Leaderboard

The great thing is, Speed Booster GH5S outperforms the 6K EF Pocket in low light as well. Unless you can get one of Luca's rather nice Magic Boosters. Who's for a GH5/GH5S Shooter's Guide?

It is 2020, a year which marks 10 years of EOSHD this month! Those 10 years have flown by. I'm wondering how the filmmaking landscape for gear has changed since the GH2 days. What are you shooting with now?

I run a channel on YouTube and I have first-hand info on some of the larger channels (1M subs) and what they can bring in. Based on data that’s publicly accessible, Potato Jet could be doing quite well financially with his current views. (I hope he is, I always enjoy his stuff.) It all depends on his fill rate and CPM for those 2.5M monthly views. If those are anything like mine, he’s probably making $10,000 to $18,000 in straight Adsense revenue. He also does brand deals, so I expect he’s clearing as much as $20k if he’s lucky. But if his fill rate and CPM are low it might be just scraping around $10k. Not much for that LA lifestyle, lol. Note that a lot of the opinion and drama channels have bigger issues with copyright strikes and demonetization and their CPM can potentially be way worse than channels that focus on brand-friendly niches like cameras or cars (Potato and myself.) So when trying to figure income for shows like Spill, Drew Goodin or Philip DeFranco you cant use the same math. Their CPM is likely to be significantly lower, but because of their size, the brand deals are more lucrative. update: I just watched the video above where Potato shows his revenue on a video (I calculated at $3CPM if 100% fill) and that is ridiculously bad with that level of engagement. Like, so bad, I don’t believe it. So either the camera category is far worse than I expected (unlikely since its a popular category) or that particular video is monetized at the bare minimum and he cherry picked it to use as an example.

Shooting with the new Sigma 45mm F2.8 for L-mount, I realised the same thing I did when I first shot anamorphic at F5.6. Beautiful rendering matters, not just wide open, but at slower apertures. This doesn't get enough attention! Sometimes I want to see that background, and not have it completely creamed out, but neither do I want to give up the '3D' look or beautiful out of focus rendering and fall-off. What is the best rendering lens at F4? I doubt you'll find answer on Google. Let's test.

I think that Arri are currently quite comfortable concentrating on and dominating the high end market.

This was stats from 2019, so likely they were filmed in 2018. Thus is no surprise to me that C700 doesn't have a strong showing there. Is more interesting to see the stats in 2020. (although my gut instinct is to suspect C700 won't have a strong showing) Am not surprised to see a lack of C300mk2 cameras, look there are also no FS7 cameras there either! (be much more interesting if they showcased the top 43 documentary shows from Netflix, I bet we'd see a FS7 there! And a scattering of C300mk2 too?) Because the C300mk2 was not designed to play at this level, the C300mk2 was Canon's response to the FS7 for the low budget productions. https://ymcinema.com/2019/05/28/the-cameras-behind-netflix-best-series-spoiler-red-dominates/ Looking at the comparisons between mid 2019 and 2019 I see the Panasonic Varicam has experienced a big drop, which is sad. As in 2018 it was the #3 camera. Looking deeper into the results I'd say the two major factors are ARRI ALEXA LF & Sony VENICE The last Netflix production I was on set for last year they had 3x VENICE. Going into the future I bet 2020's stats will show this trend growing even stronger. As VENICE was still largely in "kinda beta" firmware up until recently, just lately in 2019 has it got some really big firmware updates to bring VENICE into prime time. 2018 was very early days for VENICE, that's why the earlier survey only showed one VENICE camera. We're going to see many more VENICE productions coming. As for ARRI, well, they're ARRI! Of course they'll be picked. And now they've got the LF and even better the Mini LF (for gimbal / crane / car / etc shots), which the MiniLF didn't exist last year, then the ARRI cameras will only continue to dominate Netflix stats even further I'd say the most impressive result from that chart is how the Sony F55 (which is the oldest camera on the list) still has a number of productions shooting with it! (the F55 is in 4th= place!)

