IronFilm

I think the way NZ manages to luckily make this "work" (our government spending as a % of the economy is worse than the USA, creeping close to Greek levels) is:

1) we're a pretty lucky country! Remotely located away from the troubles of the rest of the world (no wars to worry about, or illegal immigrants flooding over our boarders). We're not known for being "the country of milk and honey" for nothing! We have a great climate and country for agriculture. 

2) we had massive reforms in the 1980's / early 1990's which helped turn us around (we used to be known as "Fortress New Zealand", as we had such stringent controls. Possibly the worst of any country outside the Soviet Block!)

3) we live "Outside the Asylum" (for now! Though is getting worse): https://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.com/search/label/fun 
https://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-outside-of-asylum.html

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

The only serious problem I had, it is their range, as they are 30 or 35mV and can't really compare with anyone really! I wish they were 50mV, but for the price, we have had something to give.

They're 30mW (not mV!).

Which isn't so bad....    you should make it very workable with care. Unless you're trying to send it to a sound cart a couple of rooms away?! But for bag usage, in the same room, should be no biggie. 

btw, I have Lectrosonics UM450, which has 250mW!! :-o

But in the end, size isn't what matters, it is how you use it ;-) 

As range is determined by both the transmitter (not just power matters, but other factors such as placement) and the receiver (such as having diversity, or using shark fins, etc).

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

@IronFilm Wireless is a nightmare for me! So much expensive, when sound is not paid that well. I saw your rates on your site, I know they are NZ$, and life there must be slightly more expensive than here (and I am not that sure to be honest), but those rates are impossible, 

You're in Greece? I guess with their whole economy going down the drain, it will be a struggle to get a good income no matter what area it is you're working in. 

As for my rates, they're a little on the lower end for professionals in my city. (which is lower than say Americans get!)
But also, the volume of full rate jobs I get is still relatively low :-/ I do a heck of a lot of lower budget jobs instead. 
I also struggle with ever getting a decent gear rental rate for what I'm bringing to a job, sigh (which has to make you wonder if it is wise all the money I spend on new gear..... !).
So still got a lot of work to do yet with lifting my earnings! But I'm feeling positive about the direction they're going in :-) 
I certainly feel ok about missing out on or turning down work if their rates are too pathetically low. (like recently a web series which was going to only pay every crew member $150/day! Flat. All in. & all crew members the same. Seriously)

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

while we have to pay 52-78% of our income to the government

Sadly, we're not actually as different as you think! :-o

I looked it up, in Greece government spending is 52% of the economy. In New Zealand it is 48%
 

11 hours ago, mercer said:

Ain’t that the truth. I am in no place to tell someone how to spend their money, god knows I’ve spent a small fortune of my own but as a hobbyist that is also interested in the conveniences of cinema cameras, I cannot rightly say that I could ever justify a $4500 price tag just to have 4K, when the majority of viewers will never see the benefits. In my opinion, if Arri hasn’t felt the need to release a 4K camera, then I don’t see why anybody on here really NEEDS one. 

So with that being said I feel the OP should get whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants, but I would still suggest either an F3, a C100ii or C300 or I guess an LS300 or FS5 if he really wants a 4K camera. And if he wants one on the cheap then get an LS300 but he should be fully aware of the build quality before just hitting buy it now.

I've made this point a few times now elsewhere in other threads/forums, and basically if you're not making money from your camera than you shouldn't get a 4K cinema camera. You should get yourself a 1080 cinema camera, or a 4K stills camera (or heck... even a 1080 one, no shame in shooting with a G6/D750/a7Smk1!).

EXCEPTION: if you're a rich hobbyist. Go ahead and buy an URSA Mini Pro! Or whatever.

As then things don't have to make any more financial sense to you than the $20K road bike you purchased but only ride down to the coffee shops once a fortnight, or the $20K set of golf clubs you haven't used for the last year. 

4 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

I know some people who have a poor opinion of the F3, and honestly agree with their reasons. Most of them have either A) shot the F3 without LOG, or B) shot on the internal codec. Safety Not Guaranteed proved that neither is a death sentence with a professional colorist, but the camera really only takes its place as one of the best 1080p sensors when utilizing both LOG and an external recorder. The earlier comparison between the C300, Epic, and F3 demonstrates that gap in image quality quite clearly.

Yeah, Safety Not Guaranteed being shot pre-Slog days kinda squashes many complaints about its internal quality. Sure, it is not as good as the external recordings with slog, but what really matters is the operator/lighting/director/editor/etc!

Everything is very relative, & is tricky to make broad statements across all countries.

