Agreed, Brian. 85% of this video is from my 7D. Lot's of shots of bricks and straight lines.
YouTube - Downtown Longmont Event: Girls, Get your Spring On! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4reSBTxE2U)

Is it perfect video? No. Is it a horrible mass of moire and aliasing. I don't think so. Even on the native files. Did the client complain about any image-quality issues? Not once. In fact, they loved it. And they were amazed I was able to grab all of that b-roll in a couple of afternoons. I don't think I could have done it with a big video cam. And I certainly would have attracted a LOT more attention shooting downtown.

i agree, the 7d is an amazing piece of hardware, and i love mine!

i agree, the 7d is an amazing piece of hardware, and i love mine!

Alister does raise an interesting point: the feasibility of adding an OLPF. I didn't realize it's something you could conceivably jury rig to a 7D.

I'm amazed that no one has come up with a replacement optical low pass filter for any of the Canons. For astronomy applications you can replace the Ir cut filter with one that let's through a broader spectrum. Until the aliasing is sorted out with a new optical LP filter the only types of shot these cams are suitable for is shallow DoF faces. Even the you see aliasing in hair, teeth and clothing. You can't fix it in post as the image is recorded full of moire. You could use some light diffusion in front of the lens to soften the image, but the amount needed will vary according to the focal length and aperture. What's neede is a behind the lens diffuser or LP filter.

All camearas make compromises in design and functionality. The bottom line is, you can produce exceptional images with this funny little camera, images you simply can't produce with a camcorder.

images you simply can't produce with a camcorder.

I'll completely disagree with that. But I will agree that you can't create them with a camcorder at anywhere near the price of these cameras. Though there isn't a DSLR available at ANY price that can provide what a EX1 can out of it's SDI port.

So there ya go.

"Though there isn't a DSLR available at ANY price that can provide what a EX1 can out of it's SDI port. "

I totally agree with you on that. I just finished Episode 4 of the The Santa Fe TV Show (http://www.santafetvshow.com).
EX-1 and 7D are now side-to-side almost in every shoot. I have learned to match quite well the look the 7D with the EX-1. The definition and flexibility of the Sony is still unmatched by any HDSLR, in my opinion. And the Sony can provide you with beautiful shallow DOF as well, just have to work differently. Again, 7D great creative tool, EX1, great all around camera, still unbeaten at that price range.

Carlo Zanella
The Santa Fe TV Show (http://www.santafetvshow.com)

I'll completely disagree with that.
You'd have to use a lens adapter on the EX1 to do the type of shots I'm talking about - which is so last year...

The EX1 is a great camera for the money, no doubt. The 7D can get great images, no doubt either.

You'd have to use a lens adapter on the EX1 to do the type of shots I'm talking about - which is so last year...

I am not talking about an EX1, and I am not talking about using an adapter. There are numerous cameras with sensors the size of the 7D.

Perrone, half the people in this thread are talking about the EX1, I mentioned camcorders. There aren't numerous camcorders with a sensor the size of a 7D and you can't slap a Canon 85mm f1.2 or a Canon 45mm T/S lens on just any old camera - that's what I'm talking about...

Perrone, half the people in this thread are talking about the EX1, I mentioned camcorders. There aren't numerous camcorders with a sensor the size of a 7D and you can't slap a Canon 85mm f1.2 or a Canon 45mm T/S lens on just any old camera - that's what I'm talking about...

Ahh yes, very true.

there are just certain things you can do with them as a team, having just one or the other is limiting, they each do their own...

having both on your set is a blessing....

my question is, what is the advantage of recording out of the hd sdi slot on the ex1? and how can i acheive that once i get an ex1?

also what about recording out of the hdmi on the ex1? if i am connecting the ex1 to a 12 ft hdmi cable to a monitor for the director to watch can i still see my lcd or viewfinder?

i wish there was a solution to this on the 7d....

there are just certain things you can do with them as a team, having just one or the other is limiting, they each do their own...

having both on your set is a blessing....

my question is, what is the advantage of recording out of the hd sdi slot on the ex1? and how can i acheive that once i get an ex1?

also what about recording out of the hdmi on the ex1? if i am connecting the ex1 to a 12 ft hdmi cable to a monitor for the director to watch can i still see my lcd or viewfinder?

i wish there was a solution to this on the 7d....

Yeah, on the EX1 you can use one of those nanoflash gizmoids and get a high data rate 4.2.2 image. Great for keying. The Nano is about $4,000 I think.

