Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: BJL on March 16, 2010, 05:50:36 pm
-
First my thanks the Bernard for the interview with Pentax Pentax Product Planning executive Yasuyuki Maekawa. He comes across as quite thoughtful and honest, with things like his nuanced discussion of the pros and cons of omitting the AA filter and why it makes sense in the specific context of a landscape-oriented camera for use by dedicated photographers who are probably willing to do some occasional PP on moiré. I also like his rationale for the integrated body approach for the objectives of this particular camera.
He (or is it Pentax) comes across as more willing or able to go with trends happening in photography than some MF makers, like his attitude to active pixel CMOS sensors, which many MF types seems to either ignore or dismiss as inferior. Two refreshingly honest and forward looking quotes:
On the other hand we realize that DSLR sensors have also progressed a lot these past few years and the gap in DR when considering the sensor alone is not that large.
... the Kodak CCD sensor that we have selected, just like all the other MF sensors available today for that matter, do not currently enable Live view. We hope that possible future CMOS based MF sensors would be able to lift this limitation.
And everyone should be happy with:
We intend to sell the 645D outside Japan at a certain point in time
-
Great interview! Both Q's & A's.
I like the modest style of Maekawa's answers very much!
Finally a camera that is not "world class" or "leading" or "unmatched" or any other crap... and possibly precisely for that reason it will be a winner.
I also like that they first want to establish the system in a managable market as they take the importance of support into account - unlike Leica that throws their S2 all over the world without any proven support system.
Pentax obviously has a clear vision of their target market and they designed the camera exactly to match that target group - this is a key for being successfull IMO.
-
... the Kodak CCD sensor that we have selected, just like all the other MF sensors available today for that matter, do not currently enable Live view. We hope that possible future CMOS based MF sensors would be able to lift this limitation.
While I'd like to think that we could all just relax, and think long-term like this "possible future", what is true is these cameras are now leapfrogging each other like mad now. The newer Canons both now shoot at 60 frames per second in video, for awesome slow motion effects, so now, the 5d2 is already outdated. The way that sentence is constructed above, it's like this new Pentax has all the time in the world to evolve, (and for that matter, even leave Japan).
I don't know what is worse: Hasselblad having that silly Countdown Clock, or Pentax announcing a camera in the English language, that's not even available outside of Japan.
As John Wayne said in "True Grit" -- "we're burning daylight".
I hereby announce to all my clients, that in May of 2011, I'll shoot some really nice new photographs for my book, so make sure and stay tuned. Don't make any commitments to any other photographers until then!
I know the word of the day is "constant and everpresent promotion", but at the same time, you wonder when you creep into the territory of "The Boy That Cried Wolf". There was a girl in my High School that had these similar qualities -- always promising, promising, promising, but never quite delivering, delivering, delivering.
-
I also found his responses refreshingly candid, honest, and he avoided quibbling. Definitely a welcome competitor to high-end Canikons and MFDBs.
And thanks for Bernard for a very good interview, you had questions which have been raised by many!
-
[...] I don't know what is worse: Hasselblad having that silly Countdown Clock, or Pentax announcing a camera in the English language, that's not even available outside of Japan.
Pentax issuing an English language announcement of the 645D -- brilliant! Look how much we want it.
I think they know, if the camera does all they say it does, and they set up the right marketing and support in the USA, they will sell thousands of these. To oversimplify the math, 10,000 cameras at $10,000 equals $100 million gross. They'll have to do it soon though, before the competition heats up.
-
The way that sentence is constructed above, it's like this new Pentax has all the time in the world to evolve, (and for that matter, even leave Japan).
they have the time! Not everyone needs live view, not everyone's needs are the same.
-
Please be aware that this was not an English language announcement.
Bernard is bilingual, and the interview was done in Japanese and then translated by him.
Michael
-
Please be aware that this was not an English language announcement.
http://www.pentax.jp/english/news/2010/201008.html (http://www.pentax.jp/english/news/2010/201008.html)
-
http://www.pentax.jp/english/news/2010/201008.html (http://www.pentax.jp/english/news/2010/201008.html)
Wow, it's really reaching for straws if the worst thing about this camera is that Pentax had the audacity to translate their announcement to English.
Can we get back to the camera, please.
-
"Several factors helped with cost. The first is the target price itself. By selecting a price point that we believe is accessible to many potential buyers we could build a business plan that allowed us to get lower prices for sourced components like the sensor thanks to the higher quantities we order."
I asked this question too many times: WHY DON'T THEY? - Never got a satisfactory answer. DMF cameras are ridicoulsly priced.
"Another aspect is that we managed to commonalize some components with DSLRs already in production and could also re-use many of the IP and technologies we developed for them. The weather sealing I mentioned already is a very good example coming from the Pentax K-7. The new 11 points AF system also comes from existing DSLR technologies. We believe that we are the only ones on the market with a combined experience of MF and digital technologies in smaller bodies."
Do the DMF market belong to the big Japanese dslr's manufacturers?
"Well, we recognize the value of live view as a tool. We would have loved to make it available in the 645D, but the Kodak CCD sensor that we have selected, just like all the other MF sensors available today for that matter, do not currently enable Live view. We hope that possible future CMOS based MF sensors would be able to lift this limitation."
Will Canon beat Pentax on bringing the first integral modern DMF camera?
Eduardo
-
they have the time! Not everyone needs live view, not everyone's needs are the same.
I don't think they have that much time. Anyone who shoots medium format digital today, who wants 40MP or more, would like to be paying under $10k for the camera. Canon and Nikon can fast-follow this.
[If I may just add, I will wonder for a long time why Leica didn't spend their time reinventing the compact camera instead of inventing the R2, a camera that seems to have been doomed at the outset by its high powered competition. ]
-
I don't think they have that much time.
All I'm saying is, the bottom is dropping out. Here is a Canon 7d, with ASA up to 12,800, that shoots eight frames per second in RAW, and 60fps in Video, and the price? $1599, out the door.
All I'm saying is, this is becoming the norm.
Yes, a Pentax 645 is nine or ten grand U.S., but still ten grand is still ten grand, if we're talking about selling to the masses.
So let's say the 1ds4 hits the streets this fall, worldwide, at $7999, with both awesome video and awesome RAW stills? The time to get that Pentax on the streets is now, worldwide, while the window is still open. Because just like the P65+ at $42,000 for back only seems ludicrous -- at some point, the Pentax at ten grand is also going to seem ludicrous.
Flood the market while you can.
-
All I'm saying is, the bottom is dropping out. Here is a Canon 7d, with ASA up to 12,800, that shoots eight frames per second in RAW, and 60fps in Video, and the price? $1599, out the door.
All I'm saying is, this is becoming the norm.
Yes, a Pentax 645 is nine or ten grand U.S., but still ten grand is still ten grand, if we're talking about selling to the masses.