For example, for the last few elections in America, Obama/Clinton were regarded as the most left wing candidates ever. Yet by my country's standards, even our most "far right" party in Parliament is in many ways to the *left* of Hillary/Barrack!

6 hours ago, redimp said:

Answering your questions – I don't own a camera anymore, sold the bmmcc a week ago along with lots of s16 lenses. Have also shot with 5d and A7s.

My goal is to get ready to a music video project we plan to shoot this fall hopefully. I make music myself and want to be able to shoot videos/stories to release along with it. I have also written a couple of scripts that I never managed to shoot because my old gear never was able to provide the aesthetics I desired – starting with extremely deep DOF and ending with a limited FOV due to the lens I used.

Currently I own an Iscorama-36 (anamorphic block) and a set of Lomo cine glass (35, 50 and 75). That's why I'm looking to get a super35 cam in PL mount – to get that shallow DOF and cinematic image aesthetics. I also own some contax glass, so in those terms I guess I'm covered. Now I just want the body that will allow me to use this glass and be comfortable to work with for my DP and myself, and reduce the technical limitations a bit, so I can get the images I want to easier.

Not sure if it makes any sense at all, but that was my logic all the way. I also expect that if I invest this much into a camera it will encourage me more to use it. My bmmcc was sitting on the shelf for the last year. Anything I wanted to use it for seemed to be a waste of effort, since I knew that images won't be as good as I want them to be.

Now coming back to your suggestions – ursa seems to have a really nice image, that doesn't look like video, more like film. I am scared of all the problems with FPN that bmmcc had as well, but almost any footage I've seen out of it looks very pleasing. But everybody very aggressively recommends to get the Pro version, because of the NDs and other ergonomic benefits, cheaper recording media, etc. Also people recommend to get it new from the official reseller, since any ebay unit can turn out to be a failure with bad XLRs, FPN, magenta corners or dead pixels, and it's possible that one will have to return the camera for exchange. I am located in Ukraine, and new pro body here is $6300, non-pro version is $5300. Add V-mount plate and tripod plate, batteries and media and you can easily go over 7 grand.
 

Really sounds like the F3 is the right choice for you.

Or maybe perhaps a Sony FS700.

Or maaaaaybe if feeling really super adventurous and up for it, try to get lucky with a cheap Sony F35.

However, if a you never did much while owning a BMMCC then I highly doubt buying an even more expensive camera will radically change that.

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

Well, now that you have added 4K to your list and $4500 cap, then it seems an Ursa 4.6 or FS5 may be the way to go. But you will need a little more accessories for the Ursa.

Yeah, whatever is your budget for a camera body, go ahead and double it immediately, then double it again!

Once you add in accessories + lenses + lights + audio + tripod + etc.... it is very easy to blow waaaaaay past that!

http://www.43rumors.com/datavideo-shows-new-nighthawk-mft-camcorder-409600-iso/

Kind of an odd ball camera here!

Don't think it is worth US$3,000-$3,500?! But who knows, I might be surprised! Probably makes a lot more sense for its niche it is aimed at, than a general purpose filming camera. 

But hey... another one with a Micro Four Thirds mount!!
Why the hell Panasonic could you not support your own mount with the EVA1??? Dumb dumb to give bolster a competitor (Canon) instead. 

51 minutes ago, redimp said:

I'm a bit confused here. So you need a cam with 444 option activated to record 60p, but you don't actually record 444 footage?

You don't have to record 444 if you don't want/need to. 
But you can if you wish!

4 minutes ago, redimp said:

Do they both record 444?

Nah, but I think that arguably the difference between the two is not that great.  
Especially if you want to save on the data storage and the extra cost for a recorder. 

Heck, with my BMPCC I almost never recorder raw, and ProRes444 doesn't even exist as an option, so ProResHQ is my usual choice (or even ProResLT! :-P If it is just to be uploaded immediately to my vlog).

So in a way, I'm approaching my BMPCC and F3 in the same way here. 

On 6/5/2017 at 5:10 PM, mat33 said:

All of these cameras are amazing really, as a m4/3 user I just find it interesting at the decisions Panasonics Pro division makes.  It seems they really don't like m4/3 and what the GH series have become, which is strange as they once owned the enthusiast/indie market with the DVX100.  First they gimped v-log-l by making it's standout feature be that it matched the varicam curve but in the process threw away bits of data making it pretty useless in 8-bit and now they have seemingly ruled out any solutions that give some chance of m4/3 being a system with GH5 and a more pro style cinema camera sharing lenses.

Office politics apparently. From what I've heard the leader of the pro division is mad at the GH developers for what he thinks is "stealing" from him.

