Your opinion on my betrayal of Jim Jannard

[Tom Lowe]

So in other words, people who have been used to shooting RAW will have to go back to being able to lock in and burn in whatever settings they want, and then cross their fingers and pray that the light and everything work out.

 

[Dylan Macleod CSC]

This is too funny!

http://asia.cnet.com/crave/2008/10/24/rail-mount-and-focus-rigs-made-for-canon-s-eos-5d-mark-ii/

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

So it's back to double-system sound. And I'll use...whatever they're using these days. Probably not a Nagra. I'll just use my HVX200 (actual real XLR inputs, Redboys, nyah nyah nyah, your penises are so small) as a stopgap until I do more research and figure out the best way to do double-system sound.

Why would you not just shoot this feature on the HVX200 you already own? Serious question here. Aside from pixel count, it is superior to the video out of the 5D2 any day, no need for dual system sound...

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

Why would you not just shoot this feature on the HVX200 you already own? Serious question here.

I have the same question...HVX200 is very good camera.

But I think you should trade it for the Canon and shoot your feature with it, and share the results with us. You might as well be first. Go for it. You'll never know until you try.

 

[Joel Kaye]

The problem is H.264, how will you grade this thing?

You'd convert to Cineform or Prores or uncompressed before doing any post anything. That's the same workflow as a lot of cameras out there that capture with a lot of compression. Even RED is unusable for most of us without a transcode at the moment. (hopefully the Adobe plugin will change that)

The real question is how bad does the h.264 degrade the image on capture? I don't think we truly know yet. Some side by side test vs. RED or Scarlet will be interesting.

Of course Scarlet just might have a 35mm sensor and a true ISO 500 for $6500 when we wake up on November 13th...I just hope they give me $17,500 in credit at the RED store so I can buy 3 Scarlets if that happens.

 

[MadamImAdam]

Yeah, I love my HVX200. I'll probably always be using it for something.

However, it does have some serious limitations. Here are problems I have with the HVX that I believe may be solved by the Canon 5D2 (naturally, I can't know yet whether my hunch is right):

1. Depth of field. I've learned many ways to trick the semblance of Super 35 selective focus (basically the audience's standard for what means "movie") out of the HVX200. Shooting open, of course. Putting on the Century tele converter, naturally. Getting in very close with a wide-angle lens. Knocking down walls of houses so I can get 100' back from an interior scene -- well, I don't do that, but I've wanted to. Every technique is a compromise, though. And shooting so much with a long lens ultimately looks boring -- the bg is out of focus, but it's also flattened and indistinguishable. No sense of place. Portraits are nice, but directing the audience's attention along the z axis (of an environment they can actually distinguish) is what I think selective focus is really for, and it's something a 1/3" sensor does poorly. Wide shots -- typical, essential, staple-of-the-filmmaking-vocabulary wide shots -- particularly look like video on the HVX. I have found no cure, only inadequate treatment for this. By contrast, I know from first learning photography on an SLR that selective focus is something that a full-frame-sized sensor does quite well. I believe the 5D2 may eliminate all of my Rube Goldberg attempts to manufacture DoF -- and look much better to boot, not least because I'll no longer be rejecting the best framing for the shot because there's no way to get selective focus.

2. Resolution. The HVX200 is not a 1920 x 1080 camera. It's quite significantly less than that, and it shows. I like the soft look -- sometimes. But it's the only look the camera has. Landscapes are a particular weakness for this reason. I have downloaded original 1080 5D2 clips and there's no question the resolution is better. That's not surprising considering that the 5D2 has to reduce a massive number of pixels down to 1080p, not upscale a smaller number upwards.

3. Noise. Noise is not just a low-light issue with the HVX200. Even with Barry Green's LoNoiz scene file (which is excellent) the noise gets into everything that is roughly dark grey. I have literally shot in broad daylight, with a textbook exposure, and gotten noise that ruined the shot. I have learned many noise management techniques through hard lessons and bitter tears, but I'm sick of it. The 5D2 does not appear to have serious noise issues, which is not surprising considering its full-size sensor.

4. Low light. The HVX200 is not anything close to a low-light camera. I don't know if the Canon 5D -- with, say, an 85mm f/1.2 on it -- is going to give me just three more useable stops or as much six or more, but there's no question that f/1.2 and the comparatively huge sensor will provide dramatically better low-light performance. Even crappy early clips from the 5D2 indicate a level of low-light performance well beyond the HVX200.

That said, I am a bit apprehensive about 40Mbps MPEG-4 h.264 versus DVCPRO HD. On paper, the comparison does not look good. However, measurebating aside, so far it seems very likely that Canon 5D footage is going to just plain look better, and that's what I'm after.