So let's say the 1ds4 hits the streets this fall, worldwide, at $7999, with both awesome video and awesome RAW stills? The time to get that Pentax on the streets is now, worldwide, while the window is still open. Because just like the P65+ at $42,000 for back only seems ludicrous -- at some point, the Pentax at ten grand is also going to seem ludicrous.
Flood the market while you can.
The Pentax with its 40mp sensor and MF body but with good AF, nice LCD, sealed body and good responsiveness is situated half way between a Phase 60mp system and a hypotetical Canon at about 30mp 35mm sensor.
If it will cost a couple of thousands more of a Canon, it will hardly look any ludicrous, especially if compared to the phase that will cost 30k more.
-
Hi,
Thanks for the interview. In my view this is great news.
The interview gave some interesting insights in the decisions that Pentax made for 645D.
I'd presume that the 645D at it designated price point sets some pressure on other MF digital vendors. It's interesting to see that Pentax makes APS-C cameras but no full frame DSLR and now a cropped format MF-DSLR. The Pentax 645D will compete directly against the Leica S2.
Best regards
Erik
First my thanks the Bernard for the interview with Pentax Pentax Product Planning executive Yasuyuki Maekawa. He comes across as quite thoughtful and honest, with things like his nuanced discussion of the pros and cons of omitting the AA filter and why it makes sense in the specific context of a landscape-oriented camera for use by dedicated photographers who are probably willing to do some occasional PP on moiré. I also like his rationale for the integrated body approach for the objectives of this particular camera.
He (or is it Pentax) comes across as more willing or able to go with trends happening in photography than some MF makers, like his attitude to active pixel CMOS sensors, which many MF types seems to either ignore or dismiss as inferior. Two refreshingly honest and forward looking quotes:
On the other hand we realize that DSLR sensors have also progressed a lot these past few years and the gap in DR when considering the sensor alone is not that large.
... the Kodak CCD sensor that we have selected, just like all the other MF sensors available today for that matter, do not currently enable Live view. We hope that possible future CMOS based MF sensors would be able to lift this limitation.
And everyone should be happy with:
We intend to sell the 645D outside Japan at a certain point in time
-
All I'm saying is, the bottom is dropping out. Here is a Canon 7d, with ASA up to 12,800, that shoots eight frames per second in RAW, and 60fps in Video, and the price? $1599, out the door.
A................snip........
Flood the market while you can.
If they made that 7d in pink I'd be buy one.
Seriously, If the Pentax tethered I'd probably buy one, even if I had to go to Japan. I like Tokyo, wife loves it and can always pick up a gig or two when I'm there, so it makes it almost a wash, maybe a profit.
After all even if your still camera can shoot video, and many of ours can, I still need two of each for backup and a second set of lenses as one camera has to be mounted with matte boxes, auto gain sound foolers, xlr cables, etc. etc. so even though I think Pentax should eventually get to cmos and live view and video, it's not a deal breaker and though 9 grand is high, it's not that much different than the next Canon or Nikon in price.
Actually when I add up what I've spent on medium format to date, 9 grand on the pentax pretty much is the sales tax and shipping charges.
I can see it now, maybe we can get enough people together to charter a flight. I get first dips on the convert a bed seat.
Now to see what I can get for my ghetto Contax' and two digital backs.
Stay tuned in the for sale section.
BC
P.S. Thanks Bernhard for the interview.
-
Hi,
I guess that the Canon 5DII is the benchmark. MF is not really intended for fast shooting. Careful work is needed to utilize the image quality.
An issue with DSLRs in general and specially canon is that they can be challenged by the sensor on the lens side. Canon WA lenses are not at parity with their sensors. Just putting more pixels in the sensor doesn't make much sense unless lenses are keeping up with the pixel pitch.
The Nikon 3DX, which seems to be the king of image quality in DSLRs (135 FF DSLRs) sells about 7500 USD and shoots neither eight FPS or video.
Best regards
Erik
All I'm saying is, the bottom is dropping out. Here is a Canon 7d, with ASA up to 12,800, that shoots eight frames per second in RAW, and 60fps in Video, and the price? $1599, out the door.
All I'm saying is, this is becoming the norm.
Yes, a Pentax 645 is nine or ten grand U.S., but still ten grand is still ten grand, if we're talking about selling to the masses.
So let's say the 1ds4 hits the streets this fall, worldwide, at $7999, with both awesome video and awesome RAW stills? The time to get that Pentax on the streets is now, worldwide, while the window is still open. Because just like the P65+ at $42,000 for back only seems ludicrous -- at some point, the Pentax at ten grand is also going to seem ludicrous.
Flood the market while you can.
-
I don't think they have that much time. Anyone who shoots medium format digital today, who wants 40MP or more, would like to be paying under $10k for the camera. Canon and Nikon can fast-follow this.
The owners of Pentax 645 + 67 glass will wait for the Pentax 645D (especially now, as it is "announced"). Pentax already has a virtual user base.
-
I don't know what is worse: Hasselblad having that silly Countdown Clock, or Pentax announcing a camera in the English language, that's not even available outside of Japan.
Right. There are absolutely zero English-speaking photographers in Japan.
-
I really pleased this camera made it in the end and at a reasonable price point, the more competition in MF the better.
It sounds like they have targeted this camera well ie. not taking on the high end phase and hassy solutions that are out there and going for the top end dslr users. The price, MP and af system will hopefully make it a winner and hopefully it won't go the way of the ZD.
-
Right. There are absolutely zero English-speaking photographers in Japan.
I just hope they've got a buddy down the street though, that'll give them a hand in setting up the camera with those Japanese-only Menus.
You guys pile on all you want. I am standing my ground. Call me in eighteen months, when Nikon and Canon have their new players in place, and the iPad is firmly entrenched, and the photo world has taken another massive step toward video, and the economy is still stalled, and ten grand seems inappropriate for a stills-only camera for the masses. Again, I say, flood the market now, worldwide, (and let me be first in line).
-
I just hope they've got a buddy down the street though, that'll give them a hand in setting up the camera with those Japanese-only Menus.
...
The camera body is in English. Someone in Hong Kong has been up there and looked at the menu and found that it has an option that it can be tailored to Traditional Chinese (the Taiwan / Hong Kong Chinese not the mainland Chinese). There are picture of the menu in this other language. I would be shocked that the camera cannot be had menu in English now.
The interview is really super. It answered a lot of questions which interested persons want to ask.
The background is Pentax has been one of the pioneer in camera (M42, K, 67, 645). In those days, as observed by Michael, it is one of those maker who actually has some in-house photographer doing the design (the PL lens can be rotated with hood on etc.) Also, it is the one camera brings the SLR experience to the Medium Format as in the past. Also, unlike Mamiya, it has done quite a bit of business in digital camera as well, both consumer (and up to K7 etc.). It is also cool headed as the demo of this kit has been around for many years. It did not do the 999 thing. It knew its niche and concentrated on it. Of course one has to actually see the picture for this kind of "investment". But we should be open minded and hope for the best. Diversity is great!
