Help me validate what I have heard so far about the MarkII's video capability.
-Aperature - selectable
-Shutter speed preset at 1/30, 1/60 or 1/125, (don't know for sure which one)
-ISO set by camera based on proper exposure.
- Exposure can be locked.

Okay, I'm coming around to the idea now.

I was also thinking that for audio you could use a Beach Tek box so you can hook up XLR mics. Though of course we don't know how noisy the audio circuits in this thing are.

Photographers can already offer both (by buying a video camera) and the Mark II won't make that any easier, but it may inspire more photographers to try their hand at video. What's more interesting is what this camera offers to videographers in terms of depth of field control, as a supplement to proper video cameras which are more practical for the demands of recording a wedding.

It will be interesting to see how a generation of photographers who have been weaned on ever-improving autofocus will manage with pulling their own focus while shooting video with this camera...

I dont get it...Michael at Luminous landscape said it was over 47 (the 5DII).
Dpreview said 35.

So between the two numbers thats how I came up with my theory...but now there is the bytes vs. bits. (Im confused now.)

Sorry about that, that was a typo - I meant to write 35-45 megabits/second (not 35-35). The camera native samples from dpreview are just under 40Mb/s - but I've seen several comments about the total recording time (approximately 12 minutes) being dependent on the complexity of the footage - this indicates they are using VBR. Both of the sample clips have little motion so they are probably at the lower range of the VBR. Doing a little math based on the 4GB limit we get the following maximum clip lengths:

47Mbps = ~11:54
45Mbps = ~12:25
40Mbps = ~13:59
35Mbps = ~15:58

((megabits per second)/8)/1000000 = megabytes per second
4194.304/megabytes per second = total seconds per 4GB file
total seconds/60 = total minutes per 4GB file (remainder x 60 = seconds)

So 47Mbs probably is likely the upper limit as that gives us just under 12 minutes. Low motion clips like the samples should give another minute or so per clip.

I wonder what will happen to the 35mm adapter systems? When you can get a very DOF with the FF chip on the MARK II. Where with, for example Canon XH A1 (b/c I own it), you would need a the whole setup rig of 35mm adapter to get the nice shallow DOF. I ask this as I plan(ed) to get a 35mm adapter for weddings/commercials/corporate etc... - What effect will this have on these systems?

I was also thinking that for audio you could use a Beach Tek box so you can hook up XLR mics. Though of course we don't know how noisy the audio circuits in this thing are.

That's my plan (pre-ordered the 5D yesterday with the thought that it will replace my XHA1) - although if the inputs are noisy a better option may be dual system with a zoom H4 or something and using vocalign (Synchro Arts - VocALign (http://www.synchroarts.com/products/vocalign/vocalign.asp)) to auto-sync to the scratch audio from the built-in mic. The best option probably depends on the type of stuff you're shooting.

Maybe even go for a hybrid approach - use the zoom instead of an XLR adapter, run it's output into the input on the camera, then you use the zoom's files in situations where the onboard track is too noisy (i.e. quiet passages).

So 47Mbs probably is likely the upper limit as that gives us just under 12 minutes. Low motion clips like the samples should give another minute or so per clip.

Don't forget to account for the audio data in your calculations...

It will be interesting to see how a generation of photographers who have been weaned on ever-improving autofocus will manage with pulling their own focus while shooting video with this camera...

That's a good point.

Don't forget to account for the audio data in your calculations...

Sample clips had no audio and I haven't seen anything detailing the format of the audio so I'm not sure what to base the calculations on. Even assuming they went with uncompressed 48khz 16bit stereo audio only adds 768kbps - compressed will likely take half that or less, so in either case it doesn't change the overall calculations too significantly. Adjust all the data rates I listed by -1 and it should account for the worst-case (well, actually best case in terms of audio quality) scenario.

