Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Motion & Video => Topic started by: spotmeter on December 17, 2017, 11:19:10 am

Title: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: spotmeter on December 17, 2017, 11:19:10 am
I am planning on doing landscape videos in addition to landscape photos, and am looking for recommendations for a sub $10K 4K video camera.

My main criteria are excellent resolution to pick up fine detail, excellent color, and ability to use Canon or Nikon lenses.

Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: Christopher Sanderson on December 17, 2017, 11:38:34 am
Interesting question to which I believe thare are a large variety of cameras as answers. Here are but two

I shoot with a Panasonic GH5 with a Metabones adapter for Canon lenses. The quality is superb but it is still a stills-based body with excellent video capability. A fully kitted out bag with the add-ons that your shooting may require would come in subtantially under $10K

However, I think if I had your budget and wanted a true video camera, my choice today would be the Canon C300 (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134579-REG/canon_0635c002_eos_c300_mark_ii.html) which comes in at $1 less than US$10K )). There are large ergonomic and practical advatages to shooting with a body designed for video rather than a hybrid - with the notable exception of size & weight which may not apply in your situation since you already are lugging around Canon glass ))
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on December 17, 2017, 06:35:42 pm
There is also the Blackmagic Production Camera
In EF mount flavour. (Super35 sensor)
It is crucial for Landscapes, arquitecture etc... That you
Get a wide DR and Raw workflow. (Cinema DNG 3840x2160)
And it fits in your budget. You still find those.

The Ursa mini is now the current BM that could fit your needs/budget.
I beleive it provides 15 stops. (4608×2592)

The GH5 Chris uses is an amazing camera, the best in its class.
For not much more cash, you get access to Raw workflow.
In post, it is crucial.
For colors you need bit depth.

Considering the extras to make those cameras operatives, (video assit, ext rec, rig...)
You stay comfortably/just under 10k.

Ps: as a personal evaluation, I'm not a big fan of the Raw DNG color science nor implementation in post.
And you may want to download test footage first to see by yourself.
The ideal may be to try to find some second hand Red ready-to-shoot under 10k if you're lucky.
It happens from time to time.

Ps: keep in mind the requirements for 4k in post. To avoid like
The plague most consummer codecs because their compression
Require calculations and it's not strange to find yourself with better
Performances in post with Raw workflow than with AVCHD and Co. Fragrances.
Don't expect real time playback with 20 nodes of CC and roto masks in 4k.
From 6k, I might get an average of 6 fps playback!!

As Chris pointed also, a proper cine/video camera is to be prefered over
Hybrids for a vast number of reasons. (ND filters are expensive
And irritating to manipulate so if you can get them in-camera better).

Ps2: one of the reasons I pointed towards Red is in the case that you are not familiar with
Log footage, Red Cine X acts just like a Capture 1. If you come from a photographer
Background, this is a big advantage as you are already familiar with the workflow.
It is an important point. DNG workflow on the contrary is more "video oriented', so to say.
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: vulture on December 17, 2017, 07:33:05 pm
Strong support for Chris's statement about the Panasonic GH 5.
Shooting with Canon lenses and Metabones adapter on GH 5 body is giving me superb results.
With Pana/Leica lenses even better when considering weight and size.
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: Joe Towner on December 20, 2017, 01:51:36 pm
So many different options, Fred just gave a huge starting point.

Next up is how portable do you need the kit to be?  Static tripod stuff or doing movements on a motion head?  How weather/dirt/sand/salt resistant are you looking for?  What current bodies are you currently shooting with?

Anything from a A7SII or URSA Mini to a used RED setup can be had.  Are you looking for embedded audio?  Higher frame rates?  Are you looking for out of camera files, or are you going to do color grading?

Hope this adds confusion & help at the same time.

-Joe
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: bcooter on December 21, 2017, 05:38:23 pm
So many different options, Fred just gave a huge starting point.

Next up is how portable do you need the kit to be?  Static tripod stuff or doing movements on a motion head?  How weather/dirt/sand/salt resistant are you looking for?  What current bodies are you currently shooting with?

Anything from a A7SII or URSA Mini to a used RED setup can be had.  Are you looking for embedded audio?  Higher frame rates?  Are you looking for out of camera files, or are you going to do color grading?

Hope this adds confusion & help at the same time.

-Joe


Very good post Joe.

Not knowing what the answers to Joe's questions are, if I had to stay below 10 grand and wanted a good camera, I'd look at the Canon c200.

On paper it seems a little under spec, with 8 bit but Canon's 8 bit is good, at least with the 1dxII.

