Very good, very good...
Have a nice day!
Jump to content
58 replies to this topic
Posted 29 August 2016 - 03:05 AM
Very good, very good...
Have a nice day!
Support Cinematography.com and buy gear using our Amazon links!
PANASONIC LUMIX GH5 Body 4K Mirrorless Camera, 20.3 Megapixels, Dual I.S. 2.0, 4K 422 10-bit, Full Size HDMI Out, 3 Inch Touch LCD, DC-GH5KBODY (USA Black)
Posted 29 August 2016 - 04:15 AM
haha yes good one.. would go well with the C300 II.. they just don't get the video side of things .. stick to lenses and stills camera,s..
Posted 29 August 2016 - 05:41 AM
Bit unfair about the crop factor, I thought. Not as big a deal as everyone makes out.
Otherwise yes, one would have hoped for log and 4K HDMI.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 09:56 AM
The crop factor defearts the entire purpose of the 5D series!
Posted 29 August 2016 - 09:59 AM
I agree, the main appeal to the Canon 5D video is that full-frame shallow-focus look, otherwise there are plenty of other options that are easier and better.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 10:16 AM
It wouldn't be quite so bad if it was a mirrorless mount (like the GH4/BMPCC/A6300 has), as at least you could then speedbooster it!
Posted 29 August 2016 - 11:23 AM
5D is and always will be the entry point for full frame still photography. The fact that it had any video features to start with was an after thought, and they are not going to make the 5D an incredible video camera that would compete against their Cinema lines. So if you do a lot of stills work and need to shoot an occasional video its a good camera. If you are primarily working on moving pictures then look elsewhere. I own a 5D MKIII that I bought for shooting stills, not the video, but I will occasionally shoot video on it as a BTS camera or a desperate B camera if I need one badly.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 02:25 PM
Canon still hasn't woken up to the fact, they're not good at making video cameras. Everything they make that shoots moving images, is substandard in one regard, all the way back to their first video cameras. They always skimp on something critical and it leaves their cameras lacking compared to the competition. It's true that all cameras within the consumer price bracket, must skimp on something. Yet, the 30 some odd years Canon has been making consumer video cameras, they haven't yet learned what's important. What frustrates me is that Canon is willing to re-tool the entire factory to make a new body, which is an astronomical cost. Yet, they are unwilling to use a better processor, constantly resorting to their own in-house Digic processor, which I've always disliked.
Canon has purposely crippled this new cameras abilities so people will be pushed towards the super expensive and ultra-useless MPEG disaster C series. I understand if Canon had a phenomenal video camera and didn't want to share technology. They simply don't have that, so the underwhelming C series is considered the highest tech they have, so the still cameras must have "worse" tech. So now, they push out yet another camera that's still 3 years behind its competitors on the video side. Heck, it's even behind on the still side, 30MP is nothing in todays word.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 02:35 PM
Although the C series is a popular documentary camera for broadcast work, which basically does the job required of it.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 02:55 PM
Right, but there are FAR better 1080P cameras.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 03:11 PM
As far as long-take documentary and outdoor shooting, what are some things you feel are better in that price range of under $2500?
Posted 29 August 2016 - 05:20 PM
No doubt, but they probably want a cost effective, reliable workhorse with an undemanding workflow. There is also brand loyalty involved.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 06:57 PM
I didn't get the C300 when it was first released and I continue to not get the series today, for all of the reasons given in this thread. The pictures can be very, very nice, because Canon knows how to make sensors. Otherwise, however, the spec is anemic, the layout is unnecessarily difficult, they're expensive for what they are and the tricks such as advanced autofocus are likely to emerge elsewhere at some point.
They do make very nice pictures, but then again so does the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 07:20 PM
The C300 was the first s35 sensor ,doc,corp level camera with 50 Mbps..broadcast standard for HD.. thats the secret of its success.. plus a very pleasing picture.. the fact it was designed to resemble a kettle.. XLR inputs right on the top of a module .. and a sub standard consumer EVF placed right at the back .. forcing the operator to hold it out in front of them.. is some how unbelievable .. all they had to do was make the F3 better.. i.e. a box longer than it is tall with a VF on the side..
Even with the Mrk II they have done weird stuff.. like centre crop is only active in HFR mode.. even though you can set the camera to 24/25/30 in that mode.. there is no audio.. why?? the F5/55 had that from the start.. and Amira have recently belatedly added it in the last up date.. let alone they just copied the same Kettle Cam design.. there really does seem to be something amiss at the Canon Video Camera dept..
Posted 29 August 2016 - 10:25 PM
What kills me about Canon is they have pretty good color science and excellent imagers. Yet they're hindered by poor electronics, mid-grade codec's and over-all poor design.
Personally, I'd rather have 2/3" 3xCCD camera with a B4 mount, all the codecs in the world in a big box that goes on your shoulder, then a design that failed in the film camera days (holding the camera in front of you), with all the issues talked about above.
Posted 29 August 2016 - 11:39 PM
Two thousands years from now and that might be all Hitler is known for.... those meme videos! (well, hopefully not)
Edited by David Peterson, 29 August 2016 - 11:39 PM.
Posted 30 August 2016 - 12:20 AM
Ok, but the question is still unanswered: what camera(s) in that price range are better?
I'm struggling with this as well. I'm currently trying to find a good replacement for my C100/C300 which is great for the work I do to pay bills (promos, shorts, industrial). I agree the codec is infuriating but if own one it doesn't take long to get familiar with the camera's pros/cons and you can get great images despite the codec, just don't plan on making any big changes in post if you've made a significant error. Cropped higher frame rates is pretty damn stupid of Canon but I'd still take the color science over what Sony, Blackmagic, Panasonic (not the varicam) is offering and just rent a FS7/F5/F55 for those few times when I need 120/240fps. I've also owned XL1, GL2, XHa1, 5D I & II, C100/300 so familiarity is a big factor as well. So as it is, I'm leaning towards C300 mrk II even though I share your frustrations I just don't see a better alternative.
Posted 30 August 2016 - 02:49 AM
I don't disagree, the C300 is more a Bolex style of operation, which is fine for 30 second shots, but not those lasting a few minutes. This won't be helped if there is a microphone on top. I suspect this may have been influenced by the DSLR users who don;t know any other arrangement, although there now is an aftermarket in rods and bits and pieces to allow some sort of shoulder mounting. Sadly, it wasn't part of the original design.
A box isn't modular unless there are other modules designed for it to make it a system, not third party fixes.
Posted 30 August 2016 - 02:51 AM
I think you have answered your own question.. its a good point if you are already familiar with a camera,s menu,s and foibles there is a big argument for staying with it.. and if you want a 4K sensor and "real" log.. Clog2.. then the C300 II would seem the best bet.. the good news is they keep on getting cheaper and you could probably talk them down a bit as they are not flying off the shelfs..
Best bang for the buck at this level camera has to be the Fs7.. I know alot of people who have taken the plunge and jumped ship .. it has its problems too.. for that price its pretty amazing.. I think Sony could have sold them for more but wanted to bury the C300 that had such a big grip of the 1080 market.. if Canon had made a mrkII with 4K/ and real LOG.. and totally re designed the body .. Sony would have been left in the dust.. but they didnt ..
Edited by Robin R Probyn, 30 August 2016 - 02:53 AM.
Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Canon, 5D, Mk4