Mitch Gross
Veteran
No, the first productions will be all about EVA1 and only EVA1. We don't want to confuse the message at the start.
And frankly, why would we want to promote matching down to a GH5 rather than matching up to a VariCam LT?
EVA1: EVA1 8/3/17 Press Release and Specifications
- Thread starter Barry_Green
- Start date
No, the first productions will be all about EVA1 and only EVA1. We don't want to confuse the message at the start.
And frankly, why would we want to promote matching down to a GH5 rather than matching up to a VariCam LT?
Jason R. Johnston
Well-known member
THANK YOU! lol
It's taking me a while to read through this whole thread, but I am highly impressed with EVA1. With the new information I was most curious about — dual native ISO, dynamic range, codec selection — it still looks like the perfect camera for me, being that I've been eyeing Ursa Mini Pro for some time. I can't wait to see the footage Panasonic EU has been cooking up in Iceland.
Actually, they are about the same when they are outfitted to shoot.
The C200's body weight is 3.2 lbs (1.43kg). The handgrip is 9.2 oz.(260g) and the LCD is 6.5 oz (185g). Total weight of the C200 is about 4.18 pounds (1.89 kg) outfitted to shoot with accessories.
Panasonic's EVA1 spec sheet states the camera body is 2.65 lbs (1.2kg) stripped down and 4.52 lbs (2.05kg) with "accessories". I'm guessing by accessories, they mean the handgrip and LCD. Not sure if they're including battery in there, but they might be, which is why the EVA1 is about a 1/2 pound heavier than the C200 when it is rigged up.
All in all, they'll probably be close to the same weight with handgrip and LCD. The EVA1 is just lighter when it's stripped down to nothing.
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
Unfortunately the C200 is more heavier as you can see by this pictures (when you add the lens -kit lens-) it's almost 3.0 kg or more. The Eva is 1.5 kg with LCD, handgrip and battery.
Last edited:
filmguy123
Veteran
Understood, and I've heard this a number of times from people who have worked exclusively in S35. It is the cinema standard. However, I find the clarification to be helpful (if not essential) in today's world, where M43, S35, and FF sensors are being used widely in professional work, utilizing lenses from standard PL cine lenses to EF lenses to converted vintage lenses. It's all to easy to have a miscommunication.
Interesting perspective - why wouldn't you? It's not all about up-sells, is it? It's about providing solutions to customers. There are more and more customers for whom which money isn't the primary concern that would prefer an EVA-1 / GH5 combo over a VaricamLT / EVA-1 combo. VaricamLT is very large and heavy - this seemed to be a marketed selling point of the EVA-1, no? Customers to whom that appeals will also have an appeal to the GH5.
I could afford an LT and EVA-1, and I don't want the LT. I want 2x GH5s and an EVA-1. And I am positive that I am not alone in wanting to know how well the GH5 can match. I am already under the assumption that the VaricamLT and EVA-1 will match very well.
Nice camera! Have you uploaded any footage yet?
According to Panasonic's website, BH Photo and a variety of others, the EVA1 is listed as:
Weight 2.6 lb / 1.2 kg (without accessories)
4.5 lb / 2.1 kg (with accessories)
That was just copied and pasted. So if that's true, it should weigh close to the same as your C200. 2.2 KG for your C200 and 2.1 kg for the EVA1. I'm guessing your second image of the C200 at 2.6kg has the battery installed? The "accessories" are not specified on Panasonic's technical sheet so we don't know if that includes the battery or not. If it does, the Panasonic would be lighter, if it doesn't, they will be almost the same.
BTW, I used the data from both Canon and Panasonic's technical sheets. It's interesting that your C200 is weighing in more than what Canon listed on their technical specifications, which is 1.89kg. I guess camera companies lie about weight, too. ; )
Danilo Del Tufo
Well-known member
The camera in the pictures is a prototype of C200, the pictures were taken by a Canon promoter of 16 June 2017 after a presentation of 12 June where I've participated and touched the camera (with the lens was a nightmare to hold). I dunno if the battery is mounted, well we can ask Mitch how is the weight of the EVA1 with battery and grip, I think that number of EVA1 (2.1 kg,with accessories) it's not accurate.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Why on earth would you want that? Movies are not shot with FF cameras. The entire cinema world since the dawn of the moving picture is a specific size and it is not FF. Get this notion of FF out of your mind. We are big boys now. FF is the wet dream of Canon to sell more DSLRs.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
It is better to think in s35mm terms like film makers really do. Steven Spielberg doesn't walk around thinking what a 28mm lens looks like when shooting stills. He doesn't give a rat's butt what a lens looks like when shooting stills.
FF is not the norm in our world and should be considered an enlarged sensor (like cropped but the opposite) and outside the norm of what we do.
Well, Vistavision, Cinerama, and 65mm, were in there somewhere between the dawn of moving pictures and now. All are full-frame or larger. Dunkirk was shot on 65mm.
filmguy123
Veteran
Steven Spielberg didn't grow up in our world. Technology has changed. FF is no longer only for stills. And "our" world if you aren't moving and working in a production set looks like an A7S II alongside a GH5, FS7, Blackmagic, and EVA-1. When someone says "I want a 50mm lens for this..." and then we decide to swap to a gimbal and an M43 sensor or FF sensor or S35 sensor, what does that even mean?
