IronFilm

Exactly, bit silly to compare data rates of an 8bit vs 10bit file as a way to explain away the shitty 8bit codec.

Sadly I think the answer is "no".

You could go with the Video Devices PIX-E5, which is a 4K 5" recorder, which is smaller than most over 4K recorders. 

23 hours ago, noone said:

Yes it isn't a big difference but then it IS a difference in FAVOUR of the A7s and not the A7Rii.

 

So? My point is the the difference is so tiny it is basically close to irrelevant. 
If the difference was just ISO 5, would you even bother mentioning it? I'd hope not!

23 hours ago, noone said:

The DXO scores are also not just for stills but for RAW stills only too.

 

So? My point is be careful leaning too heavily on DXO scores when they are for stills (raw or not), as there can be a significant disconnect between stills and video performance. 

14 hours ago, tugela said:

Not if you stick a telecompressor between the lens and the smaller sensor, then the smaller sensor receives exactly the same amount of light as the larger sensor would with the same lens.

My bad, I was extraordinarily tired when I read you the first time. 
I realise now we're on the same page :-) 
(welll.... assuming the focal reducer gives the same FoV, then the light gathered is the same too)

11 hours ago, noone said:

I disagree about the A7Rii having better low light performance than the A7sii (or A7s first version) though it is a lot closer than many other cameras and only at very high ISOs.

DXO ISO scores (IE the limit they find acceptable using their criteria) A7Rii  ISO 2993, A7sii ISO 3434 and A7s ISO 3702.      Some of that may be down to sample variation and limited cameras used.

 

If you actually read what DXO says themselves, you'll realise that ISO 441 is mostly a pretty insignificant difference!

Remember also DXO scores are only applicable for photo stills, which can end up being quite irrelevant for us! If the stills vs video performance ends up being waaaaaaay off...

On 7/10/2017 at 5:59 PM, Ivanhurba said:

I just reached the point where ISO at 6400 is enough no matter the camera I use (except my RX10II which 800 is the limit...). Would I love to be able to go higher? Maybe, but for the kind of jobs that pay my bread now, it's time to worry about other things like reliability, battery life, backup security, stealthiness and weight. Just saying .

 

Give it a while, perhaps when the RX100VI comes out, and 1" sensors will be just as good at ISO6400!

23 hours ago, tugela said:

It doesn't matter how big the sensor is, the amount of light received will be determined by the lens arrangement in front of the sensor. If you stick a speedbooster inbetween a crop sensor and a FF lens for example, both crop and FF sensors will receive the same amount of light even though the sensor sizes are different.

Seriously?? Do you not understand how a focal reducer works?

20 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Which isn't happening in real life. At the en of the day there are m4/3 cameras that beat full frame in lowlight and ISO. And vice versa. 

I only look at individual cameras and what they can do. Sensor size is borderline irrelevant.

This. Is. TRUTH.

15 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Sometimes I also notice the difference when I need to stop down a large sensor to get the same DOF as the m4/3. Which results in a darker image and the large sensor is already at max ISO. The shutter is of course fixed.

So a m4/3 can definitely have better lowlight in certain situations.

Yes, people need to not forget about the practical aspects. 

How often are you shooting WFO? ("wide fvcking open!") And even if you are shooting WFO....  MFT gets an edge here with F0.95 lenses just for MFT vs the usual F1.4 for FF cameras. 

But often the DoF is chosen for practical purposes (or artistic purposes) as you don't want to be trying to pull focus with half an inch of DoF, and once you've got picked out (let's say a couple of feet is what you select for your DoF), then if that is kept constant, you'll find FF is operating at quite a disadvantage to MFT!

13 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

My 2016 APS-C is so noisy at 400 its unbearable. Are you saying that that no m4/3 or the rx100 can't beat that?

 

Is this a "2016 APS-C" a Canon DSLR? ;-) 

9 hours ago, maxotics said:

 Also, for the purposes of a podcast, I'm leaning toward a USB interface where I can get 16 channels of separate audio into the computer for under $300.

