All Activity

@kye Thanks for the thoughtful take, two solid points. On the first one: I don’t really have emotional attachment to camera bodies anymore. They’re just tools that either help me get the shot or get in the way. Lenses are the emotional part for me (the rendering, the character, the way they feel when I look through them), but the body is basically a computer with a mount and some buttons. That said, ergonomics and UI matter hugely. If I’m constantly fighting menus, fumbling controls under pressure, or the grip feels wrong after 20 minutes, my mood tanks and it bleeds into the set. I’ve shot with cameras that technically should be fine but never clicked with my hands or brain. The day always feels harder and the results flatter. So if the C50’s cine OS with shutter angle, proper exposure tools and XLR top handle let me stay in flow instead of menu-diving or second-guessing, that’s worth a lot more than specs on paper. Reliability is primal too. A body that fails on set (AF hunting in low light, overheating mid-interview, battery dying unexpectedly, corrupted file, flicker issues, or weird grading artifacts) is a disaster, especially solo. I’ve had shoots go sideways because of exactly that. So even if a camera is technically capable, if it can’t be trusted in the field for hours, it’s not a tool, it’s a liability. On stabilization: I’m with you. I’m not chasing perfectly locked-down gimbal shots or overcooked EIS. I actually like natural camera movement, it feels alive and human. The stuff that kills the vibe for me is the micro-jitters and tiny breathing shakes on small-body cameras. Those little floating tremors look nervous and amateurish. Big intentional camera motion (shoulder rig sway, handheld energy) can be beautiful and add to the scene, but those small unintentional artifacts from inadequate stabilization are just distracting. That’s why Gyroflow plus shooting with EIS off (or Standard only when needed) feels like the sweet spot. I get to keep the organic handheld character I like, but I can surgically remove the annoying micro-shake in post without turning everything into a locked-down special effect. If a shot is so dynamic that even that isn’t enough, I’ll reach for a gimbal or shoulder rig anyway. But for 80 to 90 percent of the lifestyle, interview and observational stuff I’m shooting, I’ll be on sticks with handheld B-roll. Appreciate the nudge. It’s always good to be reminded that mood, flow and reliability matter more than specs.

@kye I don’t disagree with the basic market argument, and I’m not suggesting cameras are a necessity or a right. What I was pointing to is less about entitlement and more about cultural tone. Markets can function correctly and still feel disconnected from the lived reality of a lot of people right now. Also i’m not arguing companies shouldn’t sell high end gear, only questioning whether the pace and intensity of constant releases and marketing still feels aligned with the broader moment we’re in. This is an observation about fatigue and context, not about price controls or obligations.

I think you've been looking at the camera industry too long. We operate in a marketplace where people offer goods and services and if people want to purchase them they do, and if not, they don't. There are reasons why Governments might incentivise or subsidise various industries or products or behaviours, but I don't think any of these apply to cameras. The only other situation that is an exception is if something starts to become a necessity, like clean water or reliable electricity supply, and more recently now internet access is getting into this territory. When this happens then efforts might need to be made to ensure that these things are accessible. I very much doubt anyone is arguing that high-end mirrorless cameras are a human right, in which case they should just be traded like all goods, where they're subject to the laws of demand and supply. You can't get your house painted for $50 because paint and labour costs more than that. You can't buy a car for $9 because no-one has worked out how to make them for anything remotely like that price. You can't buy a super-car for $10000 because the market has valued them significantly above that.