The EX1 delivers an uncompressed HD signal out of the SDI port. If you're interested in the comparison of bit rates:

HDV = 25 Mbps
AVCHD = 17-24 Mbps
XDCamEX (EX1) = 35Mbps
SDI port = 1,500 Mbps.

It's a whole new world and it is SUPER clean.

The NanoFlash, made by Convergent Designs reads that high quality signal and allows you to record it at 50Mbps, 100Mbps, all the way to I believe 220 or 280Mbps. Much, much cleaner than recording it in the camera. The unit costs $2995.

also what about recording out of the hdmi on the ex1? if i am connecting the ex1 to a 12 ft hdmi cable to a monitor for the director to watch can i still see my lcd or viewfinder?

i wish there was a solution to this on the 7d....

There is no HDMI on the EX1. There is on the EX1r. This is also an uncompressed HD video signal. And you can connect an HDMI monitor, an HD-SDI recorder, and S-Video screen for the focus puller, and still see your LCD just fine. I believe the EX1r can drive 4 external displays or recorders while still giving you your LCD display.

an hdmi recorder would be the ideal quality way to record right? i am purchasing a ex1 really soon....so i was just wondering..

an hdmi recorder would be the ideal quality way to record right? i am purchasing a ex1 really soon....so i was just wondering..

I don't think it would be because you'd be tethered. There has been talk of an hdmi recorder option, nothing on the radar yet however.

is there somewhere i can view a video sample of something recorded with the ex1 via the hd sdi port so i can see what it looks like?

is there somewhere i can view a video sample of something recorded with the ex1 via the hd sdi port so i can see what it looks like?

I would guess there is probably not much to find online, since uncompressed 10-bit 1080p/24fps footage runs at 124MBps. Anything else would be recompressed anyway. But if you can find some SxS-recorded footage from an EX1 it will look nearly identical up until you heavily grade the footage, just imagine the same thing but with less chance of block artifacting, higher bit depth and more color resolution (you probably wont see the difference without viewing color channels separately or really pushing the image around or maybe pulling a chromakey). I would hardly call XDCAM EX footage from an EX1 not-clean, though.

I know the EX1 with external hd-sdi recording has been used for some major motion pictures for example public enemies where I understand it was used as a B-camera and was recorded to HDCAM SR. I'd be careful using that for evaluation of this recording method though since clearly it also had professional color grading etc.

I would probably say an external hd-sdi recorder is overkill unless you are shooting lots of greenscreens or lots of things that are really tough on your codec like snow storms or rippling water or if you have extra time and money you are dying to invest in more gear.

I would probably say an external hd-sdi recorder is overkill unless you are shooting lots of greenscreens or lots of things that are really tough on your codec like snow storms or rippling water or if you have extra time and money you are dying to invest in more gear.

I'll disagree in one instance. And that is for broadcast. If you are trying to use the EX1(r) to meet HD Broadcast muster, then the external recorder becomes necessary in some instances. And honestly, for the $3k of the Nanoflash, if you're at this level of the game, it's a paltry sum to pay for the capability.

Yes it certainly does depend very much on the intended uses of the camera and on budget. Nanoflash is a steal for what it does if you need it, no question. I just assumed if the 7D was being talked about this was a professional but low budget circumstance, I didnt realize HDTV broadcast was the intended output in this case. In that case, an EX1 with nanoflash is probably a great alternative to a much more expensive broadcast camera, with a smaller size/price and more flexibility. However, compared to a 7D, an EX1 is already many times the price and a nanoflash by itself is an additional 2x the price of a 7D.

I just assumed if the 7D was being talked about this was a professional but low budget circumstance, I didnt realize HDTV broadcast was the intended output in this case.

I don't know that broadcast is the target. But the OP mentioned weighing a 7D against an EX3. If an EX3 is in the budget, then and EX1 with Nano is going to be quite close as well and the capabilities, stunning.

All true from a pixel-peeping nerd's perspective (like myself), but from an artist's POV the EX1 is severely limited due to the lens.

The lens is the single most important component of any camera system, that's why the 7D and the 5D rock, despite their obvious failings.

"All true from a pixel-peeping nerd's perspective (like myself), but from an artist's POV the EX1 is severely limited due to the lens."

Sorry to disagree. Any camera is a system and a lens is just a part of that system. The same lens in front of a 35mm Arri, Red 1 or 7D, will produce totally different results.

