Michael Steiner

11 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

With the EOS M6 Mark II now uncomfortably close to the Canon C500 and several Netflix shows on the verge of cancelling their Arri Alexa orders for a diminutive $700 mirrorless camera, Canon felt compelled to lose the cinema frame rate of 24p.

? 

This post was a genuinely funny read. Adequate tone for the decision made by Canon (if it really gets confirmed in the next few days).   

Way more healthy to just laugh at this. And I say that as a Canon shooter who hoped to replace the M50 with one of these... 

Hope dies last, but it dies... ?

31 minutes ago, Adam Kuźniar said:

Come on Mattias, are we reading different posts or what because reading this thread I didn't get the impression that the lack of 24p is the end of the world. I did get the impression that it's silly that it's not there, that there's zero technical reasons why it's not there, that it's just Canon being " WE wANt TO PrOtect the CinemA linE " 

I, just like you, shoot in 25/50 because that's the EU standard, I don't think I've ever shot in 24 on my GH5. However if it didn't have that option, I'd be the first one to write "wtf panasonic why can you do 25fps but not literally one frame less?" Not because I actually need it, but because I feel like it's such a standard feature that it should be implemented.

Couldn't have said it better! 24p was in the 60D, 70D and 80D. Removing it now is just a silly and unnecessary move. While I also haven't shot in 24p for years lots of people do. And it would just be nice to have that option in this camera too. 

3 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's only viable if you eat your clients afterwards.

I had to laugh out loud reading this. 

But anyway, there's no reason to skip 24p in this camera when they had it in any other of their xxDs and even the M cameras. No argument. Licence fees? I don't buy that. 

2 minutes ago, PolarStarArts said:

I think what Canon could mean by 'image processing' is that the 4K files are processed via the Digic 8 processor.

I'd say it either means pixel binning or line skipping...

8 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am pretty sure since 2016 when David Bowie left us and Trump got elected we have been living in a different parallel universe where nothing makes sense any more.

24p now the stuff of 'film wannabes' is it?

You are a big old troll. And you need to fuck off.

Relax. Not saying 24p is for "film wannabes" only, that was somebody else. I just said that I never shoot 24p. But I have absolutely no problem with people shooting 24p. 

Edit: Ok, I get it now. My sarcasm-detector was off when I quoted ntblowz... Yet I still shoot all my stuff in 25p. Nothing wrong with that in Europe from my POV.

1 hour ago, ntblowz said:

I haven't shoot 24p after graduating from school lol

While I never shoot 24p either – it's just silly if they're really leaving out 24p again. As if they'd want to give their critics a valuable argument by purpose. But there's still hope they just listed the highest fps in PAL and NTSC modes in the 90D video and 24p is in there nonetheless...  

30 minutes ago, Framed_By_Dan said:

Before shooting my sequence I done a few test shots in the garden the reviewed the footage on the computer. I knew the AVCHD codec would be a potential struggle but didnt realise how bad it was until looking back on these test shots - the footage was already falling apart before my eyes! 17 Mbps is a long way off the solid looking 100+ Mbps i'm used to off my GH5! Not to mention how much moire I saw in the footage!

I think you are way to critical, and I mean that in a good way. Watching without knowledge about what camera etc. was used for me was a good experience, kind of like looking mor freely at the videography... And yours looked nothing short of good to my eyes. 

So for me this competition was also a reminder that filming is a craft first. And that good craftsmen and -woman can work with every tool. ?

26 minutes ago, TrueIndigo said:

This camera features a 9MP 5th generation Super CCD HR sensor. From the days when Fuji photsites were octagonal in shape and some were of a different size -- wild times!

Hey TrueIndigo

Thanks for the explanation. I had no idea octagonal photosites even existed... I assume there are less issues with moire on that sensor, if any at all? Very cool! 

In all honesty: I would have paid off the winner of the competition the amount 60Ds go on Ebay right now rather than handing over mine if I lost. This is the first camera I bought with my own money so it has some emotional value for me and will remain on my shelf ? 

Congrats to @PannySVHS and @Framed_By_Dan and to all other participants as well! Some very exotic camera choices and lenses already revealed. Now I'm particularly curious to see what camera @TrueIndigo has used. I liked the colours of that one the most. And of course which lens created that unusual bokeh in the contribution of @Wronzoff.

My choice was very boring and unspectacular, as I used what I already owned: Canon 60D and 60mm Macro with some cheap 0.9 ND (EOS standard colour profile without any grading).

You can export up to UHD in the free version of resolve. 4K DCI and above only in the studio-version. Not sure about any other limitations. 

22 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

 

 

Ok. Now reading this, it's even more ridiculous than I thought. If, as a billionaire, a small blog can cause this kind of "sufferings" I think the one to consult is not a lawyer.

This whole story shines a completely new light on RED, one that doesn't make that company look too nice (to say it politely).

