Jump to content

Matt James Smith ?

Members
  • Posts

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Matt James Smith ?

  1. The sensor is likely to be similar to the GH5S though. Like the XC10, the camera may shoot stills but will be highly video oriented, not a true hybrid like the GH5 - therefore it won't be a high megapixel sensor. If it's 12mp like the XC10, but on a M43 sensor, then it'll be very similar. The image out of the XC10 in good light is fantastic so an improvement on that is to be welcomed.
  2. Yes. This ties into the idea that this lens using this "mount" will be a one-off. Essentially it'll be a Bridge camera like the XC10 with it attached.
  3. There was also this image in the camera/mount patent document:
  4. I remember when the XC10 was launched Canon was talking about it as "the successor to the camcorder." Perhaps they've decided to invest in the format as a fully-fledged professional ENG alternative/competitor?
  5. Yeah it's just occurred to me since my last comment quite how insane the zoom range is. I've also just realised the physical size of the lens - 25cm long unextended! That's like putting a lens significantly longer than a 70-200mm on an XC10! I'm now doubting whether it will be the only lens. They would surely have to also offer a more compact lens. Or maybe I'm wrong and it's not for the XC camera. I can't track down the original patent document. Is an image height of 9.74 -10.82mm consistent with an M43 sensor?
  6. Here we go - this has to be it. It’s a 4/3 sensor. The “native” lens is just an evolution of the super-zoom on the XC10 - a bit faster, built for a slightly larger sensor and detachable only so EF lenses can be used with the camera. http://thenewcamera.com/canon-working-on-43-format-sensor-and-12-385mm-f1-8-4-0-lens/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NewCamera+(New+Camera) My guess is this will be the only lens using this mount and with it attached the XC20 (or whatever it gets called) will function much the same as the XC10. It’ll be a big lens though right?! Also not sure how they’ll integrate an ND filter - will it be built into the lens itself? One last musing: nutty as a bundled speed booster may seem, it’s actually consistent with Canon’s road map for the XC series. From the start it was Canon’s answer to the BMPCC and GH series (small size, affordable, small sensor, professional image quality) but friendlier to video journalists. The loupe for the LCD screen of the XC10 was their bundled Z-Finder. The only thing it lacked was an interchangeable mount. This camera will be a direct rival to the new Pocket camera. I doubt it’ll have RAW, but it’ll be the one you can just pick up and shoot with confidence.
  7. I agree the body could be a red herring. But it would be nice if it wasn't ... There's a hell of a lot going on in that mount though. It seems like it could be adaptable to EF, EF-S and EF-M. The patent appears to talk about inserting glass in the adapter too. Canon Rumours interpreted this as a teleconverter, but could it be a built-in focal reducer? What if it's a 1-inch sensor like the XC10 and Canon are building just one or two zooms for that sensor in EF-M mount ... but if you switch to the focal reducer and EF mount you get an effective APSC size sensor. Sounds outlandish I know but the mount is pretty far out already ...
  8. Canon Rumors just reported a patent filing by Canon for a pretty fancy looking swappable lens mount. Also interesting is the camera body the image shows the mount on. Looks a hell of a lot like an XC camera to me (note the fan on the side and the grip style. I’m an XC-10 and M5 owner (my “daypack” cameras) and love both but always wish they were combined so I could use more interesting lenses on the XC-10. If we’re looking at an APSC sensor in this camera - and it’s hard to imagine Canon coming out with an ILC built around a smaller sensor - this could be quite a formidable camera. If it’s 4K with dual pixel AF, I don’t see how they’d square it with the Cinema lineup though. The mount may also be significant in terms of Canon’s mirrorless stills camera direction, but to me this camera looks very much like a video camera. http://www.canonrumors.com/patent-lens-mount-adaptor-for-different-flange-distances/
  9. Yeah I would look k at the Tokina 11-16 2.8. Personally I like the lens and found mine very sharp (it was V1 - i seem to recall V2 is softer). Also they now offer an 11-20mm 2.8. They also do a 14-20mm f/2.0 but it’s pricey. All well built, fast lenses.
  10. @Andrew Reid if you want to fade to black, you need some black to fade to. Snap the cursor to the beginning/end of your clip and hit Alt-W. That drops in a slug. Now you can Cmd-T (or drag any transition) onto your clip and it will transition to black. Simples. You have to stop thinking of the timeline as a static, empty canvas. It's more like a sculpture in space. The magnetic timeline is made up only of the elements you add and their interrelationships.
  11. It's nice to have the EOSM to play with if I find myself missing my old BMPCC but mainly it's the Super-8 features that excite me. I can't find any noticeable advantage to the EOSM in 24/25p or 16:9 mode over my XC10 (which has C-Log and spits out 10bit 422 to a recorder) so it'll get used in 18fps 4:3 12bit mode with the Pentax 6mm f/1.2 c-mount that just arrived (haven't got an adapter yet though). CHDK doesnt seem to have been figured out for the M5's processor yet