Two thoughts from me. If you close your eyes and imagine each scenario, how do each of them make you feel? What is never really talked about is that if you feel like you're having to argue or strong-arm your equipment then you'll be in a bad mood, which isn't conducive to a happy set, getting good creative outputs, or just enjoying your life. I think people dismiss this, but if you're directing the talent then this can really matter - people can tell if you're in a good mood or distracted or frustrated etc and people tend to take things personally so your frustrations with the rig can just as easily be interpreted by others that you're not happy with their efforts. The odd little image technical niggle here or there won't make nearly as much difference as enjoying what you do vs not. When it comes to IBIS vs Giroflow vs EIS etc, it's worth questioning if more stabilisation is better. For the "very dynamic handheld shots" having a bit more camera motion might even be a good thing if it is the right kind of motion. Big budget productions have chosen to run with shoulder-mounted large camera rigs and the camera shake was pleasing and added to the energy of the scene. Small amounts of camera shake can be aesthetically awful if they're the artefacts from inadequate OIS + IBIS + EIS stabilisation, whereas much more significant amounts of camera shake can be aesthetically benign if coming from a heavier rig without IBIS or OIS. If more stabilisation is better, maybe it would be better overall to have a physical solution that can be used for those shots? Even if there aren't good options for those things, maybe the results would be better if those shots were just avoided somehow? In todays age of social media and shorts etc, having large camera moves that are completely stable is basically a special effect, and maybe there are other special effects that can be done in post that are just as effective but are much easier to shoot?

Good to hear you got a solution that works for your (very challenging) shooting requirements - that's what truly matters! Low-light is now the current limitation for the high-end MFT line-up. The GH7 sacrifices having a dual-base-ISO in favour of having the dual-readouts and the DR boost that architecture gives. I shoot uncontrolled external locations in available light, which means low-light performance is a consideration for me too, but the GH7s performance is enough for my needs. I suspect the low-light capabilities of MFT would be described as "Very Good to Excellent", but the latest FF cameras now have low-light capabilities that would be described as "Absolutely Incredible" and so MFT lags by comparison. You can't cheat the laws of physics! It wasn't that long ago that cameras weren't really usable above ISO 1600 or 3200, so things have advanced very quickly. Suggesting that you "need" to shooting weddings at ISO 25,600 would have been considered a joke and saying you were serious would have started arguments and gotten you banned as a troll! Personally I think the "if todays cameras can't do it then you don't need it" is a silly perspective, because it implies that there aren't any new situations or circumstances that are worth recording, and obviously that's just plain ridiculous. I wonder how the GH7 compares to the original A7S. The difference might be smaller than you'd think.

I think I may not have explained myself clearly, so I want to reset what I was actually getting at. This isn’t about whether people need new cameras, or whether older cameras are still capable. I agree they are. It’s also not about blaming any one company or getting political. What I’m really reacting to is the disconnect in tone. Right now, a lot of people are dealing with very real financial pressure in day to day life. Food, housing, healthcare, basic stability. Against that backdrop, the pace and intensity of constant product releases and marketing across the camera industry (and other industries) feels a bit detached from how many people are actually living. I’m not saying companies should stop innovating, and I’m not saying people are wrong for buying new gear if they can afford it. I’m just questioning whether the relentless “next thing, next thing, next thing” approach still matches the moment we’re in. Even for those of us who aren’t buying, it can create a kind of fatigue just being surrounded by it, especially when most modern cameras are already more than capable for professional work. So the question I was trying to raise is less “should anyone upgrade?” and more “does this constant push still make sense culturally and economically right now?” That’s all I was aiming to explore.

Good convo so far, I shoot on Lumix FF, Fuji XH2S and stills on Canon. Have had a lot of Sony's in the past (actually think the FX30 is a fantastic overlooks body if you don't need super High ISO) Bought a ZR on a whim, - to my taste- the H265 is unusable, and the RED code files are massive. There are way too many quality of life issues (like extracting the CFB card once there is a cage on the body) that really ruin it for me! For what you have listed I think the C50 is great or look for a used FX3, still a solid camera today.

