'See Impossible': Canon counts down to... something. *UPDATED*

IndyFilmPhreak2013 said:
Then what are you even doing in this thread about Canon?
Click to expand...

Sharing my opinion on Canon since I have owned Canon. Just because I don't personally choose Canon does that mean that I am not entitled to share an opinion? I didn't happen to see the rule that states that I can't offer an opinion in a thread about Canon if I don't particularly care for Canon.....for me.....PERSONALLY.

If I did miss that rule I must apologize...for sharing.....my opinion.....on Canon....for me......personally.
 
R Hudson said:
If I did miss that rule I must apologize...for sharing.....my opinion.....on Canon....for me......personally.
Click to expand...

My point is that your opinion is irrelevant to this discussion. You don't use them, hence you are not going to be a go-to for your thoughts on their current capabilities. As it is, you are just another annoying internet voice screaming about something they can't afford and don't use.

My statement wasn't an attempt to exclude, but more an incredulous query as to why you want to be involved in this thread in the first place. More reinforcement to me that most of the loudest critics here have little to no real world experience with C series nor with the 5d3, yet are very quick to proclaim the imminent death of Canon based on internet opinion of said products.

But hey, I guess you are right - it's the internet and anybody can throw in their bit.
 
IndyFilmPhreak2013 said:
And yet C300s keep working and making money, imagine that. It's almost as if specs and numbers don't matter, and picture quality is what really counts - surely it can't be!
Click to expand...

Remember the day that the C300 launched? Remember how another camera maker announced their camera the same day and claimed that it cost half of what Canon's list price was? Remember how the fanboys stormed teh internets with their howls of how Canon was blowing it, absolutely blowing it with this crappy spec'd C300 compared to the obviously superior Scarlet? Yeah....
 
IndyFilmPhreak2013 said:
My point is that your opinion is irrelevant to this discussion. You don't use them, hence you are not going to be a go-to for your thoughts on their current capabilities. As it is, you are just another annoying internet voice screaming about something they can't afford and don't use.

My statement wasn't an attempt to exclude, but more an incredulous query as to why you want to be involved in this thread in the first place. More reinforcement to me that most of the loudest critics here have little to no real world experience with C series nor with the 5d3, yet are very quick to proclaim the imminent death of Canon based on internet opinion of said products.

But hey, I guess you are right - it's the internet and anybody can throw in their bit.
Click to expand...

For some reason (perhaps it is just because I am actually responding) you have decided to single me out. I have not been anywhere close to the harshest critic. Not even a medium-level critic. I merely offered an opinion. You know absolutely nothing about what I have done or what I can afford and just because I am not currently using Canon doesn't mean that I won't again. I even WROTE that if you would have bothered to read what I wrote. I have used Canon (5dmkII, C100, C300) in addition to lower models so my opinion is relevant whether or not you agree with it. Yes there are things I DO like about Canon even still but my personal preference FOR NOW is to choose other brands that better suit what it is I am looking for.

I have been working professionally in the industry since 2000 so I have been exposed to a great many tools of the trade, some of them being Canon. That makes my opinion relevant but it is just that....an opinion. Apparently that is something you fail to grasp. I don't know who peed in your corn flakes but you really need to calm down a bit. Go see a movie, take a trip, mow the grass, whatever calms you. It's just cameras. They are merely tools.
 
Regarding moiré on Canon 5d mk iii, my understanding is that they fixed it by making the video image pretty soft. People were even experimenting with removing the OLPF from it when it first came out, and then it seems like many went the route of sharpening in post instead. That's what I'm referring to. It seems like the 7d mark ii also has the same issue. Most of the other camera manufacturers, on the other hand, have resolved moiré in video without sacrificing much detail or making the image too soft.

Also, I understand that Magic Lantern raw resolves the softness, so that means it may not be a problem with the hardware.
 
Last edited:
My apologies to everyone here. I have scheduled sensitivity training so that I can learn how to safely communicate with Canon fans in such a way as to avoid creating displeasing feelings. I was so abrasive in my comments that I am ashamed and can only hope that Canon fans everywhere can find it in their heart to forgive me for using all caps to emphasize one particular word. I now know that this was indeed yelling so I will avoid capital letters to the very best of my abilities.
 
R Hudson said:
My apologies to everyone here. I have scheduled sensitivity training so that I can learn how to safely communicate with Canon fans in such a way as to avoid creating displeasing feelings. I was so abrasive in my comments that I am ashamed and can only hope that Canon fans everywhere can find it in their heart to forgive me for using all caps to emphasize one particular word. I now know that this was indeed yelling so I will avoid capital letters to the very best of my abilities.
Click to expand...

You love to be overly dramatic, I see. Perhaps you should be on the other side of the cameras.

You sure as hell don't like keeping on topic, however. Are you done with your little show yet?
 
Last edited:
roxics said:
Absolutely. Personally I've never had a client request a specific camera. So I use what I prefer.
Click to expand...

Personally I always love to shoot with my C300. However I have many clients, who only ask for the 5D because of "the 5D look".

Perception is more important than facts as people decide on the basis of their perception. Producers perceive that 5D will make their project succeed. So they insist on it. Similarly some people here perceive that Canon cameras are bad, just on the basis of internet posts or "heresay". I own both the C300 as well as 5DIII, along with other cameras. If a client will ask me to shoot with a Go Pro, then I will do the same.

Every camera has got some weakness. If only we can extract the maximum juice out of our equipment .....
 
cowpunk52 said:
As for moire performance, it's virtually gone in the 5D III, unlike the 6D or most APS-C cameras (7D II is reported to be on par with 5D III). The clean HDMI out came with a firmware update sometime after release, but I don't know exactly when. If you like the Canon look/color and want full frame with those features, that's the one to go for at the moment. The 6D's video performance does not do nearly as well in controlling moire - but wasn't targeted as aggressively at videographers, and was meant as an entry-level full frame for still shooters. To that end, it does perform better than the 5D III in some respects in it's stills.
Click to expand...

Good to know. Thank you :)
 
Now onto 5DMKIII,

I am glad to hear that moire is practically gone and honestly I would like to experiment with some raw footage at some point. I know enough Canon guys where I think it might be possible to arrange that. I do know that I like Canon color, especially for video.

I do have to say this looks pretty:

https://vimeo.com/107738007
 
Last edited:
There is nobody here arguing that image quality is an issue. In fact, 5d MKIII RAW is amazing but we can not give all the credit to Canon. If Canon would just encode or make jpegs from the Magic Lantern discovered RAW stream the image quality would be leaps better than the native video recording. Might be a nice end of life feature addition...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top