EDIT: found on the canon site it is using Linear PCM - no word on sample rate but probably safe to assume either 44.1 or 48khz

I wonder what will happen to the 35mm adapter systems? When you can get a very DOF with the FF chip on the MARK II. Where with, for example Canon XH A1 (b/c I own it), you would need a the whole setup rig of 35mm adapter to get the nice shallow DOF. I ask this as I plan(ed) to get a 35mm adapter for weddings/commercials/corporate etc... - What effect will this have on these systems?

Initially, I would guess that their sales will drop as people wait to hear more about the new SLR announcements. Then, when we relearn that camcorders are still better as specialist devices, the 35mm adapter makers will need to add more features: manual aperture controls of the SLR lens, larger/better achromats to allow use of the sharper center region, cheaper focusing accessories. The grainy glass look is interesting at times, but I'd rather have clear glass and add the dynamic grain as a DSP plugin. The grainy noise probably affects the video compression with its excessive motion.

Ok, Canon proved they can make incredibly beautiful videos with their 5D Mark 2. All they need to do now is repackage the camera in a tiny shoulder mount configuration using the same 24x36mm sensor, same lens mount, professional audio inputs, and with long shooting and storage capabilities. You'd probably have the best video camera on the planet.

Ok, Canon proved they can make incredibly beautiful videos with their 5D Mark 2. All they need to do now is repackage the camera in a tiny shoulder mount configuration using the same 24x36mm sensor, same lens mount, professional audio inputs, and with long shooting and storage capabilities. You'd probably have the best video camera on the planet.

Good point, I hope Canon read this!

The hard work is done! Stick it in a form factor like the JVC ProHD range and they would fly out the door. Maybe rehouse some L series lenses to suite video needs as well, leave the IS in.

CF could remain, but add variable frame rates, especially 25p (24p).

It will be interesting to see how a generation of photographers who have been weaned on ever-improving autofocus will manage with pulling their own focus while shooting video with this camera...

Hi, Charles! Nice to see you chip in here.

I've been thinking about this, too; I'm not Canon-dSLR conversant and wonder exactly what range of lenses will fit the 5D2 and have manual focusing, to allow me to use a follow-focus.

(I'm not looking for automatic anything—focus or aperture—from an SLR lens; I want manual everything.)

Limiting my thinking, for simplicity's sake, to Canon and Nikon glass … web searches suggest that old-style Canon FD lenses are out.

There are apparently all manner of mount-adapters out there, which divide between simple metal rings and adapters with special optics. Looks like there can be difficulty with flange distances in this scheme.

Am I correct that EOS bodies will mount only EF lenses (from Canon) without adapters? Are there any Canon dSLR geniuses reading here who can lay out the lens-designations (e.g., EF or whatever) which will likely mount to the 5D2 correctly without adapters, and allow fully manual use?

Hi John, all EF lenses are indeed autofocus but they all offer manual focus rings, and all will mount to the 5D Mk. II.

EF lenses are made specifically for the Canon EOS system. There are dozens and dozens of EF lens models going back about twenty years. The EF lens mount replaced the earlier FD lens mount. You won't need an adapter to put an EF lens on an EOS camera... they're already made for each other (oops, I think I misunderstood your question).

all EF lenses are indeed autofocus but they all offer manual focus rings, and all will mount to the 5D Mk. II … There are dozens and dozens of EF lens models going back about twenty years. The EF lens mount replaced the earlier FD lens mount. You won't need an a …(oops, I think I misunderstood your question).

Thank you—that's just what I didn't know. I'll dig up a chart of EOS-body-&-lens compatibility from the Wide Wonderful Web …

Now, same question about Nikon & other glass: who can enlighten me on their compatibility with EOS bodies—say, the 5D (to get as close to the 5D2 as possible)?

What's your experience with Nikon lenses, adapters, etc? Any cautions or preferences about mounting?

Download this PDF: www.dvinfo.net/media/canon/CanonEFLensChart.pdf

There is no easy way to mount Nikkor lenses to a Canon camera.

Likewise, Nikon cameras are incompatible with Canon EF lenses.

Canon EF glass is the easiest, best and most direct way to go for any Canon EOS camera.

Just like Nikkor lenses are the easiest, best and most direct way to go for any Nikon camera.

