Something new from Canon on Nov. 3rd...

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Daniel Browning

Wow, great post, Steve. I hope the Nov 3rd announcement includes some new Canon PL primes.

Minor correction: the T-stop is always slower than the f-stop. Also, the stops (both T- and f-) are only valid for infinity. The closer you focus, the more inaccurate it is. The degree of inaccuracy will depend on the lens design; specifically, pupil magnification. There's also a slight inaccuracy at very wide f-numbers (e.g. f/1 does not give double the light of f/1.4 due to the fact that f-number is only an approximation).

Over at DxOMark, they test the Transmission of all lenses and I recall seeing a few Nikon lenses that were slightly faster than the F-stop. However, it might have been due to the camera, the D3, which is uber sensitive.

[Daniel Browning]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

Over at DxOMark, they test the Transmission of all lenses and I recall seeing a few Nikon lenses that were slightly faster than the F-stop.

The definition of a T-stop itself makes it impossible. T-stop is defined as the f-number that would give the same light intensity if the lens had perfect 100% transmission. Since there's no way to transmit more than 100% of the light, the T-stop is always the same or slower than the f-stop.

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

However, it might have been due to the camera, the D3, which is uber sensitive.

Indeed. Maybe the Nov 3 announcement is Canon's chance to finally catch up with the sensitivity of the D3s. (If so, I wonder if it will be short lived -- a D4 may be around the corner.)

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

"Should" we expect it to be in a price point similar to the F3, or FS100?

The exact price was not mentioned but this person's statement about competing with the F3 should give an idea about the price range. Personally, I hope its under $10k (it can be $9,999 and that would be ok). In addition, I want it to use CF cards since I already have many from my nanoFlash; has HD-SDI, Genlock and TC.

I just used the F3 on a shoot this weekend and I want to buy it even more; however, I don't need the added features of S-Log and dual-link 444. I want a camera like the F3 but without those added features which add a significant cost, and for <$10k.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

................ all I can say is that the camera 'should' be a large sensor video camera.

The big question must then be whether we're talking about a "designed for video" large sensor, or a large sensor designed for stills (with high pixel count) which will inevitably be compromised in video mode. Hopefully the former.....

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

I don't need the added features of S-Log and dual-link 444. I want a camera like the F3 but without those added features which add a significant cost, and for <$10k.

I think a lot of people will agree. Not want S-Log etc - but do want a broadcast quality codec like XDCAM422 or AVC-Intra100 without the expense and hassle of an external recorder.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Regarding breathing, all my Canon lenses breathe. I have yet to do a breathing test on our Zeiss lenses.

The winners in my collection are the 200/2.8L II and the 28/1.8. They breathe, but it's quite subtle. The EF 50/1.4 is so-so. The EF 85/1.8 breathes quite a bit. The 100/2.8 macro can suck the air out of a room it breathes so much, but that's partly due to its extreme focus range.

Let's add "lenses that don't breathe" to this thread's conjecture list. Add it to the "unlikely" column along somewhere above the "cloaking device" item. ;)

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by David Heath

The big question must then be whether we're talking about a "designed for video" large sensor, or a large sensor designed for stills (with high pixel count) which will inevitably be compromised in video mode. Hopefully the former.....

No question - it 'should' be a true video camera.

[Daniel Browning]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

No question - it 'should' be a true video camera.

Or perhaps a "cinema" camera, given the location of the announcement. (Of course, there is a large overlap between video and cinema.)

[Jim Martin]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

The exact price was not mentioned but this person's statement about competing with the F3 should give an idea about the price range. Personally, I hope its under $10k (it can be $9,999 and that would be ok). In addition, I want it to use CF cards since I already have many from my nanoFlash; has HD-SDI, Genlock and TC.

I just used the F3 on a shoot this weekend and I want to buy it even more; however, I don't need the added features of S-Log and dual-link 444. I want a camera like the F3 but without those added features which add a significant cost, and for <$10k.

Canon Video did state last year that all their cameras for the foreseeable future will be on the 50mb, 422 color MXF codec to compact flash cards.....That's better than the F3

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

Over at DxOMark, they test the Transmission of all lenses and I recall seeing a few Nikon lenses that were slightly faster than the F-stop.

As Daniel says, that's impossible. F-number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

T-stops measure the amount of light transmitted through the lens in practice, and are equivalent in light transmission to the f-stop of an ideal lens with 100% transmission. Since all lenses absorb some quantity of light, the T-number of any given aperture on a lens will always be greater than the f-number.

