Souto

Interesting test, Jazz. It looks like the MKiii works nicely with Reid-Log am curious of a comparison between his and James Miller's LOG-Like profiles. I'm also interested in hearing more from Andrew on the topic. He seems to be pretty busy lately and MIA from some of the questions asked. The good thing about the MKiii is you would be getting two beasts from the camera... Reid-Log and ML Raw. Could be a great tool in the arsenal. 

Here is the final edited video of that screenshot posted before. I must say that I've tweaked the selected Reid's LUT quite a bit to get the look I wanted. Some of the shots as you will see are a bit overexposed but the theme was black dresses and I wanted the dresses to translate onto the screen better so I overexposed on purpose. Also tried making the highlight roll-off as smooth as possible. Grade was done in Resolve. Comments are welcome!
 

I just bought it and what I can say... I tried for some minutes it on my father's Canon 6D and it is just AWESOME!

I went far to ISO 3200 without problems! I tried only C-Log, Cinema 4 and Scarlet, in the next days I will try all the other profiles.
For the moment: 
- C-Log is awesome, great DR no problem with shadows as I have with V-Log L recorded internally on the GH4.
It's really a GIFT for any Canon user! You have to buy if you need a log profile! 
I'm going to try close to BlackMagic Micro Camera as soon as possible just to see differences and similarities.

- Cinema 4 is a "neutral" with better colors and a slightly better DR. Great! I really like it for a 90% ready look.

- Scarlet is a Fuji Velvia-like profile, with raised blacks, hyper saturated look (red blinks to my eyes) and less DR in order to have a great contrast.

I think that just C-Log could cost at least more then V-Log L (it works wonders at 8 bit, instead with GH4 you have to record externally 10 bit to appreciate it), you have a lot of other great profiles, so don't wait that Andrew changes mind and buy it now!  

Thank you Andrew! And Canon has to thank you, because I'm really thinking to buy again a Canon just to use your profiles! 

 

A quick and dirty test of my Canon EOS-M10 and Andrew Reid's Custom LOG. Since this camera is Canon's most basic interchangeable lens camera, I cannot guarantee that others' experiences with other Canon cameras and EOSHD-LOG would be similar or different, or better or worse. So, basically, this is my quick test with my modest equipment and skills.
Your mileage may vary...
Equipment Used:
Canon EOS-M10 
Canon FL 35mm f/3.5
Magnus 2XM-2000V Video Monopod 
EOSHD-LOG Picture Profile
Impulz LOG Kodak Elite Chrome 200 FPE LUT

I finally had the chance to upload the C-Log onto a camera. Unfortunately it's the eos-m10... Probably the lowest level Canon camera, but it's the only one I have access to at the moment.
I think the C-Log definitely helps with the shadows and I am really enjoying it so far. I've also been testing some of your other profiles. I love the look you have shown with Chrome, but with my footage it is SUPER saturated, whereas your samples look muted... Do you think it may be camera specific? Also Cinema 4 is very saturated as well, when I cut the saturation in half, it more closely resembles your description. But with the saturation knocked down a touch or two, it kinda resembles the Wide DR mode in Canon's C cameras. Nice job, it's really cool to breathe some life into these cheap old tech cameras. 

Tried eoshd-log on the eos-m10. I used a canon log LUT from Color Finale with no other adjustments...
 

Shot in 4k with the Canon C300 Mk II in C-log, and hand graded. But I also used Andrew's three C-log LUTS and they worked beautifully on the C300 MK2 C-log footage.
 

Did a revisit on my grading of the clips easier in this tread. I did not clip the highlights and was wondering if the colour information still was in the clips. By not using any LUT only grading, but now used the vector based grading in Colour Finale (the last clips), I was able to recover more then in versjon 1. I not sure at all if we get any more dynamic range using the clog picture style vs the standard - too me it looks the same. So when using clog or similar may only help if you want to adjust to another camera - as it may be easier to get the same look, or if one want a special look it may pay off to use the logs. (as you reduce the sharpening and saturation.)
 

I finally go to take this beast out into the wild. I'm most amazed with the autofocus capabilities, coupled with the EOSHD.com C-LOG picture profile. I ran the cam on my DJI Ronin-m with a 50mm at F1.2... Just for this, I may consider adding the mkIV to my bag. If the DR was just a little bit better, I'd be completely sold.
Cam Settings
- 1080/60p
- EOS HD CLOG Picture Profile
- 125 Shutter
- F1.2
- Tiffen Variable ND Filter
- DJI Ronin-M
- Graded with FCPX Color Finale + EOS HD Cine Lut
 

Just posted this today. Footage a bit rough--but no grading here, just minor exposure adjustments to make corrections the best I know how. Rough shooting because of harsh sunlight going in and out with frequency. But I wanted to see how good the colors and footage would be out of the camera.
 

Makes sense as a concern. I thought the dynamic range was identical to prolost flat on my t3i. But clog was better for colors when grading, and it's definitely looking better for LUTs too. Regardless, the cine picture profiles and LUTs are easily worth $10.. 

screen grab of something I shot today at my friend's bbq. I didn't check for exposure nor white balance prior so color correction was more of a pain since I had to use some reference of what I remembered seeing that day. Then added a m31 lut from vision-color. 
Gear Used;
Canon 60D
Sigma 18-35 F/1.8
SLR Magic Variable ND MKII 82mm

A quick test with the very good EOSHD C-LOG on a Canon 60D. The limiting factor in some situations: the 8-bit codec.