The good thing about the c200 is if you have Canon glass your all set and it shoots a semi raw file called raw lite and the bit depth is reported to be 1 Gig a second.  That's a hefty file.  Also you don't have to add a whole bunch of monitors, viewfinders, arms,

My second choice would be the 1dxII that shoots 800 mbs and is the sharpest motion file I've seen. 

But everybody has different needs and uses, workflows, etc.

Best thing is to find a good dealer that will let you rent and test in your style then apply the rental to the purchase price. 

One other suggestion I would make is if you decide to go with a camera that accepts PL mounts, look for a set of used RED primes (they don't sell them new anymore).  You can buy a full set of clean RED primes for 9 grand, which will be over your budget, but PL lenses never go out of style and we bought a set years ago, they are sharp, have beautiful roll off and I consider them the prettiest lenses we use, except when we rent an angeniuxe zoom, though that is a very expensive lens.

IMO

BC
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on December 22, 2017, 10:35:00 am

My second choice would be the 1dxII that shoots 800 mbs and is the sharpest motion file I've seen. 

IMO

BC
But James,
Stricktly talking about video, the 1dx mk2 will not bring an advantage over the GH5
Except for skin tones and maybe AF. However it is significantly more expensive.
Both are weather sealed and both are still bodies that deliver solid footage.
But they are aimed to different users.
I'd take the Canon if I was shooting people, fashion, journalism...
Where it excells.
As you shoot fashion and advert, it makes sense. Canon colors
And skin tones are good right out the box.
However, for landscapes, I don't see any advantage to put the extra
Cash over a GH5. For the cost of the Canon, one can access true
Cine camera from BM with raw files, global shutter etc...
As for DoF, the GH5 can be improoved with the speedbooster.
At 1/3 the cost of the canon, if it was with still photography in mind, I'd
Have no doubt:Canon! But for video only I'd choose the GH5.
Numbers...numbers....

Probably your first choice C200 or Chris C300 seems a better option in what Canon is concerned. IMO.
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: chapel on December 22, 2017, 01:46:30 pm
Plus one on the Blackmagic production camera. I have the 2.5k Cinema camera and the raw files are amazing to work with.  The 4k production camera also has a global shutter and huge DR. Davinci Resolve also does a good job with the files and the free version has plenty of features.
Greg
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: bcooter on December 22, 2017, 01:59:50 pm
But James,
Stricktly talking about video, the 1dx mk2 will not bring an advantage over the GH5
Except for skin tones and maybe AF. However it is significantly more expensive.
Both are weather sealed and both are still bodies that deliver solid footage.


Fred,

I agree.  The Gh5 is the best bang for the buck, though get's a little expensive if you go crazy on glass, especially the f.95 Voigtlander's I bought, though they let you do selective focus easier.

The GH5 is probably the only camera, regardless of price that is hobbled to move you to a higher end camera and shoots one heck of a good file.   A little harder to color for skinniness, as you mentioned, but with some presets it looks good.

Happy Holidays

IMO

BC
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: John Brawley on December 22, 2017, 05:40:17 pm


The GH5 Chris uses is an amazing camera, the best in its class.
For not much more cash, you get access to Raw workflow.
In post, it is crucial.
For colors you need bit depth.


Resolution and bit depth yes.
The GH5 shoots 10 bit, but it's a pretty compressed codec and "only" 4:2:2 chroma sampling. 

Ps: as a personal evaluation, I'm not a big fan of the Raw DNG color science nor implementation in post.
And you may want to download test footage first to see by yourself.

How odd.  DNG colour science or the Blackmagic colour science itself ?  I strongly disagree with this view.

Here's some of my DNG's from a recent test I did using the Ursa Mini Pro 4.6K.
http://bit.ly/2BTJF7e

They are only single frames but any stills / photo application should be able to open them up.

Here's my grade of this footage.  Not really a grade, just a single LUT applied from a show I'm working on right now.

By the way there are three lenses, with a label, A, B or C.  They are lens comparisons between SLR Magic APO Primes, Zeiss CP2 primes and the mighty Panavision Primo primes.  Can you guess which are which ?  You can link through to vimeo and download the source file if you like too.

https://vimeo.com/246930283

If you really want to make your computer cry you can download these shots (folders of DNGs)
https://johnbrawley.digitalpigeon.com/msg/w1dD0AitEeehZgbtG5M1VQ/xqtpYQ7dYibPXK8JjM4AQg/file/c360e0c0-08ad-11e7-a166-06ed1b933555
http://bit.ly/2ksCKeb
http://bit.ly/2j5eHlz
http://bit.ly/2j5e63j

Beware that being DNG's it's possible to get a crappy looking preview generated by a web browser like chrome or even from the finder in Mac OS, but you have to open the file to see what they're really like. 