The issue will only get more prevalent - Sony is set to release a professional FF camera next year. And people may work alongside it. If they want a 50mm and they are speaking of wanting a 50 on the FS7, do we keep the 50mm on the FF? or move it to an 85mm? Conversions happen *no matter what*. This is the new reality. I don't find it relevant what Steven Spielberg thinks in for focal length; his talent has no bearing on this generation's lingo, and his work is in an alien environment to most of us.
Jason R. Johnston
Well-known member
FF is Canon marketing gibberish. Forgeting about medium and large formats, aren't we? Their full frames beat the snot out of Canon's. Canon's "full frame" is quasi-135 format. 135 was created by Kodak a long, long time ago. It's the correct name for the type of film you use in a traditional 35mm stills camera. Turn it on its side and you have Super 35. An 85mm T2 lens doesn't have the same FOV as that same lens in 135 or medium format. The formats are not cropping anything. Saying "crop factor" is misleading garbage.
FF and crop factors are not the norm in our world. We don't shoot in 135 or 6x6 because it's too difficult to achieve critical focus. It's hard enough in Super 35 at T4.5 on a 200mm lens racking with a moving subject. That's why we use spikes and focus marks and standins and tech rehearsals. That's why a DP will have his go-to ops and AC's. when you find a great focus puller, you hire him for every job.
One-man-banding a 5D? Are you insane? You need a 7" monitor to nail focus. That's after you rig it out, but you still have that crappy compressed 8bit. More rigging. No thanks. EVA1 doesn't need to be rigged out. It can be if you want to get fancy, but it doesn't need it.
The ergonomics of any dslr is horrible for this kind of work. GH5 is nice on the inside but it still needs to be rigged to be usable. And it's M43 is close to Super 16. Hollywood tried Vistavision but it was too big. There aren't many IMAX-only movies. Super 65 is a gimmick that you don't see very often.
Super 35 is the motion picture sweet spot. It's a great balance of usable fov options (ala lens choice), workable dof, manageable size and weight of equipment, cost and supply of equipmentand support.
FF and crop factors are not the norm in our world. We don't shoot in 135 or 6x6 because it's too difficult to achieve critical focus. It's hard enough in Super 35 at T4.5 on a 200mm lens racking with a moving subject. That's why we use spikes and focus marks and standins and tech rehearsals. That's why a DP will have his go-to ops and AC's. when you find a great focus puller, you hire him for every job.
One-man-banding a 5D? Are you insane? You need a 7" monitor to nail focus. That's after you rig it out, but you still have that crappy compressed 8bit. More rigging. No thanks. EVA1 doesn't need to be rigged out. It can be if you want to get fancy, but it doesn't need it.
The ergonomics of any dslr is horrible for this kind of work. GH5 is nice on the inside but it still needs to be rigged to be usable. And it's M43 is close to Super 16. Hollywood tried Vistavision but it was too big. There aren't many IMAX-only movies. Super 65 is a gimmick that you don't see very often.
Super 35 is the motion picture sweet spot. It's a great balance of usable fov options (ala lens choice), workable dof, manageable size and weight of equipment, cost and supply of equipmentand support.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
No movie uses the A7S as the benchmark or the A cam and if it is used it is for a crash cam or difficult situation shots. The crew is thinking of the lenses in s35mm terms and how to adapt that A7S to fit and not the other way around.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Sorry I meant 35mm motion pictures, I should have been more clear about that. You can't really consider 65mm FF either. It is larger and FF wouldn't really fit in that world either. Either way you look at it FF is a kind of bastard format in the cinema world pushed by DSLR makers so they could sell more camera bodies. APS-C DSLRs are a much more realistic match to the 35mm motion picture world of cinema. It is marketing that has made FF users think their cameras are somehow better suited to film making.
Barry_Green
Moderator
With all due respect -- certainly the reason you might want that are the exact same reasons you'd want a Speed booster on M43: you get a wider field of view and an additional stop of light. Seriously -- who WOULDN'T want that?
Consider that the whole point of the EF mount is to take advantage of the plethora of EF lenses out there, and EF lenses designed for a 135 frame ("FF") are generally not as wide as lenses designed for S35, so a Speed booster would make your existing 28mm or 24mm lens into an appropriate wide angle for the S35 sensor.
Finally, more options = better.
As far as I can see, nobody loses in this scenario. So I hope they do develop such a device, which wouldn't be EVA-specific but would work for BMC, RED, and Canon owners too. Heck, there's probably a whole host of APS-C Canon DSLR shooters who would be thrilled to get an additional f-stop of light and a wider field of view from their existing lenses.
It's such a no-brainer to me that I have to wonder if the only reason we haven't seen it already is because it is somehow technologically impossible.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Doesn't it have something to do with flange distance? I'm pretty sure Metabones would have been all over this if it was possible.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
Understood, but from my perspective if I put out something that effective says "here is GH5 looking just like EVA1" then it does not encourage people to buy the EVA1. It is effectively dumbing down the EVA1 to look like the GH5, as the EVA1 has greater capability. There are a lot of people who do not understand what these cameras can do and we don't want to knock down this new camera.