Alkım Ün

On higher quality projects, I run the F3 with native battery and 6" rods to hold the Gemini out back. On 4:2:0 projects I typically just have the camera and handgrip, as light as she gets. For a cinema camera she's light, but in my market I'm typically competing against people running DSLRs and the light (and cheap) support gear that couldn't support the F3. I agree that it is light on the shoulder, but I can't afford the gear I need to get the shots clients in my area are looking for. Side-point: any that can afford to rent support gear for the project typically have enough to hire a RED owner/operator. 
 
Don't take this wrong because I'm actually pretty cheerful, but honestly: I'm broke. What little money I had was spent getting a more-expensive-than-was-assured camera operational. The potential clients that I can and have reached (and even one of my close work colleagues) have no need for something with the heft and (amazing) image quality of the F3, especially when 5Ds and XA30s will will do perceptively the same job for less weight, support gear, and data storage (not to mention proprietary parts hassle). 
 
.......W-w-ould you like a fourth? :P Seriously though, I agree with all of what you said in that post. I'm not selling the F3 and Gemini to get a "better camera", as I'm really impressed and excited at the stuff I have been able to film with it, and I don't think I could find a better image in my price range. For the work that I've actually been able to get profitable gigs though, I don't need uncompressed recording, nor 13.5 stops of DR. I need something that doesn't require a bunch of proprietary-gear workarounds (SxS? FZ-mount?). If it has a nice image with some ability to colour-grade, SD recording, can be flown on glidecam, and use commonly-available lenses, then it does the kind of work my typical client wants. 
 
Thanks for the responses, it's really good to be able to bounce this off people who aren't Sony fanboys or evangelists. 
 
Also of note: For many reasons, personal and financial, my wife and I are considering the move to NWT where I would work an hourly job and leave full-time video behind, at least for the time being. While it is true the F3 hasn't worked out as well as I originally hoped for all the reasons mentioned, my filmmaking environment would also be drastically changing. We would be in a highly remote location, I would be completely solo for anything I film, with no budget for DPX sequence storage, and other factors. I would also be filming mainly for personal reasons (my son growing up, micro-films, scenic landscapes and wildlife, etc) with the odd wedding/grad/funeral as foreseeable paid gigs on weekends. For these circumstances, it is more important to have a more agile camera with good internal recording than it is to have an inexpensive cinema camera. If I still have the F3, then I'll bring the F3 up. But if I can make this change, I'd like to do it before it becomes impossible to sell the camera with enough leftover to get another. 
 
 
 

Maybe worth getting back together with the ex

Scorsese said cinema's now officially dead.
May as well be a theme park ride.
Event a good director can't save the system... Duncan Jones on Warcraft. Peter Jackson on The Hobbit Part 10.
Looking to Netflix to save cinema... They have picked up the Blade Runner style sci-fi shot by Bowie's son Duncan Jones, set in Berlin in 2050 called Mute.
And more stuff good coming out soon.
As for 2016... I am voting 5D Mark IV!

I had some free time today and so I went into the studio and did some tests. They aren't very proper and they aren't the best in the world...but hopefully this will help someone out there!
I used some of the EOSHD Canon picture profiles for the 1DC part so check that out!
I am by no means a professional colorist. I tried to balance the images best I could in Resolve. You will notice that some shots are a tad blurry....I'm sorry about that. I had continuous autofocus on.
Here are my findings:
Canon 1DC:
It's totally still relevant. The fact that this camera came out in 2012 and is competing with the new C300 mkii is incredible. 
Official Canon Log: Is great. It grades really nicely and is really clean and natural looking. Totally recommended. The 4k 4:2:2 8bit is much better than the 1080p 4:2:0 of the C100. 
EOSHD C-Log: Its good for sure but not as good as built in Canon Log on the 1DC. I need to play more with it but I had some troubles with it. 
Other EOSHD profiles: These are fun! I love the Monochrome one a lot!
C100:
Its done. Too old. Image is soft. Has terrible artifacts. Built in codec is total crap. Get this guy out of here. 
Wide DR if handled properly could be a good profile to shoot most things on. Its not too flat so the low bitrate doesn't fall apart as much.
C300 mkii:
This is the best camera of the three (as it should be) but not by much in relation to 1DC!
Canon Log and Canon Log 2 aren't very good. Canon Log 3 seems just about right as far as nailing the color science. Everything balanced really nicely and looked great. 
4K 10Bit really holds together nicely when grading. 
I thought 1080p 12bit would be stronger...but I really didn't notice much of a difference between it and the 4k footage. 
Slow motion: It's OK. There are other cameras coming out that have better slow motion abilities. To go past 60fps you have to crop in on the sensor by 2x which turns the crop from being 1.4x (Super35) to 2.8! That's more than micro four thirds.

Hey mawnnn, the C300 II with ARRI compatible settings rocks: Canon Log 2, Cinema Gamma, and Production Matrix. Then use an ARRI LUT to Rec709 in post and add saturation & contrast as desired- really fast & easy:
We also use the 1DX II, and while it looks excellent, the C300 II with ARRI compatible color is like using an Alexa with autofocus. To speed up production and save diskspace, we use 1080p24 50Mbps (IPB) most of the time. 4K is used for wide shots that we crop in post (faster & easier than doing a 2 camera shoot). Ya gotta use the C300 II in production to really appreciate it beyond tests: it's underrated until you've used it for a while

Then again everyone and their mother are going to sell off their 1DCs and C100s and BMPCCs to buy the new GH5, so your work may be more differentiated by keeping the 1DC. 

EOSHD SONY ON:

 
EOSHD SONY OFF:

...seriously good job Andrew.. will order soon for a shoot where we'll be adding an A7S2 for night shots to a Canon setup.. hopefully will be easier to match footage thanks to this!! 

The DSLR is dead. Long live the DSLR.

Too expensive for me. 
The GX85 image you put is amazing. Way better than the Sony. Good enough color wise. 
So the GH5 would do it for me if only it had DPAF like the canon.......
it would be a way better tool than the canon actually. 3 times cheaper, articulated screen, 3 times smaller, better spec and 10bit with better codec. 
Just that AF which is crucial and which is going to be DPAF decent at best, and not DPAF at worst