Seeing they forced Mr. Reid to shut up with a lawsuit back in 2010 is telling. In german you'd call that "Mit Kanonen auf Spatzen schiessen" – use the big gun to shoot the small guy. It's ridiculous and contradicts everything RED (in my understanding) wanted to stand for back then. I don't agree with everything Mr. Reid writes, but I firmly support that he can write whatever he wants in his own blog. Nothing wrong with that. 

While I think RED does indeed merit respect for turning the camera industry upside down with their first cameras, there doesn't seem to be much left from that underdog attitude and REDs self promoted goal of empowering the little guy with affordable Cinema grade gear. Or worse, it was just a nice image they gave themself to attract attention. Remember them teasing a small fixed-lens camera with 3K for 3K? They even had a teaser-video with pimps, whores, cops and skaters shot on that little beast.

Now in contrary RED seems to be responsible for preventing the next step in the evolution of motion pictures. They were first to the party but didn't let anybody else enter since then. From a business standpoint that's kind of understandable.  But considering how RED promoted itself it's just sad and they deserve being called out for that. 

The self-hosted Video looks better in Safari than anything I have seen on Vimeo and YouTube so far – good job Mr. Reid! But in Chrome the Thumbnail remains visible after pressing play while sound is playing fine (iMac 5K, 2017). Is that only happening on my Computer?

And yes – great IQ on the S1! Impressive

3 hours ago, TrueIndigo said:

 

 

Good old 4:3. 

The colors look quite good for me. Did you need to import from tape to edit this?

If this camera really is native 4:3, I bet you had to pay quite a lot to own one back then. 

Good job

Edit: since there seems to be only an auto-mode to shoot video, I assume this could just as well be shot with one of the better video capable DSLRs in the early days of digital imaging. 

Very interesting, unusual Bokeh on this shot (for my eyes at least). I wonder what lens created that... Nice grading too!

9 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

On the other hand people make more and more videos and use more and more cameras than ever.

They are just too many options.

Imagine how many action cams/drone cams/360-VR cams/video cams/dSLRs/mirrorless are sold every year, and how many minutes of video are produced, and go back to 85-95-2005 and 2015 and do the maths.

Video creation is almost a mandatory skill nowdays, go check how many Steenbecks were sold in 85 and how many professional editing suites are used right now.

I absolutely agree with you. But I don‘t think this contradicts what I said .

My point is that putting better video specs into Cameras with stills oriented form and ergonomics will not compensate for the sales lost to smartphones. The cake got bigger, but the slice for MILCs and DSLRs is getting proportionally smaller. And from my POV it’s not because of technical reasons. Just like offering 96kHz 24bit WAVE support could not turn around the decline in sales of portable music players (not the best comparsion but you get my Point).

7 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

So maybe they should focus on video specs then, because a video guy isn't going to buy a smartphone for his video projects.

Yes they are. In masses. Even BBC has a few guys that use iphones as A-Cams and even more that use them as B-Cams. No way there‘s enough volume in the video centric market to replace what has been lost to smartphones. 

So how long does it take to be doomed? Seems like a longterm project... Just asking because I have the impression of reading the same comments since the launch of the 5DIII six (or even seven?) years ago. And yet Canons bankruptcy still does not seem on the horizon... 

But irony aside, some honest questions: How many Cameras do the members of this forum buy? How often do you upgrade? Did you upgrade from the 5DII to the 5DIII and to the 5DIV? From the 60D to the 70D to the 80D? From XT2 to XT3? From A7S to A7SII? I ask because I'm not convinced (but could be wrong of course) that the crowd of lower end professionals and ambitious amateurs using DSLRs and mirrorless ILCs for their video creations have that much impact on the overall market. Is it a loud crowd? I'd guess so. But is it as relevant for a Camera company as it thinks it is? 

I bought my first camera in 2008 and since then in total eight. Only four of them costed more than 1000, of those four only two costed more than 2000 (but those were dedicated video cameras). Am I an exception? 

Not saying Canon (or Sony) is doing everything right. But isn't the impact of Smartphones on sales for these kind of Cameras way bigger than that of video-oriented guys like we are? Would a Camera that fits all our video guys needs really be the turning-point for Canon?

Being offended because Sonys new 60MP Camera doesn't have intriguing video-specs seems kind of pointless. Asking for a 3500$ 1DXIII is nothing short of naive.

I agree with Mr. Reid that this is a decisive moment for Camera companies. But would internal RAW in 4K120p really be the solution to these companies problems? I'd say a big piece of the cake has gone to Smartphone companies forever, no matter what specs they put into their cameras.

Completely agree that Adobe abuses it's position as a near monopolist. Had to finish an edit someone else started in Premiere and paid 35€ to use that single app for a month (no PS, AE etc.). Got impatient in short time so exported an XML to FCPX and finished it there. 

Move away from Adobe, it's possible. We got used to shoot with many different cameras so that should be doable with software too. 

