Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2015 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014

  
 
sirimiri
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


Fred Miranda wrote:
I just got the 1D C. Charging the batteries.

Oh, damn!



Jan 07, 2015 at 03:04 AM
Shield
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


Fred Miranda wrote:
I just got the 1D C. Charging the batteries.


I hate you Fred Miranda.



Jan 08, 2015 at 08:10 AM
Jay Adeff
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


Dave_EP wrote:
I'm not going to disagree with his verdicts, though quoting the 1Dc as a 'used' price and the others as 'new' price is a little misleading

Also not everyone wants or needs that super shallow DOF that full-frame brings. Not even Hollywood shoots full frame. If that last bit confused you, neither the Alexa or Red (the two most used cameras) nor the Canon C500 are full frame, yet we all go to the movies and enjoy the show.

Lot's of people (mostly amateurs) get hung up on needing full-frame shallow DOF for the filmic look when in reality it never
...Show more

Hollywood did use a "full frame" 35mm format called Vista-Vision back in the 1950's. The film ran sideways, just like on a 35mm stills camera, and the cameras were extremely large and heavy. They fell out of favor when 65mm and 70mm film came along (which ran vertically). I believe Steven Spielberg used a Vista-Vision camera for some special effects shots in Star Wars. But the majority of recent cinema releases have been shot in the ubiquitous "Super 35" format in which the film runs vertically, with the width of the image between the film sprockets. This allows the use of different film gate masks for different width-to-height ratios, including the popular Panavision 2.37:1 anamorphic format which many film makers, like Quentin Tarantino and J.J. Abrams, still favor. Film in cinema is alive and well. Even Star Wars VII is being shot on film.



Jan 08, 2015 at 07:28 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


Jay Adeff wrote:
Hollywood did use a "full frame" 35mm format called Vista-Vision back in the 1950's. The film ran sideways, just like on a 35mm stills camera, and the cameras were extremely large and heavy. They fell out of favor when 65mm and 70mm film came along (which ran vertically). I believe Steven Spielberg used a Vista-Vision camera for some special effects shots in Star Wars. But the majority of recent cinema releases have been shot in the ubiquitous "Super 35" format in which the film runs vertically, with the width of the image between the film sprockets. This allows the
...Show more

Lucas

65mm/70mm was 65mm image shot and then 70mm with 5mm for magnetic audio tracks for showing in cinema.

Super35mm goes edge to edge without space for soundtrack (and not used in theaters) and often shot more 3-perf wide screen, especially if planning a 2.40:1 release. It's non-anamorphic. Shoots on 35mm film run vertically. Must be converted to something for cinema display. Not using audio gave it more negative room for the image than standard shooting on 35mm did which used up one edge for audio. But it doesn't give as much area as the anamorphic wide screen formats.

Regular widescreen 1.85:1 non-anamorphic with space on edge for soundtrack.

Panavision came up with an anamorphic 2:35.1 on 35mm which uses more negative space than you get from Super35 for wide ratios, since the horizontal squishing lets it get a lot more vertical surface area. This is probably the most common of the many wider than 1.85:1 formats and the most common version of the 2.35:1 stuff.

More productions use digital than film now and even the ones that use film almost all do the editing after digitization now. I don't think anyone really uses film flatbed or Moviola and so on now although Spielberg held out with Moviola until crazily recently).

At least in my region, it's almost impossible to find a theater still using film for projection in theater other than for the few true IMAX theaters.



Jan 08, 2015 at 08:55 PM
Alex Phan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


canon Honkong just drops the price of the 1DC to the $7000 range now.


Jan 12, 2015 at 09:08 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


Bubble wrote:
canon Honkong just drops the price of the 1DC to the $7000 range now.


Thanks for the heads-up. I hope that will translate to the US prices soon.



Jan 14, 2015 at 07:12 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't HK$61,999 about $8,000 instead of $7,000?
http://www.canon.com.hk/en/product/catalog/productItemDetails.do?prrfnbr=200477



Jan 14, 2015 at 08:58 PM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


Fred Miranda wrote:
I just got the 1D C. Charging the batteries.


results?

less detail and natural texture, especially in low contrast areas than the A7S?

actually better overall? (it's sure doesn't seem like it would be from what I've seen people post, but you never know, who knows what they did to the files, how things were set, how they were compressed, etc. it seems like A7S should be better since so much of the posted stuff looks better to me, but maybe I've been misled? (at the very least the A7S system still cost a lot less, lot, lot, less))





Jan 15, 2015 at 12:03 AM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · EOSHD: The best video DSLRs of 2014


skibum5 wrote:
results?

less detail and natural texture, especially in low contrast areas than the A7S?

actually better overall? (it's sure doesn't seem like it would be from what I've seen people post, but you never know, who knows what they did to the files, how things were set, how they were compressed, etc. it seems like A7S should be better since so much of the posted stuff looks better to me, but maybe I've been misled? (at the very least the A7S system still cost a lot less, lot, lot, less))


I still have 4 days on my loan before I have to return it.
From my initial tests, the detail is there in 4k and downsampled 2K. The 1080p 24p video looks ok but can't compare to the 4k downsampled or s35 crop. 1080p @60fps is softer with some aliasing but it's nice to have the option for slow motion.
In low light I am getting some noise in c-log at ISOs above 4000. Even on the a7S in 4K and s-log2 I am getting noise at similar ISO ranges.
On the 1DC, it's a fine grain noise. It's better shooting with preset color profile in low light even though there is a clear reduction in dynamic range. Colors out of this camera are very pleasant, especially skin tones. I'm not a fan of sharpened video (In-camera or in post) and the 1D C in 4k provides all the detail I would ever need. If the price is lowered to $7k, I would recommend it instead of the A7S+Shogun just for the ergonomics alone.



Jan 15, 2015 at 10:55 AM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.