Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are Canon for Real?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by Steve Kahn View Post
    I dunno. Maybe he did it in the hopes that Canon wouldn't treat their customers like enemies but collaborators?
    So by attacking them he expected them to respond positively? What a backwards world.

    Comment


      #32
      I'm not sure I saw that he "attacked" them.

      I have to say I've also had issues with a Canon rep who works at Filmtools in LA. The guy was completely snobbish about the C300 when I asked about the validity of 8bit. The feeling was how dare I ask such a question of the mighty Canon... Go figure.
      Kahn Artist Filmworks
      FaceBook

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Policar View Post
        Why would you bring it up with a rep? It's just obnoxious and obviously hacking their camera is not something Canon would like to discuss. It's like asking someone at the Apple store about some new rumor or how a PC has better price/performance... these are sales reps, not engineers or executives, and coming at them with an aggressive question means they're obligated to end the discussion quickly, because it's a discussion to which you bring an aggressive attitude, and if they condone unsupported products then they are responsible for paying to support something someone else jury rigged to work. ...
        No, the proper analogy would be going up to GM during a car show and saying, "BTW, the Corvette has a lot performance tuners getting more hp out of the engine, do you think GM will be coming out with a supercharged version of the Vette?" That's essentially what I asked. I was not being obnoxious to Canon. And this is the third bad experience I've had with them when asking a very simple, nice question about RAW out of their cameras. Each time it was with different reps and in a professional environment. I also find it hard to believe that the rep wasn't spreading FUD. If he knows that techs can tell weather or not ML has been run, he probably knows the truth about its impact on the camera's warranty. I've been to a lot of these types of events and asked a lot of questions. I've never experienced anything like this from any other company. That said, I'm over it. Through this forum, I now know the truth about the impact or lack thereof of the warranty, for which I'm thankful. And I'm moving on.
        Jan vs Jim... I'm putting my $ on the Jersey Girl.

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan View Post
          No, the proper analogy would be going up to GM during a car show and saying, "BTW, the Corvette has a lot performance tuners getting more hp out of the engine, do you think GM will be coming out with a supercharged version of the Vette?" That's essentially what I asked. I was not being obnoxious to Canon. And this is the third bad experience I've had with them when asking a very simple, nice question about RAW out of their cameras. Each time it was with different reps and in a professional environment. I also find it hard to believe that the rep wasn't spreading FUD. If he knows that techs can tell weather or not ML has been run, he probably knows the truth about its impact on the camera's warranty. I've been to a lot of these types of events and asked a lot of questions. I've never experienced anything like this from any other company. That said, I'm over it. Through this forum, I now know the truth about the impact or lack thereof of the warranty, for which I'm thankful. And I'm moving on.
          It's not a matter of "better performance," it's a matter of supporting a hack that requires super fast CF cards and even then not perfectly, may very well strain the camera internally, and has basically no support in post. Given the context, the Canon rep was totally in the right. Asking about 60p or a swivel screen or something is another matter. I'm not saying he wasn't rude (or that you don't have the option of boycotting Canon gear or venting online), just that it's really the only response he can reasonably offer.
          Last edited by Policar; 11-12-2013, 02:08 PM.

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by Policar View Post
            It's not a matter of "better performance," it's a matter of supporting a hack that requires super fast CF cards and even then not perfectly, may very well strain the camera internally, and has basically no support in post.
            have you used the hack? I did on a hard 4 day shoot and it worked almost flawlessly.

            The report is that raw is less strain on the camera than shooting compressed video.

            As far as no support in post nothing could be further from the truth.
            Kahn Artist Filmworks
            FaceBook

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by Steve Kahn View Post
              The report is that raw is less strain on the camera than shooting compressed video.
              Canon reps at InfoConn13, who acted strange but by no means rude when I bombarded them with questions about raw, confirmed that there is no additional strain by using ML. They did, however, mention that it voids your warranty.
              Director / Cinematographer / VFX
              www.ryanlightbourn.net

              ALL THE DEVILS ARE HERE creature feature available now on iTunes, Amazon, Google Play and more!
              Trailer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-SiE7U7sbo

              Twitter - twitter.com/ryanlightbourn
              Vimeo - vimeo.com/ryanlightbourn
              IMDB - imdb.com/name/nm3405871

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by Steve Kahn View Post
                have you used the hack? I did on a hard 4 day shoot and it worked almost flawlessly.

                The report is that raw is less strain on the camera than shooting compressed video.

                As far as no support in post nothing could be further from the truth.
                Yes, of course I've used it. Was among the first to. (I also had it nearly brick my camera using one of the earlier versions.) I'll take your word on it not straining the camera, but we have no guarantee on that. I'm not sure I trust "the report" over Canon, but thanks for referring me back to "the report," whatever that means.

