Ok, so I feel so behind the times and I'm sure I am.
I did a music video a week or so ago and it was shot with 4 Red Cams and 8 Canon 5Ds. All the Reds had Optimo Lenses and all the Canon 5Ds has L series lenses ranging from 10-22 - 300mm
I pretty much went to school learning all about the Red with the Red tech/editor that was onsite downloading footage.
Having 8 operators, running around with modified shoulder harnesses for the Canon 5D was actually a little funny but the results didn't lie, the shots looked great.
Is this the wave of the future? Although the Red shoots at a higher resolution and the ability to modify the image is pretty much equivalent to a Raw file on a DSLR, I couldn't help to think that the small package of a 5D , the minimal cost and the great lenses available may make this a more common place tool.
I like others have laughed at the sight of the 5D mounted on a Steadicam but now my laughter has turned into curiosity.
Just my Two Cents on the subject
Oh, and Mr. Charles Papert thank you for taking the time to go through my Red Cam check list, it made my shoot wicked easy.
I went from being a 5D hater to becoming a member of Canon Professional Services, a convert if you will. At the same time, I think it really depends on what the next evolution of the 5D will be, as the camera itself has enough drawbacks to set it back a few paces from the bigger boys... It's pretty much a guarantee that the next couple of years will see an absolute glut of these small DSLRs that shoot video, and knowing that the 5D already shoots stills at 10 times the resolution of the video file @ 4 frames per second, 4K or higher video seems right around the corner. I do hope the next version can shoot the same RAW video as it does stills, (Frame sequences would be rad) as the Redcode Raw is pretty lacking in comparison to the average DSLR RAW file. Adobe software suites handle these files really well from still cameras... Adobe Camera Raw integrates with After Effects etc. to instantly create a video file, so full support for RAW frame sequences is already in place. A bunch of companies already have the infrastructure in place to easily surpass Red's Scarlett & Co. line of smaller DSLR cameras... Sony, who makes sensors for Nikon as well, clearly could be in the driver's seat with this whole thing. They already make a 24 MP still camera. It's not hard to imagine a slightly different body designed ergonomically around primarily shooting video, maybe a built in ND filter, etc. I imagine the standard video camera in 5 years will absolutely blow everything on the market now out of the water... It pretty much solidified my decision not to buy a Red... A great picture sure, but very much in danger of becoming another obsolete paperweight well before it pays for itself... If anything, the Canon and Nikon D90 cut well into the Scarlett market long before it was ever released. A small company like that can't possibly keep up with the demand in technology the same way a Sony can. We'll see if they're still around in a few years...
I rent Canon professional still packages as well as the HVX200's; over the last three months the number of calls I've had for the 5D has me thinking I need to add one or two to the mix. The challenge I have with with still camera rentals is out of ten calls for stills rental only 2-3 of them have insurance. As well, I've been a CPS member since the inception of the program and although it's a pain in the butt these days to go back through all the qualification paperwork required every year now, it is an outstanding program; same day repairs, loaner / demo program etc..
It will be interesting to see if Canon will introduce a 5D level sensor into their prosumer video cameras or if they'll simply keep the same DSLR form factor and add more video features / functions to the body.
Yup, I fooled around with this setup and noticed one major thing: Focus pulling becomes even more important, as the depth of field is more shallow than ever. (I never did 65mm stuff and not many people will ever)
And when the focus is off, it is really unpleasant because your eye will start to search for those parts in frame that are in focus, like the ear instead of the eye.....
All details are even more visible, though the output is still HD, due to the enormous amount of pixels in the D5 there seems to be more perceptual detail.... it's is debatable but that's my idea.
Skin detail, but also bad make-up, hair, wardrobe, set(dressing), etc is more important once it comes into focus.
I foresee the producer/director coming in with his own D5mk2, wanting to shoot his next movie on this camera, thinking to save money, only to discover that it will be absolutely disastrous when you do not have a top-notch crew available around that flimsy camera.
DOF/sharpness is heavily influenced by the quality of lens... In high end cinematography, one doesn't normally run into shitty knockoff lenses that start at 5.6 and noticeable ghosting, which a camera like these will introduce into the equation by the very nature of the environment they come from. On the other hand, my 85mm 1.2 is mostly unusable all the way open for a lot of shots, as anyone in front of the camera needs to stand absolutely still, or else the various facial features will drift in and out of focus, and it's a pain in the ass trying to play catch up.
Hmm, not sure but IMHO this camera and Canon in general does not produce shitty lenses.
This D5 that I used had a 24-70, at a true 2.8 through the whole range, so this is not a bad lens at all.
I did some shooting on 5.6, outdoor and could see that the DOF is really shallower then I would expect from a similar Cine-lens.
I'm saying that there's a wide range of lenses, not that Canon makes shitty ones... In the professional motion picture realm, from ENG to IMAX, there isn't such a wide variety of quality, probably because the cameras themselves cost so much... I get a lot of questions about this camera from guys who spend $150 on a lens and think their images look like shit, not realizing the differences in lens quality. The lenses really start to separate themselves from the pack to a significant degree with a camera like this one and its 21 MP sensor... I use Nikon a lot as well. Their situation is pretty much the same, what with so many knock off brands like Sigma and Tamron, who both have a couple of good lenses, but flood the market with shitty products. I have that 24-70, and it's probably the best lens to shoot video with that Canon makes, in my opinion.
My biggest question is what Sony has up their sleeve... They've got the most resources related to this, they already manufacture and/or bought out everything needed to make one of these, and they have a pretty incredible track record when releasing new cameras across the spectrum... The cost for this market is so much less than others, I'm sure there's a legion of white lab coats in Japan who are all over this concept