EphraimP

25 minutes ago, EduPortas said:

Why? It has RAW and costs the same as the C70, which does not.

A new miniturization tax by Canon?

I think it's more of  a horses for courses situation. They're still selling the C200, shooters can choose which features are more important to them: hybrid body style and 10-bit codecs vs cine-style body and raw. Of course, those like me that want a cine-style body and a 10-bit codec are SOL at the moment unless they have $11K for the C300 II.

On the other hand, the C70 does make a great B/Gimbal/Crash cam for those with a C300/500. It's not going to please everyone, but it does have just enough to make an interesting choice for those wedded to Canon's ecosystem, those who vale rock solid AF, and those who have a pile of Canon EF glass (though the true price of the camera rockets up over $6,000 and it's still a wait and see game until the speedbooster comes out and more lenses have firmware updates to work with it).

And no, everyone hasn't forgotten Canon's failures. It's just that they do put out interesting and solid C-line products.

I just wiped out my B&H balance today, so I  could put one on order. I'm going to wait until these and the speedbosters are actually shipping and, dare I say it, Sony throws its counterpunch with the FX6.

1 hour ago, ntblowz said:

From another forum the rumored the price could be $5299..

That wouldn't be too bad. I've seen rumors of $4K and change but others saying that low price is going to be for an upcoming C50 with the C200 sensor.  And I've seen rumors putting it in the $6,299 range.

32 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

says 404, guess they deleted it, but luckily google cache have them

EF-RF Canon speedbooster will be released at same time, C70 can do 4K120P with Audio and PDAF! 10 Stop ND filter system

 

 

Well, that's going to check a lot of boxes for a lot of people. Of course, after the R5/R6 debacle, we may want to stand back and be skeptical at first. 

Personally, for the style of shooting I'm developing, the form factor of  the new full size C-series cameras are idea, but out of my price range at the moment. That said, I know a lot of folks, especially around here, are all about that hybrid form factor. This looks like it has enough of the benefits of cine-style cameras (built-in nd, xlr, real cooling) plus goodies (high frame rates, killer autofocus and an RF lens with the bonus speed booster for EF lenses) to temp shooters like me and people who wan a 5D Mark ii on steroids. No mention of price yet, and the adapter isn't fully compatible with most lenses yet. 

No IBIS for the weebs, but it will have digital IS that works with lens stabilization.

Interesting....

3 hours ago, elgabogomez said:

No way to mount meikes/veydras on the fp unfortunately. M43 also gives access to vazen anamorphics and some cine zooms that are quite small. Also the fp has micro hdmi which is the most beloved connection known to cine standards 😉

Well, with an EF to L adapter, you could go with the upcoming full frame L Mount, or EF mount with an adapter (if you want to invest in a more universal lens mount). Unfortunately, if you want to cover the full FP sensor, the full frame Meike lenses go up to about a grand apiece, with is pretty steep compared to $400 for the M43/X-Mount/APS-C E-Mount. There is a Super 35 EF mount version too, which is only $100 and change over the original lenses. If I get more Meikes, I'll probably go Super 35 EF mount over X-Mount. That way, I can use them with a dumb adapter or speedbooster to get two lengths out of each lens, plus be able to use them on the C100-300 series, plus even upcoming RF mount C series camera with an adapter.

I with Meike would take the next step and rock the inexpensive anamorphic option. If Siriu can get around $700 for theirs, Meike could easily get $1,000 for the M34/APS-C version. And a $1,500 full frame version, say, would be light years cheaper than the nearest competitor.

On the other hand, a telephoto Meike might be a great taking lens option for an anamorphic adapter build. Anyone tried that yet?

I think the premise of the question is unhelpful. What you NEED to capture images, still or moving, is light, a sensor to capture that light, and a lens to focus it, right? Everything falls into the category of aesthetic or practical choices.

Framing a discussion around the relative benefits and drawbacks of full frame is much more interesting. Having always shot ASP-C/Super 35 since I first picked up a digital camera, I'm definitely interested in playing with that idea.

