eatstoomuchjam

DP Journey shot an official promo video for it, says he'll publish a review later:

Chris and Jordan trying to up their thumbnail game, but succeeding only in inviting any number of rude photoshops:

There are tons of people using C70's and C300 II's. I doubt they're selling a ton of them these days, given that they're several years old and most people in the target market already have them and have been using them. I think that they know that their target market isn't people who want weird pretentious talk or wild claims, but working shooters who aren't spending all day on internet forums. (That is, not me - I'm unlikely to buy this camera any time soon and I hang out on internet forums too much) I'm guessing that it's either cost or that more people told them they wanted multiple base ISO's. It also gives people a potential reason to keep buying the C70 - which they really wouldn't have otherwise.

https://www.cined.com/canon-eos-c400-cinema-camera-announced-6k-full-frame-raw-internal-recording-triple-base-iso-and-more/ I was wrong about the lower native ISO - it's 800. Also, the full sensor resolution is 6000x3164. That seems aligned with my belief that it can do 17:9 open gate (or awfully close to it). I also missed that it has built-in ND filters. Nice.

Not mentioned, but judging by the sensor that they showed, I'd guess it can do 17:9 open gate. 😃

Just watched the livestream - announcement from Canon. Main takeaways: 6K BSI stacked sensor Triple base ISO (I think it was 400, 3200, 12800, but I might be wrong on the lowest one) RF mount DPAF II USB-C standard monitor Integrated servo zoom port Mini-XLR similar to C70, 12G SDI/3G SDI + full-size HDMI Uses new version of BPA batteries, can use the old ones, but it will disable the integrated servo zoom port + multi-function shoe "Just over 5x5x5 inches" Weighs around 3.5 pounds "Best dynamic range of any full-frame EOS Cinema camera ever" $8,000 From the announcement, it looks like a pretty solid working person's camera. The YouTuber scene probably won't find much to be excited about, but I suspect that Canon is going to sell a ton of these to owner/operators. Also, it makes all the recent C70 sales make more sense. We'll see what people think once this starts getting into the hands of real users, but it looks like a solid, if somewhat uninteresting, option!

The Pyxis is almost literally the exact guts of another BlackMagic camera that was released more than a year ago, but moved into a cube and people are peeing their pants in excitement for it. The FX3 is an A7S3 in a different body. The R5C is the R5 in a different body. The industry is full of successful cameras that are basically "cheaper camera, but cinema body." Not sure why Panasonic should be held to a different standard.

You're saying it like it's a bad thing, but people really like the G9 II. Putting its guts in a pro body, enabling internal raw, and charging only $300 more for it (judging by leaks) sounds pretty great to me.

I just poked around - most of what I have with people is either for short films that I shot for others or with friends who would be upset if I shared their image to an internet forum. If it's OK for the people to be a bit out of focus (just for a skin tones test or something), I have a few from one of my own short films with people in the foreground or background.

It doesn't, but if you're not in a rush, there's an app that dumps PRR to CinemaDNG with various compression options. That or you can use something like Scratch to do some raw adjustments and then export as ProRes. Definitely more of a pain than direct input, though.

Here are a few short and uninteresting clips in f-log2. They're still uploading, should be done in about 10 minutes. I'll leave them up until I remember to delete them or need to free up space. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1wXDZ0j8JvTxejzKbjjnEYq0XWv1qZJ30?usp=sharing

Sorry, I'm not actually engaging with your dumbshit distortions of what articles actually say and desire to limit their scope to apply to only a single industry instead of dozens of industries. If you actually have evidenciary proof of whatever kompromat you claim is acquired in Tokyo and Vegas, kindly provide it. If you don't, stop bombarding everybody else with your idiotic drivel.

ProRes RAW is not owned by Atomos in any way. It's Apple's codec. The biggest problem thus far is that it's raw enough that it seems to violate Red's patent. Black Magic raw, on the other hand, is apparently less raw in such a way that it skirts it (or at least, BM haven't been perceived as enough of a thread for Red to take any sort of legal action against it)

Uh oh, everybody. We have a conspiracy theorist on our hands. Are there any other ridiculous and yet unprovable claims that you'd like to present as facts? Careful, I hear that there are little gnomes who live in your keyboard and report everything you say and do back to Wayne Newton so that he knows who to target with his satellite-based impotency ray.

At least the 18-35 was almost a 2x zoom! This one is 1.6x.

And you're flying wife? Did you check in your beautiful flying house?