- Instead of Premiere use FCPX or Resolve. I use FCPX since it launched 8 years ago, I'd say we had around 20 updates so far for which they have never charged anything. Paid 300$ (400$ with motion and compressor) and that's it. 

- Instead of Ligthroom/Photoshop use Capture One for organizing and RAW-conversions. Add Pixelmator or even better Affinity Photo and Affinity Designer if necessary. C1 costs around 300$ (upgrades around 120$). The Affinity apps are 40$ each and well worth that price.

There's no doubt you'll save money in the long term if you avoid Adobe. 

And if the world would stopp using that damn Microsoft Office I'd be completely subscription free ?  

2 hours ago, Framed_By_Dan said:

 

 

Nice! This as well as other contributions for me is proof enough that what‘s in front of the camera and who‘s behind it still matters more than bitrate, bit depth and resolution. I bet you‘d have happy clients even when this was your only tool available. Good job!

55 minutes ago, kye said:

Very nice!! and a great idea too

36 minutes ago, Geoff CB said:

Excellent short piece! Simple, effective, and shows skill.

Thank you both! The sun shined into the room perfectly to create this high contrast scene without any additional lights (just a small reflector next to the camera to lift the blacks a little bit).    

37 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I can't wait to see what this camera is

Me too. I like the washed out colors, looks almost like 8mm film. Very cool!

I'm not one of the heavy-duty contributors here but thought this was an inspiring idea and blew the dust off my very first self bought camera. Happy to see it still works and my muscle-memory was back within five minutes of handling that good old boy. 

On 6/5/2019 at 5:38 PM, newfoundmass said:

You're comparing the price of a car in 1903 to the prices of a MacPro in 2009 and 2013? The US dollar in 2009 is equal to $1.19 today. Using inflation to justify this is ridiculous. 

I wasn't referring to inflation but arguing more along the line of "times change"... (and admit it wasn't the best of analogies) 

But when you look at the current prices of MBP, iMac and iMac Pro I still think it was naive to hope for a 3000$ entry price for this machine. 

On 6/5/2019 at 5:38 PM, newfoundmass said:

I'm sorry I'm not as understanding of Apple shafting their customer base as you are. 

I'm absolutely fine with that, don't be sorry ? 

My main point was and still is that some people just need to manage their expectations a little better for the sake of their own health and for the benefit of more pragmatic discussions in these forums. 

Be it Apple, Canon, Sony or whatever company – crying "rip off", "they lost touch", "they're doomed", "they don't know what they are doing" and whatnot every time they launch a new product is annoying. And it is mostly based on individual and highly unrealistic expectations and the wrong assumption that the personal needs are those that any company has to fulfill. It's just a stupid, never ending discussion running in circles.

Sure, everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion. But most of the time these opinions reflect just some weird feelings. If there was any valuable expertise behind these outcries you'd better start a consulting company in Silicon Valley.  

Cheers

2 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

You realize that has been the entry price for the last couple MacPros, right? 

I think the 2009 MacPro I bought was $2800? Maybe $3000?

Acknowledging you royally screwed up with the Garbage Bin MacPro and, as part of trying to win people back, launching a MacPro that has worse specs than your best regular iMac (not even the iMac Pro!) and for twice the price is asinine. That it's upgradable is wonderful, but not $6k wonderful, and certainly not the $10k you'd have to spend to get the machine you'd really need. 

This is clearly a company that has lost its way. Style over substance to a ridiculous degree. That they've simultaneously done this while dumbing down/simplified their "pro" apps like FCPX makes no sense. 

The core of the Apple's creative community, and those that were most vocal about Apple losing their way, are the ones Apple has decided to ignore. 

Everyone in this thread complaining WANT to give Apple their money, FFS! 

Sorry, but your reply is just proof of my point. QED 

If you bought a Ford A in 1903, you paid less than a grand. Prices of 2009 mean nothing. Regulare Macs do now maybe 80% of what you needed a MacPro for back then. 

I fully agree with what Mr Stasianos wrote up there:

2 hours ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

When you are buying the base configuration of a Mac Pro, you are actually paying for things that you can't use until you stuff it with overpriced components. You are paying for the "fact" that your machine has the "ability" to get significant upgrades like 1.5 TB of Ram, 4 TB SSD, 4 x Vega's etc.

If you aren‘t at least relieved Apple brought this MacPro you‘re not the targeted customer for it. Go have a look at what the highend people think of it, there‘s quiet some excitement. For all normal creators I think the following is what Apple thinks too:

2 hours ago, Dimitris Stasinos said:

The iMac 2019 right now is the perfect balance for almost any content creator that can't afford the new MacPro. iMac Pro is also overpriced for the majority of users.

You dont have to like apple. If you cant live with what they offer, it might be better to move on...

But stating they have lost their way is ridiculous. Thats what I mean by being personally offended. Dont extrapolate from your feelings.