I can think of no advantage whatsoever in trying to mix products from these two manufacturers.

Thanks for the link. I'm willing to mix-&-match brands, if it's not too difficult to ruin any advantages. But you largely confirm my suspicions: I'm small-fry yet, & Canon glass will surely suffice me.

EDIT: Well, it might advantage someone to mount non-Canon lenses they already own to an EOS body. But I'm starting from scratch with this whole dSLR form.

OK, I went away to learn more on the web. Now I have a question I can't find an answer to, & that may be unanswerable, about the 5D2 …

Monitoring the LiveView HD movie stream (i.e., separately from the camera body, for tripod, stabilizer, jib) may happen via the HDMI port, but may not be full-screen. I wonder if the overlay can be turned off.

Anybody know if this is possible on the 5D?

Is it possible to share the HDMI-out signal with other monitors simultaneously?

In response to an earlier post about converting HD to 24P in post: Vegas 8 converts other formats to 24P. Not sure why it wouldn't handle HD as well, though I don't have any HD footage to confirm.

In response to an earlier post about converting HD to 24P in post: Vegas 8 converts other formats to 24P. Not sure why it wouldn't handle HD as well, though I don't have any HD footage to confirm.

30p? Because there is only 1/2 the temporal resolution to convert to 24p with.

Chris,

There is absolutely and easy way to mount Nikon lenses on EOS cameras , many stills photographers have been doing this for ages to get better glass on their cameras. Have a look at 16-9.net for examples of what is possible.

The advantage in video is that you get proper manual aperture control in the 5DmkII's video mode and a much better manual focus ring. Also you can use Zeiss, Leica or old Nikon manual focus glass which is often much sharper than the canon equivalent's and sometime very cheap too.

Dan

....and also for us cheapskates , there's tamron , tokina, and sigma which all offer cheaper and sometimes better alternatives in both mounts . I know many people using nikon and canon aps cameras choose the tokina 12-24mm over the nikon equivalent for it's quality and price , and that's just one example among dozens of alternatives./k

There is absolutely and easy way to mount Nikon lenses on EOS cameras … Have a look at 16-9.net for examples of what is possible. The advantage in video is that you get proper manual aperture control in the 5DmkII's video mode and a much better manual focus ring.

Dan, thank you. I'll have a look.

1. "proper manual control," meaning what, exactly? Just that the non-Canon lens doesn't talk to the Eos body & renders everything manual?

2. "better manual focus ring"—what kinds of problems have you had with Canon focus rings? Were they on Eos lenses? Can you recommend any non-Canon lenses to avoid this?

there's tamron , tokina, and sigma … among dozens of alternatives.

Thanks, Kurth. Can you recommend any non-Canon lenses for use on the 5D2?

You are exactly right about the manual aperture, because the camera can't control the aperture at all then it can't automatically alter it. The big plus of this is that when you lock ISO and shutter on the EOS5DmkII you will still be able to alter the aperture, and hence the exposure, to your liking.

There is nothing 'wrong' with canon manual focus rings, its just that some don't even have hard end stops (ie they keep spinning past infinity) and most prefer smoother damped focus actions from a proper manual design.

All this said if you are going to shoot stills Canon lenses are the better option. We are talking movies here.

Dan

For which lenses are best have a look at 16-9.net Their classifieds give an idea of how cheap this stuff can be Lenses for sale: Canon, Zeiss, Tamron, Rodenstock (http://www.16-9.net/sale/)

You can always try ebay too.

Personally i think zeiss, nikon or leica is the way to go, especially the cheap 50mm and 28mm lenses. You can of course look at Tokina, Tamron, Vivitar, old russian lenses etc etc

Having used the D90 I'd say an external monitor is a must for serious work, I assume the same will be true on the 5DmkII. Has anyone tried one of these Manhattan LCD (http://www.manhattanlcd.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=7001) yet?

Dan

… right about the manual aperture, because the camera can't control the aperture at all then it can't automatically alter it. The big plus of this is that when you lock ISO and shutter on the EOS5DmkII you will still be able to alter the aperture, and hence the exposure, to your liking.