Which one are you looking at getting, and why do you need 16 channels?

1)

Sounds like you answered your own question? Personally I don't think it is worth it, but it is a fairly subjective question.

2)

You'll be having to deal with more data than any other non-raw 4K camera

3)

Yes.

On 7/10/2017 at 1:39 AM, maxotics said:

As much as I want to divert the thread in a discussion of annoying my family with FX  .... I recorded another podcast last night on the Tascam 70D.  No matter how many times I told them to regulate their voices, by how they sounded in their headphones, they still often talked too loud, or too softly.  A technically proficient friend of mine who was there then became annoyed with me that I didn't keep changing the levels.  My response was it was hopeless and the podcast is just a family thing anyway (doubt anyone would find it very entertaining).   As I mentioned above, my response to JCS's recommendation of the Sound Devices is to taser people, but that's clearly not possible.  So if I was going to do a professional podcast I can't see how I wouldn't want the analogue limiters of the Sound Devices, or other professional gear.  

So I'd like to hear from @jcs, or others, just how valuable, or not, those analogue limiters are in their work.

Just pick a happy middle ground, and use the limiters with a soft knee that the Tascam gives you. You might still find yourself needing to occasionally adjust levels, but not too much, pretty easy to do on the fly. 

Don't go with such an extremely old card! Get yourself a modern one, I'd suggest getting yourself a  GeForce GTX 1050 Ti , they are in plentiful supply, are dirt cheap, and more than kick ass good enough to handle moderate editing demands. 

"2 in" => means you can record at most only two tracks on your PC with this piece of hardware. 

On 7/8/2017 at 10:54 PM, maxotics said:

 (btw, what attracted me to the Yamaha was the voice effects--yep, the 13-year-old in me was like "yeah, I'm going to add Darth Vader to the podcast!  I'm sure my family would rather I didn't!)

You don't need hardware for that? Do it in post with software on your PC. 

8 hours ago, Neumann Films said:

Because the sky high APR kicks in October 1st

Having a hard date to sell items happen over and over would be too scary for me.....   and it might force you to sell it for less than you'd like to sell it for! As you can't hold and wait for a better offer to come along :-/ 

5 hours ago, maxotics said:

 It's those things I'm really starting to appreciate, especially after using the 70D.  Although I can live without analogue pre-amps, I'll just taser anyone who talks too loud  

Just use Tascam's dual record feature! Easy breezy, handy for when actors catch you off guard.

5 hours ago, maxotics said:

Reading about all the professionals, like JCS, who can't live without the finer details that Sound Devices takes care of, makes me wonder if this is a place to go cheap, or make the investment.

Depends, are you earning an income from this? Then you can analyze the ROI ("return on investment"). 

Otherwise treat it the same way you'd look at any other hobby spending, such as buying a boat for your fishing. 

5 hours ago, maxotics said:

In that vein, the Yamaha MG10XU 10-Input Stereo Mixer with Effects is pretty interesting.  Watched some YouTuber set it up.  So throwing that into the ring...sorry!  

I looked it up, and saw this:

"24-bit /192kHz 2-in/2-out USB Audio"

Noooooooooooooooo!!! Avoid it, avoid, abandon ship!

1 hour ago, AaronChicago said:

I have a friend that just picked up an Alexa classic package on eBay for $12k. I would agree with you though that getting a new Alexa and selling within 2 years would retain value better. If you have the capital.

Anything new would depreciate somewhat over two years. You want to find yourself a really good deal, or buy secondhand. 

I'd be fascinated to hear more about this Arri Alexa Classic for $12K, as I've been posting quite often pointing out they exist!!

Could you convince him to come on over to here and start a new thread about his purchase? That would be AMAZING! 

Spooky timing...  !!

Over at gearsultz a very similar thread was started:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remote-possibilities-acoustic-music-location-recording/1156099-simple-question-how-do-you-guys-afford-all-stuff.html

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Tascam US-4x4 (US$200, so probably the priciest one here. But has limiters, and two headphone outputs).