Attached are some 4.6K frames from a recent series I did. Just "LUT" graded but they are very hard to pick form the more expensive camera we used on the show.  In fact the one way you can tell they aren't Alexa is that they're generally much SHARPER because of the lack of OLPF and the Alexa is a lower MP sensor.

DNG workflow on the contrary is more "video oriented', so to say.

Well that I just don't understand.  Can you be more specific ?  Seeing as DNG came from Adobe as a stills format, cDNG (cinema DNG) only came later.

You have a DNG RAW tab (just like ACR) and then you work on files after that ?

To the OP, I think the Ursa Mini 4.6K or Ursa Mini Pro 4.6K would be worth considering.

Neither camera has an OLPF so it's very sharp. Perhaps even with the fine detail of landscapes you may not like some of the false colour aliasing that can occur.  There are some post solutions for this, and you can also get after market OLPF's as well.

The Pro has internal NDs and interchangeable mounts (EF, Nikon and PL).

It also records higher bit depths than almost any camera in this bracket. 

DNG's are 16 bit linear / 12 bit log and UNCOMPRESSED. That's what the files are above.

They also offer compressed versions of DNG at 3:1 and 4:1

They also offer the very well proven and established production friendly ProRes formats, in 12 bit, 10 bit and 8 bit varieties.  All build in.

JB
( I am an unpaid consultant for Blackmagic design)
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: bcooter on December 22, 2017, 09:36:10 pm
the Ursa Mini Pro 4.6K.


John,

Shame on you.  Now I want an Ursa Pro and I don't really need it.    I haven't had the chance to really review your images, but I respect what you say and honestly think BM is a real force in the industry.

Our biz is a strange group.   We all think we're open minded, but I know dip's that wouldn't touch anything but an Arri, the strongly dislike RED and Black Magic, but few have tried them, so . . .

Anyway, when I return to LA, I'm going to try an URSA mini pro and see what shakes loose.

Thanks, unless this costs me money.

BTW:  how would you compare the BM to the REDs (any RED), especially in range and iso?

IMO

BC
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: John Brawley on December 22, 2017, 10:17:32 pm
John,

Shame on you.  Now I want an Ursa Pro and I don't really need it.   

Well they're cheap enough you shouldn't have to think about it too much !

Our biz is a strange group.   We all think we're open minded, but I know dip's that wouldn't touch anything but an Arri, the strongly dislike RED and Black Magic, but few have tried them, so . . .

Indeed.

I like to think I'm camera agnostic.  I use many cameras, even within the same scene to get shots done.  Sometimes its the same camera built in a different way.  Sometimes it's a different camera altogether because it gets me a shot I can't get any other way.

On the series I'm now we carrry

Alexa Mini
Alexa Classic
Ursa Mini
Ursa Mini PRO
Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera
Olympus OM-D EM1 MKII
DJI Osmo

They all have their uses


Anyway, when I return to LA, I'm going to try an URSA mini pro and see what shakes loose.

PM me and I'll make sure it gets' done right.



BTW:  how would you compare the BM to the REDs (any RED), especially in range and iso?


Well, a little bit of a piece of string.

I haven't shot much RED of late.  I am bound by a negotiated confidentiality agreement, but let's just say I haven't been a fan for a while.

I actually tried to test Dragon recently but the card didn't make it out of the test bay at Panavision.

My experience is old and perhaps not relevant, but the last real shoot I did RED was with a RED EPIC MX.  Back then I found it to be "truly" ISO 320.   My thinking with RED then was that it was wonderful as long as you had it in it's very narrow sweet spot, but it could fall into a cliff very quickly.  I say this as the first DP to shoot an episodic TV series in Australia using RED and someone that was an early champion.  But recently, because of the alluded too issues above and the simple fact that there are better options for what it does mostly have lead me elsewhere.

I saw some extensive in-house DXL tests recently that had me thinking a corner had been turned.

I think the true power of RED is actually REDCODE and not the cameras. Those R3D files that have their embedded metadata along with the brilliant compression system make it useable.  The uncompressed DNG's of an Ursa choke even the most robust of post systems.

In my line of work the resolution angle is moot (Fox still air in 720 and insist on only 1920 deliverables)

I have a lot more experience using the Ursa Mini PRO against Alexa and, they really are very close, especially in DR and look once you have a colourist who knows how to work with them.  As alluded to here, sometimes the process can be something that takes a while to land with some, but if you recall, RED went through the same kind of thing.

I shoot almost always at ISO 800 but when shooting RAW it's possible to go a few stops higher without too much grief.  I never really need to.

As I say, hit me up when you're ready and I'll bring the Pony.

JB








Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on December 23, 2017, 06:25:59 am
Resolution and bit depth yes.
The GH5 shoots 10 bit, but it's a pretty compressed codec and "only" 4:2:2 chroma sampling. 