Thanks for the interview once again!
-
..."and ten grand seems inappropriate for a stills-only camera for the masses"
You're absolutely right. But the Pentax 645D, as are all other medium format cameras, is not intended for the masses. It's targeted at a very specific speciality niche of the marketplace, and as such is appropriately priced and speced.
As for video, medium format does not need or want video. It needs Live View, and that will come as soon as CMOS sensors of the appropriate size are available with appropriate image quality, which is still likely 18 months way according to those that know how this technology is maturing.
The reason that video is meaningless in medium format is that the image size is too large and DOF is too narrow. Cinema likes narrow DOF, but even a full-frame camera like the 5DMKII is too shallow much of the time. Also, even a reduced frame 645 sized sensor such as that in the Pentax is larger than iMax, not something that too many people need or are even capable of handling.
Michael
-
Here at work in the Archaeology section of the Council, we would certainly be interested in this camera. We have a film Pentax 645 which we use for archival recording of historic building interiors and exteriors, so we already have a set of three lenses - wide, standard and short tele. This digital version sounds as if it might be ideal for aerial photography, and at a very competitive price.
John
-
..."and ten grand seems inappropriate for a stills-only camera for the masses"
You're absolutely right. But the Pentax 645D, as are all other medium format cameras, is not intended for the masses. It's targeted at a very specific speciality niche of the marketplace, and as such is appropriately priced and speced.
I just think we have a different definition of "the masses". To me, when you buy an ad in PDN or PopPhoto, you're selling to the masses. When you're Bill Maxwell or Peter Gowland or that weird Littmann guy, you're not selling to the masses.
All I'm saying is: there is a window right now where ten grand seems like The Deal Of The Day, and people are standing in line with their checkbooks out, and yet, Pentax says, "We're gonna use Japan as a beta test, and consider worldwide later on". I'm just suggesting that "later on", ten grand is not going to be an acceptable price point for the masses. In eighteen months, it's going to be more like $2699, (if it's not already now).
For the record, I want this camera to win. But now is not the time to be meek, and just put your toe in the water. Now is the time to sell a bunch of cameras to the world.
-
I just think we have a different definition of "the masses". To me, when you buy an ad in PDN or PopPhoto, you're selling to the masses. When you're Bill Maxwell or Peter Gowland or that weird Littmann guy, you're not selling to the masses.
All I'm saying is: there is a window right now where ten grand seems like The Deal Of The Day, and people are standing in line with their checkbooks out, and yet, Pentax says, "We're gonna use Japan as a beta test, and consider worldwide later on". I'm just suggesting that "later on", ten grand is not going to be an acceptable price point for the masses. In eighteen months, it's going to be more like $2699, (if it's not already now).
With all due respect, I think with the 2699 limit, is quite off and too Canon centric.
Even 10k for a camera that will have a life span of at least 4 years and will still be sellable for a few grands e replaced with the latest model, is very very affordable.
In 4 years time there is no way the any DSLR maker will be able to provide the image quality of a 40mp larger sensor.
Considering that the handling and responsiveness of this pentax, is closer to a smaller DSLR than the MF dinosaurs it is actually competing with, the few extra thousands required to get it, is a non issue for who is the intended customer of camera like these.
There are folks already willing to land at the Conrad or Park Hyatt in Tokyo doing group tours to get one, go figure how fast they will fly off the shelves even with a 10k tag.
I would not put too much faith in Nikon or Canon to compete on image quality with a 40mp sensor of larger size. As today, current offering of 21mp + FF DSLR from C, N, and S, cannot deliver the same quality of a 5 years old 22mp MF back.
-
This digital version sounds as if it might be ideal for aerial photography, and at a very competitive price.
John
If it's anything like the Pentax 6X7 system, it will be a superb aerial camera. I used the 67 system for aerials for many years.
The 645D image size is huge. Google "Wikipedia, IMAX" to see the scale of this imager.
-
I was just thinking. If Pentax can sell a 40mp 645D for $10,000, is there any reason why they can't sell a 60mp version for say $15,000? Interesting choice at that point. A fully integrated DSLR form camera with a 60mp chip, in-camera sensor cleaning, 3" high resolution LCD, fully weather sealed, and shoots both JPEGS and Raws simultaneously, but you cannot tether. All for $15,000. Or, a Mamiya DF with a P65 or an H4D-60 for $40,000, and you can take the back off the camera and put it on a view camera or a tech camera and also tether? My guess is that many who have purchased or are considering the purchase of the P65 or the H4D-60 would opt for the Pentax, particularly if they did not already own a Mamiya or H system with lenses and a good trade up program. The Pentax at that price point would also open up a whole other market of customers who would not think of paying $40,000 for any camera but might dig deeper and pay the premium to get 60mp.
Of course, if the IQ of the Pentax 645D is flawed in significant ways compared to Phase and Hasselblad, all bets are off.
-
It's targeted at a very specific speciality niche of the marketplace, and as such is appropriately priced and speced.
*********
That would be me...I was willing to pay $9+K 4 years ago to upgrade my legacy Hasselblad kit to digital. I won't spend the $20k for a HD4-40 or the $14k for a CFV-39...$10k for a 40MP Pentax is within my psychological threshold for serious consideration for purchase. I suspect that there are enough hobbyists, with a similar financial threshold, for the Pentax to do well, again if it performs as expected.
Steve
-
One thing's for sure. Hasselblad's hype about the $20K H4D being the camera that will finally win over the hordes of high-end DSLR shooters to MFD looks pretty stupid now, doesn't it?
-
I was just thinking. If Pentax can sell a 40mp 645D for $10,000, is there any reason why they can't sell a 60mp version for say $15,000?
I think your going the wrong way on those numbers. What someone needs to do is make 60mp for $8,000.
Anway since I'm in the advertising biz and advertising is just a reflection of popular culture I have these thoughts;
I'm not too sure that "medium" format matters, or even full frame 35mm, cause it's all probably gonna be 3d anyway.
http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/02/03/3d-ed...ldovino-barani/ (http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/02/03/3d-editorial-by-baldovino-barani/)
If they can find a way to show it where you don't have to wear those funny glasses.
http://tinyurl.com/ydepacx (http://tinyurl.com/ydepacx)
Or maybe we won't sell stuff with photography at all. Just Epoxy product all over the planet for people to try out.
http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/03/17/ikea-...metro-stations/ (http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/03/17/ikea-invades-paris-metro-stations/)
Or maybe we'll just shoot videos with no logos, no tag lines, or reference to who made it. Sounds like perfect product placement to me.
Think of these videos for goth clothing, or maybe plastic food wrap.
http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/03/17/the-iamamiwhoami/ (http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/03/17/the-iamamiwhoami/)
Then of course there is the part where the camera doesn't matter at all, it's just self promotion, or in this case self immolation (if the following is true).