EOS M for the win

Well, since the GH2 days I've been pretty true to MFT. Skipped the GH3. Then gotten the OM-D E-M1. Then the GH4. D5300. Z CAM E1. BMPCC. G7. YI M1. GX80. G80. G9. GH5. BMPCC4K. GX9. The oddball was the D5300, but I sold it due to its traditional DSLR quirks. A bunch I sold again, some are collecting dust. Still actually have the GH2. For nostalgia's sake, I can't get rid of it. Primarily these days I use the G9 and GH5 when the objective is to shoot some schtuff. Whenever the occassion is more casual, like city trips in the company of people that might not be the most patient, the GX9 will do. The steps GH2 < GH4 < GH5 have been quite remarkable and I really don't want to get myself into fullframe systems. So I for sure hope MFT really ain't dead yet and that the GH6 will be marvelous. Maybe they'll drop the top line separation and encapsulate the G9/GH5(S)' individual strengths in a single body.

"camera: EOS-M with MagicLantern, lens: Angenieux 8-64mm Super 8 zoom, recording format: MagicLantern 14bit raw" :

10bit is like 4K vs 1080, even if you're going to be filming in 8bit (or 1080) most of the time, it is really nice to have the option of 10bit for when you want it. Hopefully soon manufacturers will realize 10bit is just as important at 4K to include in their cameras.

It’s no secret RED & ARRI share the spotlight in high-end filmmaking production. That ranking has more to do with budget and industry standards than anything else. When you’re on a high budget and can rent anything you’re going to go for that latest RED or ARRI. Maybe a Venice or Varicam if you’re going for a different look. The C300 II is by far the cheapest camera on that list. It came out in 2015. The fact that it’s even on that list is to me a testament of its long lasting appeal. It certainly isn’t a flop in other filmmaking scenes like docu where it usually comes up on top. BTW I don’t see Ursa Mini, EVA1 or FS7 on that list at all. All Netflix approved cameras that came out around or after C300 II. What does that make of them?

Andrew, I agree that there ARE a lot of stills pros STILL with Canon and Nikon (I actually do not think the number with Leica is huge at all and many of those that DO actually use dual systems) but there ARE an increasing number using Sony (or rather an increasing percentage in a shrinking market). I also think a LOT of Pros that use Sony are also dual system users including quite a few Canon users who investigate Sony (while keeping their lenses still though that is dropping off a bit now maybe or some have settled on Sony and selling off their canon gear). Again though there is an increasing number, at least around here. It also depends on what you mean by "pro" as around here at least there are a LOT of people who hang out a shingle and shoot weddings on the weekend...many of those are still "serious" photographers and seriously good. Then there are those using APSC cameras to take Santa pics/portraits at the mall. I would also take the work of many high end "enthusiasts" over many pros too and are clearly "serious photographers". This is the bit i objected to especially... "Most of these users are not serious photographers or videographers either. If they do video then they know how much work goes into fixing Sony color. I've seen professional photographers that use Sony and post work with horrible unnatural skin tones that can't be fixed by shooting RAW. Sony is not being used by serious professionals." And THAT is as ridiculous as it would be to say that ONLY Sony users are serious photographers/videographers....it is rubbish!