How odd.  DNG colour science or the Blackmagic colour science itself ?  I strongly disagree with this view.

Here's some of my DNG's from a recent test I did using the Ursa Mini Pro 4.6K.
http://bit.ly/2BTJF7e

They are only single frames but any stills / photo application should be able to open them up.

Here's my grade of this footage.  Not really a grade, just a single LUT applied from a show I'm working on right now.

By the way there are three lenses, with a label, A, B or C.  They are lens comparisons between SLR Magic APO Primes, Zeiss CP2 primes and the mighty Panavision Primo primes.  Can you guess which are which ?  You can link through to vimeo and download the source file if you like too.

https://vimeo.com/246930283

If you really want to make your computer cry you can download these shots (folders of DNGs)
https://johnbrawley.digitalpigeon.com/msg/w1dD0AitEeehZgbtG5M1VQ/xqtpYQ7dYibPXK8JjM4AQg/file/c360e0c0-08ad-11e7-a166-06ed1b933555
http://bit.ly/2ksCKeb
http://bit.ly/2j5eHlz
http://bit.ly/2j5e63j

Beware that being DNG's it's possible to get a crappy looking preview generated by a web browser like chrome or even from the finder in Mac OS, but you have to open the file to see what they're really like. 

Attached are some 4.6K frames from a recent series I did. Just "LUT" graded but they are very hard to pick form the more expensive camera we used on the show.  In fact the one way you can tell they aren't Alexa is that they're generally much SHARPER because of the lack of OLPF and the Alexa is a lower MP sensor.

Well that I just don't understand.  Can you be more specific ?  Seeing as DNG came from Adobe as a stills format, cDNG (cinema DNG) only came later.

You have a DNG RAW tab (just like ACR) and then you work on files after that ?

To the OP, I think the Ursa Mini 4.6K or Ursa Mini Pro 4.6K would be worth considering.

Neither camera has an OLPF so it's very sharp. Perhaps even with the fine detail of landscapes you may not like some of the false colour aliasing that can occur.  There are some post solutions for this, and you can also get after market OLPF's as well.

The Pro has internal NDs and interchangeable mounts (EF, Nikon and PL).

It also records higher bit depths than almost any camera in this bracket. 

DNG's are 16 bit linear / 12 bit log and UNCOMPRESSED. That's what the files are above.

They also offer compressed versions of DNG at 3:1 and 4:1

They also offer the very well proven and established production friendly ProRes formats, in 12 bit, 10 bit and 8 bit varieties.  All build in.

JB
( I am an unpaid consultant for Blackmagic design)
John,
Thanks for the links you provided in all threads. I'll dig into them.
My point on BM footage was not by any means discreditive.
When I wrote, "more video oriented" I didn't have in mind a log workflow but in
The context of someone who comes from a still photography background.
As a personal preference I like better Red's implementation.

RLF is Cineon. I have some references I lack with DNG.
You gave some answer in your post on the strengh of Red. I like also the fact that the RMD
Is a separate file and RedCineX, IMO, helps a more "photographer
Background" approach to get familiar with.
But it's all about getting used of a workflow.
I'm currently on Mistika. Not sure yet if I'd go for a certification course
As the company is Madrid based and I'll see if digging into DNG in it brings me
a fresh approach. who knows. 

I've seen that often. Colorists (even experienced) who do not have solid experience
With DNG sometimes screw it easier.
It comes from the fact that here, the major player being Arri, by far,
Everybody is used to Arri feel, think Arri, and when they got something else
It's like the muscle memory on the wheels just does not
Work. Don't know if you see what I mean. Die hard habits.
As for the player, I tend to use Scratch play for reviewing DNG.
To be honest, I still don't have the feel with DNG.

However, I'd like to hear the Cooter experience when he will
Dig into DNG, if he finds the same as me in the color
Area or not compared to Red and Canon.

Now, that said, I would also recommend BM cameras to the OP.
There is nothing close in the current offer that brings so much for so less cost.
Blackmagic does great products at much friendlier prices than Arri or Red.
In fact, BM made a huge revolution in this business and I have respect for
this company products.

Cheers.

PS: in the video I like B and C best. (I prefer the roll off). But they are very close.
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: BJL on January 09, 2018, 10:49:04 pm
Interesting question to which I believe thare are a large variety of cameras as answers. Here are but two

I shoot with a Panasonic GH5 with a Metabones adapter for Canon lenses.
I suppose that a new contender is the Panasonic GH5S, an even more video-oriented update of the GH5: https://www.dpreview.com/news/4183659664/panasonic-announces-video-focused-lumix-dc-gh5s

The "multi-format" sensor is a bit wider than the standard 4/3" format when used in its Cinema 4K (4096x2160) mode, which it offers in addition to the more common 4K UHD format of 3840 x 2160. DR is supposedly improved too, with the help of a "dual gain" method and slightly fewer, bigger photosites than the GH5. (US$2500 body only.)