Warning, rude, explicit material in the following link.
http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/03/17/the-o...rry-richardson/ (http://cyanatrendland.com/2010/03/17/the-obvious-about-terry-richardson/)
__________________________________
Sorry to go off track, but reading Bernhard's interview the Pentax people don't make any sense to me. If there really are 2,000 nature photographers bopping around Japan just waiting for a digital solution for their dusty ol' pentax lenses
and all of them actually buy this camera that's 20 million bucks in sales.
If this is true then aren't there another 4,000 nature guys around the world with the same $10,000 burning a hole in their pockets?
We've heard forever the whole reason for the price of expensive digital cameras with just economy of scale, so if they can sell 2,000 of these things for that price, wouldn't selling 6,000 of them drop the price below a Canon 1ds3 or 4?
But that 2000 unit sales equals 20 million bucks just kind of warps my head and makes me think, how much would it really cost to make the thing tether to pick up another 2 or 3 thousands sales from pro . . . fessional photographers?
Maybe the teams of geniuses at Pentax looked into their crystal ball and realized by the time they get this camera boxed up, out the door and shipped around the world, Canon will probably have a 30 mpx 5d3 that sells for $2,000.
IMO
BC
-
If this is true then aren't there another 4,000 nature guys around the world with the same $10,000 burning a hole in their pockets?
We've heard forever the whole reason for the price of expensive digital cameras with just economy of scale, so if they can sell 2,000 of these things for that price, wouldn't selling 6,000 of them drop the price below a Canon 1ds3 or 4?
Maybe the teams of geniuses at Pentax looked into their crystal ball and realized by the time they get this camera boxed up, out the door and shipped around the world, Canon will probably have a 30 mpx 5d3 that sells for $2,000.
IMO
BC
Pentax no longer has worldwide support in place; the cost to set that up for an unproven product would be huge and risky. I think it makes perfect business sense to introduce it while minimizing support costs. If the camera world changes in a few years, at least they got back their R&D; if not, they expand the offerings at little financial risk
-
I'm under the impression that once they get the camera tetherable, they will start worldwide distribution.
Eduardo
Pentax no longer has worldwide support in place; the cost to set that up for an unproven product would be huge and risky. I think it makes perfect business sense to introduce it while minimizing support costs. If the camera world changes in a few years, at least they got back their R&D; if not, they expand the offerings at little financial risk
-
I'm under the impression that once they get the camera tetherable, they will start worldwide distribution.
Eduardo
I was under the impression that Pentax sold them little cameras round' da world. They gotta' have some kind of support for those.
In fact as long as somebody can fix something fairly quick (see CPS) . . . (don't see Leica), if the camera is logical and fairly intuitive you don't need support.
If you got your act together your gonna have back ups in place anyway.
I've never called a camera store and asked them how to set a 1ds on JPEG + RAW, or how to zoom into the LCD.
I kind of thought that was my job to figure it out.
BC
-
..."and ten grand seems inappropriate for a stills-only camera for the masses"
The reason that video is meaningless in medium format is that the image size is too large and DOF is too narrow. Cinema likes narrow DOF, but even a full-frame camera like the 5DMKII is too shallow much of the time. Also, even a reduced frame 645 sized sensor such as that in the Pentax is larger than iMax, not something that too many people need or are even capable of handling.
Michael
I'm not an engineer, but I'm not too sure about that.
If you've ever cut a video with an ad agency and clients everyone starts cropping. You'll here "can we pull in on the face another 25%, now let's move down and do a separate cut of the hands. Yea, that's cool".
I hate to say it but now in still and motion, it's a post production world.
Also F8 on a smaller than 645 format camera and 55mm lens pulls a lot of depth of field.
For video ( on a professional level) I'd love to see a real 3k or 4k file that went to the same high iso as the 5d2, whether it was 35mm or 645. 3k seems like overkill until you really start moving stuff around and at 3k if the conditions are right, you can probably pull a decent still out of it.
(What I would really love to see is a compression scheme that worked seamlessly in Avid or FCP without having to render or convert, (but I guess that's another subject).
I think the reason your seeing so much shallow depth of field on all the 5d2 videos is just because video guys have been stuck with tiny, tiny little 3 ccd chips forever and it's just junky madness that has sent all of them shooting their 5d2 at F 1.4.
They had never held a camera that would actually show focus falloff and once they looked at the back of the 5d2 they went wow, F 2.8 is cool, let's try 1.2 and see what that looks like.
That will all settle down eventually.
What I think is Pentax missed the mark. They kind of wanted to be the amateur medium format back killer, but they could have been the RED, Canon and MFDB killer all in one.
I think Canon is the 400 lb. fat guy in the room and it seems most everyone lives in fear, or anticipation about what they'll do next.
Ask any photographer if they're gonna buy a RED and they say uh well, I'm kind of thinking about what the next 5d is gonna be like, or for that matter ask any professional photographer if they don't own something made by Canon and there will probably only be 14 hands that go in the air.
IMO
BC
-
..."and ten grand seems inappropriate for a stills-only camera for the masses"
As for video, medium format does not need or want video. It needs Live View, and that will come as soon as CMOS sensors of the appropriate size are available with appropriate image quality, which is still likely 18 months way according to those that know how this technology is maturing.
The reason that video is meaningless in medium format is that the image size is too large and DOF is too narrow. Cinema likes narrow DOF, but even a full-frame camera like the 5DMKII is too shallow much of the time. Also, even a reduced frame 645 sized sensor such as that in the Pentax is larger than iMax, not something that too many people need or are even capable of handling.
Michael
When sensor will be available, I'm sure they will do it anyway at one point.
Maybe will emerge a new language from this extreme narrow DOF
But what happen if we mount cinema lenses let's say on the future P65 2 CMOS???
Also, what could happen is dedicated cinema backs totally different that the ones for steals.
Just speculating
Fred
-
I'm under the impression that once they get the camera tetherable, they will start worldwide distribution.
Eduardo
The odd thing is: I'm betting this entire (already shaky) MF marketplace has now ground to a complete halt. Here we are in March, and this camera not shipping (in Japan) until May, (if then).
The guys that were on the fence about the H4D_40 now feel the rug pulled out from underneath them. No phone calls were made today to lock down a P.O.
The guys that took delivery on other cameras, now looking at themselves in the mirror and wondering what they've done, and checking their Bank Statement to see if the check really cleared the bank.
Suspended Reality.
I miss those days when Apple Computer announced a computer in the morning, and that afternoon, it could Fedex out from SmallDog.com. That day. In that business model, the world kept on turning, and a camera was actually judged on its performance merits, rather than by its marketing department's ability to announce. These MF companies just keep leapfrogging each other's announcements, and in the end, nobody actually buys anything, for fear of yet another announcement before your own camera is ever delivered. I call for a Truce within the industry -- when you've got something on the Dock, ready to ship, then announce it; until then, STFU.
-
The 1Ds4 will be announced next month, a pro dealer told me.