EX1 has a very good sharp lens that will cover most of the shooting situations. Additional wide angle adapters are available. Furthermore, the original question was about 7D vs EX3 - not EX1. And EX3 is interchangeable lens, so...

Nanoflash is great if you intend to shoot a feature, but otherwise EX1 produces great images right out of the box (at 35mbps). Besides, when Canon finally comes out with it's 4:2:2 camera, Sony might just issue a firmware update to allow the EX cameras to shoot at 50mbps... (if Sony had any sense of humor, this is what they would do...)

Bottom line: as many have said, 7D and EX are very different tools. IMHO there's no doubt that EX is much more versatile and useful for the video. Figure out your needs or, if you can, just get the two.

There's no audio-out capability for headphones, though there is audio-in as a mic port. It's better to record to a second audio source and sync in post.

More generally, I own a HG20 and a 7D. The 7D is a pain in the butt to work with. If I don't have a lot of time to set-up the image and I don't have a lot of control with the environment, the HG20 produces the better picture. If I have time and control of the environment, the 7D produces the better picture.

Senad, if you are shooting with a 7D or 5D you are doing so to produce a certain look. That look is primarily governed by the size of the sensor and the characteristics of the lens being used.

The lens on the EX1, though very good for what it is designed for cannot do what lenses designed for the Canon system can do. There's a world of difference between having a good sharp lens that produces a nice clean image and being able to slap on an 800mm f/5.6 telephoto to shoot the moon, then swap it out for an 8mm fish-eye to shoot your buddy's contorted face.

Audiences don't care about data rate, but they do care about artistry and that's my point.

Also, your point that the same lens in front of an Arri, a RED1 or a 7D will produce different results is a misnomer. Film and RED will have more detail and more color depth, but optically they will look very similar. BTW, I shoot film, I shoot RED, I own an EX1 and a 7D. I agree with you that the EX1 is a great camera, more than good enough to accomplish what most people need.

do you feel that for the price the 7d is comparable to the red? also i own a 7d, and i am finishing the rig up, and i am purchasing a ex1r, do you think this will be a good set of cams to work with? i also looking at the ex3 but i dont think i can muster up another 2 grand extra...

what do you think?

If going the DSLR route, I recommend the T2i over the 7D for video (I have a 7D and T2i). For movies I find them essentially equal, none of the conveniences of the 7D are worth the extra $1,000 in my book. In fact, I'd say get two T2i's rather than a single 7D. The 7D is tougher, but you'll be more apt to "risk" the T2i for a great shot since you have less to lose. You also won't feel so bad when you upgrade to the inevitable better equipment coming down the pike in the next 18 months. Unless you are going to be shooting staged footage only, and can only get one camera, get the EX or another dedicated cam. The DSLR's have limitations that will be problematic if you are depending on them exclusively unless you are looking only at artistic work or static interviews, for instance. The DSLR route can give you phenomenal results if camera movement, focus, and aliasing can be controlled. Even as a hobbyist, I often choose an XHA1 over the 7D/T2i for many applications and the EX1/3 is considered by most a step up from the A1. If you can control around the limitations of the DSLR, say for a seated interview, a landscape, leaves changing, or a tripod shot of a train going by...., the 7D/T2i looks like a much more expensive camera and the look can be quite stunning. Add to this the DSLR's portability and their ability to take great still pictures, which are an important element in many of my video pieces as well.

So now I find myself with using 3 genres of cameras, a dedicated prosumer video camera for dynamic work, a DSLR for creative work, and a minicam in my pocket for fun. I'd be hesitant to rate any of the three "better" unless carefully defining the use. It's a great time to be a alive with so many powerful options!

There's a world of difference between having a good sharp lens that produces a nice clean image and being able to slap on an 800mm f/5.6 telephoto to shoot the moon, then swap it out for an 8mm fish-eye to shoot your buddy's contorted face.

Audiences don't care about data rate, but they do care about artistry and that's my point.

You could achieve both of those with adaptors (2x and fisheye) on the EX1. In both of those instances, the advantage of a large sensor would be irrelevant. Obviously there is an optical advantage to using stills lenses vs the video lens plus adaptor, especially in the telephoto situation, but depending on what type of shooting you do, these may be considered exotic circumstances.

I am a little uncomfortable with the assertion that shallow depth of field=artistry, because many are taking it to an extreme these days and it has become the go-to visual cue to the point of distraction. Don't get me wrong, I'm investing heavily in DSLR technology as I like having the flexibility to use depth of field just as I always have shooting 35mm film, but I think a true artist is one who can make beautiful results with any gauge of media, which has everything to do with lighting, framing, camera movement (or lack thereof) etc. rather than control of focus.