Will you be reviewing it Chris?
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: Christopher Sanderson on January 10, 2018, 09:58:16 am
Will you be reviewing it Chris?

Probably not but Michael Durr might. The loss of in-body IS makes the GH5S less desirable for me. If I shot a lot of very low light footage, then it would be a good choice. However I would rather spend the money on better faster lenses...

Now if the GH5S low-light features and marginally better IQ were in a GH6, I would be first in line ))

Some interesting examples and opinion on ProVideo Coalition (https://www.provideocoalition.com/panasonic-lumix-gh5s-one-camera-thousand-opinions/)
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: Don Blauvelt on February 02, 2018, 04:50:06 pm
I think you would be hard pressed to find a better video camera than the Canon Cinema C200, if quality and color are your main concern. In addition you can use Canon EF-L series lenses and Canon's Cinema lenses. The icing on the cake for me would be the C200 Dual Pixel AutoFocus and the built in ND Filters 2, 4, 6 and Expanded 8 and 10 ND. Current list seems to be $7,500.

I have seen some criticism regarding that the Full HD video recording Spec that it is only 8 BIT, many pro reviewers have said it is surprisingly good.

Then, if you record "Cinema Raw Light" your now recording 23.98 & 29.97 (24p & 30P) at 12 bit and slow motion at 59.94P 60p) at 10 bit. If you need that quality for Full HD deliverables, down convert.

Do a search for C200 reviews, there is so much more this camera offers.
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: bcooter on February 02, 2018, 06:12:38 pm
I think you would be hard pressed to find a better video camera than the Canon Cinema C200, if quality and color are your main concern. In addition you can use Canon EF-L series lenses and Canon's Cinema lenses. The icing on the cake for me would be the C200 Dual Pixel AutoFocus and the built in ND Filters 2, 4, 6 and Expanded 8 and 10 ND. Current list seems to be $7,500.

I have seen some criticism regarding that the Full HD video recording Spec that it is only 8 BIT, many pro reviewers have said it is surprisingly good.

Then, if you record "Cinema Raw Light" your now recording 23.98 & 29.97 (24p & 30P) at 12 bit and slow motion at 59.94P 60p) at 10 bit. If you need that quality for Full HD deliverables, down convert.

Do a search for C200 reviews, there is so much more this camera offers.

I haven't tried the c200, but just finished a project where about 1/3 of the footage was with the 1dxII.

Canon color is unique.  It's rich and deep and for commercial work requires very little correction.

If your  trying for a cinema look (whatever that is) some saturation needs to come out, but we matched it easily with the RED footage.

The canon dual pixel autofocus is crazy amazing.  Very organic and works well in most situations.

Like the c200 you hear about 8 bit depth, but the 1dxII shoots a 800 megaByte per second file, looks great in resolve and has a lot of range.   

I think the c200 shoots a gig a second in raw, so the file should be sturdy, though blow through a lot of c fast cards.

Though today the talk is about larger than super 35mm sensors, larger lenses, 8k, 6k, etc.  I personally don't think it makes much difference but others will disagree, or they say Canon is behind. 

This a good read, on 11k scanned film down to 2.7K arri classic.   It's based mostly on delivery but it's informative and well done.

http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/ResDemoPt2.html

IMO

BC





Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on February 02, 2018, 07:09:46 pm
I haven't tried the c200, but just finished a project where about 1/3 of the footage was with the 1dxII.

Canon color is unique.  It's rich and deep and for commercial work requires very little correction.

If your  trying for a cinema look (whatever that is) some saturation needs to come out, but we matched it easily with the RED footage.

The canon dual pixel autofocus is crazy amazing.  Very organic and works well in most situations.

Like the c200 you hear about 8 bit depth, but the 1dxII shoots a 800 megaByte per second file, looks great in resolve and has a lot of range.   

I think the c200 shoots a gig a second in raw, so the file should be sturdy, though blow through a lot of c fast cards.

Though today the talk is about larger than super 35mm sensors, larger lenses, 8k, 6k, etc.  I personally don't think it makes much difference but others will disagree, or they say Canon is behind. 

This a good read, on 11k scanned film down to 2.7K arri classic.   It's based mostly on delivery but it's informative and well done.

http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/ResDemoPt2.html

IMO

BC

A semantic fun on the Canon AF: when you say "organic"
Talking about autofocus.

The Canon AF is sexy!