Edmund
So let's say the 1ds4 hits the streets this fall, worldwide, at $7999, with both awesome video and awesome RAW stills? The time to get that Pentax on the streets is now, worldwide, while the window is still open. Because just like the P65+ at $42,000 for back only seems ludicrous -- at some point, the Pentax at ten grand is also going to seem ludicrous.
Flood the market while you can.
-
so pentax has a 40mpix ccd, no video for about 9000 (maybe less street).....this most likely produces considerably better still files at base iso then the soon to be announced
canon 1ds4, which is probably 30mpix cmos, HD (maybe uncompressed) video (maybe up to 60fps)....and the obvious advantages of DSLR.....for about 8000....
the 5DII shoots 24fps HD video, (according to rumors a coming firmware provides uncompressed video via HDMI) and everybody has one especially for 2400$....
who will get the ds4? sport shooters might, but the file is too big, they just bought the d4 anyway....
and let's not forget the 5DIII will give the same (maybe even better) file in a couple of months later for 25% of the price....
i think a lot of people would rather go for a 5DII/pentax combo, have all bases covered (video and superior stills) for the same price...
if phase/hass/mamiya weren't shaking in their boots, they should be after reading this interview.....
pentax seemingly waited patiently and now are going in for the kill....and it will be easy for them.....
is the 645d my dream camera? not at all, but i am much more likely to buy it rather then a 30mpix canon (if it delivers and unless the canon has something outrageous i can't imagine now...)
-
sorry,
I'm joining this discussion kinda late, but I've been following it since it started, and I'm very excited about what I've been reading. This interview was an eye-opener to a camera, that IMO, will be a game changer.
let me 1st say though, I'm a current college student, a photo major here in LA. I know that many of you participating in this thread are established pro's, so you're looking at it from a standpoint of "will this give me and my clients what we need/want for a reasonable price?", please correct me if I'm wrong.
since I'm a student, and making photographs is my passion, I've been considering getting a 5dII, as my 1st digital solution in cooperation with my MF-film kit, as well as LF(when time is permitting,etc...). I've really wanted to go to MF digital, since 35mm never really felt "right" in my hands, but I've gotten so used to the quality and the "look" of MF film, that its been hard starting to shoot assignments, and my own work, with a digital solution that can match MF film quality.
After this camera was announced, and at the supposed pricepoint($6500), I almost jumped for joy, thinking "hey, this camera I can (almost) afford, and it can get as close as I can afford to MF/LF film!
I know that many of you will answer with, "film, wtf is film?", but since I picked up an RZ kit for less than a grand, and since then have added a few lenses, I'm still less than the cost of a 5dII body, much less in terms of price. The thing that really gets me about digital capture(at least to my eyes), is the creaminess of it, its just smooth(when done right obviously). And the 5dII with L-lenses is a great camera to shoot with, light and fast, and easily bump it up to 800 or 1600iso, and shoot available light into the dusk, no problem.
motion ain't my thing, yet, but as BCooter and others have made us aware of, going from a stills to motion camera is about a 5 min change. Easy as that.
so, for my stills-only game, from a student's standpoint, this camera is a game-changer. PHASE, MAMIYA, LEAF(P1), watch out, once this camera hits stores I think it'll fly. And when it gets to the US, it'll rock!
just my $.02, from a budget-limited student of photography.
-Dan
-
The owners of Pentax 645 + 67 glass will wait for the Pentax 645D (especially now, as it is "announced"). Pentax already has a virtual user base.
Has it been confirmed that 67 glass will be compatiable (with adaptor) ? The interview only mentions Pentax AF legacy glass.
-
I think Canon is the 400 lb. fat guy in the room and it seems most everyone lives in fear, or anticipation about what they'll do next.
Ask any photographer if they're gonna buy a RED and they say uh well, I'm kind of thinking about what the next 5d is gonna be like,
BC
My mind is boggled by how much talk there is about people shooting TV and films with the Canon: The whole last episode of House with the 5D2 (http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=2818), Ron Howard and crew shooting (http://blog.planet5d.com/2010/03/ron-howard-using-canon-hybrid-dslrs/) with a 7D (http://vimeo.com/9978341) (!), TV Show “Numb3rs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtB_vpXnj14&feature=player_embedded)”, etc., etc.
-
so pentax has a 40mpix ccd, no video for about 9000 (maybe less street).....this most likely produces considerably better still files at base iso then the soon to be announced
canon 1ds4, which is probably 30mpix cmos, HD (maybe uncompressed) video (maybe up to 60fps)....and the obvious advantages of DSLR.....for about 8000....
the 5DII shoots 24fps HD video, (according to rumors a coming firmware provides uncompressed video via HDMI) and everybody has one especially for 2400$....
who will get the ds4? sport shooters might, but the file is too big, they just bought the d4 anyway....
and let's not forget the 5DIII will give the same (maybe even better) file in a couple of months later for 25% of the price....
i think a lot of people would rather go for a 5DII/pentax combo, have all bases covered (video and superior stills) for the same price...
if phase/hass/mamiya weren't shaking in their boots, they should be after reading this interview.....
pentax seemingly waited patiently and now are going in for the kill....and it will be easy for them.....
is the 645d my dream camera? not at all, but i am much more likely to buy it rather then a 30mpix canon (if it delivers and unless the canon has something outrageous i can't imagine now...)
Agree.
Cameras of the 1ds and D3x class are becoming overkill.
90% of the users that need the high megapixel count, does not need any of the extra features which add 5k to the price tag of those cameras.
Hence the success of the 5d2.
As soon the 1ds4 will be out, very likely Sony will show up their 30mp body for less than half the price.
Current Sony A900 has almost been a non event on the market, I have to say, but nevertheless the camera when is in use, has more reliable AF and deliver better files (and faster with larger buffer) than both canon counterpart.
-
My mind is boggled by how much talk there is about people shooting TV and films with the Canon: The whole last episode of House with the 5D2 (http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=2818), Ron Howard and crew shooting (http://blog.planet5d.com/2010/03/ron-howard-using-canon-hybrid-dslrs/) with a 7D (http://vimeo.com/9978341) (!), TV Show “Numb3rs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtB_vpXnj14&feature=player_embedded)”, etc., etc.
i talked to 2 DPs the other day and both prefer the 7D...because of the 24fps and because the smaller sensor actually makes it a little easier to keep focus.....the sliver of the 5DII is almost overkill unless you need that look....both prefered the canons to the red btw.....neither said that the canons gave better footage but they both felt that in a year from now that is all they will shoot anyway (canon) so why bother with red.....like i said this is not from my own experience but only from what 2 actively shooting (commercial) DPs told me.....
-
i talked to 2 DPs the other day and both prefer the 7D...because of the 24fps and because the smaller sensor actually makes it a little easier to keep focus.....the sliver of the 5DII is almost overkill unless you need that look
APS sensor makes perfect sense for video, really. After all they're about the same size as a frame of 35mm motion film. And even 3k video resolution is still well within the capabilities of an APS sensor.
