This is why we are excited

[Phil Bloom]

Sure the sensor is smaller but that opens the door to the use of things like this...

Philip Bloom Blog Archive 7d with a BIG cinema lens on it

[Chad Nickle]

Holy &%#$!

I Know, not very constructive

[Paul Mailath]

Originally Posted by Chad Nickle

Holy &%#$!

Exactly what I said! - it may not be constructive but it's entirely appropriate under the circumstances

[Matt Gottshalk]

Who makes that adapter?

[Stephen Mick]

That's why you're excited, Phil. I'll pass.

I mean it's cool, but only for maybe .001% of people who would actually buy this camera.

Me? I'm just hoping the HDMI-out isn't crippled like the 5D.

[Chad Nickle]

Originally Posted by Stephen Mick

That's why you're excited, Phil. I'll pass.

I mean it's cool, but only for maybe .001% of people who would actually buy this camera.

Me? I'm just hoping the HDMI-out isn't crippled like the 5D.

I assume you meant buy that lens? cause a-lot more than .001% will buy this cam ;)

[Dan Brockett]

Rodney is just compensating.

Dan

[Andrew Oh]

Wow, that is some setup! Thanks for sharing, Philip! Now if I can only afford one of those lenses... :)

Andrew
Andrew Oh on Vimeo

[Dan Chung]

I guess the point of this that virtually no-one owns Panavision lenses, but for the right production you could rent one and use it with the 7D. Potentially changes the game of budget HD filmaking for TV dramas etc...

Also apart from Cine lenses there are no ultrafast wide angle primes available for the aps-c sensor size. The Sigma 20mm f1.8 is about it, and thats not too good or too wide.

Dan

[Charles Papert]

Where this starts to get interesting is with productions that already have a full complement of lenses and larger bodies. In this instance, a show that shoots with Panaflexes or on Genesis could utilize 7D's as crash cameras, point of view cameras, you name it--all with the existing lens package. Likewise, for Arri shows (or other PL mount cameras, including--hah!--RED), this should also be a great companion. I haven't heard yet whether there are any restrictions on the depth of the mount for either camera (I know the Panny mount for the 5D only worked for lenses longer than 35mm).

You may have the seen the pic I posted here a while back with the 5D and Panavision Primo lens on my lightweight Steadicam. It was a fantastically light setup for such "big" images!

Stephen's point is probably valid, although I'm not exactly sure about the numbers. Fortunately for me, I'm in that tiny percentage as I work with these lens packages all the time so I'm looking forward to the possibilities with this camera (except for the bloody form factor)!

[Bill Pryor]

Yeah, I like the 5DMKII and I like this one...but I keep wondering why, if they can put a bigger chip in a still camera and sell it for under $2K, why can't they put the same damn chip in a real video camera, even if they sell it for double or triple that?

On another topic that's related...I have a friend here who got the Panasonic micro 4/3 Lumix G1 and says he has an adapter so he can use C-mount lenses. But I've read you can't do that with an APC size camera because the lens would have to stick back too far into the camera, and also the lens wouldn't cover the whole field of view of the chip. Does the C-mount work on the micro 4/3 camera because the chip is so small?

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

if they can put a bigger chip in a still camera and sell it for under $2K, why can't they put the same damn chip in a real video camera, even if they sell it for double or triple that?

Could be that such a thing is already in progress... we've been speculating about it quite a bit:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/area-51/2...l-h2-when.html

[Ben Syverson]

C-mount adapters work on M43 because the sensor is smaller, and there's no mirror box, so the sensor is closer to the lens mount.

[Mike Demmers]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

...if they can put a bigger chip in a still camera and sell it for under $2K, why can't they put the same damn chip in a real video camera, even if they sell it for double or triple that?

Because soon, there won't be any such thing as a 'real video camera', or for that matter, a 'real still camera'. Because we are on the cusp of a major paradigm shift, and the manufacturers are still tryng to figure this out.

The distinction between still cameras and video cameras has been an artificial one whose days are numbered ever since the imagers were first put on integrated circuits, and the control functions handled by microprocessors.

Soon we will just buy a 'camera'. With whatever mix of features and form factor we like, which in the better models may include stills, video, 3D, even projection out of the lens. This will happen for the same reason that we no longer use typewriters, or dedicated word processors.

The 5DMKII just included a test of a feature - not much different than many other such tests that have either succeeded or failed in the past - but its wild success (and maybe Red) has made the paradigm shift crystal clear even to the most conservative of manufacturers.

It's not just the direction that a few video enthusiasts want, such as we constantly see here. Had the 5DMKII not been very successful, Canon might well have pointed to Red and said 'It's just a niche market'. It's pretty clear now that is not the case. Ultimately, not only I, but the general public, will want a 'general purpose imaging device' rather than a 'still camera' or 'video camera', just as the Wang wordprocessors died in favor of general purpose computers running software.

So what follows now will be a long period of figuring out what features and form factors work for which price points and markets, more trying one thing, then another. Business pretty much as usual in the tech world. The screams from early adopters seeing their purchases topped by new models should become loud enough that harnessing acoustic energy may well become the new alternative energy fashion. ;-)

I think you will see the form factor and features you want within the next two years. It may, or may not, be called a 'video camera'. Of course, if Apple makes one, it will likely be called the iEye, copied by Sharp as the IiEye, and cloned by the Chinese as the I-i-I-iEye. ;-)

-Mike

[Yang Wen]

Am I the only person yawning at those pics? Sure it's nice and all and not something we're used to seeing but who amongst us will be able to use these cine lenses with custom made mounts from panavision? And why would I want to shoot with a massiv 135-420 (216-672)zoom? Lol maybe if I'm shooting a safari video and I had a crew with me..

Once agan yawn..

I would love to see some anamorphics being used on these DSLRs though!


In addition, don't know why everything is embracing the VDSLR form factor as if it's the way going forward. There is absolutely nothing stopping Canon from building an HV40 type of camcorder with a big APS-C to FF sized sensor. That would be the ideal form factor for me...