tests to back your claims so people know if they are within spec or not, then if there is still a problem that is NOT what the company advertised you NEED to reach out to the company and say "hey wtf is this normal?" and gather some sort of statement. Especially when you are working with a pre-production unit. Then you put their quote or statement into the review. For example "My camera actually overheated 5 minutes into recording which is not normal according to Canon's spec sheet. I reached out to Canon and they said____________". None of that happened. I don't see how this is proper journalism. 

A new tweet by canon rumors, who I find the most reliable of all rumor sites, says that Canon is open to adding BRAW to their R series cameras.

This would be the biggest company to add BRAW to their cameras other than blackmagic themselves. It doesn’t matter if you care about these Canon cameras or not, every single person should be rooting for this to happen, because if Canon adds it, it forces the hand for Sony, Panasonic, Fuji, etc to add it as well. And when that happens, we all win. BRAW is our only choice for some sort of compressed RAW, because of REDs patent ruining the party. BRAW in more cameras means cheaper media, easier editing, color grading, etc. So, make some noise so canon knows we want this or whomever your favorite brand is. Sites like this one have pushed brands to be better and right now, they are listening and we need to continue to be loud. BRAW should be in every single camera that takes video seriously. 

That C5D article is one of the worst professional “reviews” I have ever read. It reads like a blog by a college student. He goes into zero detail about what actual mode he was using (hq?, etc), how long he was shooting or if he even reached out to canon to see if it was normal. Not to mention the writing skills are just plain bad. 

5 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

The latest rumor:

"The A7Siii will have the S-Cinetone colorscience.
The sensor will be an Exymos R CMOS Sensor.
Sony will add Movie Edit add-on compatibility for Image Stabilization in post. So far only RX0m2, RX100m7, and ZV-1 are compatible with that app. This is how they plan to match Cannon’s IBIS, it won’t be as good but at least it won’t be “warpy”. Also, the slight crop will be used to achieve this.
15+ Stops of dynamic range.
C4K in addition to UHD will be available.

Overall this camera is similar to the A7R4 tweaked in the same way as ZV-1 with similar specs to the FX9, but with a 12MP sensor. Like I said before there is a slight crop. Nothing seems extraordinary on paper except that EVF, but realistically there is no 4K60 10-bit internal 600Mbit camera on the market that can record unlimited video without overheating, with great autofocus and no fan."

4k60p internal with new AF and a flippy screen.

(Not) Exceeding expectations. Actually I felt more or less this was what the a7s3 was going to be all along since Sony wasn't going to trounce the FX9 with a $3500 body. Maybe, met expectations?

Chris

If they are bringing their new color science and it shoots full frame with actual high dynamic range, not bullshit marketing dynamic range, and the footage actually looks like fx9 - this exceeds expectations. It’s crazy to me that all we are hanging on is specs. The footage is what should exceed expectations - isn’t that all that matters? If the a7s3 and R5 shoot amazing looking video that get close to their big cinema brothers - we all win. In fact, with these 2 cameras we are all winning no matter what. It’s amazing the kind of tech we are getting in hybrid bodies.  

1 hour ago, ntblowz said:

Had a play at local camera store where they have R5/R6 to play

The guy said R5 is the final production while their R6 is still pre-production one

My u3 card last 4 seconds on 8kIBP, on 4k50p ibp it is fine , guess u really need UHS-II for All-I or 8K IBP.

Auto focus is really good, can detect person's eye against the light (window) even though the person is really dark on the camera

IBIS on the 85 DS is much more smoother than the A7R4 we had with us. 

I can definitely fake a few gimbal/slider shot with the R5/R6 vs with my R. 

R6 with the 24-105 7.1 focus quite fast inside the shop at 7.1 aperture.

And after playing with 28-70 i m never gonna get this lens at all, it is just too heavy and big. The 70-200 2.8 RF is surprisingly light on the other hand.

I’ve been going back and forth on that 28-70. I’m assuming the size and weight isn’t an over exaggeration? Can you compare to another lens? Is it bigger than the 70-200?

4 minutes ago, Kino said:

I don't think it is going to win any DR contests, if that is what you mean. But if you keep the camera within its limits, it can generate some decent footage with no apparent noise:

http://vimeo.com/428556668

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UskTIP40HTQ

But, yes, overall the footage has been rather disappointing from a "filmic" perspective. Most of what we have seen demonstrates limited DR (around 10-11 stops?) and a "thinning" of the color bit depth:

Some of that poor quality probably has to do with user error or lack of proper grading options.