Agreed that FLC is going to be pretty rough for sales of FilmConvert and Dehancer. I'm just waiting for YouTubers to start coming out with their FLC "packs" for sale. But really, I was just pushing back on the general concept that the R1MX has some sort of magical image because it has some super-OLPF that exactly mimics "film," whatever that is. Of course, a bunch of the rest of the above rant was weird too - like questioning whether "David Fischer [sic]" would choose a C70, a camera designed for fast run & gun operation - when Fincher famously does 50-100 takes of each scene and barely ever moves the camera. On a DF picture, for the most part, the camera and lights get set in a place and are expected to stay there for hours while they shoot endless takes. It doesn't matter a bit how heavy the camera is or how long it takes to set it up for the next scene. The corollary to that is if you're on a small crew and have a location for only 1 day and you have 5 pages to get through and a mix of interior/exterior shots, it's generally better to choose a lighter camera which can be operated quickly. If doing that, I'd think you were crazy if you said you were shooting the r1mx, a camera that is famously inflexible (needs specific lighting), heavy (needs bigger/heavier tripod and harder to move), and prone to randomly rebooting or crashing throughout the day. It's all a matter of which compromises. That's it.

This is the problem. While you're not wrong that in general, the MTF curve for film has a downward slope near the highest end, for some film stocks, for some it is a curve which increases until a certain point and then drops off and the shape of the curve and slope of the descent varies. Kodak Gold only dropped off to around 70 where Velvia drops all the way to 30. On the other hand, for Tri-X, it's nearly flat until the higher levels where it drops down to like 20. https://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF1A.html https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/files/resources/f4017_TriX.pdf This is where I am going. Film doesn't match the MTF of film, depending on which film you choose. It is a true statement that the MTF curve of all films (that I know of) drops off on the right, the amount of drop-off varies wildly.

Please see previous comments about how "film" doesn't look like "film." You seem to be parroting marketing claims that are completely nonsensical. Even if an OLPF could be designed to match the sharpness or softness of a given type of film, which is a strange concept, 5203 and 5294 are only so similar - and the chunky grainy look of Tri-X is even less similar, not to mention black and white.

4K is 4x the size of 2K so it makes sense that 4K ProRes would be 3x (or more) the size of 2K ProRes. 🙂

Nice! Even outside of boom use, I have an s-mic 2s that I use with my C70. Guess I know what I'll get to use with the k-x as soon as I get an xlr adapter for it!

Can't you do 4k raw from fs700 with Ninja and/or Video Assist? I thought it did 4k raw up to like 120p, though I don't remember if that was continuous or only for a few seconds.

The C70 seems less sharp, for sure, beyond being 4k vs 6k. Colors are a little punchier straight out of camera. I don't have a Xyla 21 and haven't done anything scientific, but I think the C70 has a little more dynamic range (but the difference is less than I expected). Both sensors are a bit wider than a standard APS-C sensor (26.2mm for the C70 and 27.03mm for the K-X) so with a focal reducer, the field of view/dof of the lenses is a nearly perfect match for full frame. Also, C70 has rolling shutter, but I think it's around 16ms - so it looks mostly fine when shooting moving stuff/moving the camera around. It has the advantage when overcranking to 120fps that it doesn't need to crop in at all, but the disadvantage of turning off DGO and losing dynamic range (though then the RS is even less, like 8ms or something). This weekend, maybe tomorrow, I'll do my side-by-side test and would be glad to post a couple of frame grabs (before and after using the color chart tool in Resolve). Gotta' hand it to those folks - I've done some crazy stuff to get the shot, but I'm not sure I'd be up for standing in the middle of a bunch of fighting apes.

One can only hope that they didn't lose Jerry's invitation in the mail this time. Their event just won't be the same without him sitting on a couch not shooting anything and distracting other people who are just trying to generate a quick marketing piece.

I'd say the same about the term "filmic." It's usually used by people who clearly never shot on film and seem to think that all film looked the same. But Portra (negative film, low contrast) and Velvia (positive film, high contrast) don't even remotely look alike. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that half of those people would see images shot on Velvia and damn them as being insufficiently filmic. 😉 Similarly, FP4, HP5, Delta 400, and T-Max 3200 all look very distinct from each other - including that the first two are traditional black and white films and the others are modern t-grain films. Even within the same black and white film stock, choice of developer is extremely relevant. Anyway. People use "cinematic" and "filmic" in camera discussions like people used "old-timey" in O Brother Where Art Thou. They just mean it's something they like, but for some reason, won't just say that.