IronFilm

Only one has been on eBay recently: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ikonoskop-A-Cam-dii-Super-16mm-CCD-Digital-Cinema-Camera-DNG-RAW-kit-extras-/122572101775 The guy wanted US$10K! :-o

Ha! Did you look up what it was shot on, or did you already know? ;-) I posted it because I get a little tired sometimes of discussions of higher end cameras as "cinematic", or writing off various cameras as *not* cinematic. Basically we're living in an amazing time of abundance, with a luxury of choices when it comes to cameras. *Any* dedicated video camera with interchangeable lens mount and 4K is a top notch choice that can be "cinematic", As your lighting/grading/composition/movement/filters/lenses/etc will all add up to making a much much greater difference than whatever camera you choose from those options! If a person is not happy their results are not "cinematic" with such a camera, then very likely the problems lies with themselves! Not the camera body.

That is still less than HALF the price of a GH5. And you got a lens for that $900 with the G85? Which the $2K GH5 doesn't come with. If it follows the trends of GH3/G6 and GH4/G7 then the G90 will probably have a few little areas where it is better than the GH5 ;-) (but not in all ways) I know for me at least, I preferred the G6 over the GH3, and is one reason why I purchased the G6.

That "LUMIX Tether" PC software is cool news for studio shooters! Something to keep the stills photographers happy! As they often complain about Panasonic being too video focused (they could always just buy Olympus instead!)

Is this a "filmic" look? Or does this series have a "video" look?

On my super crappie Samsung J2 (yeah I know, I need a new phone! But I keep on spending my money on filmmaking gear....) then the site seems to be loading a tiny bit slower. Not unbearable though.

Ditto. I paid the same price for my 444 F3 too, *years* ago ;-) It is impossible to recommend a better full size cinema camera at this price point. The only reasons which might hold me back: Is if you want to go smaller: BMD Pocket or Micro. But then you miss out on other features. Or if you can stretch the budget a little: because the FS700 has fallen so far in price now! (This is probably what I'd do instead of an F3, if I was doing this all over again today) Or the wildcard JVC LS300 Or you want a stills camera too: Panasonic GH5, or G80.

Can't remember if it was an Oktava or a Samson C02. I'd need to look up what I wrote in my metadata. Lav was a stock Sony UWP-D11 If I was you I'd stick with the Oktava, until you can afford a MKH50 or Scheops. As what other gear gaps are more pressing for you? Robustness?

Has timecode and genlock too, which I as a soundie appreciate.

The G85 is going to be made better however, when the G90 gets released ;-)

Whoops! Should have taken more careful note of the usernames.

Interesting! No issues ever with the cable? Would love to see BTS video of a shoot with this, as well as the photos.

Yup, all businesses practice segmentation of some sort or another. And yup, Canon does it far worse than Panasonic! (or Sony)

My kit is listed here: http://ironfilm.co.nz/sound/ Technique is nothing too special? Just using my ears and brain, with a boom and lav on talent.

HD? PL? S35? 60p? NDs? DR? Colors? Lowlight? Sounds like you just described the Sony PMW-F3! ;-) Smart!! No contest. F3 wins. Yeah, JVC LS300 or secondhand Sony FS700 are probably the only other S35 cinema cameras with NDs I'd consider on an ultra low budget, other than the Sony F3. Rather go with a BMD Pocket/Micro than the BMCC

No. You forget about the unseen. What many discoveries are we missing due to the lack of private spending? Because it was sucked out of the economy by the government. There are private couriers too.

Oh hey, I've got a whole thread with my username in the title! :-P From memory there was an HMI shining from the kitchen window on the left, I kinda forget about the rest used. I probably should upload soon the BTS I filmed for my vblog, might jog my memory about the lighting.

No. Part of the reason why Apple was so successful is exactly because Jobs put great engineers in place at his company (and yes, that means partly having a great HR department in place too, to recruit them). Or have you so quickly forgotten Steve Wozniak? He was just the first of many great engineers to work for Apple.

Do you feel creating the atomic bomb was a net gain for humanity? I doubt it. Was putting a man on the moon the best use of billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars? It was just a big dick waving competition with the USSR. I feel society would have flourished more if that money had been left with those who earned it, to spend as they saw best, rather than being stolen away to finance the space race. The US Postal Service is operating at a massive loss. You didn't give particularly good examples of government :-/

LOL! Wellllll....... they are right, you acquire a lot of experience of failure over a hundred years!

