IMO if you're mainly doing faces as opposed to highly detailed cityscapes, flowers etc. Then I see no reason you can't use the 5D2 for a project. However, I would suggest you spend a bit more time looking at ML RAW. It's such an improvement over the standard video that I can't imagine not using it. I don't know what you mean about motion cadence and again i'd suggest you go to vimeo and look at the tons of ML RAW test videos. I haven't read anything about choppy motion unless you have dropped frames.

Thanks Mr Bill, I have been looking at those, I love the raw image quality, but don't like the motion blur, or lack there of. There's something odd about the motion that I can't seem to accept. Maybe they have got it ironed out by now though.

I've never heard of these filters affecting motion blur - don't really see how that's possible. Do you follow the 180degree shutter rule, and what frequency is the refresh rate of your viewing monitor?

Why would shooting raw affect motion blur at all? If there are the same amount of frames, and these frames are exposed for the exact same duration, and played back at the same speed, motion will look identical. What is that "cadence" I hear some people speak of lately?

i have the 5d3 and Im having a hard time letting go of the 5d2 (unfiltered raw image is unique)

I can't deal with the added workflow of shooting raw, not to mention the moire is ridiculous, think it's bad in h264? shoot raw, it's much worse. I'm finished with the project now, and have to say, I think it looks good, the client was happy, the check is cashed and spent;-) On a side note, I recently did a test with a bunch of cams, and asked people that have no production knowledge which image they like the best, it was canon 5d2(h264) over every other model (gh2, g6, t3i, ect.. even a couple 1/3rd in chip cams) Not one person picked anything other than the 5d2. I guess it's easy to forget most have no idea as to what to look for when it comes to image quality, and most could careless, they only know if they like it or do not like it. It either looks good or it doesn't. It's all about overall aesthetics for non pixel peepers. I got so caught up in looking for the cons, I totally overlooked the pros. Lets not forget many productions have used the 5d2, if the image was good enough to cut with 35mm film then, it most certainly should be now, not that I'm shooting anything on 35mm film these days, but you get the point. I also found if your very careful, the 5d2 sharpens up beautifully, I was always under the impression it was not doable because of the aliasing/moire issues along with the codec limitations. Not the case. If I had the mosaic filter, Raw would be a good option (as long as the dng conversion process has been streamlined) and it appears they have the motion issues worked out.

Your example looks great!! Very nice compositions. What about the moire issue? many examples I've watched had terrible moire to the point it was not useable in my opinion. Lastly, would you be willing to make a short tutorial on the workflow you mentioned? Would like to see how quick and painless it can be with the software conversions. Thanks for posting;-)