-
My mind is boggled by how much talk there is about people shooting TV and films with the Canon: The whole last episode of House with the 5D2 (http://www.cinema5d.com/news/?p=2818), Ron Howard and crew shooting (http://blog.planet5d.com/2010/03/ron-howard-using-canon-hybrid-dslrs/) with a 7D (http://vimeo.com/9978341) (!), TV Show “Numb3rs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtB_vpXnj14&feature=player_embedded)”, etc., etc.
The final episode of House is not being shot entirely with the 5D2, its being used as a special effect, shallow dof rig for certain shots. The 5D footage looks good, but not for an entire 46 minutes of 1080p, which is intercut with commercials shot on film and run through high quality telecine. The compression artifacts are too hard to integrate, for long periods and without MASSIVE POST, into film/Red/Arricam footage.
That being said, the 5D is amazing, especially when considering video was an after thought. Pulling focus with the L lenses is a cruel joke. You block the shot, run through rehersal, tape everything down, then BAM, focus is slightly off. The next 5D and ds4 I bet will solve many of these problems, such as RAW VIDEO.
-
Awww. Why ruin a good story with the facts?
Folks would much prefer to think that a million dollar TV production can be shot with an $800 camera, just like the one that they own, and probably hand-held by one person as well.
Michael
-
Has it been confirmed that 67 glass will be compatiable (with adaptor) ? The interview only mentions Pentax AF legacy glass.
The offical announcement also mentions 645A lenses and if the A lenses work, so should the 67. Perhaps the auto diaphram will be be lost, but I can't imagine why since it's retained on the film 645.
Lens mount • Pentax 645AF2 bayonet mount
• Usable lenses: Pentax 645AF2, 645AF, and 645A mount lenses
-
I've been watching Battlestar Galactica on BluRay and the image quality is usually worse than my home videos with a Canon 5D2. There is less noise and more detail in my Canon and I can also hand hold the camera better than they can even without a bracket. The list goes on with blown highlights and purple fringing in trees.
Bill
Awww. Why ruin a good story with the facts?
Folks would much prefer to think that a million dollar TV production can be shot with an $800 camera, just like the one that they own, and probably hand-held by one person as well.
Michael
-
Awww. Why ruin a good story with the facts?
Folks would much prefer to think that a million dollar TV production can be shot with an $800 camera, just like the one that they own, and probably hand-held by one person as well.
Michael
True but some of the footage of expensive episodic broadcast is being shot with a under $3,000 camera which would have been unheard of a couple of years ago and though high budget broadcast advertising is still shot on film or with a RED/Arricam, there is more and more experimentation trying to use these dslrs.
Let's see what happens next, but the beauty of digital footage is it's opened up a whole new world for artists. Prior to even mini-dv, building a reel, or learning the editorial process was an incredibly expensive and time consuming ordeal.
A 7d a few lenses, some sticks and a copy of FCP studio tops out at about 4 grand. To do any of this a few years ago was in the hundreds of thousands.
Regardless, under certain situations the 5d2 footage has artifacts. No denying it, no talking around it.
Maybe outside with a lot of quick cuts, lens flare, very shallow dof, it doesn't show, but in real lit production a jacket zipper will christmas tree light, or a red top with have this moving moire.
As T-Mark said it can be fixed in post, usually massive, but it would be nice to see Canon address this at the front end.
Now as far as the 7d or a smaller frame, I dunno, I guess that's ok as long as you don't have noise. The real beauty of the 5d2 is that you can shoot video at almost any iso and not see noise when the image is moving.
http://ishotit.com/rundsmc.jpg (http://ishotit.com/rundsmc.jpg)
What really would be nice is if there was a single codec that was the standard for video. It's almost mind numbing to go through the process of mixed codec, formats, frame sizes and try to cut and color a coherent piece, even for the web.
We just had a RED on set and the DP/video guy used it for about 2% of the footage. For locked down lit dialog it was fine,(Then again what he shot with it could have been done with about any high def eng) but moving, high iso, , even quick stationary images he was holding a 5d2, while the RED set in the corner.
Regardless of all of that, I would bet dollars to donuts the next 1ds4 is gonna be a killer. Canon had to learn a lesson about putting more stuff in a cheaper camera (5d2) than their flagship and though you never know what any of these companies are going to do, almost everyone believes the next 1ds will have raw footage, probably more than 2k and maybe even better live focus.
Will I buy it, yea maybe . . . well probably, cause when I tally up the numbers and the art, no camera has been as good for my business as Canon. It may sometimes seem soul less and everyone loves to kick sand on em, but everybody owns one and there is a reason why, mostly because it covers more territory than any camera.
BC
-
What about Canon video cameras, ordinary cameras will always lack some comfortability. I think no 1Ds will sell much different figures due to video capabilities, it was rather the price of the 5D MK2 which opened many doors.
That said, I hope that Canon pays more attention to still image side, much can be improved.
Regardless of all of that, I would bet dollars to donuts the next 1ds4 is gonna be a killer. Canon had to learn a lesson about putting more stuff in a cheaper camera (5d2) than their flagship and though you never know what any of these companies are going to do, almost everyone believes the next 1ds will have raw footage, probably more than 2k and maybe even better live focus.
-
Awww. Why ruin a good story with the facts?
Folks would much prefer to think that a million dollar TV production can be shot with an $800 camera, just like the one that they own, and probably hand-held by one person as well.
Michael
it's actually funny to see how little the production has changed around the 800$ camera!
-
What about Canon video cameras, ordinary cameras will always lack some comfortability. I think no 1Ds will sell much different figures due to video capabilities, it was rather the price of the 5D MK2 which opened many doors.
That said, I hope that Canon pays more attention to still image side, much can be improved.
It's funny talking about price.
This thread is about a $10,000 medium format camera, that is at least half the price of any of the traditional medium format cameras and everybody seems thrilled, but since Canon has a 3 grand 5d2, some of the same people seem crushed that a 1ds4 would be 7 thousand.
But maybe that's where all these cameras need to be, $3,500 max, since they change every 18 months or so. I guess you don't need weather sealing, or tank like build quality if it's gonna be traded in before it gets close to worn out.
In regards to still image quality that's very much personal preference. In certain situations and working in post I can see the difference (maybe even appreciate the difference) of a non aa filtered ccd camera vs. a aa filter cmos, but I've shot both systems side by side for a few years and to a client/A.D./person if I put the images up on screen most clients don't notice, though the ones that do always pick the Canon file and say something like it looks less digital, whatever that means.
Some photographer's love the oversharp look of medium format, some don't.
____________________________________
In regards to Paul's quote about how production around the camera is the same, well today maybe, but I'll bet you see less crew soon. After all a clean 2000 iso allows for less lighting power, less cable pullers, smaller generators, faster production.
Just as digital still photography has double the volume in a day's shooting, I would imagine, cinema, motion, television production will also start doubling the volume per day, if they haven't already.