Yes. The idea is not to keep updating it. How often do Arri change their colour science? Once you get it working, once you get it looking beautiful, there is no need to keep tweaking it. Sony had it right in 2008 then fucked it up and tweaked it for past 8 years to the point where it's only 10% better than the fuck up. Honestly head should roll, but just like they doggedly stick to the same broken menu system, it seems they stand by their failures in people management too. My reading of the situation, is that most people are attracted to Sony by the high-specs. I am sure they have more enthusiast usage than pro for stills. I think most stills pros are on Canon / Nikon / Leica. If you buy a stills camera for the high specs you are not going to care about JPEG very much. You are going to care about the raw files, and have ample skill in Lightroom to do what you like to the colour and dynamic range. In video, it's a different story and you are at the mercy of the image processor to a much higher degree. It has to be right. I have had lovely results from Sony's cameras because they at least afford us a great control over the picture profiles, gamma modes, colour gamuts, etc. and enable us to mix up the settings to patch over any shortcomings in the default ones... of which there are legion. But it is still the case that my 1D C beats it every time for skintones and teal / orange shooting where you want to maintain a nice emphasis on warm and cool tones in a single frame. The auto white balance is also far better. I will do a comparison between the 1D C, Leica SL2 and Sony A7 III soon which proves there is a big difference in the ways the cameras handle colour and WB. The good thing like I said above is that Sony is not shy about giving us a lot of settings to play with. When you have the Minolta colour science to compare with (Sony A900), a Leica SL2 and a 1D C, or even an Alexa, you have the best industry reference for colour science in the world to act as a guide. This is what makes EOSHD Pro Color possible, so thank you Sony for allowing us all those complex options to diddle with while I compare. On the other hand if you are a non-technical shooter with a great eye and a job to do, but no time to diddle around and not a high level of nerd ability and nerd patience, are you going to have a spare 100's of hours to test settings or even the benchmark cameras to compare to? I don't think so. You just want the damn camera to deliver out of the box effortlessly like your last one did. If I were the latter, I would not let a Sony mirrorless camera within a yard of my shoot. It would be Leica SL2, Fuji GFX, or Canon 1D X III all day long.

i kno rite. ive got my fingers crossed for fully articulated flippy ?

For Micro Four Thirds fans https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAu6iO8En48gGBcEzoUl-sA

17.7mm vs 26.7 mm , an adapter should be doable! Would be a tighter fit though for the electronics. However people who buy GFX lenses (they're very expensive) is an extremely small niche of buyers, an adapter wouldn't sell many at all. And I doubt a Fujifilm FF camera should be made, as Fuji would just run into the same problems Sony did. (if not even worse, for Fuji) As Sony never started out with planning to make a FF mirrorless camera, thus when they decided to later on they had to face the decision of: 1) ditching E Mount and creating a new mount, like Canon has done with EOS-M (then making RF Mount instead) 2) squeezing in a shoehorned FF sensor into a mount intended for APS-C, with all those compromises that mean (such as Sony's IBIS never being as good as the competition) I personally think Fuji has been very smart here. They realize they're too small to compete head to head against the big guns of Canon/Nikon/Sony FF. Instead they've got the double headed strategy of: 1) embrace the essence of the purpose of mirrorless, high quality but very compact camera packages. A Sony FF kit will never be quite as compact as a Fuji APS-C kit (Olympus is taking a similar strategy here, but leaning the quality/compact balance further towards the compact side). This allows Fuji to sidestep competing directly against Canon/Nikon/Sony, and Fuji can instead play to their own strengths. 2) bring out mirrorless medium format cameras positioned above FF cameras. As Fuji is gaining the first mover advantage in the medium format mirrorless market, and in the long run sensors will become cheaper and cheaper. Eventually medium format will become "affordable" for even the average joe, just like has happened with FF cameras. Today an entry level FF camera is one anybody could buy, FF is no longer super expensive like it was back at launch. (imagine a world where a Medium Format camera only costs a few hundred bucks more than a Full Frame camera??) It's a nifty business strategy, sidestep the white hot intense competition in FF bodies, and instead bring out the very best there is one stop above and one stop below FF. (which also handily positions Fuji's own products two stops apart, which is a good distance to space them apart. Prevents their own products being so directly in competition with each other as they're spaced far apart. Interestly, Panasonic has a similar strategy wih a gap apart of two stops as well with their cameras: but MFT vs FF, instead of APS-C vs Medium Format) Is a bold strategy which is a bet on the future that Fuji (and Panasonic) are making: They're betting that with time the performance of their smaller sensors will become so good, many people will happily compromise in exchange for having a small compact kit. They're also betting (this was a much eaiser bet for Panasonic to make, than for Fuji. Except that Panasonic is fighting in a tougher market niche... against Sony/Canon/Nikon) that the prices on their large sensors will come down in price far enough that they can become relatively mass market products and not just a small small niche.

