Leaderboard

I'm thinking of selling mine. I have had mine for a couple years and understand the camera's ins and outs if you need any information. As far as your question, I'd be most worried about the usb-c port. Most of the available cages do not have cable clamps, so I'd imagine most FP users haven't used them with the camera. So I'd verify with the seller that the port functions and the connection is tight.

You may have read me post before that I came to the FP, due to my love of 1080p (actually 1920x818) ML Raw on the 5D Mark iii. I seriously love the image and it still reigns as the best image and favorite camera I have ever owned, but being 1080p and an EF mount camera, it could be "soft" with certain lenses and I couldn't use some lenses I have collected over the years. That said, in some ways, the FP is the spiritual successor to the 5Diii ML Raw because both are "uncompressed" raw and both have, or lack, a manufacturer designed post production workflow. Coming from ML Raw, this never bothered me. With the FP, I set the picture profile to OFF and used the camera meter to judge exposure... as long as you hover +/- 0, you will be able to finesse the image in post however you want to. So I never worried about seeing an accurate representation of anything with it. I made sure I didn't clip the highlights, used False Color to check skin and hit record. As far as EF mount lenses go, I have 4... the Canon 28mm 1.8, Samyang 50mm 1.4, and two modified lenses... a Minolta 58mm 1.4 and the Canon FD 50mm 1.2 L. I have so many other vintage lenses that I didn't even get an EF adapter. However I was planning to bring out my 5Diii more often, so I looked at purchasing (repurchasing) a couple lenses... the 24-70mm f/4 and 35mm f/2 IS, so I did glance at a few of the electronic adapters for L Mount thinking they could pull double duty. At the time I was more worried about IS translating over to the FP than I was ND, so the Sigma adapter seemed like the safest bet. The FP was intended to be an inexpensive and tiny raw camera that I could walk around with and grab shots for short films, so I wanted the footprint to be as minimal as possible, which unfortunately is near impossible with the FP and eventually frustrated me. I later bought an inexpensive GH6 and the Arri LogC3 upgrade key, with similar intentions but the crop annoys me. Now I think I'm going to sell both and get a Nikon ZR, and be done with it. I have my 5D3 and a Canon V1 for one film I started working on and the Nikon will be for the other film. All that said, the FP is a fine camera and the image is pretty damn good, it's just too quirky for my run and gun incognito sensibilities, but if you don't mind rigging it up a little, I can't imagine the S9 could come close to the FP in pure image quality. In fact, I was thinking of waiting to do a major camera upgrade and getting the original S5 as a stop gap for my second film and then reevaluating my cameras this time next year, and I may still do that for the IBIS, but in reality, the image is more important to me, and the flexibility of a raw workflow, so I'd probably just keep the FP for that scenario... even though the GH6's IBIS may have spoiled me a little.

Got it! I think for me, the biggest things I've been trying to wrap my head around (because I've only been able to learn about this cam via bits and pieces of anecdotal info from Youtubers and owners posting in FB/Reddit groups) are: (i) The monitoring situation: So as I currently understand it - the Ninja V is the only monitor that - when used with the Ole Berek LUT - shows you a fairly close representation of what the RAW image actually looks like in the field compared to what you get on the FP's own screen (as far as exposure, etc) (ii) What is the best EF-L mount adapter with VND? I'm seeing that the issues with the Meike version might have been addressed and I'm unsure whether the Meike and Fotodiox/Vizelex Smart adapter/VNF versions will fit when using the Dark Power Laboratory Base cage and.or Ultimate cage. Any help/thoughts on this would be appreciated. All that said, I'm still interested in it but if I can't get a good deal on one here in Toronto, I will prob just end up getting an S9!

What will you use this kind of thing for? You seem very excited, but I don't really know what I'd use this for.

I'm once again reminded of Noam Kroll, who has gone a long way into this rabbit hole. My recollection of his method was a balanced approach, where you make a plan and then improvise and adapt within a limited range. My impression was that he would storyboard things as a way of mentally rehearsing the shoot, and would end up with a clear idea of the logistics of the shoot, the equipment required, etc. Location scouting and anticipating the light etc as you normally would. I believe he also gained a clear idea of which shots were required, and which had some flexibility. Then when he was shooting he could make sure that he got enough for a functional edit, but was also clear enough in his thinking that he could adapt the plan to compensate for any challenges that arose and also to take advantage of any serendipity or inspiration that occurred. I suspect that this is a very deep skill, to plan and then improvise a shoot with an understanding of how the choices being made will go together in the edit. I know enough about editing to know that it's a jigsaw puzzle where you can have two small sequences that work well but don't cut together directly, so unless you can find a way to get from one sequence to the other then you have to change one of them so they're compatible. To do this for a whole scene, or whole film, in your head while you're still shooting it is beyond what I could even imagine, but I'm sure that the talented cinematographers are easily up to the challenge. Noam actually went further, describing a process where he worked with two actors and where he 'designed' what would be shot ahead of time, with the major plot points and story beats, but didn't fully script it. On each day of shooting the three would have breakfast and discuss the motives of the characters and how the scenes should go. Then they'd shoot while improvise the scenes, filming as they went and exploring ideas. It was freedom within a planned structure. I believe he was shooting one or two days a week, and so after shooting he'd review the footage and do rough edits, seeing what worked and what didn't. Then he'd 'design' the next shoot day accordingly, sometimes keeping on with his overall plan for the story but other times seeing something in the footage that made him adapt the narrative. I suspect that the skill is in knowing how much you can stray from the plan and knowing in which ways to adapt to make the end result better than if you just shot it as planned without any adapting to the situation. Certainly if you make a plan and then prioritise which shots are the most to least important then you'll have a good chance of coming back with a functional edit. My impression of great travel content is that most shots are good-but-not-great, and the art is in the edit and how they're combined. EOS-M and primes and a Fujinon-TV 14-70 f/2 will do a lot of the heavy lifting in making it look like cinema instead of video. In my mind you'll need to pay attention to how to keep the camera stable and then look at your references and study their coverage so you can design yours. By shooting on less than pristine equipment, you'll have to get things right in-camera as you won't be able to mess with it in post as much. Specifically, being able to zoom in a little in post can be useful if a random passer-by is staring. If you were shooting this with a modern mirrorless and sharp/neutral lens then I'd suggest using the highest resolution possible just so you have that flexibility. Your concern for getting stared at is legitimate, but the focus is to not get people staring while they're in the frame. As such I'd suggest getting more coverage using tighter framing and shallower DOFs, and for shots that are wider, simply getting more footage so you can edit around people staring. AI can potentially help if there are random people staring in shots you really want to use, but if you can edit around these moments (or prevent them from being in shot in the first place) then all the better. It's also worth considering that there are a number of things you can do that will lessen the changes of people noticing you and the camera, or lessen the people who are currently in frame noticing it. Another strategy is to investigate how much b-roll can be used in the edit without it taking away from the story. You may be able to get away with putting b-roll on top of a good audio edit, essentially having an L-cut followed by a J-cut where the audio goes from one character to the another but the visuals go via a b-roll shot from the location. I'm sure there's a deep art to doing this, but it's worth grabbing as much b-roll as you can while on location (especially if shooting has to wait for any reason but you're able to shoot). You can even return at a later time to get more footage, or better yet, take your kit and go shoot the location ahead of time so you can do a dry-run with the actual rig and also get a sense of what the location is like to shoot by actually shooting in it.