10 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Not for me to explain, ask him. Canon did it to me as well in the past. They are very hard to communicate with.

With Tilta, I am starting to think the fan cage was a social media event to grab some attention and doesn't actually exist.

I guess what I mean is, where did you hear this. I don't believe he's mentioned it on YouTube, which is why I said I don't follow his social.

On 9/5/2020 at 5:42 AM, IronFilm said:

https://www.sounddevices.com/product/wave-agent-software/

Ah, more software to learn. Funny that it is incompatible with 32-bit float files. Of course, these files aren't 32-bit float because I was powering off of a USB power bank. The powering options are the main thing I don't like about the MixPre. I don't want to pay $65 to $100+ for a simple plastic battery sled to use better power options than AA size batteries.

On 9/4/2020 at 8:26 AM, Jeremy Clark said:

This has tripped me up MANY times - make sure that all the audio tracks in premiere are "on" (you have 3 active channels - A1-A3. Click so all are blue, then drag them over and see). 

It wasn't that the tracks weren't on. With the first clip, I was able to drag all four tracks in and I didn't change anything for the other ones that wouldn't drag the "ghost track" in. This screen grab is from a lot later on, after I deleted tracks I wasn't using and did some work in Audition.

1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

Meanwhile Canon continue to blank us and in the case of Gerald Undone after his review which covered overheating in-depth, completely ghost him.

This is the second time I've see a reference to Canon ghosting Gerald after his review, which was actually pretty neutral to Canon, if clear-headed about who wouldn't want to buy these cameras. I watch G's videos, but don't follow him on other social media. Care to explain more what happened?

8 hours ago, Jay60p said:

Most of mine are too. I have X-T3.

For the FF telephoto lenses it increases their effective focal length, big advantage there.

For my two manual Nikon SLR zooms I just got in the Turbo II speedbooster today.

Mainly for my Nikon AF 28-85, I now have access to the full coverage of the lens, plus it cuts my ISO requirements in half

(so less advantage of a full frame camera in the ISO department, on top of the the cleaner 6K to 4K oversampling!)

Besides the Fuji 18-55 kit zoom the only new lens I needed was a wide angle, the Fuji 10-24 is amazing.

 

Man, I've been shooting full frame glass on crop sensor bodies since the 30D (up through the 70D and 80D). Now, between my Metabones and Vizelex nd throttle I can either get that full frame FoV with increased aperture or boost my focal length with VND behind the glass. 

If the X-H2, when it finally comes out, is closer to a cine Super 35 cine camera than a full frame hybrid, I personally will be in heaven and snatch one right up.

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

What happens when you look at in Wave Agent?

Good question. What's Wave Agent?

16 hours ago, dgvro said:

I wanted to make a separate thread to ask about this but maybe I shouldn't:

Those of you who have used electronic adaptors to mount other lenses on the XT4 - which one(s) are best for still getting IBIS in the camera body to always function while using the adapter? Not DIS, not lens OIS, not IS Boost - I mean actual on-sensor IBIS.
I'm probably talking about EF->Fuji adapters here for the most part but sort of interested in whatever's out there too I guess.
 

It sounds like with nearly all the Fringer/Viltrox/Kipon/Metabones electronic adapters, you're pretty much getting an "all bets are off" with regard to whether IBIS will function in the camera when using the adapter, depending on the lens. I DON'T use and don't want to use any lenses that have their own OIS - and I know that OIS lenses force you to have the lens OIS supercede and deactivate the Fuji IBIS when using these adapters. But let's say just a regular electronic zoom EF lens like my Tamron 28-75 or Tokina 11-16, neither of which have lens OIS, apparently these will also prevent me from being able to use XT4's IBIS when on all of these adaptors?

