Jump to content

IronFilm

Members
  • Content Count

    6,547
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    77

Everything posted by IronFilm

  1. The GH3 seems to be selling for similar or more than a G6, which makes the GH3 overpriced in my opinion unless you really want that live HDMI out / headphone out / weather proofed body. (which to be fair enough, are all legit reasons for some people)
  2. I think Fuji has too many lines of X Mount cameras, with all these ranges: Mx, Ax, Ex, Txx, Tx, Hx, and Prox!! 7 lines just for APS-C is a crazy number, especially for a small brand such as Fuji. Of course, I think we're never going to see a "X-M2" in the future. The X-M1 was a one off, so really it is just six types of cameras. Am suspected the X-H1 will be like the X-M1, and it is going to be a one off that never gets repeated. Which brings down Fuji's line to five different camera bodies, which is still quite a lot, but is a much more manageable number. And that is why they didn't bring out a X-H2 before the X-T4
  3. Personally I'd go with an OG BMPCC and a little cropping in post instead.
  4. You have cheese in your sex shops?? Man, you go to weird sex stores!
  5. The G6 has a little better sensor, has wifi, has 1080 60fps slow motion, and has focus peaking. Might be a few other things the G6 has over the GH2. Basically the G6 is an easy choice over the GH2! The core benefits of the GH2 over the G6: live HDMI out, a hack available, and a MAR sensor. Not enough to sway me to recommend a GH2 over a G6 How about the Panasonic GX7? Is dirt cheap, you lose 4K, but you've still got IBIS (the first ever Panasonic with IBIS!) and is a nice solid semi pro rangefinder body. Also worth considering GM1 (ultra compact!), GX850, and GX1 (is dirt dirt cheap now! Been a long time since I owned one, but I remember liking it a lot back then). G4 doesn't exist. I find the quality gap between a G3 and a G6 to be too big to recommend the G3 at all. (not unless you're basically being given the G3) Good point. When did Panasonic first bring out focus peaking? I know the G6/GM1/GX7 have focus peaking. And the GH2, GH3, GX1, G5, and G3 don't have it.
  6. Just been watching the DPreview Pentax videos! As Chris and Jordan are doing a "Pentax Week". Put this video out as well, which is a brand new APS-C UWA lens design: There should be more Pentax videos coming out this week. Old Pentax film lenses btw were the first set of lenses I bought for my Panasonic GH1, because I picked them up (together with a Pentax film body) for next to nothing at all.
  7. HF??? Do you mean "RF mics"? You ideally need more than just lav mics to do a car scene well. Does you sound mixer have experience doing car scenes?
  8. They're waaaaay outside the reach of almost all users on this forum however. For example that 18-85mm costs US$87,300! Wish there were massively cheaper versions of those.
  9. 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.
  10. Don't forget about sound! I've got lots of videos on my YouTube channel about car rigs: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCniNTuAtkFiSCQNfIaw9SJw/search?query=car And WiFi from the camera won't be a robust and strong enough signal to be able to always monitor from in your follow car.
  11. 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)
  12. I agree, unless having a mic input is really important then get a G85 or G9 depending on budget. If both are outside your budget, then just move progressively down the chain until something does fit your budget: G7 G6 etc Wow, why so many G7 bodies? btw, I wouldn't pay that much for a G7 body in 2020! As Panasonic G85 bodies have now started to fall into the range of 300ish to 400ish
  13. An ARRI Mini? I'm sure there are a few EOSHD members who own one, there are lots of them out there, and tonnes of registered members of EOSHD. Just none of us active users own a Mini, I think there is a few slightly semi active ish posters who own an old ARRI Alexa Classic? I've seen it mentioned rarely, can't recall who though.
  14. Sports shooters really don't need any more. (and neither do most of us!) It's just like us sound mixers recording at 48KHz for many years, as more really is not necessary. Heck, more megapixels can be BAD if it slows down their workflow of getting images uploaded immediately and instantly to their press agency.
  15. No, there are 10 films exactly. (and 11 different cameras) Some used one camera, some used two or more.
  16. That was ARRI's intention, the Mini was going to be a specialist camera to shut out RED from stealing all those niche roles. (car rigs / drones / gimbals / etc) As RED was making a lot of headway into high end production (especially as gimbal / drone / etc usage became popular). I think it even surprised ARRI themselves just how popular the Mini became as a general purpose camera / A Cam. But it is easy to see why: Mini is more affordable for Owner Ops, and is lighter so can be used by smaller crews more easily. In recent years the ARRI Mini and Sony FS7 easily by far take the top two spots as the most popular cameras I've personally worked with on shoots. 3rd place I'd say is AMIRA. Tricky to say what is 4th, we're getting down to a point which is far far less common than the top two spots. I guess the URSA Mini. 5th place is even less common, probably a fight between Panasonic EVA1 / Panasonic Varicam LT / Canon C300mk2 / etc or even perhaps a mirrorless Panasonic GH5 / Sony a7whatever might be here in 5th place. Wouldn't know for sure, they're all far far less common for me to come across than a FS7 or ARRI Mini. Nah, you need EPO for those.
  17. @barefoot_dp agreeing so much! Am saying the same myself. I'd add to that list a few more (but all are limited in some major way), such as: Sony 18-105mm or 18-110mm, but they're both "only" F4 and restricted to E mount. Plus the various cinema PL zooms which are waaaaaay too expensive.