Ps: this pixel race plague that now contaminated the motion imagery
As it did in it's glory days with stills has become completly absurd.
To put that crap into the edit/color requires an
Investment beyond the range of most above 4k. And the audience
Does not even notice anything.

Instead of pushing towards more Ks, the motion camera makers
Would better spend their time in fixing the increcuble chaos
Of codecs, flat curves and color spaces. Since ACES was created
In order to sort of cure this industry uncontroled mess,
At least a dozen of new bunks have been created,
Just to feed the wreck.

And of course, the pixel race obliges the engineers
To rethink the color science and their proprietary
Magic curves so that what you learn today is already
Obsolete. Red has created for ex, new curve and new color space
To feed the DR monster and their new tech. But of course,
It's not standart. It's not one big colour space for all
But branded. The Mac dudes was fun during maybe 10 years,
Now it's not any more.
Most of the topics I read now in LGG, Red forum or the Cow
Are boring like hell engineers discusions, spending their times
In fixing sins and problems created 90% by the industry lack
Of control.
Before, a colorist was first an artist and a bit of an engineer.
Now, a colorist has to be an engineer and a bit of an artist.

But...did the product improved?  There are no
More Felinis now than before. But many
More computers and dudes to make them work.

The era of computer freaks has arised, full of
Technicities and green screens.
As you said about the Mac dudes: as long as I'm not one of them!
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: bcooter on February 02, 2018, 08:39:44 pm
A semantic question on the Canon AF: when you say "organic"
Talking about autofocus, in what sense?

The Canon AF is sexy?

Ps: this pixel race plague that now contaminated the motion imagery
As it did in it's glory days with stills has become completly absurd.
To put that crap into the edit/color requires an
Investment beyond the range of most above 4k. And the audience
Does not even notice anything.

.....snip.....

Just to feed the wreck.


By organic I mean the auto focus.  There are a lot of settings like face and object tracking, which is crazy good, speed and also touch screen autofocus, which with touch screen obviously means if your going back and forth from face to face, you'd need to be on sticks or have the smoothest hands in the world.

The file is really good and the following makes no sense, but I did a quick prelight test on the first setup, prior to makeup, with my red ones* and the canon 1dxII.  Shot the 1dxII in still and motion. The actor was on a bed, with a glass wall behind her.   The wall has those translucent blinds with a slight rib.  On the RED 1 with RED 35mm prime, set at 800 iso, with a kino fill.  on the 1dxII still image which is listed at 14 bits in depth the blinds blew out, and to match the look of the R1 the canon was set at 1250 iso.

On the canon in 8 bit 24fps motion jpeg codec at 800 MBS you could see some slight detail on the blinds, so the footage appeared to have more range than the still image?  Go figure.

Now on my RED 1's with the RED primes which have a smooth rolloff, you could see full detail of the window blinds.  Not dark, but pretty much what my eyes see.   It's crazy but my R1's since the last update of firmware (I think two years ago)and the newest resolve and cinex, I nearly always set the native iso at 640 or 800 and even though the evf and on camera monitor is set as high as it goes, if it looks good in camera, you have to stop down a little over 2/3's a stop or the file is hot, which means I'm probably around 1000 iso if set at 800.

*Now what is also crazy is the Canon is shooting 800 MBS and my R1's at their best compression level redcode 42 is only 40 megabytes per second and very clean.

The commercials have not been released yet so I can't show the screen grabs.

Anyway, the Canons have a great look.   If you want to test the Canon autofocus rent an 80d and 17 to 55 2.8 Canon zoom with stabilization and though not as exactly good as the 1dxII it's pretty amazing. 

And also keep in mind about the above, the lighting test was quick so we could have been slightly off, though throughout the shoot the Canon held up very well.

IMO

BC
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: Peter McLennan on February 02, 2018, 11:28:53 pm

This a good read, on 11k scanned film down to 2.7K arri classic.   It's based mostly on delivery but it's informative and well done.

http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/ResDemoPt2.html

IMO

BC

EXCELLENT!  Pixel peeping at its best.  Very educational. Thanks for that bcooter.

DP'ing is certainly more complex now than it used to was.  :)
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on February 05, 2018, 07:31:27 pm

By organic I mean the auto focus.  There are a lot of settings like face and object tracking, which is crazy good, speed and also touch screen autofocus, which with touch screen obviously means if your going back and forth from face to face, you'd need to be on sticks or have the smoothest hands in the world.

The file is really good and the following makes no sense, but I did a quick prelight test on the first setup, prior to makeup, with my red ones* and the canon 1dxII.  Shot the 1dxII in still and motion. The actor was on a bed, with a glass wall behind her.   The wall has those translucent blinds with a slight rib.  On the RED 1 with RED 35mm prime, set at 800 iso, with a kino fill.  on the 1dxII still image which is listed at 14 bits in depth the blinds blew out, and to match the look of the R1 the canon was set at 1250 iso.

