RED forums, huh? This explains your attitude towards me. So I am sorry, you are not a "troll". But you are certainly prejudiced against me.

Your first reply to me was completely baseless, and that's why I called you out on it. You are the one who accused me of "shameless promotion" (honestly, I don't see how this works just because someone is using their real name and picture in a sea of anonymous cowards), and that I am repeating myself. I did not re-iterating anything, I came here to say that these 5D/7D cams are good cams for video. In the past I have commented here and elsewhere that the 5D lacked 24p, but what I did say here today is that this is a feature that's coming. In other words, I brought a sort of closure to my previous comment a few months ago, I didn't repeat it. It was new information.

I have nothing further to say to you. You have obviously made up your mind, and I am too sick tonight to drag this on.

"Cy Starkman", and "Solid Gray Fox": nice trolling. I didn't start the actual 24p discussion (it started when someone commented about one of my bullet points on the linked article), I commented here because I had something to say about these cameras since I do have experience in the field, and yes, "24p" and "25p" are the correct terminologies in this case.

If you think you can bully me around just because I have the balls to sign with my own name, put a real picture of me, or because I am a female, think again. You obviously don't have the same amount of balls when hiding behind nicknames. And I seriously doubt you have the same amount of footage shot as I have.

>if you're commenting on something you've only read about and seen on the Internet.

I am very familiar with both cameras. I suggest you look me up before you talk back to me in this derogatory and aggressive manner.

>so all those foreign films from Japan, Iran, France are doing it wrong i suppose with their long cutting?

I personally hate foreign films exactly because of that. And I am European myself. It's a personal opinion, but there's a reason why US films are more popular worldwide.

>that's only because cinema projectors can run them at that speed only.

This is incorrect. Newer ones can do 48 fps too, but it's more of a religion between DPs and directors, not a real technical limitation today. Try telling DPs to switch to 48 fps and most of them will eat you alive. Besides, my article is about people who want to do small films and music videos for online distribution, not about showing their work on a theater. My article was not about how to make your film look good in a theater, but how to emulate theatrical films. There's a difference.

And why wouldn't I? The 5D and the 7D are the first cameras to offer impressive video image quality and shallow depth of field -- for such low prices. It brought the cinema look to everyday people. Before that, you had to buy 35mm adapters, and big prosumer cameras to get a similar look, and let's face it, they wouldn't work as well, they made them bigger and bulky and heavy, and the image resulted was NOT as sharp (both because of the lower bitrate of HDV, and because *all* 35mm adapters soften the image -- including the good ones). So right now, you are able to get a better image quality, no need for adapters, and at a cheaper price. So yeah, if you call realism and appreciation as "fanboyism", then I guess that's what it is.

Panasonic's GH1 would have gain that praise instead of Canon 5D/7D only if:
1. They used more bitrate than the very low 17 mbps.
2. Their PF24 mode was true 24p and not PF24. PF24 requires pulldown removal, which is a major pain in the rear (I am coming from the HV20 background which also had PF24 instead of real 24p, and I know first hand how bothersome that is).

Erm, depth of field is not -- for me -- the most important "filmic"/"movie" quality. In fact, I don't care much about it. There are other, more important, points to consider. The fact that the 7D can have shallow depth of field (when using the right lens) it's just an added plus, but nothing more than that. Besides, the kit lens doesn't generate much shallow depth of field -- and most non-pro people are going to use the kit lens anyway. I've written on my blog about what I consider important in trying to recreate an impressive movie-like look:
http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2009/09/08/the-elusive-film-look/
(sorry I am linking to my blog for this, but that's a long article)

The Ti1/500D would have been perfect with just 24/25p and full manual controls. 30p only at 720p. The reason I am limiting that model with that wishful thinking is not because this is a cheaper camera, but because it's running a different chip and operating system than the 5D/7D/1D. It has less processing power. Therefore, 1080/24p and 1080/25p with 720/30p, but with full manual controls (shutter, aperture, ISO, and some color settings) would have been more than enough for that hardware/software model, for that price.

It is indeed a great camera. Personally, I am more excited about its video capabilities. You can now create videos with quality that used to cost 20x the money! This is my favorite 7D video so far: http://vimeo.com/7199178 It's not uploaded in HD unfortunately, but it still shows the "filmic" quality the camera possess.

I bought a 5D MarkII recently myself, since Canon semi-officially announced that an upcoming firmware upgrade will also offer 24p and 25p support in that model too (it's not certain it will do 50/60p though, like the 7D can).

No, it's not enough. I want to check the bitrate, I want to see how the encoding is actually is done, if there's banding, or other encoding errors, if they use an encoding algorithm that edits fast enough etc etc. There are reasons to want and test a file directly out of a camera. Just like he gave the ability to download the JPEGs, he should have done so for a small MOV file too.

Also, his review does not state other stuff, e.g. can you exposure compensate + lock exposure when not in aperture mode? Is there shutter speed support? Are there contrast/saturation/etc image controls in video mode too, so we can shoot "flat", so we can better color grade in post? All these BASIC info is not included in his review.

Unbelievable. They put a review out there, and they don't include a 5 second video clip *directly* out of the camera. There's no way to evaluate it otherwise, and check its actual format, and how it works with our editors etc etc.

I have a GSM Hero, and I would like to see it getting updated with at least v1.6 of Android, if not v2.0. I just dislike having a smartphone and not being able to get full OS updates for 1-2 years after the purchase of the phone. I know that it's very difficult for a company to put resources aside for all these phone models, so I wouldn't mind paying $10 every 6 months for a full OS update. But having Hero with Android v1.5 right now is just unacceptable to me, because there are features from the v1.6 that I want. And this is supposed to be a smartphone, not a dumbphone that's not upgradeable. And no, it's not Google's OR the community's job to provide ROMs, I want an official HTC release. With updated versions of the HTC Sense UI too. And I am willing to pay for it a sensible price to get it. If HTC finds that too difficult to do, maybe then they should stop creating a gazillion of models every year. Instead, only offer about 3-5 models maximum, but provide GOOD support for them in terms of HTC-official firmware updates.

That's my personal opinion on the matter as a gadget user.