Whoops!! I was thinking of the Roland Rubix24, not the Tascam, same price though at US$200.

3 hours ago, jcs said:

Simple mic-on-camera placement (in the studio all mics are boomed close to talent). In the outside shoot with the NTG-2 and CMIT5U, mic to mouth was about 4 feet. Primary noise source (street) was camera right (perpendicular, so best rejection possible (no sound behind camera, so no need to mic top down)).

 

Hmmmm....  well, oh, reckon you can't  make much of a conclusion when you're just comparing them mounted on the camera. As that isn't how they're meant to be used. 

Still, zero surprise the CMIT5U came out ahead of the NTG2! It is a $2.2K microphone! And I suspect almost noone else will be using it as a microphone on top of a DSLR. 

Still sitting on the fence as to which cheap and affordable USB interface I should buy, I think I've narrowed it down to three that grab my interest the most:

BEHRINGER U-PHORIA UMC404HD (only US$100! And has MIDAS designed pre amps, and has 4 XLR inputs). 

Secondhand Focusrite Scarlett 18I8 (hopefully could get it for sub US$200 secondhand on eBay? Although might be only generation 1, does gen2 add that much more?! I do like that not only does it have 4 XLR inputs, but I can easily enough expand it up to **EIGHTEEN* inputs! :-o ).

Tascam US-4x4 (US$200, so probably the priciest one here. But has limiters, and two headphone outputs).

What do folks think?

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

At the absolute bare *bare* minimum, if you're aspiring to do this professionally and/or you just simply *care* about sound then get an Aputure Deity or Rode NTG3 as your shotgun for outdoors.

A little secret tip for the very frugally minded: if even an Aputure Deity is outside your price range, then grab yourself an Audio-Technica AT4073a from eBay. (Or maybe even the Audio-Technica AT4071a if you can handle the extra bulk of its longer lengrh)

As this was a very popular mic, an "industry standard" even. And a ***tonne*** of these were used by broadcasters for the Olympics (as AT was the Olympic sponsor) which ended up flooding the secondhand market and driving down prices. And unlike the other "industry standard" Sennheiser 416, the Audio-Technica AT4073a is nowhere near as famous, which has helped keep prices down even lower.

http://www.dslrfilmnoob.com/2012/03/27/gear-watch-audio-technica-at4073a-shotgun-mic/

I'd disagree with DSLRfilmnoob here, as if you're paying over two hundred bucks then you failed! As with patience it can be found even cheaper ;-)

I have one myself arriving in a few days, which I picked up for a mere song.

Do you have any BTS pics of mic placement? As that is what matters the most when filming.

But yes, the NTG2 is a student grade mic (or for other non-sound specialists who just don't care about sound, such as cameramen. Which is where I use my NTG2 now, as an on camera mic when there is no other option for a scratch track. I should probably sell my NTG2 though, as I have plenty of other options for that).

At the absolute bare *bare* minimum, if you're aspiring to do this professionally and/or you just simply *care* about sound then get an Aputure Deity or Rode NTG3 as your shotgun for outdoors.

On 7/5/2017 at 10:38 PM, 64mulford said:

Lenses: Thinking the full set of Sigma Arts - 14mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and maybe a 70-200mm

 

If you want to be nimble and fast, then don't get a set of primes!

Get instead the classic "Holy Trinity" of fast zooms for S35 (I'd recommend to get all in Nikon F mount, and it seems like you'll need to do a bit of photography for your job? So thus pick up a Nikon D7100 secondhand for dirt cheap, and it will handle this side of things extremely well):

Tokina 11-20mm 2.8 + Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 + Sigma 50-100mm f1.8

You might want to throw in there an extra long tele zoom, just to have those occasional shots covered! Perhaps the Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D for cheap secondhand. 

Then for whatever system you go with, be it perhaps a Panasonic GH5 or say a Sony FS5 or even the Panasonic EVA1, then also get couple of native lenses which work to the strengths of the system, specifically a superzoom (for extra run and gun speed, it is handy at times!) and a pancake lens (for when you want to go undercover!). 