Also, your point that the same lens in front of an Arri, a RED1 or a 7D will produce different results is a misnomer. Film and RED will have more detail and more color depth, but optically they will look very similar.

Can't resist the grammatical cheap shot, but using the term "misnomer" in that sentence is itself something of a misnomer! You were debating an argument, not a label...

Liam, I think you clarified your original argument ("The lens is the single most important component of any camera system") to some degree in the subsequent post, but because it may cause some confusion, let's clarify it further: if one is championing the depth of field characteristic of one camera over another, the single defining factor of this will be the sensor size, not the lens itself. Mounting a 50mm still lens (via simple mating adaptor) onto a 1/3" camera will not produce a result significantly different than setting the stock zoom to 50mm, particularly in regards to field of view and depth of field. That same lens mounted on a large sensor camera like a 5D/7D will have the same depth of field but a much wider field of view.

While I enjoy the benefits of a large sensor camera, I do feel limited by some of the current issues with the DSLR's, such as the ability to ride the iris, the unpredictable rendition of skin tones, the limited overcrank rate and associated issues with shooting 720p which relate to the biggest one of all: the aliasing/moire issue, which can force one to have to modify a perfectly good shot. Talk about limiting one's artistry! Even though it has its limitations, the EX1 wins out in most if not all of these areas.

Charles, I wholeheartedly agree that a true artist will make any gauge of media work for them and I also agree skin tones suck on the 7D and there are many other failings.

Also, I'm not arguing the case for Shallow depth of field per se; indeed going through the rushes today of a shoot I did on Friday I really like the look produced by the Tokina 11-16mm - wide, sharp and crisp.

Don't get me wrong, there're plenty of reasons not to shoot on a DSLR, but it is worth noting the good points too. Like the wide availability of quality glass and the larger sensor allowing for a more pleasing perspective - and not having to use an adapter.

I agree shallow depth field is overdone these days and often used poorly or lazily, but I also know that when I have two minutes to light and frame an interview I can quickly achieve stunning results with a Canon 85mm f/1.2 and a window.

I'm getting my EX1 out of its bag less and less these days as I learn how to consistently get great results with the 7D. In fact, I doubt I'll be taking the EX1 on a shoot in Pakistan and Indonesia next month and will go with two 7Ds and a 5D instead - though I'm still debating if I'm mad or not. I guess you can decide that:)

What are you seeing in the skin tones? Is it a color balance issue? Too warm/cool/green/magenta? Or is it a noise reduction issue with a plastic feel? Is it better/worse in daylight/tungsten/fluorescent?

I have my own feeling about it, but I haven't seen much discussed and would like to hear about what others are seeing - especially if they have strong opinions about it.

I agree with you that the EX1 is a great camera, more than good enough to accomplish what most people need.

Well, that's pretty much what I wanted to say. If the OP needs to achieve a certain look that cannot be achieved with an EX camera, he can go for a T2 and some special lenses to achieve that look. How many times will that be? He is the only one to know what his needs are.

Re DOF, normally I would NOT shoot with any lens opened to it's max aperture, especially if it's a 1,4 or 1,8, unless I have no choice (not enough light, so must open wide), or I really want to get softer image and shallow DOF. The focusing becomes then a real issue. One should better take his time to focus properly and check twice.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge, the Red 1 has a chip that is smaller than the 35mm film frame, so optically they cannot produce the same results with the same lens.

Artistry matters, of course, there's no point arguing that.

I'm currently fighting a dilemma myself about going for a DSLR or a consumer grade videocam for my next project. I need lightweight and small but if that weren't the case, I would go with an EX with no hesitation.

Cheers.
Senad

What are you seeing in the skin tones? Is it a color balance issue? Too warm/cool/green/magenta? Or is it a noise reduction issue with a plastic feel? Is it better/worse in daylight/tungsten/fluorescent?

I have my own feeling about it, but I haven't seen much discussed and would like to hear about what others are seeing - especially if they have strong opinions about it.

Yellow. Lots of yellow.

Yellow? Add iron to your actors' diets...

I would think that it's worse under fluorescent lights than daylight. Have you tried WB Shift? You could add a touch of blue to the standard WB.

Also, do you find that the yellow tint is a problem after grading?