 

[Jason Ing]

MadamImAdam,

Out of curiosity, could you post examples of the "best" images that you have created so far with whatever technology you had at your disposal?

Thanks.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

All fair points regarding the HVX200 -- I used to own two HVX's myself. Personally I found its biggest two weaknesses to be the pixel shifting and the sensitivity. Like you say, it's low-light sensitivity is lacking... For narrative work, I didn't find this to be a big problem, you just light accordingly. It still had pretty good range, considering what it was for the money and the other cameras of the time. I had a lot more trouble protecting my highlights with the HVX than I did keeping noise out of the shadows, in most situations. The pixel shifting could be a nightmare, often producing halos around subjects on a greenscreen or other anomalies. At times, I think I would have rather had a native 960x540, un-shifted image to work with instead of the 960x540 with offset green that they up-rez.

Anyway, with all that said, I have still seen some very nice work with an HVX200. For 35mm look and feel, a good 35mm adapter can do a lot. I had the RedRock M2 with my HVX200 and it worked well. Of course, it induced more light loss.

Anyway back on the subject of features and shooting them on what camera. I don't think the 5D2 is the answer. For a still camera that can also take some movies in a pinch, I think it's a great choice. But I think that when shooting a feature, the forced 30fps and need to use a separate audio system alone would justify using something else.

Anyway, we're all just guessing about your specific needs here and we know that budget is a concern. Perhaps RED will announce something that will work for you on the 13th. Granted, it would still be several months away from shipping, but maybe it will offer some clarification and hope.

 

[Jose Alvarez]

You forgot to add one item to your poll questions: [I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT]

Others have already pointed out some of the REAL differences between this two cams. Not saying that you HAVE to choose the R1, but just be more informed before make this kind of speculations and comparisons. As long as you know what you're getting into, there is no reason why you can't choose to get a Canon/Nikon/whatever over the R1.

 

[pango]

http://vimeo.com/2018626

I'm seasick hmy:

 

[Mark Thorpe]

Thank you for your reassurance.

And thanks to all who chose "Good For You!" in the poll. Your support means a lot to me.

Given the direction of your thought I cannot understand why anyone would sign anything other than 'Gigantic Furry Yeti' in your poll of polls. Many people are willing, and do take risks in the hope of being perceived and seen as having the balls to push the envelope with emerging technology. Shoot, we saw that in the infancy of RED. I wouldn't however, given the understanding of the formats we are now considering, feel very confident in pitching a camera designed as a DSLR with limited video capability against RED. Thats just plain lunacy, you Gigantic Furry Yeti........!!!!!

Best in your endeavors........
Mark.

 

[Joel Kaye]

I wouldn't however, given the understanding of the formats we are now considering, feel very confident in pitching a camera designed as a DSLR with limited video capability against RED.

Let's see what Scarlet brings - but this Canon isn't even out yet, right? Maybe 24p and audio will show up before the release. Certainly a lot of people have been claiming RED should only be used with dual system sound and only recently has sound onboard really begun working right in the newest cameras.

I like to test stuff before shooting it down as a possibility. A lot of people shot the idea of RED down unfairly based on early reviews and footage. Seems like this Canon is getting some of the same treatment. Given the pricepoint that it might compete in any way with RED is notable.

But I'm still leaning on Scarlet and Epic right now. If Scarlet "was" a 2/3" chip camera before the redesign you have to wonder what it's become. I'm anticipating it will have interchangeable lenses.

 

[MadamImAdam]

You forgot to add one item to your poll questions: [I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT]

Others have already pointed out some of the REAL differences between this two cams. Not saying that you HAVE to choose the R1, but just be more informed before make this kind of speculations and comparisons. As long as you know what you're getting into, there is no reason why you can't choose to get a Canon/Nikon/whatever over the R1.

I always want to be as informed as possible, and if I have made any uninformed or mistaken statements, I'd be grateful for any corrections.

Will you please quote directly from my posts any instances where I have made specific false or misinformed claims?

Thanks for your help.

 

[MadamImAdam]

MadamImAdam,

Out of curiosity, could you post examples of the "best" images that you have created so far with whatever technology you had at your disposal?

Thanks.

Not quite sure what you're getting at here, and I don't have a library of my work or full 1080p images available on the MacBook I'm using at the moment. But I happen to have a few HVX200 small JPEGs that demonstrate some of the qualities I describe above.