42 minutes ago, redimp said:

I'm collaborating with a friend of mine who's also a DP full time, he says he worked with this camera a lot in the past and it's not good, so that's holding me off from buying it, otherwise I would've pulled the trigger on it already, you guys seem to love it.

What specifically is he saying? If he is just vaguely say "it is not good" then call him out on his bullsh*t

42 minutes ago, redimp said:

Also the price for the body is on a cheap side, yes, that $1400 cam you've linked to earlier seems like a great deal, but Covergent recorders seem to cost another $1500, and that's a 3k package we're looking at, excluding cost of SSDs for the recorder.

Get an Atomos Samurai Blade like I did (or get a BMD VA), you can find it secondhand for just $300ish. Or buy new for $500
SSDs are dirt dirt cheap these days! We are not still living in the days of the BMCC when it was first released, and you had to spend a minor small fortune on recording media. 

 

42 minutes ago, redimp said:

I've spotted a Kinemini for sale today, it's a package for $4k. Seems to tick all the boxes apart from the NDs, but watched the footage on vimeo/yutube and apart from this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhyCOtG9aWE I could not find anything decent.

A full Kinemini package for $4K would be good too, did you know they just recently announced a Terra 4K as well? US$4K for the brain. 

They shot a bunch of other things with their KiniMINI as well:

Basically we live in a fantastic time, any of FS700/F3/Kinemini/Terra/BMMCC/BMPCC would be a excellent choice that great things can be made with!

Had a friend have something a bit odd happen with his GH5, he has two identical Lexar cards, but one does, and the other doesn't work in his GH5!

Because Panasonic does it much much less so (arguably to a reasonable extent),  while Canon doesn't. 

3 hours ago, kaylee said:

aaaaanyway ive decided to make 9 (+/-) 5 min episodes, so the whole thing is (+/-) 45 min, like an hour long tv show minus commercials

thinking of it as basically an episode of the xfiles divided into pieces makes sense to me

 

if anyone has [additional] feedback on that point, PLEASE speak now or forever hold your peace lol

I'd see how many more iterations you can have of the script, going over the script to tighten it down, if you can make it be say 5x 4 minute episodes instead for instance. 

Not only will that make it easier to produce, but I believe a faster snappier web series will be more appealing to the audience than a slack drawn out one is (not at all saying yours is.... never seen your script! But just making a general point here).

On 9/27/2017 at 1:41 PM, Kisaha said:

those stock Sonys are really good (for what they are)! Just finished a TV series for a major network here, and it was almost live TV, had 2-3 presenters at all time, and a couple more random people, plus boom (416 outside, Oktava in some interiors, but inside it was mostly radios). It was a nightmare to shoot, and Sonys did the job.

1 of the Sony's kit broke (we had 6) so I am consider buying another 2, the pro version with the better Sony capsule. I was that impressed.

Six is a lot! :-o Ha, then again I do have 5x UWP-D11 myself. Never yet used them all at once however, but have been using 4 of them + a Lectro the last couple of weeks.  (oh wait, I did once use all 5! Had one UWP-D11 receiver taking a feed from my 552, which was attached to a plant mic, then being sent back to my F4)

If you want a better mic capsule, why not start by getting some OST lavs?

http://www.oscarsoundtech.com/services.html

Pro Sony wireless, are you referring to the DWX series? 

I do wonder if DWX is compatible with their UWP gear, as then it would be tempting to buy one of those dual receiver DWR to use with my existing Sony transmitters as a half way upgrade step.

However my UWP-D11 transmitters are already so lightweight and their DWR is kinda bulky, I doubt if there is any weight savings  at all?

Sony DWRS02D weight = 9 oz (255.14 g)
Sony URXP03 = 6.21 oz (176 g) including batteries (for AA batteries, rechargeable Ni-MH cells around 31 g / 1.1 oz each)

Plus of course there is always the Sony URX-P03D 2-Channel Reciever: 7.4 oz (210 g)

Thus getting the Sony DWRS02D would be a backwards move for me in terms of saving weight in my bag. 

Unlike my Lectrosonics UCR210D which are hell bulky and heavy! Switching to Lectrosonics SR series would make a big difference for me. 

Anyway, when you look up the prices:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1259102-REG/sony_dwt_b01n_30_digital_bodypack_transmitter_566.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/879345-REG/Sony_DWRS02D_30_Dual_Channel_Digital.html

Not cheap! 

Don't see the point in it when I can buy a Lectrosonics SMQV for less:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/877748-REG/Lectrosonics_smqv_21_SMQV_Super_Miniature_Wireless.html

The Lectrosonics SRc is a little more expensive:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1242605-REG/lectrosonics_src5p_b1_src5p_dual_channel_slot_mount.html

But you're certain to pick up a SRb for cheaper!
 

