# Is the EOSHD guy crazy?



## HaroldRJohnson (Apr 19, 2012)

Why is he so angry?

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7951/blackmagic-not-just-by-name-why-the-cinema-camera-is-the-future


----------



## bluegreenturtle (Apr 19, 2012)

Andrew's a little weird. 

But he's got some good points in this article. There's a lot of frustrations in the lower end video segment that a lot of manufacturers seem to be intent on only aggravating, here comes a maker who's actually trying to address a market segment and only with the features they want, not protecting their other products.


----------



## akiskev (Apr 19, 2012)

Nobody seems to notice how tiny that blackmagic sensor is. 2.3x crop factor? It 'd be great if it had aps-c dimensions!


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Apr 19, 2012)

akiskev said:


> Nobody seems to notice how tiny that blackmagic sensor is. 2.3x crop factor? It 'd be great if it had aps-c dimensions!



Yes, exactly. It's the size of 16mm film. You're very limited in lens choice with this camera. Don't forget the permanently-sealed battery, too.


----------



## Policar (Apr 19, 2012)

His views are completely nuts. Plenty of professionals shoot JPEG and the most popular digital camera for high end TV work (Alexa) records both raw and prores and prores is by far the more popular delivery format and the preference of most editors over arriraw or redcode. Anyone who has tried doing post on a feature with red knows the pratfalls of shooting with a raw format. What advantages does raw offer you over a baked-in format? If you shoot correctly, almost none--just a lot of time and trouble rendering files that you could shoot correctly on set. What disadvantages does the black magic camera have? A small sensor with a mount not designed for wide lenses (you NEED the 11-16 f2.8 if you buy this thing), an untested workflow, poor ergonomics, and a battery that's built into the camera. If anything, this is the ultimate hobbyist camera--totally cool, great price point, likely great IQ for the money--and very ill-suited for actual shooting.

That said, he got you to read his article on an ad-supported website, so...maybe he knows what he's doing even if the article is basically gibberish. The camera does look pretty cool, though, and it will likely sell well, but I don't see how it could be any more disruptive than the 5DII, Red, and Alexa, all of which were revolutionary within their price range.


----------



## bp (Apr 20, 2012)

in a nutshell, I think he's very angry that they're selling the camera he was hoping for $15K, and calling it the 1D C, instead of calling it the 5D Mark III and selling it for $2700.


----------



## jlev23 (Apr 20, 2012)

he should change the name of his website.

though if Canon really wanted to shut everyone up now, the only right thing to do is release a firmware upgrade next week that gives us clean HDMI out. that is the only answer. NIkon has it, its foolish we dont. this way we can still have our still camera and for 1500 bucks get a recorder of our choice and make us be able to shoot professional quality video. then we would have professional photography and videography in our hands, that beats the black magic camera in my mind, especially as far as a prosumer market.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 22, 2012)

He makes some good points, no denying that, but he does seem to be going a bit overboard.

And I do not agree with him that the D800 video looks better.


----------



## psolberg (Apr 22, 2012)

He's not crazy. He's just not siding with canon and siding with the consumer instead. I see nothing wrong with that.



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> He makes some good points, no denying that, but he does seem to be going a bit overboard.
> 
> And I do not agree with him that the D800 video looks better.



there isn't much to agree on a fact. it simply does resolve more detail which is his primary goal. you can see a lot of comparisons in vimeo which demonstrates the lack of detail in the 5DIII footage compared to the D800, specially the 4:2:2 color uncompressed HDMI out which delivers video that is more grading friendly. Resolution wise the D800 is much closer to true 1080p than the 5DmkIII which is only fixable so far with the removal of the OLP filter. Although, I still think the hacked GH2 still delivers better true 1080p resolution than the D800. I have not yet seen a GH2 vs D800 shootout but I'm sure some will appear soon since as of now.

I decided to make the switch and have a D800 on order.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 23, 2012)

psolberg said:


> He's not crazy. He's just not siding with canon and siding with the consumer instead. I see nothing wrong with that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The D800 isn't THAT much sharper once you have sharpened the 5D3 in post (neither are really THAT sharp actually) but moreso the problem is it (D800) has aliasing and tons of color moire (and a lot worse SNR). So I'd take the aliasing/moire free (and 1.5 stops better SNR) of the 5D3 over a tiny bit better D800 detail.

That said, if the 5D3 is soft because the 3x3 blocks are so far from the AA filter scale that they need to AA it a lot in post and soften it then why not a sharper 2x2 C300 like blocked mode at 1.6x crop? You either shoot FF for best noise and lowest DOF or you shoot cropped for a bit better detail and more reach.

THey really need to add cropped mode! It was unbelievable they left that out after the flack they got for the ridiculous leaving out manual controls for the 5D2 release.

They also gotta add zebra stripes, we know that 100% possible for sure since even ML hackers could add it to even the older camera. And focusi peaking while shooting wouldn't hurt either and some bitrate control options, allow for higher rates, locked CBR, adjust to maintain more deep shadow fine grain and low contrast detail, etc.


----------



## psolberg (Apr 23, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> psolberg said:
> 
> 
> > He's not crazy. He's just not siding with canon and siding with the consumer instead. I see nothing wrong with that.
> ...



we all have our goals and if the 5DIII suffices for some then I have no problem with that. However based on what I've seen and my own personal taste, it simply doesn't hold detail as well as the D800. 

I'm not worried over miore. I've dealth with it in the 5DII. I also don't shoot patterns with the 5DII and won't with the D800. I'd take a 5DIII with moire that is able to resolve more detail over the current iteration (but that may just be my preference). I know I could mutilate a 5DIII like some are, but that's where I cross the line since then you also have to deal with IR.

You're correct you can try to sharpen in post but I haven't seen anything that I could say resembles even the base internal resolution on the D800 without lots of artifacts and sharpened bokeh. Say nothing of the 4:2:2 out. Sharpening just isn't a fix, not to mention the D800 footage can off course be sharpened too and retains the lead.

second, grading. I've been seeing a lot of footage of the 4:2:2 out on the D800 and it is obvious you can grade footage more gracefuly than with these internal 4:2:0 codecs. 

third, codec panic with motion. The 28mbps looks better (exactly as you told me before and you were 100% right) than the all I codec. but that codec, like that on the D800's internal suffers during motion....this is why I'm now considering a ninja after seeing how well it handles in post

https://vimeo.com/40788982

ninja + 4:2:2 out seems to be in my future.

again this is my own personal opinion and I realize many will gravitate to the 5DIII strenghts in low light and footage with patterns. That's just not as important to me. I wish there was a camera that could deliver D800 devel of detail with 5DIII low light low moire footage all under 3K. I guess they are called D900 or 5Dmk4?


----------

