Rolf Silber

This is how it works: "Pirates" open the harbours and lands (in this case the realms of creativity) under the flag of creative/information freedom - they destroy in the process the idea of creative ownership and/or that people should pay the artist for what he/she does - they attack the "old industries" and call them "content mafia" - they "sell" the pirated content by building a coalition with the advertising industry and later with the labels which run for cover under the attack (you can also call it extortion) - they keep the most of the money and get even bigger ... and the moment they are big enough (now), they put the pirate costumes away, bring out their pin-striped suits, send their lobbyists to town .... and then they kick us all in the behind, having become mega-industries themselves and show all of us the finger. Brave new world - 2.0.

There will be no Ãœber-camera, me hopes. Never. Ever. I love to walk and work in a camera-zoo, where strange creatures lurk in light or dark. For instance I love MFT-sensor cameras to be able to attach via an adaptor almost any "big sensor" lens. I also would like to own a Phase One middle format camera for stills at times (budget wise and what my wife thinks, I won't). So instead: Lets be happy about all the strange beings, each adapting to different requisitions. No one to fit them all. Each interesting in their own way.

sorry, wrong argument... ;-)

Pricing in itself will be a real but very probably not the most decisive argument in the market the Amira is heading for. In this market even a maybe slightly more expensive camera will win over customers - if it fits into the workflow and produces an outstanding picture. For a high-end tv-movie in my country the actual costs of a camera (minus lenses and other directly camera related gear) may account for something of about 3 to 4 % of the budget. So the decision to go for a camera which is - say - 20% cheaper than the other accounts in real life for a difference of 0,6 to 0,8 % of the budget. Every production manager worth his money (sic!) may think this still is a factor. True. But if the same camera will be easier to rig and handle, has an outstanding reliability and would produce an only slightly better image - then even in strictly economic terms this camera will win.

Totally agree with Tom Hopkins and Andrew on this one: The Amira may become leading lady in what was the S-16 slot in the older days for higher-end TV. Both for documentary and narrative. While producing a superb s-35 image. Meaning: It may also be used for certain movie-jobs. Yes, Canon and Sony have been faster in that slot, but I remember the Alexa coming a bit late to the digital party too - but taking up most of the more attractive dance cards fast and waltzing nicely.... ;-)

Just to show what Sundance movies have been shot on. Interesting mix. Alexa seems to rule here too with RED and Canon strong contenters: http://www.indiewire.com/article/how-they-shot-that-heres-what-this-years-sundance-filmmakers-shot-on?utm_source=iwDaily_newsletter&utm_medium=sailthru_newsletter

I think we all have been to much, much darker places than this one... ;-)

I would hope guitarists won't base their decision to use a Gibson or a Fender or a whatever on "this is the best" but on "this one fits my needs or the situation best". Including personal preferences for a certain sound. Different but same for cameras, I believe.

And all of a sudden I seem to know that you may know what a lot of us would want to know.... ;-)

I feel your pain.... ;-)

Even when shooting with the ARRI "The Fridge" D 20 back in the "old days" the decision to use it instead of a RED was a decision for the aesthetic character of the image, it's "film-likeness", that made people to put up with a camera which was kind of hard to handle concerning size and weight. This concept - stay as near to film aesthetics as possible - was quite efficiently transferred to the Alexa which provides great DR plus excellent colour rendition, especially skin tones. Also Alexa fitted better into the existing workflows. A decisive bit less franken-rigging. Very nice and not overly complicated menues. Sturdy body. And great reliabilty. What befuddles me is that the rental costs of a camera should be a big factor in a major production of a narrative film or even an average one. For a German TV-Movie costs for camera (excluding lenses) is maybe 3% of the budget or even a bit less. The cost-factor should be really only kicking in, when you go small to low budget or your production manager is named Scrooge. Apart from questions of aesthetics - you like or dislike a certain characteristic delivered by a sensor (which really is there or maybe only assumed :-)) - again workflow on set and in post is also cost-wise the decisive factor to take this or that camera. Not rental costs. In the end all a camera is is a tool. And Alexa seems to fit in better under most circumstances for middle to bigger budget productions of narrative films. No miracle here and definitely no "fanboy'ism".

Nicely done.

Just an estimation .... obviously not as good as GH3 (which is really good imho), but probably on par with GH2. Which is quite good for such a small cam.

As I see it: This is not really your camera if you have hands & fingers more of the Mike Tyson class. You do on the other hand not need to have fine sensored tentacles of an elf to operate it. But yes: At times your thumb may press the wrong symbol on the touch screen or the wheel may react to soft. But you wanted to have a camera really very, very small, haven't you? And small it is. Btw it goes extremy well together with a wrist strap. The main thing for me - this one can be with me nearly all the time I go out. I think I will call it Henry in commemeration of Cartier Bresson..... :-)

Ah .... TGV needs 3.5 hours from my home town to Paris ... I should take it. Thanx, Pier-Yves.