Personally, I find that skin can get plastic looking if its exposed on the high side. I hear that the new firmware has less noise reduction, so maybe that will help. Magic Lantern has a 0xb000 zebra setting for skin tones (69%), but that's a bit hot for my tastes. I have a new Marshal monitor, and I have heard that the skin setting for false colors is at 55%. That's a bit cold.

Where is baby bear's porridge when you need it? ;)

If going the DSLR route, I recommend the T2i over the 7D for video (I have a 7D and T2i). For movies I find them essentially equal, none of the conveniences of the 7D are worth the extra $1,000 in my book

A while back i wrote a post about canceling a shoot because of rain - after doing some research, but most of all talking to pros at my local pro photography mall - my fears have subsided completely!

Two weeks ago i was shooting under a threatening sky, which in turn became a torrential, side ways down pour, with nothing but a shower cap over the lens' glass to keep the rain off. i completed the scripted scenes in about an hour and a half. LIFESAVER!

That shoot paid for the camera(ok, it was already paid for but you get the idea). Rain jackets are fine, used them with my Sony in the past...but a torrential downpour is something that i would have avoided like the plague with a regular camera, where one drop of water, or even the humidity can cause grave problems. I love the fact that the 7D is weather resistant (not "proof" mind you).

So like me if you are shooting in an erratic climate, the 7D might save the day. If not, then yes, the T2i is proving to be an equal for vids.

What I'm seeing in the skin tones is certainly aggravated by (even slight) overexposure for sure, and it tends to happen with those who have pinker skin tones. It is indeed a plastic look to the point of a loss of detail. Even at equivalent exposures, those with olive or darker complexions seem to reproduce better. In fact, I've found that these cameras seem to reproduce African-American skin tones better than many other cameras I've used.

One of the "feelings" that I have is that when I have used the WB shift feature particularly by adding magenta (to offset a green cast in the lighting, i.e. from fluorescent), the skin tones really go out of whack. Mathematically this should work out and it would with most cameras, but the Canons seem to have problems in this area. I plan to shoot some tests with steadily increasing levels of green and magenta coupled with countering adjustments within camera and see what happens.

(...)the unpredictable rendition of skin tones(...)

Well this is very interesting, i shoot in Asia (China), the skin tones vary widely, from white as rice to red farmers neck skin tones...

Haven't seen anything jump out at me...yet...as I bang on wood. Got a shoot tomorrow morn, and my talent definitely has a yellow-olive skin tone already... I got stills and a few minutes of test footage of her on location, but i can't upload to dvinfo (China again).

Charles, i wish i could understand or have the experience with cameras the way you do and you're the proiest pro here so let us know your results when you have time:)

I agree Charles, if you overexpose even just a little the shot becomes unusable. But if you get it right the shot can look natural. The trick I find is to keep control of the highlights - particularly in the red channel. If you blow the red channel you'll always have terrible looking skin.

These frame grabs are from some run and gun interviews I did the other day, all had a basic preset WB. All look fairly poor up close (too much yellow), but should scrub up fine with a little color correction.

Good points about the red channel, Liam.

I just posted a link to a series of corporate videos that I worked on with Vincent Laforet:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/show-your-work/475496-usaa-annual-report-canon-1dmkiv-laforet-papert.html#post1504742

I was quite pleased with the skin tone rendition on this one: YouTube - USAA 2009 Report to Members: Anthony E. Hargrove (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCCeZxMJ6NA&feature=related)
But disappointed on these:
YouTube - USAA 2009 Report to Members: Expanded Eligibility (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8mV_OvnEks)
YouTube - USAA 2009 Report to Members: Employees (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdhOj-Fzf0s&feature=related)

Both the lady in the first one and the security guard in the second had quite pink complexions and they often reproduced poorly. The lady in particular was quite pale and it appeared that due to miscalibrated monitors we overexposed her slightly, but the results were different than I would expect from most cameras--as Liam indicated, any amount of exposure in red highlights is a disaster.

I'm now using an HP Dreamcolor monitor on set to ensure the WYSIWYG factor for these types of shoots.

do you guys know where i can find the tripod camera back plate for this tripod? i lost the one that came with it...screws on to the camera, and clips and locks in...

Canon | Deluxe Tripod 200 (Quick Release) with 3-Way | 6195A003

Good points about the red channel, Liam.