Generally it seems like:
Lenses with OIS of their own - Fuji IBIS unavailable
UNstabilised Zoom lenses - Fuji IBIS is still defeated
Unstabilised fixed primes - Fuji IBIS usually may still work
Stabilised primes (rare, I can't even think of any) - Presumably still defeat Fuji IBIS

It's a real shame if so. If it's really only like that I will probably be going with some kind of fully manual dumb focal reducer (like a Zhongyi Lensturbo ii), keeping full use of IBIS (constantly setting focal mount length manually in the menu) and using other workarounds for if/when I want to change aperture.

 

 

15 hours ago, MrSMW said:

As an XT3/Fringer user with XT4 on the radar, I was not aware of this and thought IBIS worked with all adapted glass & adapters.

Potential spanner in the works then if this is the case as I was interested exploring the latest Metabones with focal reducer and a 24-70 from Tamron or Sigma.

Hmm...

I can speak to the Metabones adapter and a few  non IS EF lenses. I've use mine over the past few weeks with the 17-40L, 70-200 f2.8 (non-IS) and the 50 1.4. I didn't have receive any error messages about IBIS from the T4 when using these lenses  and was able to toggle Boost on and off. So I've assumed that IBIS was working with them. I just played around with the 17-40 and looked at footage I shot the other day with the 70-200, and it definitely seems like the IBIS is working. 

I have a 180 L Macro I can play with at some point, and I have a dumb Vizlex VND adapter I can put on and see if it makes any difference with IBIS and EF lenses, but probably not today.  Slammed with work projects and freelance stuff right now... a good place to be.

I'm happy with the Metabones speedbooster so far. I need to figure out an EF lens with good native autofocus that would fill a hole in my lens collection to buy and test with the Metabones. A  prime in the 50 to 80 range would be the ticket, I'm just not sure which lenses to look at here that aren't L-series. All my personal EF glass is L-Series, but I don't necessarily want to spend a grand+ right now on an adapted lens.

I'm having the weirdest issue with some audio tracks I recorded to my MixPre 3 II yesterday on a doc shoot. I had one boomed shotgun and one wireless lav connected to the MixPre, and everything was fine for the first two tracks. It was a very intense interview with a family who's youngest child got cancer from pesticide spray, so I was very caught up in the interview. At a certain point I noticed that the lav mic signal wasn't showing up on the recorder's screen so I stopped rolling to find the problem. If I remember correctly, the lav mic's channel was toggled off (I'm not sure how that happened, maybe when I was trying to adjust channel gain while focused on what my subjects were saying). I figured I just wouldn't have lav audio for however many takes the problem when on for.

When I pulled everything into Premiere, more takes than I expected didn't have the lav iso, which is the fourth channel in the WAV file. Then I noticed that the source monitor shows 4 channels for these clips, but when I pull them into the timeline only three show up, the lav channel is missing, as the screenshot below shows. 

If I open the original WAV file in Audition, it again shows four channels and when I extract the channels to mono files, the fourth channel does have audio present. What's going on here?

9 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Thanks man. I’m sure it’s great quality! Little over what I was hoping to spend though. But thanks for the tip. 

I feel you. I have them because the guy is so obsessed with trail camera footage he volunteered to send me them just so he could get whatever footage I send him. Self funding a project can get expensive.

I'm curious about what your doc is about, seeing as it has a wildlife angle. Also, what are your distribution plans? Are you hoping to recoup your investment on this and the value of your time? 

I have a couple of these out in the woods right now:

https://www.reconyx.com/product/XR6-UltraFire-High-Output-Covert-IR

A client I'm working with on a series of social media shorts sent these to me just for fun. He's using them on another project, a long-form doc on forest recovering from wildfires that has funding from Nat Geo. I suspect the images is about as good as you can get out of a trail cam.

2 hours ago, markr041 said:

I dislike this footage - the framing makes the widescreen aspect inhibiting, since the videographer constantly cuts off peoples heads, and I do not like how the particular discolorations ( we call it "grading") chosen in post affect skin tones.  And, videos of cute kids are second only to pet videos in terms of cuteness. But, so what? This will have zero influence on whether I like the camera.

Yeah, definitely not a fan of the color grade. Who wants their kids to have gray skin tones? 