Depending on which source, we're the third, fifth, or sixth highest. But that also comes with highest prices for a lot of things including health care. My after-insurance cost for a dental check-up, two cavities filled, and a crown was over $2,000. To have a skilled laborer (like a plumber or electrician) come to your house will usually cost $300+ for all but the most basic things. The trend started before the current president and is applicable to every country. In general, fewer cameras are being released in the $2,000 range than are released in the $3000+ range - and far fewer still under $1,000. Even if the median salary is $40,000 (according to the SSA), after state+federal taxes, that'll come to under $3,000/month - barely enough to cover rent, food, and insurance. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/central.html

US has the third highest median wages (PPP) of all countries in the world (only Luxembourg and Switzerland are ahead in this metric). I think it's remarkable that Americans would complain about prices when those prices are much less within reach to people living in almost all other countries in the world, and even make it a point how supposedly THEY are feeling strained. That said, camera and lens prices in the US have increased because the US government has increased/created tariffs which the customers have to, in the end, pay in the form of increased prices. Yes, manufacturers also feel this in reduced sales and because of this many of them probably have gone into the red (making a loss), but there is not much they can do apart from concentrating on other parts of the worldwide market and trying to make up for the reduced US sales by trying to sell products elsewhere. The tariffs affect low and middle classes more than the upper class because they are flat taxes without progression. The US government is using the tariffs to increase relative taxation of the majority of the population to fund tax breaks to billionaires. This is not the camera companies' fault. It's the people who voted in the latest elections who selected these politicians into office. If you have working cameras and lenses, keep using them until they stop working, then have them repaired, until there are no more parts and the repairs are unsuccessful, and only then consider the purchase of new equipment. Now, of course, marketing will try to get you to buy new stuff. Stop following internet gear forums and concentrate on your work and art.

I hear you, they are great lenses, especially L series and it was actually hard selling them.. but if I go back to Canon it will be the affordable RF STM series (mostly have IS) and who knows maybe I'll venture back to EF for the more exotic ones like tilt shift etc. Sure it is. Just wishful thinking they put the A9iii GS sensor. Gotcha, I'm trying to test it out but it looks like the C50 test footage mxf files I got don't have the meta data in them 😞

Pity about the EF stuff. I'm planning to keep mine for as long as possible and I'm still adding more on occasion. Adapts to everything, autofocus feels native on RF bodies. Plus most of the lenses were designed before it was assumed that the camera would fix defects with a profile. The M mount glass will look brilliant on any system you mentioned, though. Isn't the FX3's RS only like 8ms already? Usually that's enough even for fast action to look good. Just keep in mind that gyroflow-style solutions usually require fast shutter speeds.

I think there are a few things at play. We're in a place where cameras from 2019 (and maybe a bit earlier) are still totally great and usable. The Z-Cam E2-F6 was released in 2019. The EOS R5 was released in 2020. The A7s III was also released in 2020, as was the OG Red Komodo. You can go pick up any of those cameras right now and make great-looking content with more than enough resolution/quality to be played and look good in any theater. Because of that, there's not a huge reason for everybody to upgrade. If I look at upgrading my R5 to the R5 II, I see nothing that would be worth me spending $1500-2000 for it (assuming I sold for standard used price and bought for standard used price). What am I getting? A bit less overheating, slightly better DR, and more 8K frame rates that I won't use a lot? For $2,000? 🤷‍♂️ Assuming that most enthusiasts have purchased a new camera within the last 5-6 years, they have a camera that's good enough to produce professional results, either in still photos or video. I can sort of see what manufacturers would focus on high-end gear with big margin instead of chasing a share of the shrinking low/mid-range market. But! The good news is that if you're in the category of a person who bought a decent camera in the last 5 years, there's no need to get stressed by the hype around new models. Watch people going for corporate gigs and the like these days and you're apt to see most of them carrying a 5-year old FX3 or FX6.

Also it needs to be warp stabilizer; any of the stabilization algorithms in Davinci resolve don’t do as well and end up making the result worse. Warp stabilizer set to substance warp is quite good however. I actually am currently paying for just after efffects alone and have some scripts that let me quickly render a single clip in Davinci resolve, apply warp stabilizer in AE, render and import quickly back to Davinci.