I just posted a link to a series of corporate videos that I worked on with Vincent Laforet:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/show-your-work/475496-usaa-annual-report-canon-1dmkiv-laforet-papert.html#post1504742

I was quite pleased with the skin tone rendition on this one: YouTube - USAA 2009 Report to Members: Anthony E. Hargrove (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCCeZxMJ6NA&feature=related)
But disappointed on these:
YouTube - USAA 2009 Report to Members: Expanded Eligibility (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8mV_OvnEks)
YouTube - USAA 2009 Report to Members: Employees (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdhOj-Fzf0s&feature=related)

Both the lady in the first one and the security guard in the second had quite pink complexions and they often reproduced poorly. The lady in particular was quite pale and it appeared that due to miscalibrated monitors we overexposed her slightly, but the results were different than I would expect from most cameras--as Liam indicated, any amount of exposure in red highlights is a disaster.

I'm now using an HP Dreamcolor monitor on set to ensure the WYSIWYG factor for these types of shoots.
Great work Charles, I see your point about the skin tones, but I think the filmmaking skills more than make up it.

I believe HDSLR rigs have come a long, long way. Just take a look at the test that Zacuto released today, the great camera shootout. Philip Bloom, Robert Primes ASC, and a number of other top end cinematographers took the time to actually compare the 5D MKII, 7D, 1D MKIV, and others to the gold standard of quality in the industry - 35mm film stock. The results? Well, you'll just have to watch the first episode yourself.

The Great Camera Shootout 2010 | Zacuto (http://www.zacuto.com/shootout)

The first episode is all about latitude. Scenes are designed to really push the cameras across the range of exposure to see where they can hold detail and where they begin to lose out. As expected the HDSLRs handle low light exceptionally well. But, check it out. Like I said, just the fact that there are proven and skilled cinematographers out there who are stunned at the quality of footage that is capable by the 5D MKII and 7D shows that they're rapidly closing the gap on 35mm film.

I tried watching that, but gave up after several minutes because it was so unbelievably self-indulgent.

I think they're allowed a bit of self-indulgence for what they were able to put together here. If it bugs you so much just skip the first ten minutes.

The tests are excellent, it's unbeliveable that these dirt cheap cameras are even being compared to film and that they are holding their own in many cases! Pretty exciting stuff.

Hey Bryan, I just did that, skipped down to the tests. The first few minutes did put me off though and were totally unnecessary. I'm sure Steve Weisz is a top guy and I have no axe to grind with Zacuto - I think they make excellent products - but all that stuff on the front simply undermined the whole video.

Agreed, Liam. I started watching and was waiting and waiting for something to happen, finally decided I had to let the whole program load and come back when I could skip to the actual tests.

On a larger note, I'm utterly fascinated by what passes as "tests" these days. Sure, old-school camera tests were a little on the dry side, but I'm not clear on why it's become the norm to insist on packaging footage like music videos with the obligatory "a film by" credit. Films are films, camera tests are camera tests...

Amen, guys. I waded through it all last night. Interesting, for sure, but they really get caught up in their own "pomp and circumstance". Ridiculous.

My biggest question: why wasn't there a RED in there? Just rent a frickin' one. And maybe an EX3. And one of the P2 cams.

And skip all the Western motif, chest-pounding, roll-the-credits crap.

Man, you guys are rough. It was clear they were just trying to have a good time and I applaud them for putting some fun into it.

(This complimentary post in no way is because they are giving away a piece of gear each Friday if you post a response to their videos on their site.)

Hey, a little cheese goes good with dinner! I enjoyed some of the theatrics, but the dialogue before the comparison's got a little tedious.

Of all the issues, I found the close seating of the two speakers in the brick room very awkward.

ok it is not unbiased, never ever. Too much talk, and why the got no Red, dead simple Red does not want to be compared to small chease boxes. The zacute movie gives about 7 minutes good information, film is not dead, the 5 and 7 are close, the Nicon has too much compression the 1 maybe a bit more detail,(gray scale, but who cares about it really) and the lumix is not a toy, why does it TAKE 35 MINUTES AND WHY the vine yard poem, who knows it is zacuto.....

Great work Charles, I see your point about the skin tones, but I think the filmmaking skills more than make up it.

I agree Liam! (not that viewing on youtube is greatest). There have been quite a few "look at the problems in this footage" posts floating around the forums, and many times the problem is so trivial that...well... maybe we have become too picky.

Charles, the story and execution sell it. I wouldn't worry about it, i doubt that outside the circle of creatives, no one will notice.

...the only problem is i wish, i could take my own advice.