27 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

I power my BMPCC4k and 5inch Video Assist with the same V-mount battery and haven't had any issues. I use this mount on my rig:

I

 

I use a different V-Mount plate, but other than that, my solution to powering my X-T3 rig and Ninja V is the same. I use a dummy battery for my Camera and a 12v cable for the monitor. I've been doing this for about a year with no problem. I've also been using a Powerextra NP-F960 style battery with USB and DC outlets to power my X-T4 and another Ninja. I plug the battery directly to the Ninja and use a USB to USB C cable for the T4. I haven't used this as much, but no problems yet.

5 hours ago, Adrian Bacon said:

 I’m not saying that having 4K HQ or 8K isn’t desirable. It is. It’s just that those Modes are best reserved for special shots, and getting them should be planned for accordingly..  as it is, shooting anything at 4K at any quality with the bit rates canon has been doing is really expensive on the rest of the video chain, especially if you shoot a lot of content. It’s just not viable to shoot a lot of 4K unless you have a big budget, and if you have a big budget, then why not get an appropriate camera?

That's complete bullshit. As others have stated, a 4K workflow, even for 1080 delivery, is standard now. I've got about 20 Terabytes of storage sitting on my desk top right now, in mixed SSDs and spinning disks. Cost a couple hundred bucks. 3 Terabytes worth of SSDs in my editing machine, cost a couple hundred more. The 1 Terabyte drives I use for my two Ninja 5 recorders cost a bit over a hundred a piece. Really big budget.

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Adrian here is the ultimate proof that people are blinkered idiots, that live under rocks. They miss long term trends and they even miss how millions of people use cameras differently to how they do.

As for professional camera for video... I refer you to the famous Canon EOS R5 marketing and PR statements!

https://www.eoshd.com/news/opinion-on-dpreviews-canon-eos-r5-overheating-test-in-4k/

Even Richard Butler at DPReview didn't absorb or register the Canon statements about professional video and cinematography use.

It's unbelievable it really is.

Why is the world so utterly full of chinless wonders who wander around the planet with their eyes half shut??

Why are we feeding the troll? I know, I feel like doing it too. But it's pointless. He either doesn't actually know much about video production, or he's a Canon shill, or, most likely, he's just here to troll. Lame.

 He doesn't believe in the cripple hammer, which is unfortunately very real in this case, hit him with the ban hammer.

11 minutes ago, rawshooter said:

Yes, shot on two cards at the same time for data security. But my experience matches that what is being reported elsewhere on the X-T4.

AF-C video autofocus with the X-T4 is unusable IMHO, both with the 50mm and the 18-55mm. I recorded one video with AF-C and had to throw away most of the footage afterwords. For strange reasons, the focus doesn't say locked on subjects, but pumps all the time - to such degrees that you won't see on the camera display, but only later on the big screen. 

I hope that Fuji will still fix this with firmware but won't hold my breath.

Not trying to discredit your experience with overheating, just understand it. I just tried to test the dual record situation, but one of the cards I was using is not able to record at DCI h265 10bit 4:2:0 All-I. 

As far as autofocus, my 18-55 hasn't been having the same kind of pulsing problem. I'm on firmware 1.02. I've only been using it for interviews, b-roll is mostly manual.

7 minutes ago, BrunoCH said:

I think 16mm don't cover APS-C sensor size but only MFT sensor.

You may be right, at least for the Veydras that the Meike lenses are based on. For some reason, I thought the 12 was too small but the 16 would work. But, then again, they might work.

3 minutes ago, elgabogomez said:

16mm on veydra covered the 16:9 area on apsc Sony, I saw it on my own camera. On 3:2 full sensor there was vignetting in the corners. I looked for the 2 or 3 shots I took at NAB 2017 but not finding them 😕 so I have no proof but my word.

I asked Duclos if they'd make a rear mount MFT to X-mount mod for the 16mm MFT lens and they replied:

"Possibly, but we have many other projects in the works right now."