Could be wrong, but we'll see.
BC
-
but I've shot both systems side by side for a few years and to a client/A.D./person if I put the images up on screen most clients don't notice, though the ones that do always pick the Canon file and say something like it looks less digital, whatever that means.
Some photographer's love the oversharp look of medium format, some don't.
____________________________________
In regards to Paul's quote about how production around the camera is the same, well today maybe, but I'll bet you see less crew soon. After all a clean 2000 iso allows for less lighting power, less cable pullers, smaller generators, faster production.
Just as digital still photography has double the volume in a day's shooting, I would imagine, cinema, motion, television production will also start doubling the volume per day, if they haven't already.
BC
I believe the Canon's "less digital" look refers to less sharp, which seems to look more "natural" and pleasing to many people.
In terms of the production/crew size not changing (yet!) with the smaller cameras, I think that is because these behind the scenes videos that keep popping up are productions which are using a variety of camera formats, so naturally the crew has to be large enough to support the Arri/Red/ or whatever other main camera they are using...
-
I believe the Canon's "less digital" look refers to less sharp, which seems to look more "natural" and pleasing to many people.
In terms of the production/crew size not changing (yet!) with the smaller cameras, I think that is because these behind the scenes videos that keep popping up are productions which are using a variety of camera formats, so naturally the crew has to be large enough to support the Arri/Red/ or whatever other main camera they are using...
Soft or sharp, it's just the response. Personally I don't care what anyone uses and honestly believe a photographer should "use" whatever gets them where they want to be.
The more experienced (older) AD's make more comments, the younger ones, don't seem to care, at least in my experience.
Some of this comes from the preview on computer, some can just be the monitor calibration, but usually it doesn't matter cause production is so ramped up today you have to shoot the easiest fastest camera anyway.
Maybe that's the reason Pentax targeted the landscape photographer. Those guys don't usually have 12 people standing behind them saying can you move than center tree to the left.
As far as costs, well we all know it's a world run by the money guys. I know two chief marketing officers that came from "finance", not creative, not marketing, so try explaining to them why a camera package is $5,000, vs. $1,000 for the day.
Let's face it the economy has changed the way all of us look at this stuff. A few years ago a new $30,000 digital back didn't make you blink, today a new $7,000 Canon will make you think twice before sliding that credit card over the counter.
It's not that business is bad, or not good, it's just that all of us have proven to our clients that we can shoot more for less. That's going to be a hard one to go back on.
The only thing that will move our numbers up is to offer more . . . and motion and stills combined does that a lot more than 15 more mm of frame format. Shooting both motion and stills is a hard trick to pull off, it's probably not 100% there yet in all productions, but it gets closer by the day as photographers get better at motion, the equipment gets cheaper and easier, film crews get better at bringing in a still guy and retouchers get better at making, 1,000 iso quick stills from a motion shoot look professional.
BC
-
Much depends on what the camera is pointing at. For those who feel Gawd got it wrong and there's no place for pores on women, or are after that 1970s airbrush look, well, MFD is probably wasted on them.
Personally I don't want to view the world in soft-focus and don't want a camera to dictate a look, I'll take the life-like file and then decide on where to take it.
The dslr's can have as much eye shredding, eye lash/pore/powder texture detail as any back, on screen. The dslrs are hardly "soft focus".
Only LEAF has a really pleasing sharpness to a file, for people photography. Sharp but not too sharp, not crunchy like Phase, and the Leaf color is really natural as well.
The ds3/5d2/d3x files are smooth and natural without being too sharp. The files look like P30+ files run through LR and then adjsuted for pleasing color in PS, but you get that look OUT OF THE CAMERA and in the in camera JPEGS that the get sent to the designer for FPO during the shoot.
For people photography the current dslr's are about perfect.
-
It's funny talking about price.
This thread is about a $10,000 medium format camera, that is at least half the price of any of the traditional medium format cameras and everybody seems thrilled, but since Canon has a 3 grand 5d2, some of the same people seem crushed that a 1ds4 would be 7 thousand.
But maybe that's where all these cameras need to be, $3,500 max, since they change every 18 months or so. I guess you don't need weather sealing, or tank like build quality if it's gonna be traded in before it gets close to worn out.
In regards to still image quality that's very much personal preference. In certain situations and working in post I can see the difference (maybe even appreciate the difference) of a non aa filtered ccd camera vs. a aa filter cmos, but I've shot both systems side by side for a few years and to a client/A.D./person if I put the images up on screen most clients don't notice, though the ones that do always pick the Canon file and say something like it looks less digital, whatever that means.
Some photographer's love the oversharp look of medium format, some don't.
____________________________________
In regards to Paul's quote about how production around the camera is the same, well today maybe, but I'll bet you see less crew soon. After all a clean 2000 iso allows for less lighting power, less cable pullers, smaller generators, faster production.
Just as digital still photography has double the volume in a day's shooting, I would imagine, cinema, motion, television production will also start doubling the volume per day, if they haven't already.
Could be wrong, but we'll see.
BC
the 5DII at the 2500$ price point keeps popping up in all discussions because it can do so much...and like you say: is weatherproofing and faster AF worth an extra 5000$ or 2 extra 5DIIs? not for me....
the 5DIIs ability to do everything very very well thank you automatically makes it the elephant in the room.....
i can see the 2500$ camera becoming a 18-24 month investment..no problem with that at all....
DMF lost me when i was on my way to have my P30 upgraded to a P30+.....for 7000$....and i almost did it...they make it look like it is the most natural thing in the world....but i thought about it for a second....and that was that....
to put the pentax (or even the ds4 at around the same price) in perspective....i could get a whole litepanel kit with 3 dimmable/variable color for the same price....hmmm
the canons almost have that polaroid effect: it's does not necessarily have to look exactly the way the final product will look like but it has to look good because it sets the tone for the rest of the day.....and somehow that screen makes everything look good....
as for production and sets: i think most TV productions and DP simply replaced the cameras....and are slowly finding out that they can do with one or 2 trucks less gear all of a sudden....but in some of those behind the scenes videos it does not look like it has sunken in yet...
and let's not forget that film, TV,...is union...so there have to be at least 15 random guys with headsets.....
it'll all change...
-
Awww. Why ruin a good story with the facts?
Folks would much prefer to think that a million dollar TV production can be shot with an $800 camera, just like the one that they own, and probably hand-held by one person as well.
Michael
Here's the story: House Season Finale Filmed Entirely with Canon 5D Mark II (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/house-season-finale-filmed-entirely-with-canon-5d-mark-ii/)
http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/house-...non-5d-mark-ii/ (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/house-season-finale-filmed-entirely-with-canon-5d-mark-ii/)
Some quotes:
"@MVRamunno: What is the difference in how it looks on a TV screen compared to a regular camera?