On the canon in 8 bit 24fps motion jpeg codec at 800 MBS you could see some slight detail on the blinds, so the footage appeared to have more range than the still image?  Go figure.

Now on my RED 1's with the RED primes which have a smooth rolloff, you could see full detail of the window blinds.  Not dark, but pretty much what my eyes see.   It's crazy but my R1's since the last update of firmware (I think two years ago)and the newest resolve and cinex, I nearly always set the native iso at 640 or 800 and even though the evf and on camera monitor is set as high as it goes, if it looks good in camera, you have to stop down a little over 2/3's a stop or the file is hot, which means I'm probably around 1000 iso if set at 800.

*Now what is also crazy is the Canon is shooting 800 MBS and my R1's at their best compression level redcode 42 is only 40 megabytes per second and very clean.

The commercials have not been released yet so I can't show the screen grabs.

Anyway, the Canons have a great look.   If you want to test the Canon autofocus rent an 80d and 17 to 55 2.8 Canon zoom with stabilization and though not as exactly good as the 1dxII it's pretty amazing. 

And also keep in mind about the above, the lighting test was quick so we could have been slightly off, though throughout the shoot the Canon held up very well.

IMO

BC
I agree on Canon colors (at least for advertising/fashion).
And it seems indeed that the AF is the most sophisticated today.
Thanks for the practical and informative details.
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on February 05, 2018, 07:34:50 pm
EXCELLENT!  Pixel peeping at its best.  Very educational. Thanks for that bcooter.

DP'ing is certainly more complex now than it used to was.  :)
If you watched zen the full 2 videos of the serie, you should be canonized. :o
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: Don Blauvelt on February 09, 2018, 11:43:01 am
If you are intending to use one camera to do both, I would look into the Canon
1DX MK II as has been suggested by others, otherwise my previous suggestion, the Canon C200 for video only.

I personally have some limited experience with the Canon 1D X Mark II, shooting a series of tests for an upcoming project. I found the video quality to be excellent and the Dual Pixel AF superb. I didn't continue with it, because I realized I needed Pro Camcorder ergonomics for my documentary project.

1DX 2 Video Spec:
4k (DCI 4096 X 2160):
24p, 30p @ 500 Mbps  (23.98,29.97)
60p @ 800Mbps (59.94p)

1DX 2 Photo Spec: 20MP

A further though on your landscape video part.
I think you will find that you will need a camera with 60P frame rate to have more control over wind and other movements.

Don
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on February 09, 2018, 07:46:11 pm
If you are intending to use one camera to do both, I would look into the Canon
1DX MK II as has been suggested by others, otherwise my previous suggestion, the Canon C200 for video only.

I personally have some limited experience with the Canon 1D X Mark II, shooting a series of tests for an upcoming project. I found the video quality to be excellent and the Dual Pixel AF superb. I didn't continue with it, because I realized I needed Pro Camcorder ergonomics for my documentary project.

1DX 2 Video Spec:
4k (DCI 4096 X 2160):
24p, 30p @ 500 Mbps  (23.98,29.97)
60p @ 800Mbps (59.94p)

1DX 2 Photo Spec: 20MP

A further though on your landscape video part.
I think you will find that you will need a camera with 60P frame rate to have more control over wind and other movements.

Don
Coot is right. The footage of the Canon is really good and usable
Even side to side with heavier artillery.
What I don’t like is the weight/ergo. The ideal design would be
The (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/KFbDpECExCU/maxresdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: bcooter on February 13, 2018, 07:25:33 pm
Coot is right. The footage of the Canon is really good and usable
Even side to side with heavier artillery.
What I don’t like is the weight/ergo. The ideal design would be



I agree with Don about Canon.   The c200 has the newest Canon sensor, the 1dxII shoots way above it's 8 bit specs and if your using Canon still glass, the 24 to 70, is one of the best still and motion zooms I've ever used (the latest version).   For the C200 the aps C 17 to 55 with IS is also a great piece of glass, though won't work with the 1dxII (go figure).
Same with the 70 to 200 with IS.

Canon color is smooth and vivid, has to be pulled down some in saturation to match my REDs but if your not use to color grading, IMO  Canon will be the easiest color to hit.

Knowing this, (and never using it) I'd take a long look at the ursa mini pro.  Their cinema dmg file works well with Resolve and my little BMPCC (though 2k) will blast through resolve on my laptop like crazy.

People get hung up on price and names but I think black magic is one heck of a company and offers a lot.   With the right AA filter you can shoot it next to Arri's and REDs and I don't think anyone would notice the difference.     Just like in still cameras there are a lot of opinions and sometimes snobbery towards cameras.   