Hey guys! Got a stupid good deal on Zeiss Distagon 35 f2 T* i’m getting it next week. $300 Anyone used this? Comments concerns i should know about? I already have FF gears that will fit but just wanting everyone’s experience with them. Either way, I plan on sharing usage over with my photo camera too.

Maybe it will have a boutique carved ironwood grip?

Last but not least from our good fellow @ZEEK:

Do you need a mic input? Cause the GX85 (GX80 overseas) is a KILLER camera but it lacks a mic input. I got it as my c-cam for multicamera shoots. Combined with the 35-100mm f/2.8 it blows my mind. You could always attach a Zoom H1 or something for better audio.

I was watching a TV show last night and they had some cool spy vs spy stuff through the streets of Hong Kong, and it was shot well, had great colour science, the story was engaging, but it felt like a home movie. I've watched several seasons of the show and other sequences didn't have the same feel. I worked out that it's because I'd been to where they were filming. I've increasingly noticed this trend - if I've been somewhere then it doesn't seem so exotic anymore, it doesn't have that 'other world / smooth / detached' feeling that something being 'cinematic' feels like to me. Some of my favourite travel videos have transformed over the years from spectacular experiences to slightly awkward sequences of shots of places I've been. Does anyone else find this?

Thanks, I've seen some Varizoom Lanc controllers but I think I just need to bite the bullet and buy the Ursa Hand Grip because that really has the simplicity I'm looking for. That paired with the BMPCC Speedbooster and the Canon 17-55mm seems like a great minimalist handheld set up. The problem with that setup is that the total cost would put me in the P4K price range and I'm unsure if it's a wise investment at that point and I don't know if the total size would be much smaller... OT - Do you know of any good 12-75mm c-mount lenses that cover the S16 sensor of the OG or the P4K crop mode? I have the Cosmicar but it vignettes heavily as I believe it's designed for 1/2in sensors. It was a beautiful little parfocal lens with the EOS-M in ML crop mode though. I'll probably just use my 5D3 for another few years... LOL. Seriously though, I think I can't conceive shooting in anything less than native full frame raw/ProRes. Completely OT - I don't know if I ever thanked you for turning me onto Samyang lenses, but the 50mm 1.4 continues to amaze me on my 5D3... So cheers... for continuing to be one of the most helpful members on this forum!!!

You can also use a 360 VR cam... Full thing: here btw (campaign is long over, but info can be found here). That's like the only VR 360 application I actually thought was a promising format. I could imagine a 'who dunit?' crime video/game, where you have to pay attention and catch clues of who killed who and schtuff. Otherwise I never found implenations of VR that interesting.

I believe he may have used Emotive on the Ursa portions; he is a huge fan of GHa and has P4Ka as of 3 weeks ago. The rolloff on the sunny leaves etc. feels right, but the colors are very off and green; its a safe bet that the Ursa has quite a different color science than the P4K, and will need its own conversion (working towards that day)

He doesn't need to prove himself! He has an opinion and that's that. It's not a photo competition. The skin tones are pretty dreadful in my opinion as well, but it's not ideal light.

I moved from a GH1 to a G6, it is just so much better, and the G6 is now so dirt cheap I'd struggle to recommend for settling for anything cheaper. (then again the G7 is only slightly more.... it is a slippery slope! Next step each time just being a little more)

This topic is fairly interesting to me. Let me pretend to know what you guys are talking about and summarize the issue. When the sigma FP is debayering the raw footage; it seems to be causing artifacts because of the algorithm it is using - a firmware update is needed to cleanup the out of camera video by using a better algorithm. Also, since RAW is RAW, davinci resolve needs an update to better read the sigma fp raw footage because it too is adding artifacts to the footage. If those two things were fixed. Most importantly, the better support of FP raw within davinci, than for $1.8k, this is a really good camera for the price. Am I seeing everything correctly? ?

"Difference" in what manner? In terms of ROI? Yeah, I'd say the difference for most people is quite significant. You'll see two dozen job adverts for a "FS7 shooter" for every one looking for a C300mk2 owner.