                There is support for it to the extent that you can make it work, but, like the hack itself, NLE support is somewhat dodgy... most NLEs won't ingest it and most post houses won't accept 5D raw before being transcoded. It's easy enough for hobbyists to use, or for use on a small project, but it's not consumer-ready (easy to use), nor is it resilient enough to use on a higher end professional shoot in which every aspect of production is handled by a different house (reliable)... and the 5D is a proconsumer camera. Has to cater to both markets, and the hack is ready for neither. I'm glad it worked on your shoot, though, and I do think the hack is very cool. Just don't tell Canon. But seriously, the support for it is terrible relative to AVCHD, prores, even .r3d (which many post houses hate receiving). Terrible.

                I'm not defending Canon's tone, but the letter of their response is all they can offer. They haven't set out to destroy magic lantern, which is about as positive a response as is imaginable for a product that has the potential (however limited) to result in broken camera and increased customer service costs. I can't see how anyone could reasonably be upset at their response to this. Look what Apple did to shut down jailbreaking (and don't ask any Apple employees their opinion on that).
                Last edited by Policar; 11-12-2013, 04:03 PM.

                Comment


                  #38
                  How is a discussion about technology construed as an attack?

                  It's not like he hit him with a bricked camera.
                  And it's not like he walked up to a priest and attacked his faith.
                  It was a reasonable line of conversation regarding a highly publicized adaptation of a camera that this person represents.

                  I wasn't there so all I can say is I would have no problem chatting up anyone including the CEO of Canon regarding anything about their cameras.
                  Like countless people, I've invested a mortgage in their gear over the years. I'm their customer - I talk politely, they listen politely.
                  That's pretty much a standard of good business.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by jimagine View Post
                    And it's not like he walked up to a priest and attacked his faith.
                    You should hang out with more sales reps. They're usually more defensive about their products than the executives.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by Andrius Simutis View Post
                      You should hang out with more sales reps. They're usually more defensive about their products than the executives.
                      Really, you think I should? Somehow it's an aspiration I'm OK without.

                      Comment


                        #41
                        As a sales rep or when working in customer service, you can't say anything that could be misconstrued or make guesses based on information you don't have. And you don't have permission to discuss anything beyond the company line.

                        It's understandable asking executives or emailing a company about something like raw video (though less so about an unsupported hack), but asking a sales rep about an unsupported hack is like asking someone at the Apple store how to jailbreak your iPhone. While this rep may have handled it rudely, he was in the right changing the subject as quickly as possible.
                        Last edited by Policar; 11-12-2013, 07:26 PM.

                        Comment


                          #42
                          Originally posted by BobbyMurcerFan View Post
                          FYI, whatever it is, it does void the warranty. As Canon's techs can tell if it's been run on the camera.
                          Stop spreading BS. You quite clearly have no comprehension whatsoever of this topic.

                          As for your original question: of course the sales people are trained to not talk about ML. It's the single most important piece of software to hit the digital film market and it interferes with the sales of their video cameras.

                          -ML doesn't overclock anything. It pulls raw data from the sensor. In many ways, this is actually less CPU intensive since the camera does not have to transcode the raw footage to H.264 in camera.
                          -ML is not a hack or a firmware update. It runs alongside the original fi......blah blah it's all been said before a thousand times.


                          There's a reason why I don't advise people on the best way to perform a heart transplant -- it's because I don't know anything about heart surgery.

                          Comment


                            #43
                            Originally posted by Phil1076 View Post
                            Stop spreading BS. You quite clearly have no comprehension whatsoever of this topic.

                            As for your original question: of course the sales people are trained to not talk about ML. It's the single most important piece of software to hit the digital film market and it interferes with the sales of their video cameras.

                            -ML doesn't overclock anything. It pulls raw data from the sensor. In many ways, this is actually less CPU intensive since the camera does not have to transcode the raw footage to H.264 in camera.
                            -ML is not a hack or a firmware update. It runs alongside the original fi......blah blah it's all been said before a thousand times.


                            There's a reason why I don't advise people on the best way to perform a heart transplant -- it's because I don't know anything about heart surgery.
                            +1

                            The only thing I might add is that I think Canon is less bothered by it than they make out.
                            Basically, they threatened legal action if anyone touched their 1D series.
                            However, the fact that they have let ML go on without any such efforts for their other cameras seems a little bit like a wink of the eye.
                            They don't condone it, but they know clearly that it contributes to sales.
                            If only because it adds longetivity and chutzpah (love that word) to the mythical image of their cameras as possible "professional" tools.
                            Which is perfect because something like the 5D Mark III is actually for the semi-professional market.
                            Anything which gives the enduser the dream that he can make films like Hollywood is gravy for them.
                            Last edited by yoclay; 11-13-2013, 02:00 PM.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X