I completely understand. What I can say is for some reason solid handheld technique + Canon IBIS + Canon DIS + ADOBE warp stabilizer is very consistent and stable. Worth a try. But I do get it, gyroflow is great too and uses real motion data. I’ve done a ton of filming on canon bodies though and this technique works really well. It’s not 100% perfect but I’d call it 95% perfect with a bit of tweaking.

Greetings Fellow Creatives, This week's brand new free-to-use-with-attribution music tracks are: "SNOWY PUZZLER_v001" (LoFi) You can listen to it here: https://soundimage.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Snowy-Puzzler_v001_LoFi.ogg We also have: "LIGHT PUZZLES 10" (LoFi) "ARCTIC PUZZLER" (LoFi) You can freely download them all from the Puzzle Music 7 page on my site: https://soundimage.org/puzzle-music-7/ OTHER (HOPEFULLY) HELPFUL LINKS: https://soundimage.org/attribution-info/ https://soundimage.org/ogg-game-music-mega-pack/ https://soundimage.org/ogg-music-packs-2/ https://soundimage.org/custom-work/ As always, enjoy, please stay safe and keep being creative. 🙂

Interesting, I'm usually not a fan of post stabilisation as it often crops a lot and you get weirdness depending on the shot. Gyroflow seems so much smarter thanks to gyro data. Of course IBIS on the R6 mk3 would actually be enough in most case scenarios so sure I agree IBIS is a plus vs no IBIS on C50, however I feel GF somewhat alleviates the lack of IBIS, and I'm gaining a whole lotta reliability with the C50 fan etc. The top handle on the C50 is really really nice and helps keeping the cam steady, especially with body contact point. I was actually all set on the R6 mk3 as it checks just about every box on a hybrid.. and then I tried the C50 and it immediately reminded me of my C100/C200 days, except in a so much lighter package with so many more specs. Now the C50 feels like the 5D mk3 after I upgraded to the C100. Still great but photo centric body and UI. I still have about a week to make my mind so keep the feedback coming!

Sadly sold the G9II. I realized I need good high ISO performance, and seems PDAF is disabled at real high ISOs. I scored a canon r6 for $929 and other than the overheating it’s great. And I can live wijt the overheating for how I shoot. IBIS can genuinely compete with LUMIX by having DIS on standard and using adobe’s warp stabilizer, somehow warp stabilizer absolutely thrives at stabilizing the type of leftover shakiness and artifacts of canon’s IBIS + DIS combo. Very consistently stable without warpy artifacts. Great high ISO performance. Lovely image in CLOG3. I did like the G9II. Its image was great. Best Ibis I’ve ever used. Very comfortable. Just realized I need better high ISO performance. Yes I could have gotten a super fast zoom like the sigma 18-35 1.8/speedbooster or Panasonic 10-25mm 1.7. But sometimes I REALLY need to push things at weddings or concerts, shooting at ISOs like 25,600. That’s beyond what the Gh7/G9II can handle.

This does require a good technique ofc meaning good crouched heel toe walk, holding the camera a bit loose and even using a neck strap helps. But when I shoot this way with canon IBIS + DIS Standard and then use warp stabilizer, the results are excellent and very consistent.

Something interesting about canon bodies with IBIS is that I find with a good walking workflow and adobe’s warp stabilizer the results rival gyroflow. Especially on wide lenses I can very consistently get beautifully stable resultS across multiple canon bodies with IBIS. For some reason adobe’s warp stabilizer absolutely thrives at stabilizing the type of footage coming out of these camera bodies with a good workflow. I’ve been able to get amazing results on an original canon r6, r5 and r7. For best results put DIS on Standard and then use warp stabilizer to carry it the rest of the way. 1-3% on warp stabilizer smooths out the jittery IBIS motion. 5% looks like a steadicam. 10% is near gimbal level. 50% is insane. so in some ways the r6 iii with this workflow could be more useful. The IBIS helps in this workflow meaning you in a lot of situations can keep your shutter at 1/50 and stabilize. Gyroflow without IBIS you really have to shoot at 1/200 or above.

