peederj Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 Hyperbole? C100 is not raw or full frame or $3k. It's a whole different ballgame creatively. I've shot with the C100, the image is mush compared to raw on the 5D Mark III. You are looking at compressed 5D footage in the DVX comparison. You try grading a DNG from the 5D Mark III and a AVCHD frame from the C100 and see what happens. Using the Ninja 2 and Neat Video with both the C100 HDMI out (with Canon Log) and the 5D3 HDMI out (with Cinestyle) yields perfectly gradeable and usable footage provided a camera operator able to set a custom white balance and expose for the highlights properly. Those are the best "official" (unhacked) low light options available under $10K and the Ninja is a joy to use and cut the footage from....you can literally shoot all day and not worry about batteries or storage and the ProRes or DNx drops straight into your NLE with scenes and shots and takes all numbered for you. That is absolutely a professional workflow and any operator that can call themselves professional will be able to get a completely broadcast or big screen-ready result that way. There's a bit of pot-meet-kettle with all the criticism of Bloom and Laforet not falling all over themselves publicly over the ML RAW hack. To avoid being guilty of the same unfairness we can't dismiss entirely what's already officially here and working for real productions rather than a few image quality junkies. The RAW image will likely give more latitude and color accuracy, but I'm not yet sure it provides more DR or resolution than the HDMI out with a log gamma. We need scientific tests to determine that and to date ZERO have been posted, just a bunch of image junkie anecdata examples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.