You guys mean the camera that isn’t out yet? Canon has historically had horrible videos promoting their cameras. But if those first two videos Kino linked don’t look “filmic” or at least good to you, I’m not sure what to tell you.
 

Blackmagic is using a Sony sensor and it’s filmic look is color science and being raw, which allows better color grading. Canon has a great color science and can also shoot raw, so once it’s out in the wild I’d expect the same mix of great and shit, same as blackmagic. Don’t forget the first 2 months of pocket 4K footage was horrible. Everyone was complaining it looked like a GH5 and too “video”. Me being one of them. I learned my lesson though and realized very few cameras outside of arri are instant filmic. 
 

Get it in the right hands and it’ll be nice. “Filmic” looks needs proper lenses, filters, lighting, and color grading. I used to hate when people told me that, but once I learned about lighting and color grading - that all changed. Yes it is boosted by a camera with good dynamic range and great colors. To my eyes dynamic range looks good on the R5, especially the footage I played with. I don’t care how many stops it is, the fact that the second link is just a basic handheld slow mo shot at the beach and it looks that good, makes me think once people use it with real lighting like the first link of the guy at gym - it can really shine. But I shoot photos and video, so hence me gushing. For me it’s both of my worlds in one package. 

44 minutes ago, Super8 said:

The 12K footage looks good but not better than Arri, RED or Canon.    It still looks like BM color science.

BM has a brand problem.  No big studio has to move away from RED or Arri.   The incentive to do so is not their unless the image quality is better.

BM has also shown the flaws of it's lower line up.

Going to agree with this as well. I have never really seen a Blackmagic camera on a legit shoot. It's usually always Arri, RED, or Canon. At my old job Canon c300 was the go to for eng/documentary footage. In all other shoots I have been on its RED or Arri (mostly Arri at this point). Can the ursa line shoot fantastic video? Yes. Is it better than Arri or RED? Definitely not better than Arri, but I do think that the ursa mini with Fairchild sensor looks better in many cases than some RED cams. But their is a brand problem for sure. 

I have to go back to my previous point that their plastic outdated body design doesn't help them much in any area. It feels and looks cheap. You cant take it serious. Ursa might not feel as cheap as the pockets,  but it sure does look dated. Also, just because the pocket line isn't used much in high end work, doesn't mean that it doesn't affect the entire brand. They look like fisher price toys and when you bring up Blackmagic in high end shoots, they are usually kinda laughed at for being cameras for amateurs. I am NOT saying that is accurate nor do I agree with the attitude, but that is the attitude they have. Lastly, if we look at communities around a brand - Blackmagic community is dead last. They are as an overall community (not targeting everyone),  the most immature/amateur group of the big brands. Their Facebook groups and forums are littered with attack memes toward other brands, horrible amateur videos of their girlfriends in slow motion with crappy LUTs, and 98 percent of the posts are about some creative way to try and rig the atrociuous bodies of the pocket line. Most of them have never been on an actual shoot. I mean, just look at their groups over the last 24 hours, people are freaking out about the URSA being expensive at $10k, which just shows they have no idea what the real value of a cinema camera is. This all adds up to a brand image and amazing camera or not, Blackmagic have an image of a cheap brand that shots good video for amateur filmmakers on a budget and Arri and RED are for high end work. Its going to take a lot of work for Blackmagic to turn that around. 

17 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

It would be in BMs best interest to get BRAW into a prosumer mirrorless camera as soon as possible. It’s coming to the Sigma fp, it’s on the EVA1 externally.

Bingo. Charge a pretty penny for BRAW  and put it into as many cameras as you can. Sigma FP is not enough, there are like 10 people who own one and I think they are all on this forum. They need to get BRAW everywhere - just like how Sony spread their sensors everywhere.  People wont stop buying Blackmagic cameras, even if BRAW were in other cameras. We aren't going to get compressed RAW because of REDs patent, so BRAW or something similar is our only hope in other cameras. Every high end Fuji, Canon, Sony, etc. should be using BRAW internally - not Prores RAW to an Atomos Ninja externally solution.