Lately I’ve been thinking about how fast new cameras and lenses come out, and it made me wonder, do these companies actually realize a large portion of the world (especially here in the U.S.) is feeling some real financial strain right now? Between rising living costs, inflation still lingering in daily budgets, and shoppers saying they plan to cut spending because things are less affordable, people in many income brackets are tightening their belts rather than splurging. At the same time, camera gear prices keep going up, with manufacturers leaning heavily into higher end products and even having to increase prices due to tariffs and costs and used gear demand is surging, which suggests many photographers are turning away from new purchases and toward more affordable options. Meanwhile the constant cycle of marketing, hype, and new products can get overwhelming. It starts to feel less like “new tech we need” and more like noise pushing us to buy things even if budgets are tight. I’m curious, do you think camera companies are aware of this, or does it not matter to them because their target audience is high end buyers? And has the constant churn of new gear given you a kind of “second hand fatigue” not necessarily because you want nothing new, but because it feels relentless and disconnected from what most people can realistically afford?

I've been mainly Canon/Sony shooter these last years but only have an FS7 left (which I'd sell but has depreciated so much I'd rather keep for gigs demanding a big cam with NDs etc). Lens wise I've just sold my remaining EF glass and as stated still got my Zeiss Batis (E-mount) set. Also have manual Leica M glass. I guess the FS7+Batis and no EF is what is making me hesitate jump back into Canon. Its going to be an investment. If only Sony had an FX3 mk2 with global shutter, open gate and tilt EVF I'd be going that route. But that isn't the case and I now have to make a rather quick decision. That is where ZR feels like good middle ground: e-mount adaptability, 6K, tons of codecs, FX type body. Affordable. But that soft NR ridden h265 makes me pause. R3D RAW file sizes is also just not doable for fast turnovers. Plus no open gate on neither Sony/Nikon is a real bummer. Like I said I'm going to have to deliver both 16:9 & 9:16. Having the option of either OG or dual format recording on C50 is mega clutch. The 4X digi zoom option is also killer, it would turn the 24mm f1.8 into a parafocal 24-96mm f1.8 zoom lens! Having tried it, its butter smooth using the rocker lever with various speed velocities. Gyroflow support is also a BIG plus for C50. Free open source and tests I've seen shows it being better than any type of other stabilisation done before wether mechanical or digital! If I do go the C50 route, I do plan on getting a second R body for IBIS but also mech shutter stills for flash photography. All in all the upfront investment is what is giving me second thoughts but since its for paid work I'm telling myself its worth to swallow the cost..

What are you using now? Do you already have lenses? Without having used it, the C50 seems like a great choice from what you have listed. If lack of IBIS is a big problem, you could also pair it with a used Canon body (now or in the future) which has decent IBIS for those handheld shots (or your current body if you have one, if it has IBIS). There's a reason that my R5 comes with me on every shoot. Need a quick handheld shot? Just grab it from the bag. Wanna have someone go pick up some b-roll? R5. Suction cupping it to the windshield? R5. Plus the second body with decent AF can be really useful for grabbing a second angle, if wanted. Just set it up, make sure to hit record, and let it do its thing.

