IronFilm

14 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

I like the D750, but I DO need a backup, and it kind of makes sense of I am going to do video in addition to stills to have an a6500 and an a6000 as a backup (or an a6300 as a backup) instead of a D750 and D5500 (I would get the model that has the touch screen for faster focusing). 

 

I wouldn't say there is that much of a dealbreaker for me personally with a Nikon D5200/D5300/D5500 vs a Sony a6000, and sticking with the Nikon brand has benefits for now. 

15 hours ago, DBounce said:

I don't know that the Canon is a "luxury status item". The 1DXMk2 is a real workhorse of a camera.

For all but a tiny tiny tiny niche of readers here, the 1D X mk2 would indeed be a luxury item. 
And I bet a not insignificant portion of 1D X mk2 sales go to rich dentists/accountants/lawyers/doctors/etc

15 hours ago, DBounce said:

If you want a Leica and you want a EVA1... or FS7...  just buy both. 

Ha! "Just buy both" is not that simple at all for most people. 

13 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Yeah, I know a few people doing real estate stills with a D300 (12MP crop sensor) and a Sigma 10-20 (hardly the sharpest lens out there) and they do quite well for themselves. 

 

The friend I know who does the highest volume real estate (as in at times dozens and dozens of houses per week!) was up until a few months ago shooting them on 2x Nikon D700 bodies, also 12 megapixels. 

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

@jax_rox EVA ain't C200 in no way, it doesn't even have a viewfinder (the most obvious difference),

Meh. I think Panasonic simply decided it was more sensible to let people choose their own viewfinder, rather than ship one which might not work for everyone (but everyone would need to pay for, via a higher price). 

Also, for the vast majority of us, they're purely luxury status items. 

A better buy for a videographer would be a Sony FS5, or heck you're almost getting into territory of a Panasonic EVA1 or secondhand FS7 (which would be a real workhorse).

Ages and ages ago (last year), I wrote up this draft for a blog post about the Nikon D750 (partially because I was considering buying one myself):
 

Quote

 

Go with the Nikon D750, it is a killer general purpose FX DSLR especially in low light. Read this reviews, including lots from people who have been lifelong Canon shooters but now the D750 means they can no longer deny the compelling case to ditch Canon for Nikon:

http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-d750-review

("The above image, imported into Lightroom with the exposure pushed +5 stops, is below. Mind boggling detail recovery! The depth of detail in the dark shadow areas seems to defy logic, they are essentially black in the original image. Stunning.")

("Stellar performance from the D750! It has kept pace with the undisputed DXOMark DSLR low light king!")

https://www.slrlounge.com/nikon-d750-best-wedding-dslr-ever/

("In other words, people have been saying “it’s a matter of preference” for years, and sure, Canon and other companies do make amazing cameras. However when I tally up the real-world benefits and drawbacks of each camera on the market, the D750 wins by a margin that any wedding or portrait photographer will find hard to ignore…")

http://shotkit.com/megan-allen/

("Interestingly enough, I started out last year on Canon, and shot all my weddings on a Canon 6D and a Canon 5D Mark III.

 

I started on Canon because it was what the camera store had suggested, however, after the Nikon D750 released, I was impressed by the reviews coming out, and watched many of my friends and colleagues make the jump to Nikon.

 

One weekend I decided to test the Nikon D750 out, and that was all it took. While Canon was fine, Nikon has allowed me to shoot in a manner I feel is more intuitive to my style, and it’s really allowed me to push my abilities to the next level. So, without further ado, I give you my Shotkit!

 

Nikon D750 x2: Like I said, I was (and still am) fairly new to the photography world, but switching from Canon to Nikon was like having a pair of blinders taken off for me.

 

The Nikon D750 is unbelievably light, the autofocus is nearly mind-reading at times, it’s a low-light monster, and crazy sharp. The dynamic range is just mind-blowing, and to this day I’ll look at files and shake my head in disbelief at how much you can truly work them.")

https://hofferphotography.com/2015/02/26/the-3-reasons-why-we-switched-to-nikon/

("If you had asked me 1 month ago, I would have told you that our next major equipment change was going to be when we switched to a mirrorless system. I didn’t want to change.. but these 3 things changed my mind:")

http://www.wirkshopseries.com/why-i-gave-up-on-a-30-year-relationship-with-my-camera-2/

("During a conversation about cameras and gear, a wise photographer said to me: “it’s not the arrow, it’s the Indian.” (Meaning the camera has nothing to do with it. It’s the photographer that matters.)

 

I believed him and stuck to that motto for years, slowly upgrading my gear only when necessary. The last new camera I bought was two years ago and I still shoot with a 10-year-old camera and even older lenses. Fast forward to a few days ago when I rented a Nikon D750 and found myself doing something I honestly never thought I would do.