Thank you for that straightforward explanation. It makes the basic workflow clear.

… if you are going to shoot stills Canon lenses are the better option. We are talking movies here.

Yes. Precisely my interest.


For which lenses are best have a look at 16-9.net classifieds … ebay … zeiss, nikon or leica is the way to go, especially the cheap 50mm and 28mm lenses. You can of course look at Tokina, Tamron, Vivitar, old russian lenses etc etc

Thus, a world of glass, ranging from the dodgy to the priceless, to experiment with. I've been waiting for this facility in DV for some time.

One question about manual aperature rings and the 5dII.

If you lock exposure in the camera, say at f4, then you put one of these lenses that have an aperature ring on the camera, what happens when you turn the aperature ring?

Do you get different shades of f4?

Because the body can not react to the changes because it thinks the aperature is locked down.

Sounds like a 35mm adapter kind of setup.

how didnt i think about that before?

30p also comes with 30p related shutters, which are not a problem in NTSC countries, but anywhere where there's 50Hz (most of the world), lights will flicker like mad, totally ruinning the video.

therefore if it can only shoot at 30p, the 5Dmk2 could only be used under the sun in 50Hz countries. Use any light, or a mix of them, and footage will be awful.

this must be fixed. Canon must allow for 24/25p too.

One question about manual aperature rings and the 5dII.

If you lock exposure in the camera, say at f4, then you put one of these lenses that have an aperature ring on the camera, what happens when you turn the aperature ring?

Do you get different shades of f4?

Because the body can not react to the changes because it thinks the aperature is locked down.

Sounds like a 35mm adapter kind of setup.

With modern ( Nikon and Canon EF and others.. ) all communication between camera and lens takes place through electrical contacts; there are no mechanical levers or plungers.

when you put a fully manual lens ( older nikon with adaptor or contax C/Y with adaptor ) on a eos body, the camera reads "0" for the aperture. It has no idea what F stop the lens is set at... also... when you stop down the lens the image in the viewfinder will darken more per stop..... old school.

I have a few Carl Zeiss contax C/Y lens' that I put on mu 1ds3.... very nice ... but good "L" canon primes perform just as good, with the benefits of full control from the camera.

Also.... when shooting 1080p on the 5d2, I doubt one will notice the so called improved resolving power of the ziess lens'.

Also 2.... the manual focus rings on the EF lens are VERY smooth...... follow focus will be very easy as opposed to older fully manual lenses that are sometimes stiff.

Your missing the point, with a EF lens you will LOSE manual aperture control on the 5DmkII after you lock exposure. With a manual lens you can adjust the aperture at will after locking the other variables. For run and gun this is essential.

Not ALL EF lenses have very smooth focus, yes I would agree good L glass can be just as good. The point is that it is also much more expensive than manual lens options. Also the look , or bokeh, of the lens will show on video. I for one prefer the look of some zeiss lenses over their Canon counterparts.

We at our institution decided to put together what the Canon 5D Mark II would look like if it was up to videographers. Unfortunately we don’t have the 5D2 so we compromised by using the Canon 5d it was setup on the Varizoom DV Rig along with the Ikan 8″ Monitor and a senheisser on camera mic.

We wanted to give a feel for the kind of setup we would eventually be seeing next year, if 5DII takes off in the video industry (which most likely will). But I don’t see it taking over Video Cameras but that is a whole other topic.

Here is the link:
Canon 5d Mark II - Mock Setup Pics P-your VISION Productions’ Blog (http://pyvproductions.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/canon-5d-mark-ii-mock-setup-pics/)

Honestly I hope that they don't completely blur the distinction between the two - am I the only one that thinks that that would look a bit lame? I want a cooler-looking body -- I want to look different (read: cooler) than the photogs.

Your missing the point, with a EF lens you will LOSE manual aperture control on the 5DmkII after you lock exposure. With a manual lens you can adjust the aperture at will after locking the other variables. For run and gun this is essential.