Examples:

Sony 18-105mm f4 + Sony 20mm f2.8

Panasonic 14-140mm (or a Panasonic 12-60mm) + Panasonic 20mm f1.7

On 7/5/2017 at 10:38 PM, 64mulford said:

Audio: Rode shotgun, lavs and Zoom recorder

Hell no.  No, just no, no. 

I'd go for Aputure Deity + Audix SCX1-HC + 3x Sony UWP-D11 + Zoom F4 (or Tascam DR70D if the budget is being stretched too far) + multiple OST Lavs + 2x Ultrasync ONE (or Tentacle Syncs if DSLRs are being used a lot) + 3m & 5m carbon fibre boom poles + blimp + Rode WS6 + dead kitten + Rycote InVision INV-HG + Electro-Voice RE50L + RodeLink Newsshooter Kit (note: **NOT** the Filmmakers Kit!!!) + lots and lots of various other supporting accessories you'll need...

Together, this makes up a very good "no budget" level soundie's kit to start out with. 

Edit: although... I just realised you didn't say you're solo shooting? Hopefully you're not! But now I think about it.... you might be? 

If so, then you choice of audio gear changes quite a bit, and also depends on what camera you're getting, and even more heavily depends on your particular style as a solo shooter as to just how much (or rather: how little!!) you'll care for sound (as this can vary an awful lot from one shooter to the next).

8 hours ago, mercer said:

I meant two well shot films but yes I agree with you. 

Oh, what did you mean then by a "bad movie" shot on an Alexa?

2 hours ago, dbp said:

Following and discussing tech is still very fun to me, but I think it's been removed as the limiting factor for a while now. Seems like lighting, stabilizers etc are slowly following suit.

I feel the next big areas to come down to the average joe level and be democratized is lighting and audio tech.

Hopefully we will get more/better/cheaper HMIs, like what CAME-TV is already doing:

https://www.came-tv.com/collections/hmi-par-and-fresnel-light

We also need more educational material for aspiring gaffers.

Luke Seerveld's "Meet the Gaffer" series I think is the **ONLY** regular content on YouTube being produced by an independent working professional gaffer?

The good thing though is there is a ***HEAP*** of other film lighting info out there as well to get started with, even if it is often more coming from the DoP's side of things that is being shared rather than the gaffer's perspective. 

Then there is what companies like Aputure is doing with LED technology, which is going to be (and already is) a massive GAME CHANGER for the lighting world! 

Especially as cameras are getting better and better at low light, it means smaller lighting packages can be used (such as LED powered ones). Because let's admit it, even something like a Panasonic GH5 with fast lenses is pretty damn good at low light. Gives us abilities to see in the dark that filmmakers in the mid (or even late) 2000's would've killed for!!

3 hours ago, mercer said:

I think the difference in consumer equipment versus professional equipment is where the divide is. A bad movie shot on an Alexa will still look better than a good movie shot on a GH1 or a t2i or a D5500.

 

I'd disagree, a well shot movie with a D5500 will absolutely be better than someone with an Arri Alexa who doesn't know what they're doing. 

Lighting, composition, art, costume, audio, etc (I didn't even mention "story") all matter **A LOT**. 

But all of that stuff hardly cares what camera it is shot on, in the big picture perspective of everything. 

While watching one of their BTS videos (which they'd linked to as part of their advert for a new flatmate) of a local kiwi filmmaking duo:

I realised from watching their BTS of the film, that their feature film (which is a damn decently good one for a person's first feature and done on a very low budget, absolutely worth a watch!) was shot on the Panasonic AF100 (for those who are somehow not familiar with this camera, think of it as like a hacked Panasonic GH1 but in a camcorder body):

I think (?) that their second feature film (disclosure: I was involved myself in its shooting for a very tiny part of it! As the sound recordist for a few pick up shoot days) was primarily shot with a Canon 1D C and a 5Dmk3 ML raw, thus this film when it is released should also be of great interest to members of this forum: