Canon jumping on the LF bandwagon...
|
Colin Elves
So... looks like Canon are joining the LF party train: http://www.studiodaily.com/2018/03/canon-announces-full-frame-version-c700-cinema-camera/
That just leaves Panasonic and Black Magic standing on the platform. Mitch. You. Er. Gonna be running those rails any time soon? Colin Elves Director of Photography Berlin/London.
|
|
|
|
Gavin Greenwalt
Joining? Canon started the large format bandwagon with the 5D mkII.
Gavin Greenwalt Seattle, WA
|
|
|
|
Colin Elves
Ha! fair comment! I should’ve said jumping on the LF cinema camera bandwagon. Although. The 5D is ‘full frame’ not ‘large format - right? Colin Elves Director of Photography Berlin/London
On 28 Mar 2018, at 21:02, Gavin Greenwalt <im.thatoneguy@...> wrote:
Joining? Canon started the large format bandwagon with the 5D mkII.
|
|
|
|
Yeah and look at the chaos that caused!
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://UKMediapeople.groups.io/g/main is an online group for people within the media industry to chat. And its free! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael J Sanders: Director of Photography Mobile: +44 (0) 7976 269818 Linkline Diary: +44 (0)20 8426 2200
|
|
|
|
Mark Weingartner, ASC
One could argue Paramount Pictures got the ball rolling with their VistaVision cameras… some of us have been shooting “full frame” for decades;-) Mark Weingartner LA based DP
|
|
|
|
Matthew Clark
Gavin wrote: Joining? Canon started the large format bandwagon with the 5D mkII. But, thankfully, Canon didn’t start it. They just grabbed ahold of a new, modern trend. If I recall correctly, there were a few other players in the VV, LF world long, long before the 5DmkII. *smart ass talk here* In all seriousness… It will be interesting to see if this version of the C700 can gain some attention and users. Sounds like the original C700 hasn’t really taken off.
|
|
|
|
Fahnon
Anyone else think it was an odd decision to go with a $7k bolt-on recorder as the only way to get raw out of their flagship when their mid-range C200 conveniently does it internally? I'd also be shocked if the inevitable C300 mk3 didn't ship with raw support...
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Colin Elves <colin@...> wrote:
--
|
|
|
Well, for what it’s worth the addition of the video feature in the Canon DSLR/5D was driven at least in part by requests from photojournalists, who wanted to be able to grab both stills and video in the field with one camera. I don’t think the executives in the Canon boardroom really had the movie or TV business in mind when they added video, but luckily they had the foresight to see the opportunity when it started to catch on. Feli di Giorgio VFX / Bay Area
|
|
|
|
Art Adams <art.cml.only@...>
I attribute the current craze to selling more UHD TVs and luring audiences back into cinemas, similar to the film format wars of the 1950s and 1960s. The 5D was an interesting anomaly, and it started a mini craze of its own, but I don't think that's what lead us to where we are now. I'd say the return of 70mm film release prints, and attempts by Arri and Red to create digital equivalents, have been more influential than anything else. And the Alexa LF is large format almost by accident, in that the only way to preserve the characteristics of the Arri look in UHD without compromising color and dynamic range was to make a larger sensor rather than a new, smaller one.
|
|
|
|
Gavin Greenwalt
and while the reduced depth of field was interesting it didn't cause a mass stampede toward large format cinematography
Really? You can only say that if you only count blockbuster film production. For every studio film there are 1,000 people out there shooting razor thin F1.8 on FF35 cameras. I would also argue that “large format cinematography” is ultimately nothing more than “shallower depth of field cinematography” which definitely has been a stylistic ‘stampede’ even on s35. Suddenly nearly overnight after the 5D’s rise to prominence everything was being shot wide open on a master prime which might as well be Vistavision. Combine that with cameras like Red Dragon, released in 2012, which was vignetting on s35 lenses and suddenly the “stills” lens manufacturers saw a big opportunity. The most prominent of those movers was Leica. Leica saw how many of their old lenses were being rehoused for cinema, combined with the stylistic trend toward wide-open shallow DOF and jumped on the bandwagon 5 years ago in 2013. On the low end, every other stills manufacturer was bending over backwards to sell their fastest still lenses to low budget cinematographers. Smartphones have destroyed the stills market so selling large format lenses to ‘indie’ film makers has been a lifeline for Canon, Nikon, Sigma and the other big names in “stills” photography who have been producing fast large format lenses for nearly a century.
|
|
|
|
Argyris_Theos_cml
I will say this once and keep silent afterwards.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Our job is about narrating a story. To do this we use visual clues. The more depth of field we choose, the more villas clues we get. Too many of them are often distracting. According to the story there is an optimum. We choose our shooting aperture according to this optimum. With the advent of the 5D lots if visually illiterate people got to shoot AV. They had no idea on how to organize multiple visual clues at once, so they chose to go for just one: the talent. It's easy, it's safe and people like it. But it's not a style. In most instances iIt's laziness. Best Regards Argyris Theos, gsc DoP, Athens Greece, theos@... +306944725315 Skype Argyris.Theos www.vimeo.com/argyristheos via iPhone 29 Μαρ 2018, 10:00 μ.μ., ο/η "Gavin Greenwalt" <im.thatoneguy@...> έγραψε:
DOF
|
|
|
|
Art Adams <art.cml.only@...>
>I would also argue that “large format cinematography” is ultimately nothing more than “shallower depth of field cinematography” which definitely has been a stylistic ‘stampede’ even on s35 Sure, but that's not what you said. Shallower depth of field has been in for a while, but large format cinematography is a fairly recent development. One facilitates the other, but they are not the same thing. When I started out, in the late 80s, there was an entire school of (mostly European) cinematographers who were shooting wide open on Super Speeds. Also, I'd argue that the 5D initially caught on not because of the shallow depth of field but because it was an affordable way to buy an HD camera. Initially the shallow depth of field was considered a huge headache. >Hell, RED announced a FF35 (and Medium Format) camera nearly 10 years ago (along with a never released FF35 lens). I attribute that to the fact that they were going after the stills market as well. >If there has been pressure on Panavision and Arri it’s been from the low end with the Sonys, Sigmas and Canons of the world creeping closer and closer to feature film A Camera quality. I think Arri saw an opportunity to replace 65mm film with 65mm digital and went for it. Panavision's DXL was a response to that, and also a fairly logical choice given that they have a huge inventory of large format lenses collecting dust. From my perspective, the shallow depth of field look came about because large format still cameras that shot video became a cheap option for budding filmmakers, not because filmmakers were naturally drawn to shallow depth of field. >If anyone is joining a bandwagon it’s Arri in their recent rush to release 4k cameras without changing their winning sensor formula I'm not sure where the rush came from... it's not like people haven't been expecting a UHD/4K Arri for literally years. And, currently, there's no way around physics, and given how crazy good the ALEV sensor functions, I'm not sure why someone would change up something that just works and has become the gold standard for color, noise and dynamic range for eight years. They'll have to change things up eventually, but right now the Alexa LF is large format simply because there's no need to mess up a good thing.
|
|
|
|
Art Adams <art.cml.only@...>
>In most instances iIt's laziness. It's also necessity. I have a job next week where I either have to shoot exteriors and hide the fact that there's nothing growing around us even though that's the point of the spot, or, if we switch to an interior, I have to make it look good given the fact that we're budgeted that day for natural light exteriors with grip gear and not to light a large interior. As budgets shrink, I'm often shooting wide open to hide the lack of art direction, or the lack of lighting, or the lack of a location scout, or the lack of time to light properly.
|
|
|
|
Gavin Greenwalt
> I'd argue that the 5D initially caught on not because of the shallow depth of field but because it was an affordable way to buy an HD camera.
|
|
|
|
Jonathon Sendall
"As budgets shrink, I'm often shooting wide open to hide the lack of art direction"
I think that has pushed shallow DOF more than most think. I've certainly done it on small budgets a few times when the set wasn't particularly attractive and the budget for lighting equally so. Jonathon Sendall DP, London
|
|
|
|
Noel Sterrett
On 03/29/2018 04:23 PM, Jonathon
Sendall wrote:
I think that has pushed shallow DOF more than most think. Actually, I think the sweet spot for DOF is S35. Having shot an actual large format for some time, 8x10, I know well that to get the same depth of field with a larger format, more light, or a faster lens is necessary. Both more light and faster lenses are expensive. There's no free lunch. Cheers. --
|
|
|
|
The upside for me, as one who uses Canon regularly, is to finally have a FF camera in a form factor I cut my teeth on. Decent viewfinder. Shoulderability. (A new word?) One that may be able to offer the balance of an Amira and the most recent sensor and camera technology. The downside is waiting for the MkII version of the 700FF. (Devilish smile.)
David Brillhart Cinematographer, Sacramento 410-707-3552
|
|
|
|
Jonathon Sendall
Noel Sterrett wrote:
"Actually, I think the sweet spot for DOF is S35" I was thinking more of the 5D revolution. Whack on a Zeiss Contax 50mm f1.4 or some of the older Rokkor lenses at f1.2 and you had cheap super shallow DOF but admittedly shitty codec. But for a lot of things it was workable but you couldn't pull focus on it, you had to do that with your feet and body movement instead. Fun days Jonathon Sendall DP, London, UK
|
|
|
|
Joseph Goldstone <jgoldstone@...>
Bless you. Five years of hearing people complain about how we were too slow on this; it’s great to hear someone say we’ve moving overly fast. Reminds me of this old joke:
Joseph Goldstone Image Science Engineer
ARRI Cine Technik Munich / ARRI, Inc. Burbank
This message is confidential. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work product immunity or other legal rules. If you have received it by mistake, please let us know by e-mail reply and delete it from your system; you may not copy this message or disclose its contents to anyone. Please send us by fax any message containing deadlines as incoming e-mails are not screened for response deadlines. The integrity and security of this message cannot be guaranteed on the Internet. This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
|
|
|
|
MARK FOERSTER
I think that has pushed shallow DOF more than most think. (Budget)
——————————————— I agree as it took a skilled lighting/cameraperson to light backgrounds properly to create depth/halos/twinkles etc, it was the difference between good and great. - I quite enjoyed doing that and it’s still better to know and implement that then just crush it - but I find rates going lower and lower as cheaper practitioners can crush it and forget it. Mark Foerster csc Toronto 9059225555
|
|
|
