Canon C70 RAW Update | Overhyped Or A Major Upgrade?

[@thefilmpoets]

I like how you describe the "feel" of it. Raw feels thicker in the colors to me.

[@mitchforteclassic]

I think everyone is missing the point of what raw is giving. It's not dynamic range, its more colors. It gives you a wider range to work with and can be more detailed with color grading. XAVC is nice and can push it pretty far, but you're still at a difference of 68 billion colors (12bit). Which is why if you look at other tests and compare skin tones of each file, there's much better retention in the RAW. Also you can bend the highlight rolloff so much better now.

[@Miguel_Molina]

major upgrade. the info in the shadows is what makes raw shine. exposing for highlights, and bringing up the shadows *chef kiss*. the XAVC all i is a wonderful compression codec so obviously its gonna look similar, but if you know what you are doing you will fall in love with RAW because correction and grading will be a breath of fresh air

[@area51pictures]

Even with KZbin compression, I can see a shitload more colors in the RAW image. It's not subtle - look at the shadows. 7:23, the wooden boards, is a great example. I could see that on my little phone screen at 3 feet viewing distance. That's not a subtle upgrade. Yes, its compressed raw, its on SD cards after all - and XFAVC works good for 120P. But man, I've watched a lot of raw vs AVC comparisons for other cameras and they are rarely this easy to see. Just my 2c. Where in the image you looking for "the difference" matters.

[@rosspfeffer5185]

The Raw LT footage is smoother looking. It’s less harsh with better gradations, even whilst watching on an iPhone. Thanks for doing that.

[@TizOnly1]

I'm still going to use the XFAVC All-I, bc that's what I've been using the most up to this point. It's just a much easier edit than the Long GOP. I like the RAW a lot, and will use it when I can, but losing Digital IS is a pretty big deal for the kind of shooting I tend to do. When I have the camera on a gimbal or sticks, I'll shoot RAW.. but otherwise I just don't trust warp stabilizer like I trust Canon's digital IS.

[@rosspfeffer5185]

You may also lose lens aberrations corrections (done in camera) when shooting raw. Nonetheless, I think it’s brilliant that Canon has provided so many options in the C70!!

[@frankhu8692]

in terms of why the lt raw is so crucial, it preserves more color in shadows when you pull back, if you are in a controlled envrironment with everything dialed in exactly what you like, then xfavc and raw doesn't matter, that's why asking people to see if there is a difference in terms of the quality of your Aroll makes no sense at all

[@ScottSilva]

Quality between the two is very similar. All the noise over your left shoulder seemed the same throughout.

[@TruthReviews]

Great video, which lens were you using? I recently used the 24-105 f4 rf lens and was very disappointed with low light performance. you're footage looks good, was wondering the lens.

[@JonathanPalfrey]

Thanks! It was just the 24-105mm EF II lens with the focal reducer. Its not a bad lens, IS is good but low light and sharpness not great. It also gets darker when you zoom which is common issue with Canon lenses.

[@TruthReviews]

@@JonathanPalfrey Ahh ok. I was pleased with all the extra info you get from the RF lens, it even tells you how far the subject was from the lens. But the 24-70 f2.8 is £2,000+ for that extra light. Might give the speed booster a try. hope the autofocus and stabilization are not that much worse than RF.

[@ViolenceTheatre]

Lol. Fantastic opening there.

[@ChrisSmith-qb5lq]

Did anyone else lose functionalbility with the .71x adapter/speedbooster? I'm still getting 2 stops lower but it wont recognize my lenses correctly. Says my 16-35 f2.8 III is an 11-25mm. Does it not work with this adapter? What am I doing wrong?

[@scotey]

Think I saw on another channel that Canon is doing relative math here, showing you the relative change in focal length by using the adaptor. It does seem strange though.

[@stevenfries7032]

I love canon cameras......but this is why I am in love with my BMPCC 6k PRO. Internal RAW recording at 3:1 on a 1TB CFAST card 5.7k resolution 60p gives me around 35 minutes. that is insanely uncompressed. This is all done at a fraction of the price of canon cameras. I just love BMD

[@JonathanPalfrey]

Yeah in terms of value for money, Blackmagic is impossible to beat. Crazy to think how good the pocket 4k was for its price!

[@jonnynoakes9070]

Get a c70 you won’t regret it 😀 I have had all the blackmagic cameras bar the 12k and the c70 blows them all out, period.

[@Miguel_Molina]

i had a bmpcc6k pro, but went to c70 for the AF. Bmpcc6k pro was good but AF is just too useful for interviews/product shots/ and all sorts of one man ops. and so glad don't have to deal with vmount batteries and external drives anymore. Highly recommend!

[@JonathanPalfrey]

@@Miguel_Molinayep, autofocus, battery life and file sizes are the three reasons we got a C70. That said in terms of image quality, the 6K pro is up there with the C70 and in some areas, such as sharpness, it's better. I would love to see a 6kPro that fixes all the issues. Sadly nothing at NAB

[@DavidKfilmmaker]

Every thing I see from a BM camera looks like a horror movie. Their “cinematic” is SAW

[@kasmedify]

Is this RAW Codec smooth in the edit?

[@JonathanPalfrey]

Very smooth. Much better than the C200s raw.

[@robertj.smalley1269]

I'm watching the 4K version of the clip on KZbin and I don't see a difference.

[@JonathanPalfrey]

Yeah that's kind of my closing point. The difference is so subtle that if it's just for online then the extra file size is probably not worth it.