Why not RED? Or Canon. Because the skintones & DR are not good? So is a smaller camera without IBIS? Thus in conclusion: a Sony (but not in s-log), or maybe a Panasonic?

Ha! Those guesses are all over the place. But you are right that it wasn't shot on an F3, or any other camera I own. As I had zero influence over camera choice. Well, as people talk so much about the inherent color science of one brand or another, I'll give a hint by narrowing it down to just a few brands it might be and see what people might rule out: RED Sony Canon Panasonic The camera was from one of those four. Random observation: We shot this over one single day. You can very obviously see how the ratio of internal to external light changed over the day by observing the kitchen window on the left.

This is the point I've been long making. That the feeder network of cameras matters a lot for sales success of the higher end cameras. Thus Panasonic made a massive blunder with their Panasonic EVA1. They have a massive success with their Panasonic GH series of the years. Then you have the Panasonic Varicam LT which is a top notch high end camera. The Panasonic EVA1 was the golden opportunity to build a bridge between those two worlds Panasonic has succeeded in!! & provide a pathway up for GH series owners. But Panasonic failed to have a MFT version of the Panasonic EVA1. While this is an area Sony is doing successfully. You could start out with say a NEX-5N or a5100, then move up to an a7Rmk2, then secondhand FS700 for 4K raw, then an FS7mk2, and then a VENICE!!! All the way along you get to stick with the same E mount throughout! Genius! Have you seen CHDK?? Magic Lantern was so successful because they got to build on top of that success. You won't see Magic Lantern for any other camera ever happening any time soon, without that massive amount of groundwork being laid beforehand.

Heh, & that is the same crop as a GH2 ;-) And 4K really isn't needed by many. I won't get a 4K camera until next year, or maybe even the year after!

No. That wasn't what I was saying. Plus a BMPCC / F3 / GH5 / FS700 / LS300 / etc are all very very good cameras in their own rights. Cameras with these capabilities that many indie filmmakers just a few short years ago would have given their kidney to get their hands on. Anyway, my core point is just to keep things in perspective. A camera is but a tiny part of the overall package you need to spend. Especially if you're an indie filmmaker just doing it for the love of it, there is a greater need you'll also have to have a comprehensive lighting + sound + etc kit as well. Vs if you're a professional owner op you might be able to get away with a bit more minimalistic kit, as you'll be hiring in crew people with that kit or having the budget to rent. And like another commentor said, if you go with a cinema camera such as a RED ONE then it will place heavy demands on the size of crew and lighting package needed. Either that, or you'll find yourself severely limited with only a R1. Also, if you're an indie filmmaker you'll be making relatively few films per year. Vs a professional who is using their camera day in day out every single week. Yet the likes of a brand new URSA Mini Pro will be experiencing very heavy depreciation over the coming years. Thus from the long term perspective I wouldn't recommend it. (Too often have I seen indie filmmakers blow the bank on an expensive camera that is the latest hot item such as say a brand new Sony EX1 or Panasonic AF100, only to sit sadly with it a few years down the track never having used it to its full potential) So once you think about the total cost of ownership both initially and over the years, it is a sizeable sum. Now if you're the guy who can drop tonnes of money on his hobbies (I think the analogy I gave before was spending $20K on golf clubs?!) then sure, go right ahead and buy an URSA Mini Pro! Or Kinefinity Terra 6K! Or a RED Raven! Or whatever. I have zero problem whatsoever with wealth, and people spending extravagantly if it is within their means. But I was just pointing out that for most people they don't have that kind of money to drop on a hobby, once you all add it up. Thus for most indie filmmakers an F3 / BMPCC / FS700 / GH5 / LS300 / etc are the max camera spend it makes sense to do. Note I said "most" and "max". Not "all". There are always exceptions! Note also, I said "max". As I'd also say for the bulk of indie filmmakers a GH1 to G80 is the range where they fit in. Not even a GH5. Too often I see new filmmakers with say a GH5 but only the kit lens! They'd be better off buying a Panasonic G80 and putting the spare money into a few Nikon F mount lenses + focal reducer + redhead kit + C stands & cutters / diff + a few LED lights.