Greg Yaitanes: richer. shallow focus pulls the actors faces to forground [sic]"
"@klizma: How did you manage to stabilize the camera in tight spaces? Any special kind of brackets?
GY: no. mostly gave it a hand held feel. or on a small tripod"
"This is quite an endorsement for Canon, with a network giant entrusting the finale of one of its most popular shows to the 5D Mark II "
"In 2008, House was distributed in a total of 66 countries. With an audience of over 81.8 million worldwide, it was the most watched television show on the globe and far surpassed the viewership figures of the leading TV dramas the previous two years"
-
I was told months ago that this was not the case, that the 5D was for certain sequences. I guess they changed their mind.
The real question is: how much was the post budget compared to a regular episode? I know its possible, we ran our own tests. We shot a trailer for a script my brother in law wrote on Super 16, Red, Sony EX1 and 3, and the 5D2. We were looking for ease of integration of the different formats. It was all compiled by Postworks in NYC, and our conclusion was that the 5D2 footage needed too much post when integrated into other formats and there were too many image anomalies, like randon Christmas tree lights off of spectral reflections. The negatives outweighed the positives of generally excellent IQ. If we had been paying for the post, it would have been considerable.
We are looking at the 7D now, and hope that Canon puts some effort into their next generation. Honestly, I'd rather shoot Super 16 than any digital vid cam. That being said, simplicity is king. The less that gear and process gets in the way of the creative process, the better, and there is certainly (or can be) less gear in the way when using a video dslr.
FYI, as for shooting film, Super 16 looks real nice and is about the same cost as digital, maybe a little more. When we shoot freebees and use film, the stock is usually donated, and we get breaks on processing and telecine. So if you are shooting your reel, get jiggy with Super 16, ask and beg for stock and discounts.
Here's the story: House Season Finale Filmed Entirely with Canon 5D Mark II (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/house-season-finale-filmed-entirely-with-canon-5d-mark-ii/)
http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/house-...non-5d-mark-ii/ (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/04/09/house-season-finale-filmed-entirely-with-canon-5d-mark-ii/)
Some quotes:
"@MVRamunno: What is the difference in how it looks on a TV screen compared to a regular camera?
Greg Yaitanes: richer. shallow focus pulls the actors faces to forground [sic]"
"@klizma: How did you manage to stabilize the camera in tight spaces? Any special kind of brackets?
GY: no. mostly gave it a hand held feel. or on a small tripod"
"This is quite an endorsement for Canon, with a network giant entrusting the finale of one of its most popular shows to the 5D Mark II "
"In 2008, House was distributed in a total of 66 countries. With an audience of over 81.8 million worldwide, it was the most watched television show on the globe and far surpassed the viewership figures of the leading TV dramas the previous two years"
-
It's nice to know that now a $2500 camera can do the job - at least for some. It's also interesting to note that shallow depth field trumps all kinds of perceived drawbacks such as "christmas trees" etc.
And it will be interesting to see this episode when it airs. They are putting it in front of 80 million viewers, I presume it looks pretty good ;-)
In any case, things can only get better from here: New lenses, cheaper chip technology, lower noise, AF while shooting, etc., etc. Yee ha.
-
The final episode of House is not being shot entirely with the 5D2, its being used as a special effect, shallow dof rig for certain shots. ... Pulling focus with the L lenses is a cruel joke. You block the shot, run through rehersal, tape everything down, then BAM, focus is slightly off. The next 5D and ds4 I bet will solve many of these problems, such as RAW VIDEO.
Apart from the fact that it was in the end shot entirely on the 5D2 (not quite an $800 camera, especially with all the lenses used!) it does seem that there could be a major issue of focus pulling with lenses not designed for still photography.
I wonder if the next wave will be cameras specifically designed for video and using sensors of about cine-35mm size. Panasonic just announced one such at NAB 2010 yesterday, with a 4/3" sensor, and I just say a photo of Sony presentation at NAB today. Few details on the Sony, but I am guessing it will use the forthcoming EXMOR APS-C HD sensor. [Edit: I was wrong it seems; the new SRW-9000PL (http://www.sonyinsider.com/2010/04/12/nab-sonys-srw-9000pl-professional-camcorder-35mm-imager-and-pl-mount/) model for which we have details uses the same Sony Super 35mm format CCD sensor as in the Sony F35 CineAlta (http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/product-F35/). My guess now is that the future unnamed less expensive model also shown at NAB will use the same sensor as those two Sony 35mm professional video cameras that we know about so far.]
There is a potentially huge advantage in not going beyond traditional cine-35mm formats like the 24.9x18.7mm of ANSI Super 35mm: the ability to use cine-camera lenses through PL mount adaptors. Focus pulling should be a bit easier with dedicated cine-lenses and a somewhat smaller format, and if you need a 7x zoom faster than f/2.8 across the whole zoom range and with minimal focus breathing, 35mm still camera lenses will not do it, but PL mount will: http://www.zeiss.de/c125756900453232/Conte...125756f003df792 (http://www.zeiss.de/c125756900453232/Contents-Frame/be74a714e225c41cc125756f003df792)
P. S. Maybe the post-processing problems of "mixing media" dictated the all 5D2 decision?
And about 16mm: for lower budget options, I believe that micro 4/3 mount cameras can be used with many 16mm lenses without vignetting problems.
-
Christmas Tree artifacts aren't a "perceived" drawback. It's real and it's ugly and time consuming and expensive to fix if you don't catch it in rehearsal and block the shot differently or do something with the offending spectrals. I'm not saying this because I'm against the 5d or Canon. It's fact. I also think that the David and Goliath hype is out of control. It's neat, you can shoot pro work with it, it looks really good by itself, looks even better with tons of post. It's small and cheap. Awesome. It has flaws and requires work arounds, too.
It's nice to know that now a $2500 camera can do the job - at least for some. It's also interesting to note that shallow depth field trumps all kinds of perceived drawbacks such as "christmas trees" etc.
And it will be interesting to see this episode when it airs. They are putting it in front of 80 million viewers, I presume it looks pretty good ;-)
In any case, things can only get better from here: New lenses, cheaper chip technology, lower noise, AF while shooting, etc., etc. Yee ha.
-
Christmas Tree artifacts aren't a "perceived" drawback. It's real and it's ugly and time consuming and expensive to fix if you don't catch it in rehearsal and block the shot differently or do something with the offending spectrals. I'm not saying this because I'm against the 5d or Canon. It's fact. I also think that the David and Goliath hype is out of control. It's neat, you can shoot pro work with it, it looks really good by itself, looks even better with tons of post. It's small and cheap. Awesome. It has flaws and requires work arounds, too.
tmark,what I meant was "observed" drawbacks, not "perceived." No offence.
-
tmark,what I meant was "observed" drawbacks, not "perceived." No offence.
No sweat LR!
-
... at some point, the Pentax at ten grand is also going to seem ludicrous.
Just like the EOS 1D... it was $8000 when I bought mine... but it was easily justified at the time (in film savings alone).