EVA1: EVA1 8/3/17 Press Release and Specifications

[icarusfilm]

You cannot integrate a speedbooster into the mix here because there isn't enough flange distance to make it work- it only works with FF lenses onto a mirroless.
About FF cinema- yes until recently cinema was a super 35mm world. That was based on economics 35mm film was in production putting it on its side was easy and made 1 second of film i.e. 24 super 35mm frames cheaper than 24 FF35 frames. That standard will not be around for long there are aesthetic reasons that make FF or Vistavision appealing you can use wide angle lenses with much less distortion and a much more natural perspective a FF28mm looks much better than a super 35mm 21 or 18mm lens. Kind of the same reason people like anamorphic lenses.

 

[Barry_Green]

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.

The flange distance is generally an issue in adapters that don't have optics in them. It seems to me that since SpeedBoosters are inherently optical adapters, that it's possible that the flange distance can be taken into account in the design of the optical element.

I also would think they'd have been all over it, so one of two things must be the case... either:
1) it's impossible and I'm a moron for thinking it's possible, or
2) they never thought about it.

I think Brian Caldwell has participated here on DVXUser before, but I don't know what his userid is or I'd send him a message to ask if it could be done.

 

[Mitch Gross]

Don't know how we really got into a Super-35 v. Full Frame debate here. I railed on the term "Crop Factor" because it confuses the hell out of so many people. To me a 50mm is a 50mm. It has a specific magnification. That shows different fields of view depending on the size of the sensor. All the rest is confusing nonsense. You have no idea how many times I had people come into my old job and say something like "I was going to buy this Zeiss 50mm lens but I reach that it has a 1.6x crop factor, so I guess I'll buy the Canon 50mm instead." That's a problem.

 

[Barry_Green]

You cannot integrate a speedbooster into the mix here because there isn't enough flange distance to make it work- it only works with FF lenses onto a mirroless.

That's what we're talking about -- a FF lens onto a mirrorless.

Flange distance is an issue in adapting any lens to another mount; if the mount's flange distance is too short then it simply cannot be done because focus cannot be achieved without the addition of an optical element in the chain. But since the SpeedBooster is, inherently, an optical element adapter, I'm thinking the flange distance question can presumably be managed by the design of the optical element in the SpeedBooster. They just have to change the distance it focuses at.

But not being an optical designer, maybe what I'm proposing is impossible, I don't know. It just seems like it should be possible.

 

[Mitch Gross]

The flange distance is generally an issue in adapters that don't have optics in them. It seems to me that since SpeedBoosters are inherently optical adapters, that it's possible that the flange distance can be taken into account in the design of the optical element.

I also would think they'd have been all over it, so one of two things must be the case... either:
1) it's impossible and I'm a moron for thinking it's possible, or
2) they never thought about it.

I think Brian Caldwell has participated here on DVXUser before, but I don't know what his userid is or I'd send him a message to ask if it could be done.

The flange depth still is involved, otherwise you would need to do an aerial image projection. You really don't want to start with that kinda thing.

 

[Barry_Green]

The flange depth still is involved, otherwise you would need to do an aerial image projection. You really don't want to start with that kinda thing.

I found Mr. Caldwell's userid and sent him a message. Would be nice if it's possible, but understandable if it isn't.

Furthermore, I wonder if there's any value in the notion that the EF-S mount is generally designed for mirror-based cameras, but the EVA-1 and other cinema cameras are inherently mirrorless, so ... the physical restriction of how far optical elements can protrude into the mount are obviously very different when designing for a solely mirrorless camera. Maybe there'd be a way to take advantage of that big empty tube (the throat of the EF mount), maybe the SpeedBooster optics can be rearset to intrude into the tube, thus perhaps accommodating to some degree for the flange distance issue.

Or, maybe a SpeedBooster EF->EF-S could be designed that doesn't affect flange distance at all; maybe it could be a device that mounts internally in the lens mount throat, and that way the EF lens mounts directly to the camera's EF mount as always? Such a design could obviously never be used on an EF-S mirror-based camera, but as a dedicated mirrorless system perhaps there's some possibility?

Eh, probably pointless to waste space discussing it here as it all comes down to what Mr. Caldwell says, so I hope that he checks his PMs and responds.

 

[robotfist]

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.

Weird. I went to Canon HQ in Burbank and used the C200 with a 16-35 MK III lens and found it fantastic to hold. I could shoot all day with that camera in my hand. What lens did you use? If it was a big cinema lens, yeah, I could see it being way too front heavy in the hand. But that would be the case with the EVA1 as well. I guess it all depends on where you're coming from. If you're coming from a DSLR world, I imagine 2 kg might feel extremely heavy and the bulk of the C200/EVA1 might feel awkward. In the world of professional cinema cameras though, both the C200 and EVA1 are as light as feathers. My Red clocks in at around 13 pounds (6 kg) and it's that weight that makes me constantly think about the C200/EVA1.