3 hours ago, Dogtown said:

I put it together, I found these on Vimeo. I was looking at this camera 3 years ago, and found a lot of these examples on Vimeo. I ended up buying three of these F3's, as the price with the S Log RGB was $1,800 to $2,000 (with a few extras as well!) you can't beat the F3 for the money. And built very well with all the HDSDI outputs. I find it can shoot just about anything you can throw at it  

Might steal this list, and add a few of my own, for a future blog post at some point. 

As would be nice to have one central link I can point people to when referring to what the F3 is capable of. 

Other than this of course:

http://www.shotonf3.com 

3 minutes ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I totally agree with his comment that 4k vfx etc. are prohibitively expensive. What's weird is online it always seems to be vfx artists (or companies pushing cameras as designed for vfx) asking for higher resolution. Whereas in my (very limited) experience and in agreement with that tweet, 4k is the LAST thing vfx artists want. But I read a post on Canon Rumors, presumably from an artist on Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (which is the only thing I can think of shot at 8k), who was discussing how great 8k is for vfx.

A lot of conflicting narratives there.

For Keying / tracking / etc then 4K can be handy. 

CGI? Nope!

So I guess it means what type of VFX you are talking about. 

http://www.filmtake.com/streaming/subscription-video-trends-challenges-part-one/

Quote

 

Subscribers watching licensed and original television series’ content on Netflix account for more than two-thirds of viewing time.

Series viewership outpaces overall growth mainly because Netflix has dedicated vast resources to becoming a content producer rather than remaining only an aggregator.

Although Netflix has acquired rights to a modest number of films at Sundance, Cannes, and TIFF, their U.S. film streaming library remains weak.

 

Quote

 

For every $8 per month Netflix collects from its 100 million subscribers, between $6-7 is spent on content production and licensing. More than half of these content costs now fuels Netflix original programming, which has soared.

The size of Netflix’s film library has steadily decreased over the last two years. 

 

Quote

 

At a recent conference, Netflix’s Chief Content Officer said one-third of subscribers view movies, regardless of how many different movies are in its library.

Adding more movies to its library doesn’t increase the amount subscribers watch.

Independent film distributors would benefit from banding together to offer streaming options rather than having their films buried in Netflix’s original series catalog or Amazon’s impossibly expansive warehouse of everything.

 

Wonder if this might be bad news for indie filmmakers trying to sell films to Netflix? 
(good news though if you're pitching an original series to Netflix! But for the vast majority of us, that isn't applicable)

1 hour ago, Dogtown said:

 I recommend the Optitek FZ to Nikon or Canon lens convertor, it's rock solid and locks the Nikon or canon lens on the F3 without any jiggle or play. I use my Odyssey 7Q+ and together they work a charm

I'd love the Optitek mount & an Odyssey!

But that would kinda defeat my purpose of being super frugal with my camera purchase.... :-/ 

So poor me settled for a chinese eBay FZ adapter, and an Atomos Samurai Blade. Still happy with it though! Is excellent. 

Saw this tweet:

"John Wick 2: 2k, Alien covenant: 2k, Arrival: 2k, Fury Road: 2k. Do people really think they are getting actual 4k resolution movies?"

https://twitter.com/RuairiRobinson/status/912865327221846016

People shouldn't feel pressured to buy a 4K camera (plus almost all VFX, with some rare exceptions, is not done in 4K! And with how VFX heavy films are these days, even the 4K films are typically having a lot that is not 4K)

4 hours ago, DBounce said:

It’s important to point out that all thing being equal, a 4K file is 4x the size of a comparable 1080p file. So this file would be equivalent to 4K at 800 Mbps, assuming the same compression ratio.

You get scales of efficiency with compressing a higher resolution image (as the same jmage at 4K, is not the same as 4x random 1080 images), so it would not be exactly a linear increase in bit rate that is needed.

But as a first approximation, it is a good enough guess.

Nice! Where did you get this list from, or did you put it together yourself?

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

No, its body only price. 

Ah, because currently on B&H it goes for $999 with a 12-60mm lens

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1280824-REG/panasonic_dmc_gm85mk_lumix_dmc_g85_mirrorless_micro.html

4 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

 For me, G85 is my first camera on which I shoot video at all. 

Lucky lucky!! For me the Panasonic GH1 was my first personal video camera (Nikon D50 was my first camera, unless you count my cell phones).

& before then I was using a borrowed Nikon D90 (from my GF) or a Canon T2i (from my sister) for my film school assignments.

You've got to be joking