One thing to think of is if want to move from EF glass to PL you can change mounts by the user, unlike Canon.

Glass makes a difference and though they get few applause, the original RED PL primes to me are beautiful with nice roll off and I tested them against two kinds of Zeiss primes and Angenieux zooms.  If I was wealthy I go Angenieux zooms, but as I mentioned before you can buy a full set of RED lenses for 9 grand.

still grab from R1 and RED PL mount glass.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/julia_spot.jpg)

The main thing is test if you can before you buy and most of all smile.   Filming can be hard, but it's huge fun.

BC

P.S.  Fred thanks for moving these discussions along and most of all thanks for contributing.




Title: Re: Sub $10K 4K video camera for landscape videos?
Post by: fredjeang2 on February 14, 2018, 07:47:19 pm

I agree with Don about Canon.   The c200 has the newest Canon sensor, the 1dxII shoots way above it's 8 bit specs and if your using Canon still glass, the 24 to 70, is one of the best still and motion zooms I've ever used (the latest version).   For the C200 the aps C 17 to 55 with IS is also a great piece of glass, though won't work with the 1dxII (go figure).
Same with the 70 to 200 with IS.

Canon color is smooth and vivid, has to be pulled down some in saturation to match my REDs but if your not use to color grading, IMO  Canon will be the easiest color to hit.

Knowing this, (and never using it) I'd take a long look at the ursa mini pro.  Their cinema dmg file works well with Resolve and my little BMPCC (though 2k) will blast through resolve on my laptop like crazy.

People get hung up on price and names but I think black magic is one heck of a company and offers a lot.   With the right AA filter you can shoot it next to Arri's and REDs and I don't think anyone would notice the difference.     Just like in still cameras there are a lot of opinions and sometimes snobbery towards cameras.   

One thing to think of is if want to move from EF glass to PL you can change mounts by the user, unlike Canon.

Glass makes a difference and though they get few applause, the original RED PL primes to me are beautiful with nice roll off and I tested them against two kinds of Zeiss primes and Angenieux zooms.  If I was wealthy I go Angenieux zooms, but as I mentioned before you can buy a full set of RED lenses for 9 grand.

still grab from R1 and RED PL mount glass.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/julia_spot.jpg)

The main thing is test if you can before you buy and most of all smile.   Filming can be hard, but it's huge fun.

BC

P.S.  Fred thanks for moving these discussions along and most of all thanks for contributing.

Thanks James. A pleasure to read your posts.
I always learn from you.

I think that this black hole of time called motion
Imagery, in a way, requires a great dosis of self disciplinre.
When a system/workflow works, it's
Productive to avoid experiments
Unless there are absolutly benefic.

One trained on Resolve does not switch to a Baselight or Mistika ecosystem
Just like we would do in stil imagery.
Everything is more time/ressources consuming.

Sticking to a known workflow and equipment brings the advantage
To avoid loosing time learnycurving here or there, testing new exotic stuff
and stay focus on the art. Otherwise we rapidly become engineers and that
Is not going to be fun.
This black hole of time is fine as long as we stay away enough
From its gravity. But if we go too close, we get
Sucked.

There are many aspects that are very exciting in motion
Imagery. Others, not that much, depending on each interest.
I really do hate all the color management
And gamma sagas. I think it's the borriest thing
Created by digiman. Some dudes find that so interesting,
It became their jobs. But motion is supposed
To be a highly collaborative and fragmented
Discipline as each area is complex and requires
Specialists. That means budgets.
But when there are limited number of people to
Embrasse the work, the key is to stay in the boundaries of one or 2 systems
That one knows well and don't get distracted.

I don't want to sound old conservative, but when
One knows a workflow from prod to post...
That is a huge time/problems/headackes/cash/ saver.
We might see Red vs BM
X grands cheaper, compare numbers.
But...what is the value of your expertise with Red? All those
Years working wlth has a value, beyond the cost of gear.
It is true that there is some snoberry wlth brands.
But as you also pointed in another thread,
The active pros don't like to change their horses so easily.
The reason why Arri rules motion here is not because Arri
Is best, it is IMO because they are used to it. They know
Exactly how to make it work. Just like PS rules the macdudes
In still.
Infinity is a great software, managed by a dynamic
Company. I don't like the souscription plan of Adobe.
But the pro still imagery is based on Adobe. PS, InDesign and Illustator.
I remember many phone calls from the printers when I refused in the past
To learn Illustrator and sended them Freehand files  ;D
There is no option. Even if one embrasses Infinity, he/she will have to
Use InDesign and Illustrator anyway so in the end it's PS.

In motion, one highway is better than many paths.
(...oh...I sound a bit Osho here...)