EOS-M Blackmagic on a budget!

[maxotics]

Like everyone else, I wanted a Blackmagic pocket cinema camera NOW.  Only NOW, I can wait. 

I spent $400 for an EOS-M on CL with a 22mm pancake and Canon Adapter.  I then bought a Sigma 10-20mm used for $300.  So for $700 I have a camera PLUS lens which takes full RAW 720p video.  The only difference between the ML EOS-M will probably be 1080p vs 720p and, I grant, the Blackmagic will be sharper and have better color saturation (and of course, built-in audio). HOWEVER, the BMCC will NOT do photography like the EOS-M or give me all kinds easy Canon lens options, and flash, and other ML goodies, etc.  That is to say, in my fanny-pack I am now carrying a complete photo/video killer-kit.

I LOVE my current setup.  Next, I'm going to try a wide angle adapter on the 22mm.  My guess is that for $250 body, $150, 22mm pancake,  $165 Century Optics .5x adpater [EDIT: Adapter does not work, can't get focus], (total $565) you can get, in crop mode, an effective 40mm cinema camera that will give you everything you want in a film look.  And an amazing APS-C sensor size photo camera!  I hope the following video shows the potential!

Go ML team!  PLEASE keep working on the EOS-M firmware.  This is a super, super hit in the making!  The only thing standing in its way is a widespread obsession with RAW resolution.  Sharpness is nice, but not necessary, to shoot beautiful film-look video today. 

[arrinkiiii]

Thanks for the info, eos-m seems to me very promising machine 

[maxotics]

Thanks for the info, eos-m seems to me very promising machine 

I looked at your videos and see how you're reducing contrast and getting one to accept blacks as grays through some very talented grading.  To think what you can do with more dynamic range.  The problem with in-camera video is there is no way I have found, to get detail out of the shadows.  If I expose for the shadows everything else blows out and I can't get good color back.   If you have any Canon camera that will do ML RAW then just use that to start.  You have to see for yourself!

[1%]

I guess we have to see what happens with dual ISO in LV. We're figuring it out.

[arrinkiiii]

Thanks maxotics. Don't know what my video you see... all videos from vimeo are in 8bits h.264 native from camera canon 7D. From youtube they are from raw. Yes, raw is amazing you can push the envelop a lot more forwarder   

[maxotics]

Thanks maxotics. Don't know what my video you see... all videos from vimeo are in 8bits h.264 native from camera canon 7D. From youtube they are from raw. Yes, raw is amazing you can push the envelop a lot more forwarder   

I looked at some of your videos on Vimeo, the "Art Attack".  Looked like 7D.  Again, very nice stuff!   I think the "push the envelop" thing is misleading to a lot of people, though please feel free to disagree or tell me otherwise.  Most people shoot h.264 so are used to that high-contrast look.  Every year, sharpness increases and artifacts are reduced.  All good!  However, the image contrast out of a RAW camera, going straight to H.264 (which is essentially what happens in my clip) is very different than any in-camera H.264.  Many people seem to believe that the primary benefit of RAW is that you have "latitude" in post, to make the image more or less contrasty, or color graded.  True.  BUT, it is not the primary benefit to me, at least now.  The benefit to me is that what I see in the shadows actually appears in the video I shoot. 

For me, RAW video shot that goes straight to a Cineform 422 output, without any grading, is more natural looking to me than H.264 video that comes out of a Canon Mkiii.  I did not say BETTER.  It's a matter of taste.  Or put another way, I have found no way, in post, to make H.264 look as much like film as I'm getting from this lowly EOS-M/RAW setup.

Many do not understand this, I feel, because they haven't shot both.  They look at RAW footage, like what I shot, and only see the lack of sharpness and saturated colors.  Again, nothing wrong with that.  But you don't need to go to post to get a film-look.  Thoughts?

[maxotics]

At 1% It's already better than anything you can buy today for under $500!   ML RAW video would grow faster if there was a stable, and easy to install, release for the EOS-M.  If there was a simple program (Mac and PC) that did both pink dot removal and converted the RAW files to both Cineform and Quicktime (without the dng/tiff process) more people would try it and see what I keep foaming in the mouth about   I'm NOT complaining in the least.  I am full of gratitude, gratitude, and more gratitude! But one technical person to another, keep in mind how un-technical most people are. 

I'm fortunate in having a lot of technical skill.  The ML RAW video I get out of the 50D and EOS-M, thanks to you, is fantastic!  Unfortunately, the perfect is the enemy of the good here! 

[1%]

It might get a little better with MLV... and better post processing tools. Direct MLV w/dual ISO to H264/prores/dnxhd/good cineform and dark frame for the noise would do wonders.