They're just such radically different cameras, puzzles me how someone can swing to considering an a7 one moment to GoPro the next! (or even the reverse, GoPro to a7) They were even selling for sub $200 brand new, is a pity the current eBay prices don't reflect that. (the Z Cam E2C is another really cheap Z Cam camera if you're not aware of it, pricier, but close in price to the E1 than to the E2)

So I just did that - but I had no resolution chart at hand, but used a fine-pattern silver synthetic fabric to provoke moiré in the camera. With the Sigma 45mm/2.8, I did two shots, both at f8 and 11 degree shutter: - one UltraHD CinemaDNG shot; - one 24MP still DNG shot. I processed both in RawTherapee (but without False Color suppression filter): 6K (24MP) still DNG 4K (12MP) CinemaDNG The difference becomes already visible here, but for 1:1 comparison, I opened the 24MP still in The Gimp, scaled it to 3840 horizontal pixel (using cubic scale) and cropped it from 3:2 to 16:9 aspect ratio: still DNG, scaled & cropped to 4K 3840x2160 Now let's compare the 4K still DNG and the 4K CinemaDNG in a 1:1 center crop: CinemaDNG still DNG, downsampled to 4K While there's visible moiré also on the still DNG, the result in 4K CinemaDNG is much worse, very obviously because of a problematic scaling method. (Scaling an undebayered 6K/24MP Bayer matrix into an undebayerd 4K/12MP Bayer matrix, and probably not using the best algorithm for that.) The result is both an excessive pronunciation of moiré and (compared to the downscaled 6K) a blurry image - much like in the good' old Canon video DSLR times... One more test: center crop from the still DNG, this time downscaled in the Gimp from 6K to 4K without any pixel downsampling, but with line skipping ("Interpolation off") - still DNG, line-skipped from 6K to 4K Moiré is more pronounced than in the downsampled still, but still not as bad as in the CinemaDNG. So I really suspect the culprit in the transformation of the undebayered 6K to undebayered 4K, probably through crude line skipping/heuristics.

Shooting with it yesterday on a C300 II and I had the same thought - really wanted it to be longer. It's just too limiting, but the f1.8 aperture is too good to pass up. 16-55 f2 would be amazing, but I'd take an 18-50mm f2 in a heartbeat.

I would be ready to pay a grand for a 18-35 follow-up with IS and possibly a little more range. But I fear you‘re right. None of the manufacturers seem to care about APSC in this time. While I have no intention to switch to fullframe anytime soon, many seem to do just that. So the market might just be to small...?

Really like my Contax Zeiss 35-70 3.4, bought it to be a flexible addition to some other Contax primes. http://youtu.be/JhpT3UfJub8

Sony I think is strongest with YouTubers that can't live without AF and think they need shallow depth of field while standing in front of their "sets" that all look the same. I don't think this site attracts those types. The Sony shooters here I've found to be pretty competent videographers/filmmakers. Sony's offerings provide the YouTube crowd good bang for their buck and quick results right out of the box. They're not too concerned with a lot of the things we care about. They do minimal, if any color grading, etc.

I use 2 instances of OpenColorIO in AE, then pop it back to VLog and use a custom lut I designed for Gh5 VLog based on Portra 400. It means I can make WB and exposure adjustments in ACES where AE's legacy brightness control +15 = 1 stop and CC Color Offset does global WB. Then it's back to VLog, then my lut. It's a bit cumbersome so I only do it when I'm feeling fancy. I haven't yet found a way of doing accurate corrections to VLog in Rec709 space. So it's not a fully ACES compliant workflow, but the ability to make accurate corrections when in ACES space...

You could sell your a6500 on eBay and get a Panasonic G85 instead on eBay and even come out a little ahead. The Sony 35mm f1.8 is a cheap APS-C lens they make for their cameras, so even if sold at a loss, you shouldn't be losing too much. (ditto the speedbooster sale) Yes, the G85 is "only 8bit", but so is your a6500, so you wouldn't be moving backwards. Just something to think about. You could run for that setup for say a year or so, by then the GH6 will have been announced and been out for half a dozen months (perhaps). And GH5 prices then will have seen a massive dump in prices on ebay I'd hope, and you should be able to pick up a GH5 body for well under $1K You'd grab a GH5, and your G85 becomes the perfect B Cam to your new GH5!