Bottom line, it's my personal opinion that the EVA1 will be comparable in weight and the difference won't be so noticeable that it really blows people away. Perhaps once Mitch gets his camera, he can weigh it with a battery and give us an actual shooting weight? As of now, this is all speculation until the fall.

And speaking of the fall, I do hope when Panasonic says "the fall" they mean shipping in the fall, and not officially released in the fall and shipping sometime in early winter. I've got just enough cash for one of these cameras sitting in my hand right now and it's as tough a decision as ever. The DPAF autofocus really does makes this a difficult choice. I could sure use that. Being able to fly around on a gimbal while shooting wide open, with your focus dead locked on a subject will result in some gorgeous shots that you could never get without a focus puller. I still love the ultra shallow look and DPAF makes that possible. I held off on the FS7 because I hate, hate, hate rogar-Angry(DBG): Sony's menus and wasn't crazy about the larger size of the camera. Turns out the cinema camera I've been waiting for these past 5 years was just split into two cameras, the C200 and the EVA1. Both look fantastic for different reasons. I wish I could just squish them together.

 

[icarusfilm]

Angenieux is building a speedbooster into its ne EZ1 and EZ2 zooms.

 

[scottfs]

That's it! You've convinced me not to buy the EVA. I'm waiting for the super-duper better-than- =IMAX sensor, a 12" sensor with a billion pixels. It will instantly obsolete everything on the market. Everything else is garbage.

 

[Mitch Gross]

Perhaps once Mitch gets his camera, he can weigh it with a battery and give us an actual shooting weight? As of now, this is all speculation until the fall.

And speaking of the fall, I do hope when Panasonic says "the fall" they mean shipping in the fall, and not officially released in the fall and shipping sometime in early winter.

I don't have an accurate scale at home. Maybe I'll walk over to the UPS Store down the street.

The EVA1 will ship in the Fall. In volume.

 

[Mitch Gross]

Angenieux is building a speedbooster into its ne EZ1 and EZ2 zooms.

Actually, Angenieux's solution is quite clever for the EZ lenses. The base lens is designed for an in between size, and then it depends on the rear optic that you put on to make it for Super-35 or Full Frame. Thus the lens performs equally well for each.

 

[scottfs]

The VariCam is the camera I want. Can you loan me $45,000?

 

[filmguy123]

I love the Varicam's personality, but I am all about the EVA-1's body.

 

[graywolf]

About FF cinema- yes until recently cinema was a super 35mm world. That was based on economics 35mm film was in production putting it on its side was easy and made 1 second of film i.e. 24 super 35mm frames cheaper than 24 FF35 frames.

35mm motion picture film came first. The Ur Leica used double frames to give a bigger negative for making prints, and it was barely adequate for 3x4 prints at that. Times do change. And, I think Super 35 is actually a smaller film image than standard 35mm, cropped vertically to give a wider look.

 

[Barry_Green]

And, I think Super 35 is actually a smaller film image than standard 35mm, cropped vertically to give a wider look.

Super35 (in 4:3) is quite a bit bigger than Regular35. If you're comparing at the same aspect ratio, Super35 is bigger. If you crop Super35 down to 2.39:1, yes it will be shorter than Regular35 at 1.85:1, but still notably wider, so I don't see how that's a fair comparison. Regular35 cropped to 2.39:1 would be notably smaller than Super35 cropped to 2.39:1.

 

[boosh]

Mitch any word on if 4k 100fps is possible or will be possible in bursts via the SDI out? I have a lot of clients who insist on 4k for their 4k shop screens but also want 100fps.

 

[Danilo Del Tufo]

Weird. I went to Canon HQ in Burbank and used the C200 with a 16-35 MK III lens and found it fantastic to hold. I could shoot all day with that camera in my hand. What lens did you use?

I've used together with C200 the Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS USM II lens, I've found very heavy to hold, with two hand it was better (one in the bottom of the camera, the other hand at the handgrip), but with this hands position it was impossible to access to the LCD to change focus.

 

[Noel Evans]

Yeah. OK Mitch. You guys have done good. Really good.

 

[wschmid]

Sony uses 12-bit Linear RAW while EVA1 uses 10-bit Log RAW. I and most others would argue that the use of Linear encode is inefficient and that our 10-bit Log RAW actually contains more useful data. Most RAW structures are encoded Log, including ARRI.

Sure - but would it not have been possible to use 12 bit log raw? Because I would have assumed that the signal processing is done at 12bit - but maybe it is done at 10 bit only.

But then this will now also a hardware limitation also.

 

[Run&Gun]

The VariCam is the camera I want. Can you loan me $45,000?

You're just not looking in the right places ; ). I had a dealer offer me one of their demo units for less than a new LT and a few days before that I saw one on eBay for similar.