All were shot open or nearly open, at full tele, with the Century converter added. There's nice shallow DoF at this focal length, but unfortunately it's not portable to a majority of situations. The two deer demonstrate what I think is nice about the HVX: the handling of color, especially in low-contrast situations like an overcast day, is quite pretty. Those shots also show a main weakness of the camera. The shots aren't out of focus -- the HVX really is that soft, even in reductions like these.

The red fox shows what I managed to get fully open, 1/24 shutter speed, in the latter half of magic hour. I was amazed that I could pull out even this much in Photoshop -- the untreated file was an ugly gray wash.

 

[MadamImAdam]

Given the direction of your thought I cannot understand why anyone would sign anything other than 'Gigantic Furry Yeti' in your poll of polls. Many people are willing, and do take risks in the hope of being perceived and seen as having the balls to push the envelope with emerging technology. Shoot, we saw that in the infancy of RED. I wouldn't however, given the understanding of the formats we are now considering, feel very confident in pitching a camera designed as a DSLR with limited video capability against RED. Thats just plain lunacy, you Gigantic Furry Yeti........!!!!!

Best in your endeavors........
Mark.

Yeti don't have fur. They have hair. Since most people know this, I doubt they were thinking "Gigantic Furry Yeti."

 

[MadamImAdam]

Let's see what Scarlet brings...

The Canon 5D Mark II is Scarlet.

That is, if we define Scarlet as follows: The camera in between the HVX200 and Red One in image quality, that is coming out in early 2009 for around $3000.

The camera that comes the closest to that description is the Canon 5D Mark II. I wish it were something better. But the camera with significantly better specs than the HVX200 (huge sensor, interchangeable 35mm lenses) that will be available soon is the 5D2. The 2/3" fixed-lens Scarlet doesn't even exist anymore as an intention, let alone an early-2009 possibility.

In fact, it's undisputed that Scarlet 1 was scrapped because "the market has changed" due to Nikon and Canon. I think it's a legitimate interpretation of events to say that the Canon 5D2 displaced Scarlet 1.

I have little doubt that Scarlet 2 is going to kick the 5D's crippled, corporate ass. But, in the real world, Scarlet 2 is at least a year away from retail availability. Count on it.

So the closest thing to Scarlet 1 is the 5D.

 

[Stuart English]

Separate Sound

Separate Sound

Yes, I definitely consider the Canon 5D to basically be a camera without sound capabilities.

So it's back to double-system sound. And I'll use...whatever they're using these days.

Agreed. Which then poses the question, how will you sync the Canon and your sound recorder?

 

[MadamImAdam]

Yes, I definitely consider the Canon 5D to basically be a camera without sound capabilities. The track recorded by the internal mic might be useful as a reference for syncing, but that's about it.

So it's back to double-system sound. And I'll use...whatever they're using these days. Probably not a Nagra. I'll just use my HVX200 (actual real XLR inputs, Redboys, nyah nyah nyah, your penises are so small) as a stopgap until I do more research and figure out the best way to do double-system sound.

Yes, yes.. mini-XLR etc, so how will you sync the Canon and your Separate sound equipment...:whistling:

I dunno -- how did you Red boys do it back when nobody was willing to do single-system sound with the Red One?

Actually, I'm serious in asking. I haven't done double-system sound since I made a 16mm film. I know it's not rocket science, but I actually don't know exactly what tools and workflow I will use on the sound end.

It's gonna be weird using a clapper again.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

The Canon 5D Mark II is Scarlet.

That is, if we define Scarlet as follows: The camera in between the HVX200 and Red One in image quality, that is coming out in early 2009 for around $3000.

(...)

I have little doubt that Scarlet 2 is going to kick the 5D's crippled, corporate ass. But, in the real world, Scarlet 2 is at least a year away from retail availability. Count on it.

So the closest thing to Scarlet 1 is the 5D.

There are a ton of cams between the HVX200 and the RED...

And as to the 5d = Scarlet "1"...
The 5D has a very good thing going for it conceptually with the 35mm sensor and interchangeable optics. Really. But as a film cam it is not really... anything, even compared to Scarlet.

1. Unstandard fixed framerate.
2. Silly recording format.

But Scarlet isn't here... So isn't the 5D, but you're probably right it's gonna be here before Scarlet...

But, hey... Jim's good with surprises. Maybe what is presented on thursday isn't renders at all...

But really, full cameras with hockey-mum workflows.

We'll just have to wait a bit more.

But I would vager a bet on that one year estimate, if you're up to it. Not Jim-style, as I'm dead broke at the moment, but a beer or two, and I'm in!

 

[Stuart English]

Separate Sound

Separate Sound

I dunno -- how did you Red boys do it ....

Good question. Having a time code input to the camera helps...it may just have to be clapboard and hope for the best then.