Yeah that is why most of the video pros i see with a "proper" camera and not a DSLR or mirrorless ILC are actually using Sony. As for not being serious photographers (and increasingly serious hybrid shooters) You really need to get out more....there are more that i see with Sony than other brands around here now with quite a few who switched from 5D mk whatevers. Again, to many there IS an issue with Sony colour and its seems I am not alone in thinking a LOT of that is due to auto white balance but it is hard to take you seriously with what seems an extreme bias against Sony.

lol now I'm intrigued which one is it ?

I would kindly tell Andrew if he is wrong but he is 100% correct in his assessment of Sony color. Sony sales are not based on Sony color and Sony shooters have nothing to compare it with except what they've shot from Sony. So many Sony photographers have stopped caring or able to see good color because they're blinded by brand loyalty. I am not a Canon shooter, yet. Arri and Canon have the best color by a mile.

I'm gonna start using that too

If Fujifilm indeed has implemented IBIS in the X-T4 as the rumors suggest, and it doesn't overheat or has terrible rolling shutter, it will be the best fast turnaround documentary camera to date, I believe.

You do understand that French is spoken in a lot of countries right? This guy may be French, but also african. And according to his phrasing, he is clearly not a native speaker. Your message is still stupid and offensive.

People here don’t realize. I have friends with 100K followers on IG getting paid thousands of dollars for a few stories and a post with product placement. Just from IG they can make good living. We are talking 100K/y. It’s just a matter of having the right brand deals often. Youtubers with millions of subs are all multi millionaires. They make good already money with views, but product advertised in the videos are what get the most cash. Casey said himself he once got a $200K deal for one video showing a product, the biggest deal he got, but it shows. As he explains in that poadcast, some companies pay big money to have an Ad on TV that nobody watches and everybody is feeling negative about tv ad. Influencers are trusted by they followers, and they are followers because they share the same day interest. The power of an ad with an influencer that goes to 10M subs is beyond measure so they don’t hesitate to pay dozens/hundreds of thousands. Generally money topic is avoided as a youtuber, but a few of them used that as a point and openly talked about money, with proof including live video of Google Ads account. Pretending to be open and transparent unlike other youtubers, but doing this to get attention of course. Regardless, shit loads of money. If your follower count is in the millions as youtuber and you are not a millionaire, you either completely suck or hit that number five days ago. As for the guy in the OP video clearly he did not reach that level yet, but with 500K subs for sure he can afford those few MacBooks and cameras. Some of the equipment might be given free of charge and with big $ bonus, as an ad. And I didn’t mention affiliate links as well. Those few cameras are peanuts.

I occasionally watch this channel. His wife often comments on the lack of funds available to afford their own home due to his purchases.

The only tool here is Peter McKinnon thinking he needs a 2400Mbit codec for YouTube vlogs.

Here is a video shot to really push the hell out of the grade and stress the 200Mbps H265 codec. Shot in 5.9K encoded at 50Mbps with 150Mbps Mbps maximum.

I guess to each its own, I much prefer the 1.33x ratio, go figure... less radical IMO, easier to shoot and more balanced. Sold : -)

I had so much fun shooting with Mavic 2 Pro. Felt like a kid who got his first video game console. H265 in 10bit holds up surprisingly well. I graded my video in HDR and didn't experience any issues other than slight banding in the gradients.

Look at the amount of money on screen here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNJe8uQhM2G4jJFRWiM89Wg/videos I am not making any comment on the quality of the channel, clearly people like his content. I might even like it. Haven't watched any yet. But what is amazing is the relentlessness and the amount of money in the gear he has used in just 1 month. - C500 II - Macbook Pro 16" - EOS R and new RF Speed Booster - Arri Alexa (a snip at $6000) - Mavo LF - 90D - Insta360 - Moment anamorphic And that is just in 1 month, a little under 1 month in fact. Hardly anyone can compete with this relentless pace. And even fewer can afford to. It looks like the doors are swinging closed to YouTube as we speak.