  18. X-H1 has IBIS (the only Fuji to have this) but lacks 10bit internal, thus is both "the best" and is "not the best", depending on your perspective! And what matters to you. But popular opinion is usually choosing the X-T3 over the X-H1 if they're buying a new camera today from Fuji
  19. Maybe this thread should now be renamed to "OG BMPCC in 2020!" Here is a brand new post from Noam Kroll: Why I Am Revisiting Blackmagic’s Original (1080p) Pocket Cinema Camera https://noamkroll.com/why-i-am-revisiting-blackmagics-original-1080p-pocket-cinema-camera/
  20. https://noamkroll.com/playing-against-filmmaking-trends-on-our-feature-with-arri-alexa-classic-2k-prores-hq-43-aspect-ratio/ Why Shooting 4K Is Becoming Less Important + The Resurgence Of The Arri Alexa Classic https://noamkroll.com/why-shooting-4k-is-becoming-less-important-the-resurgence-of-the-arri-alexa-classic/
  21. Interesting chart, and you can draw broad conclusions from it: ARRI dominates! (but no surprise there) And film still has a presence, somewhat surprisingly. But be careful about drawing more detailed conclusions about the broader high end market, as 10 films is a very small sample size so your confidence interval would be massive.
  22. I definitely remember reading about this a few years ago, and no, it never was anything ARRI officially said they were doing, as it never came to pass. I do agree. (and heh, how many $40K ARRIs even get sold? Yeah, the bare bones ARRI Mini is slightly under that I believe. But most people loaded it up with the options and get the EVF, which then pushes that above $40K) Because people EXPECT student footage to look subpar (although many student's thesis year projects can turn out damn well!). Can't see it harming them if it is only sold to select approved educational institutions. And what people start out on, they're likely to carry on with in their career. So I can see how it can be beneficial for ARRI to get in early. I disagree. If you are looking at it from the perspective of "a person camera to own", then yes I agree, an ARRI is very much like "aspiring to have a supercar". But if you look at it from a professional aspect, then ARRI is just your usual standard workhorse camera that gets seen on sets all the time. To graduate without hands on experience with an ARRI would perhaps be like getting your truck driver's license without ever being in a truck and only ever driving a van??? Now of course many film schools wouldn't own an ARRI, not even at "special educational pricing". Those small film schools are getting an URSA Mini instead, or perhaps still using some old gear like a Panasonic AF100, or even worse! But if you're one of the top film schools in the country then you'll be wanting professional cameras from the upper end of the spectrum for your students to work on. Imagine you're in the shoes of an ARRI business manager, do you want all these film schools to be buying and teaching their students about a RED Dragon / Sony PMW-F5 / Panasonic Varicam LT or an ARRI ALEXA?
  23. Fuji likely wasn't expecting IBIS to be a major feature, maybe had never even considered it, back when they design the X Mount. Guess this often happens, people can't predict the future. Sony make a similar, or even worse mistake, as they never planned at the start to squeeze a FF sensor into the E Mount. Canon stumbled with the EOS-M mount, perhaps also never thinking they'd want to put their high end FF sensors into these dainty little consumer bodies. They've gone the path of coming up with a completely new mount instead! Fragmenting their users across EOS M & R mount. (Nikon did something kinda similar, dipped their toe in with the Nikon 1 system, then dumped that completely for Z Mount) Wonder what mount will be the most future proofed to allow new tech to be put into it and built on top without compromise? I'd bet on Nikon Z Mount or L Mount, the newest mounts of them all. But will their late start in the mirrorless market be too late and they've missed the boat in gaining a foothold in market share?
  24. Am sure the ratio of FS7 to C300mk2 varies from market to market and niche to niche. But when you're talking about a large city like Seattle, then I don't believe a C300 could be waaaaay more popular than the FS7. Globally the FS7 would be the #1 most popular cinema camera for corporate shoots. (and heck, popular for all kinds of low budget shoots. Just for instance do a search for the #SonyFS7 vs #CanonC300 hashtags on IG, the FS7 has waaaaaaaaaay more) Am not a local Seattle resident, so I can't speak from first hand experience, but what I did was I went productionhub and did a search for C300 vs FS7 in Seattle. 23 vs 19 result, so yes, Canon is ahead, but only marginally so, within the sampling error for sure. But additionally.... there is a big weakness in this methodology: I bet *many* of these C300 results are referring to the old C300mk1. And we're getting a false positive in the search results. As after all, a very large proportion of veterans who are shooting with a FS7 today were shooting with the C300mk1 before the FS7, so would still have "C300" listed under experience/CV. (as the C300mk1 was the #1 Camera for this bracket before the FS7 stole its crown) Thus I went through the C300 search results reading each profile to see how many had an FS7! Half of them. (plus saw a few more too with a FS5 instead, the "baby FS7") Sure, crippling can occur for more than one reason: market segmentation, lack of horse power, plain old oversight/cluelessness, etc And that's the point, Canon has frequently simply lacked the grunt of cutting edge electronics to give the consumer what they really need. That is why the Canon 1D C had such an efficient codec, that is why the C300mk2 has its weird hidden limitations too, etc
×
×
  • Create New...