  12. BTW I now use an EOS-M5 as my main still's camera - I bought it only for stills but to my surprise love it as a video camera too. AF and digital stabilisation is fantastic, EVF and tilt screen are great, body is tiny, resolution is "good enough" (much better than EOSM1). 22mm f2 stays on it 80% of time but being able to adapt my EF glass perfectly is a big bonus for shoot days - I can pack the camera without it taking up any room but use it with my Sigma 50-100 1.8 if a quality still is needed. Also use it for timelapse quite a bit (with external remote thingy only though unfortunately).
  13. Yes C100II plus XC10 for the interview B-camera (wide). External shots are a mixture of older footage from other cameras
  14. @cantsin yes fps override and set it to "exact fps". Re chroma smoothing, I understood that defeated the point of RAW but I'm not technical enough to understand TBH. @mercer problem with sticking a loupe on the EOSM is you need the touchscreen to navigate ML menus. I am using it with a pistol grip on the base though @Alpicat thanks all good info, will try crop mode with lossless rec. Terminology is very confusing though!
  15. All else being equal, if I shoot at 50p with a 360-degree shutter (1/50th), edit that footage on a 50p timeline, output to a 50p file and upload it to be played back at 50p on YouTube ... will it look any different to 25p footage shot at 180-degrees (1/50th) and delivered via standard 25p workflow?
  16. Thanks @cantsin this is all very good to know. I suspected I might not be the first to have done this but glad to see some other approaches. As far as I know it's not possible to work on non-standard frame rate timelines in any app (not in FCPX for sure) and I believe it wouldn't be desirable to output to non-standard frame rates as no player (eg. quicktime) or platform (e.g. vimeo) would support it. It may be that 24p would be better than 25 but my maths isn't good enough unfortunately :D Your videos look great. It seems you're using a different method to me though? I am using the 5x zoom (magnify function with the experimental Crop-Rec build - which allows you to go up to 2496 x 1078 if you like widescreen) More details here: https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=9741.msg171910#msg171910 How did you deal with the focus pixels? Was your image HD with continuous shooting?
  17. I've been playing half-heartedly with ML on my EOS-M for a while but in general lost interest due to annoyances such as the focus pixels, low resolution and workflow. However, inspired by recently released footage from Kodak's new Super-8 camera and fond memories of playing with real Super-8 footage in art school, I decided to mess around with the EOS-M again to see how close I could get to the Super-8 aesthetic. Turns out I surprised myself! I've only shot a few early tests so far but the following video is, I think, very usable as a digital Super-8 stand-in. The basic specs are as follows: 4:3 ratio (like Super-8) 1440 x 1078 resolution (plenty for Super-8) 18fps (same as consumer Super-8) 12-bit Lossless RAW (continuous!) 5x zoom (haven't accurately calculated crop factor/sensor size in relation to Super-8 yet - would appreciate help with this) 3X3 Crop mode (Experimental build: magiclantern-crop_rec_4k.2017Dec19.EOSM202) Also- no focus pixels! (I have no idea why this is. They reappear if you go up to 14bit lossless or use any of the standard 10/12/14-bit modes). Below are two versions of my initial tests - the first is with FilmConvert film emulation applied, the second is without FilmConvert, just some basic contrast and saturation tweaks. Sorry the grade isn't very good I'm getting used to both the EOSM DNG's and FCPX's new grading tools. FilmConvert: https://vimeo.com/253014693/badd381eb4 No FilmConvert: https://vimeo.com/253014620 My post workflow is very simple: convert .MLV files to DNG's with MlRawViewer and then drop them straight into FCPX. Do a bit of colour correction with an adjustment layer if needed, then export clip as ProRes 4444 XQ. Bring it back into FCPX and conform the 18fps to the fps of the timeline (I always use a 25p timeline and *think* this requires slowing the 18fps clip to 72% but I'm not confident my maths are accurate - it certainly looks close to normal speed to me though). I'm not very technical so you won't find much explanation of why it's working from me. I'd appreciate contributions to what's going on here so I understand it better and other can replicate if they want to. In particular I'd like to figure out the effective sensor size I'm using, and also why there are no pink dots. The things that excite me about it as a viable Digital Super-8 camera are: 1. The shutter speed - only Magic Lantern allows that really, and it really helps give that authentic Super-8 feel. 2. The 12bit colour space and RAW grain makes the footage film-like and organic. 3. The fact you can adapt C-mount lenses to the EOS-M. The lens I used for these tests is just the 15-45mm EF-M kit lens in manual focus mode. However I have a Cosmicar 6mm f/1.2 on its way to me as we speak and if I can get it to infinity focus I think I'll have a 'normal' lens (again, I need to figure out the imaging area I'm working with). 4. Shooting 4:3 and 18fps, like Super-8, allows continuous shooting. Things I don't like: 1. Live view is not perfect but using the info button you can jump between Canon's 5x zoom to focus and ML's rather choppy live view for framing. 2. I'm not seeing horrible rolling shutter but it's no Digital Bolex so that does give it away as digital footage somewhat. I hope some others start playing around with these settings. With the 16mm Digital Bolex discontinued and Kodak's new Super-8 camera all the rage, there's a space for a small sensor digital cinema camera to get some love.
×
×
  • Create New...