Not ALL EF lenses have very smooth focus, yes I would agree good L glass can be just as good. The point is that it is also much more expensive than manual lens options. Also the look , or bokeh, of the lens will show on video. I for one prefer the look of some zeiss lenses over their Canon counterparts.

little do we know about the 5dII... but I'd think you can still spin the wheels for iris from the body during vid shooting.... or at least have the iso automatically adjust. ( from the dpreview hands one..."Auto ISO in all modes except manual" )

Having used the D90 I'd say an external monitor is a must for serious work, I assume the same will be true on the 5DmkII. Has anyone tried one of these Manhattan LCD (http://www.manhattanlcd.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=7001) yet?
Dan

Yes, I have it. Check out this thread:
2 low cost HD field monitors - Page 3 - The Digital Video Information Network (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?p=943048#post943048)

Your missing the point, with a EF lens you will LOSE manual aperture control on the 5DmkII after you lock exposure. With a manual lens you can adjust the aperture at will after locking the other variables. For run and gun this is essential.

Not ALL EF lenses have very smooth focus, yes I would agree good L glass can be just as good. The point is that it is also much more expensive than manual lens options. Also the look , or bokeh, of the lens will show on video. I for one prefer the look of some zeiss lenses over their Canon counterparts.

I guess what is hanging me up is the question of if you lock the aperature in movie mode, will it be advanced enough to then recognize the manual aperature lens and let go of the lock you just put on it?

I would think it is either auto iris or locked down, no in-between.

So your manual aperature might have to operate within the f-stop selected.

This will all be clearer when a video person gets their hands on a model!

I think I might have to sell my 1Ds MkIII and my XL-H1 and get one on these instead. Save a bunch of money and have one camera that can do both stills and motion. Amazing.

I was just on the phone with Canon's media reps and apparently they're not going to have any review samples of the 5DII here in Australia until December :( so we can't run a proper evaluation of the camera's video abilities until then.

I like that little setup you've put together Prashanna. Though as hilarious it looks, I think if you throw a mattebox on the front end of the lens most people won't know the difference!

Just a thought. A pretty 'normal' 12x zoom on something such as a Sony Z1 takes you from 33 mm to 400 mm, and from f1/6 to f/2.8. The 20x zoom on the Canon XH-A1 is even more impressive.

Now have a look-see at what you can bayonet onto the new 5D Mk2. Having realised how limited the zoom range on offer is, take a look at the weight, price and speed.

Here's an example. One of the longest wide to tele zooms they do is the 28 - 200 and it's f/3.5 - f/5.6. So it's a 7x zoom that's 2 stops slower (that takes the edge of the low-light performance and dof control), costs £250 (£345 from Canon), takes 72 mm filter and weighs over half a kilo.

There's still life in the little 1"/3 chip yet.

tom.

A couple of people have mentioned the much shallower DOF that the 5D will produce than dedicated camcorders. Some have expressed enthusiasm for focusing it manually. But, do they understand that with this large sensor, how much more precise the focusing adjustments will have to be than with a camera using 1/2-inch or 2/3-inch sensors? On movie sets where one scene may take all day to produce, setting the focus on 35mm or 70mm cameras is an art in itself and there's plenty of time to do it right. However, when you're out in the field with a video camera, many types of subjects have to be shot from the hip, so to speak. Often, there's little time for that level of focusing. I think that many people will find this camera problematic to use for some types of video shooting. I can imagine a lot of people who would buy it mainly for still pictures and who would use the video on a more casual level, might be frustrated with trying to get good footage. I doubt I would want it for wildlife, sports events and other subjects that move fast. The question might be, how well would the autofocus of the lenses it uses, work for this kind of video shooting? Or does the camera even drive the autofocus of the lenses, when it's in video mode? When I shot track meets with my full-size Beta, with a 9.5mm to 165mm lens, I could set the focus on the farthest point of the action and back off to about 3X when the runners came by close. With 2/3-inch CCDs, the DOF kept the focus sharp. How well could a manually-focused 5D handle this situation? What Tom just said about the value of small video sensors as opposed to the limited amount of zoom power, the cost and the weight of D-SLR lenses, also figures a lot into the overall practicality of the 5D for video.