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Jim Martin

Canon Video did state last year that all their cameras for the foreseeable future will be on the 50mb, 422 color MXF codec to compact flash cards.....That's better than the F3

For us in the US, 50Mb 422 is not really a big deal versus the 35Mb XDCAM EX. I have done comparisons of the internal 35Mb vs 220Mb I-frame from my nanoFlash and the difference is barely noticeable.

For a noticeable increase in quality for projects that need it, you need to record 10bit at 200Mb/s or higher. The PIX240 fits this need perfectly with its ability to record PR HQ and DNxHD - both 10bit.

On a side note, I have seen people say that Canon uses the Sony XDCAM HD codec but I have not seen it mentioned in Canon specs. Can someone confirm whether this is true or not? Its a big deal because it would allow archiving to Sony's XDCAM HD discs including the new 100GB quad-layer discs. Even though the nanoFlash has used Sony's XDCAM encoder from the beginning, it took C-D quite some time to make the 50Mb 422 recordings 100% XDCAM HD legal in order to support the writing to discs.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

I have seen people say that Canon uses the Sony XDCAM HD codec

Not really. What is actually happening here is that both Sony and Canon are using the standard .MXF file format, which pre-dates both manufacturer's implementations of it. This is the reason why the folder structures are very similar and playable within each other's systems (the Sony XDCAM viewer can read and play back the Canon files, for example). Sony put it in their cameras before Canon did, but .MXF is certainly not exclusive to Sony. For what it's worth, Panasonic uses .MXF for their P2 HD file format as well.

[David Heath]

The trouble is that .mxf doesn't uniquely define the wrapper - Material Exchange Format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia - which can lead to incompatability problems. Sony refers to it's variant as XDCAM MXF, as for the Canon version, then from the wikipedia link:

In 2010 Canon released its new lineup of professional file-based camcorders. The recording format used in these camcorders incorporates MPEG-2 video with bitrates up to 50 Mbit/s and 16-bit linear PCM audio in what Canon has called XF codec. Canon claims that its flavor of MXF is fully supported by major NLE systems including Adobe Premiere, Apple Final Cut Pro, Avid Media Composer, and Grass Valley EDIUS.

It seems that the essence is the same between them, and probably good compatability within NLEs, but in answer to the question Steve posed (a very good one) that doesn't guarantee the Canon files are 100% compatible with XDCAM discs.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

Its a big deal because it would allow archiving to Sony's XDCAM HD discs including the new 100GB quad-layer discs. Even though the nanoFlash has used Sony's XDCAM encoder from the beginning, it took C-D quite some time to make the 50Mb 422 recordings 100% XDCAM HD legal in order to support the writing to discs.

Steve - it occurs to me that the XDCAM discs can be written to in two ways. It's a bit like DVD's - you have to write data to them in a very specific structure for them to be recognised by a DVD video player, but you can simply use them as a basic data file store.

But if you (say) just copied a set of MPEG files to a DVD disc, then whilst you may be able to play them back on a PC drive with something like media player, a dedicated DVD player would just reject the disc with an error message - it wouldn't have the correct file structure.

Hence, I don't think there would be any problem using XDCAM discs to backup the Canon files - what I'm not sure about is whether they would have full functionality in such as an XDCAM deck.

[Monty Wentzel]

I was very close to purchasing a sony nex fs100 but started to lose steam a while back. Now with Canon's nov 3rd deal I'm wondering if this will be a camera and if so will I want it.

It's always tempting to get new stuff with new features, but really what do I really need these days. The picture quality seems so good now, how much better do we need. So many have said the quality is rarely appreciated since most is viewed on computers etc. For that matter Canon 7d footage is hitting the big screen and no one knows the difference.

I really want to get a camera that I can use for the next 10 years, even 20. As with cameras and any other product the savvy marketing teams are always luring us with what we think are must haves. But if a camera can hit the big screen what else can I want, other than a steadicam built into the camera.

Not the most popular thinking here but I need to really begin to perfect the art of story telling. Is there a forum for that?

Monty

[Jon Fairhurst]

Frankly, what I'm looking for is all about the delivered video, not so much about ease of use and features. After making do with untwisting lenses, shining lights into the 5D2, and hitting exposure lock - and having that fixed in the firmware update - I'm not too worried about the operational side of the next gen.

For me, it's about image quality.
* Fix the aliasing issues.
* Reduce or eliminate rolling shutter.
* Give me more than eight bits of depth (along with a tall dynamic range)
* Reduce coding artifacts so I can translate that bit depth into smooth, graded images.

I also want a good price. I'm hoping that DSLR quality continues to improve. I like riding their volume curve and am comfortable with their usability.