Hey everyone, You know me. I’ve been agonizing over my next camera the entire year of 2025. Countless threads, rental tests, ecosystem debates… I've got a shortlist but I’m still somewhat undecided in February 2026. Now a proper ongoing gig has landed: high-end lifestyle / product / mini-doc content for a well-known outlet. All solo run&gun: fast stories, Reels, interviews, close-up product detail, lifestyle vignettes, multi-platform deliverables (horizontal main cuts + vertical social + still assets). No crew, just me moving fast in boutiques, ateliers and interiors. Current shortlist : Canon EOS C50 (€3,500 ) Pros that keep winning me over after testing: 7K open-gate 3:2 + simultaneous 16:9 / 9:16 dual record to different cards = massive time-saver for vertical/horizontal from one take. Dual zoom rockers (body + XLR handle) smooth variable-speed creeps and fast punch-ins on primes felt magical. Built-in fan = no thermal anxiety on longer takes. Cine OS: frame guides for every ratio, false color/waveforms/zebras, shutter angle, base ISO switches. Gyro data + Gyroflow covers stabilization so well that lack of IBIS isn’t a big issue. C-Log2 grading is easy and beautiful, plus Wide DR mode (I’ve missed that since my C100/C200 days). Pro mini cine cam body look perception is important in my field; you can charge more with something that screams serious filmmaker. Cons: Body+lens investment hurts minimum RF 24/1.8 Macro IS STM (~€500) + RF 45/1.2 STM (€500) = €4500 total. Closed RF glass. EIS only (electronic), so very dynamic handheld shots rely on technique or light post-stab. Canon EOS R6 Mark III (€2,899) Pros: IBIS for aggressive handheld run-and-gun. Built-in EVF (huge for bright interiors/outdoors). Mechanical shutter + flash sync for occasional stills. 7K open-gate 3:2 for post-cropping multi-ratio. Same C-Log2 grading ease and fast hybrid menu/dial switching. Cons: No simultaneous multi-format dual recording all multi-ratio work is post-crop only. No 7K downsampled digital zoom (FHD only). No built-in fan thermal limits in demanding long takes (30–60 min in 4K/7K high-bitrate). No XLR handle or mounting points out of box. Consumer-looking body doesn't have the pro mini cine cam vibe. Sony FX3 (€3,500 ) I already have Zeiss Batis primes, so zero lens spend. IBIS, low-light is proven, and it’s the safe solo workhorse everyone knows. But in 2026 it feels dated: Still capped at 4K internal (no 6K/7K future-proofing). No open-gate all multi-ratio work is post-crop from 4K (quality hit). No RAW for high-end stuff. No EVF. 12MP stills. Spending serious money on a 5-year-old body feels like questionable investment math, especially considering an FX3 mk2 will drop later this year. Sony FX2 (€2,500) Despite its controversial usage of the old A7IV sensor, it's a real nice body thanks to its unique tilt EVF that I absolutely love. Also a proper hybrid. Its already gone down in price a little bit but like the above FX3 it feels silly investing in a cam with outdated tech and specs. Nikon ZR €2,200. Cheapest option. I could adapt my Sony glass. Internal R3D RAW is appealing for high-end grading. Big, beautiful display is the main draw. Main cons: R3D RAW means huge files. H.265 codec applies quite heavy noise reduction that turns into “mush”. No open-gate. Basic controls. No EVF, no mech shutter. Ecosystem still feels young for run-and-gun reliability on a high-profile gig I’m leaning hard toward the C50 right now. The open-gate + simultaneous dual-ratio recording + rocker zoom control feel tailor made for the exact multi-platform content I’ll be shooting. C-Log2 grading is easy and beautiful, Wide DR mode brings back what I loved on my old C100/C200 days, and Gyroflow + EIS covers stabilization perfectly for my style. Cine menu and exposure tools also feel like a step up for product polish. RAW and anamorphic support for potential high-end stuff. The handling with the excellent top handle makes it feel like an evolved FX3. It's a hefty investment although I should recoup fast once I start getting paid. Yes I'm purposely omitting Lumix, a forum favourite I know but I just don't gel with either bodies or lens choice. Appreciate any real-world takes from people who may have used above gear and/or deliver this kind of content. Thanks in advance.

Thank you for letting us know! I'm glad you're well! I do wish the content stayed up, as it was still useful, but I understand your reasoning. At the end of the day, it was YOUR content and you could do what you wanted with it! I hope that you check in from time to time and thank you for all your input over the years! And congrats on the family!

Apparently putting numbers in order in a list isn't my strong suit. 🤦‍♂️