Here's an example. One of the longest wide to tele zooms they do is the 28 - 200 and it's f/3.5 - f/5.6. So it's a 7x zoom that's 2 stops slower (that takes the edge of the low-light performance and dof control), costs £250 (£345 from Canon), takes 72 mm filter and weighs over half a kilo.


The f-stop is a function of both focal length and aperture of the lens - Focal length divided by aperture diameter.

Since larger sensors require longer lenses to achieve the same angle of view, it is far hard to make such lenses with a low f-stop.

For a smaller sensor you are, in effect, condensing the light onto a small area, increasing the intensity. However, larger sensors tend to be more sensitive and produce less noise due to their larger photosites. Therefore the advantage of smaller chips is often lost.

DOF is dictated by actual aperture. Since the actual aperture in a f3.5 35mm lens is still far larger than a f1.4 1/3" lens (of the same angle of view), the 35mm will still produce far shallower DOF.

Your point about zoom ratio is pretty true though - there are any 35mm still lenses with the flexibility of video zooms.

Sorry about that, that was a typo - I meant to write 35-45 megabits/second (not 35-35). The camera native samples from dpreview are just under 40Mb/s - but I've seen several comments about the total recording time (approximately 12 minutes) being dependent on the complexity of the footage - this indicates they are using VBR. Both of the sample clips have little motion so they are probably at the lower range of the VBR. Doing a little math based on the 4GB limit we get the following maximum clip lengths:

47Mbps = ~11:54
45Mbps = ~12:25
40Mbps = ~13:59
35Mbps = ~15:58

((megabits per second)/8)/1000000 = megabytes per second
4194.304/megabytes per second = total seconds per 4GB file
total seconds/60 = total minutes per 4GB file (remainder x 60 = seconds)

So 47Mbs probably is likely the upper limit as that gives us just under 12 minutes. Low motion clips like the samples should give another minute or so per clip.

Does anyone know for sure if it uses a VBR? I contacted Michael at Luminous Landscape and asked him about the 47 Mbps rate he showed for it. He said that was a mistake in the figures Canon had sent him along with the advance 5D he was loaned for testing. He said he corrected it on his website. I didn't see anything about the bit-rate on the Canon website other than the 38.6 Mbps rate they listed.

Has anyone been able to download the sample 5D video he has posted on Luminous Landscape? I tried twice, using 6 Mbps broadband and after 75 minutes, it still hadn't finished. I'm not sure it was even loading at all, as there was no progress indicator showing on my screen.

I'm more than aware how hard it is to focus a 35mm full frame lens, anyone who has been using a Letus or Brevis 35mm adapter knows its not easy. But you can do it on run and gun, especially if you stay wide. Have a look here Rice farmers of the Philippines on Vimeo (http://www.vimeo.com/1077881)

Photojournalists have gotten used to changing lenses frequently on the move, I have something like 15 different ones and kit out according to the job at hand.

That said I'd plan on the 5dmkII tripping up many people who don't really understand what they are getting into or just can't adjust their style from having an all in one video lens as before. I can still see plenty of occasions when a regular video camera is more usable than the 5DmkII, that's why I'm not planning on selling my Sony EX-1's just yet. In fact I am going to set them to 1080/30p and see if I can try and match the 5dmkII and Sony colours when it ships. That way they can be used interchangeably.

Since larger sensors require longer lenses to achieve the same angle of view, it is far hard to make such lenses with a low f-stop.
I think that's exactly the point Tom is making. What's the point in making a bigger sensor, with a two stops sensitivity advantage for a given f-stop....... if you can then only realistically make a suitable lens that's f3.5 instead of f1.8? Effectively, they both then require the same amount of scene illumination. In the still world, you may be able to just say, OK, 1/125s instead of 1/500s - that's not possible with video.