14 minutes ago, BrunoCH said:

I have the, 25, 35 and 50mm. 75% of my shots are made with the 35mm. When I need wider, I put the 25; very rarely I put the 50mm. Hope Meike will release a 20mm or 19mm if I need wider than 25mm and get stuck by a wall indoors.

Yeah, I'd hope they go wider than 25 too. Do the three you have work as a matched set very well. They should, but I understand that they may have made some changes to the optical formula between making the 25 and the rest of the set. For the price, it's really phenomenal to be able to get 3-4 cine lenses for the price of one from another brand.

1 minute ago, rawshooter said:

I had the camera overheat after 25 minutes of shooting a concert in ca. 23 degrees room temperature, 4K DCI h265 10bit 4:2:0 All-I on dual SD cards, with a Fujinon 50mm/f2 WR lens.

So you were shooting to both cards at the same time, to have backups? Just trying to make sure I understand what happened in your case. If so, I wonder if double recording would cause more heat. Seems plausible, but I'm no electronic or electric engineer. That would really be a bummer, as doubling recording is a critical workflow for a lot of people. 

Btw, how is the autofocus on the 50? 

24 minutes ago, BrunoCH said:

Here is a quick XT4 IS test done at the end of the afternoon. No problem with overheating. I shot about 12mn rushes in 45mn without any problem when it was  34 °C in Paris.
XT4 hand held  with my 50mm Meike cine lens + ND16 filter + lens hood. IS ON; IS boost ON.

How are you liking the 50mm Meike cine? Do you have the original 25mm? I'm wondering how they compare, because I have the 25 and have definitely been tempted to get the 50 and maybe the 35.

9 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Is the XT4 more prone to overheating than the XT3 then?

9 hours ago, rawshooter said:

Yes, and yes. I own the XT-4 and had the XT-3 before as a rental camera. The overheating shutdown of the X-T4 is a known fact, and openly communicated by Fuji. You're getting about 20-25 minutes video recording time out of the camera. 

Most likely, this is due to the IBIS system of the camera (which not only consumes additional power/generates heat, but also worsens dissipation of heat from the sensor). 

This is interesting. I haven't posted on my T4 recording torture test yet. Last weekend I tested 4k 24p recording times in my office at 79F/26C. I was able to get almost 2 hours out of the camera, ending the test when the battery died. I recorded for about 24 minutes in 4K (limited by the amount of space on my card) then messed around the menu system, recorded a minute or so in 1080, reformatted the card and then recorded about 74 minutes in 4K by restarting record each time it ended after timing out.

During this time, I was also feeding signal to my Ninja v to monitor recording. OIS on my 17-55 was enabled, as was IBIS (but not boost mode if I remember correctly). The camera was positioned on my desk on a Ronin-S, so the stabilization wasn't actually needed. I'm not sure how much heat the IBIS generates if it's on but not actually needed. I had the screen flipped out to dissipate heat. The camera definitely got hot to the touch but didn't trigger an overheat warning or limit record times above the normal limit.

After I put in a new battery and reformatted my card, I put on my new Speedbooster with an EF 50 1.4, switched to photo mode and took a bunch of jpegs of one of my dogs, who was sleeping on my office couch (photo below, just for fun).

So, at least at reasonably warm indoor temperature overheating doesn't seem to be an overheating problem, at least not one that would cripple a reasonable video workflow. ~Two hours of actual record time on a shoot is pretty long. As I mentioned before, I got about 2 hours of total use time outside on a 90+ degree day recording external 4K plus internal 1080. I'll try to do an outdoor torture test soon, but I'm not sure how to set it up with monitor (because I'm chained to the computer until I finish editing a project for a client). So far, overheating on the T4 isn't going to hold me back. IBIS

9 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

 

This looks actually pretty good, 

Meh. The screenshot is nice. The actual footage didn't look impressive, at least on my screen. Not bad, just not better than a lot of current hybrid footage. Definitely didn't seem on a level with cine camera footage, though some other Komodo clips have, at least for me.