The bigger sensor may provide shallower dof, which may or may not be an advantage, but is likely to need bigger, heavier, more expensive lenses, with a likely much smaller zoom range.

A much smaller, un-motorized zoom range. Maybe not a big deal for some filmmakers who use a zoom as an adjustable prime, but a definite challenge for anyone wanting to change focal length during a shot.

And zoom photo lenses tend to breathe quite a bit... another challenge for anyone wanting to pull focus with one during a shot.

where a large sensor shines is with wide angle lenses with shallow depth of field. for example... here's a shot I took the other day on a 1ds3 with a 35mm f1.4.....


please note that a 35mm on a full frame 35mm still body gives an angle of view of 63 degrees. Canon has a 24mm f1.4 as well... fantastic lens..... and their 14mm has a angle of view of 114 degrees... and it's not a fisheye ( distortion )

http://www.witzke-studio.com/_W8E4057.jpg

many wildlife photogs I know prefer the smaller aps size sensors so they get more reach out of their longer lenses..... horses of courses

I think that's exactly the point Tom is making. What's the point in making a bigger sensor, with a two stops sensitivity advantage for a given f-stop....... if you can then only realistically make a suitable lens that's f3.5 instead of f1.8?

I agree it terms of zoom ratio but larger chips are far better in terms of low light sensitivity/noise and DOF control. My 2/3" camera wipes the floor with my 1/3" cameras even though my 2/3" lenses have a higher f stop.

If Canon could make a video camera with 35mm sensors which made the same step up again, it would be very interesting. I'm tempted to get the 5DMKII as a wide angle and low light tool. Even with a few lenses, it would cost less that a broadcast wide angle lens.

On movie sets where one scene may take all day to produce, setting the focus on 35mm or 70mm cameras is an art in itself and there's plenty of time to do it right.

You're right; it's just such agonizing working conditions some of us want to enjoy—with the fillip of remaining independent of corporate financing and its attendants!

Just a thought. A pretty 'normal' 12x zoom on something such as a Sony Z1 takes you from 33 mm to 400 mm, and from f1/6 to f/2.8. The 20x zoom on the Canon XH-A1 is even more impressive.

I've got an XH-A1, and I've pre-ordered the 5DmkII with the expectation that it may well replace the XH. One big factor in this is that with the 20x zoom I've found far more situations where I wished for much wider angle rather than longer zoom. In fact I can't think of a situation where I used the zoom that I couldn't have just moved in closer if the zoom was shorter (I don't shoot wildlife or sports where that would be difficult). I have however run into several situations where I couldn't move any further back (small rooms, etc) and the lens just wasn't wide enough - which shouldn't be a problem with the 5D.

A much smaller, un-motorized zoom range. Maybe not a big deal for some filmmakers who use a zoom as an adjustable prime, but a definite challenge for anyone wanting to change focal length during a shot.

This is exactly my situation - I rarely use the zoom other than for composition. In the very few instances where I have used a slow pull in a shot I'm pretty sure I can figure out a way to deal with it with the 5D - or just shoot the scene differently. Ultimately I think the suitability of the 5D for video has a lot to do with your intended subject. It won't be good for one-off, run & gun type shooting - but for staged, dramatic work I think it's going to be great because you can easily work around the weaknesses of the camera and really emphasize it's strengths.

The question might be, how well would the autofocus of the lenses it uses, work for this kind of video shooting? Or does the camera even drive the autofocus of the lenses, when it's in video mode?

The 5D apparently does drive the autofocus in video, but it uses a slower contrast detection mode since the mirror is locked up while shooting. I believe Vincent Laforet mentioned in one of his blog posts that it worked but was slow to react... hard to know what this means since he's primarily a still photographer and DSLRs in general have much faster autofocus than most video cameras. I'm also pretty sure one of Canon's promo videos shows the face-detection mode working while shooting video, which could actually make it more useful than that on many video cameras - it would be less likely to do things like shift between the foreground subject and background. It'll be interesting to see if you can do things with this like select which face to focus on in a scene... might allow for automatic rack focusing between two people.