 

After being a lifetime Canon shooter, I am now a Nikon shooter.

 

Hell has frozen over, pigs are flying, and the fat lady has indeed sung. However you want to say it, I’m amazed that I now have two Nikon D750’s sitting in my studio ready for action.

 

I have been an avid Canon shooter for about 30 years. The very first photo I ever took was on my Dad’s Canon FTB. I’ve shot Canon cameras since then with unwavering loyalty. So why the change?

 

It wasn’t easy to make this decision, but all it took was shooting one wedding with the new Nikon D750 and it was lights out for my long-standing relationship with Canon.

I had heard the Nikon D750 was pretty much the perfect wedding camera. Words like “game changer” were being thrown around and most of my friends were backing it. For years I heard how superior Nikon’s auto-focus was to Canon’s, but I wasn’t a true believer, nor did I have the financial resources to make the switch. So I stuck with my Canon gear, fighting frustration with not only autofocus but also ISO quality. There were (and still are) things about Nikon cameras that don’t appeal to me. I have never liked the ergonomics of Nikons; the placement of the dials never agreed with my hands compared to Canon. I can use my Canon cameras super fast and have nailed great photos because of the ability to spin the shutter speed and aperture dials at lighting speeds. That combined with the massive price tag to switch systems never allowed me to consider it.

 

Until now.

 

Enter the Nikon D750. Finally, a camera has arrived that makes it undeniably hard to ignore, but more importantly, makes it financially possible to jump ship.")

http://shotkit.com/imagine-photography/

("Nikon D750 x 2 – The switch from Canon to the Nikon D750 was terrifying for us. Why? Because we had been with canon for our entire careers, which for Jo was a 20 year period. We just never touched anything else. I am happy to report that these little beauties have been a godsend. Missed shots due to focus issues? Gone. Soft images? Gone. Heavy body? Gone. We have a keeper rate well over 95% now, and the files are sharp, have brilliant color tones, the high ISO noise is beautiful (almost film-like when done right), the features such as WiFi and tilt screen (which I actually felt were gimmicky when I learned of them) are actually rather helpful and we use the latter a lot during each wedding, and we have way less body ache from carrying the cameras in our Holdfast Money Maker straps during an 8 hour day. It’s been pure bliss from word go. We were lucky to see the cameras 1st hand at WPPI, and the folks at Nikon were more than happy to show us the features and cool bells and whistles of the bodies.")

https://fstoppers.com/education/how-i-have-my-camera-set-shoot-weddings-73441

("The Nikon D750 is one of the most talked about cameras in a long time. It’s a small lightweight body that packs a major feature set and has even lured Nikon D4 shooters to "upgrade." ")

http://zachashcraft.com/blog/2014/11/20/nikon-d750-reviewpart-1-video

("This has been a strange few months for me. After a lot of thought and a few gear rentals, I ended up selling all of my Canon cameras and lenses. After a brief few months with the Sony a7R and a7S, I ended up here, with a Nikon D750. ")

http://soulphotography.uk.com/rupesh-akshis-wedding-a-brief-review-of-the-nikon-d750/

("I’ve been shooting with Canon cameras for over 9 years & I kid you not, I used to swear total allegiance to the brand. I would even play trump cards with Nikon users going all out to prove that Canon was the better choice of the two. But now having used the D750 on a handful of occasions, I have to admit Canon have fallen behind Nikon by a mile. I have therefore jumped ship & joined the Nikon faithful.")

http://ryanbrenizer.com/2014/10/review-nikon-d750-and-d810/

http://sebastiendamour.com/blog/2014/10/27/why-i-switched-from-canon-to-the-nikon-d750/

http://www.scuffinsphotography.com/cameras/switched-canon-to-nikon-wedding-photography/

 

The Nikon 85mm f1.8G is a highly rated lens which is very well rated, or the even cheaper Nikon 85mm f/1.8D which is the one I own and use.

 

If I was going into pro photography( instead of the filmmaking I'm doing now. With only the rare, and low paid, photo gig), then I'd be buying myself a Nikon D750 in heartbeat along with a D7100 as a cheap back up body. (as don't want to ever go to a job with only one body. And especially for live events, such as weddings, you want a second body on you as you don't have time to swap lenses. And the D7100 I rate more highly than any Canon APS-C for photos, and broadly as good as a stock 5Dmk3 for video http://www.eoshd.com/2013/02/nikon-d5200-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii/)

 

The D750 is a damn fine DSLR for video too, arguably the best there is (if we ignore for a moment the obscenely priced 1D C :-o ):

http://www.eoshd.com/2014/09/nikon-d750-review-initial-thoughts-real-world-footage-ladies-gentleman-contender/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMM17DZyrQA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLPiXmi7wOE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QnyKZSUcL8 (D750 vs BMPCC!)

 

25 minutes ago, cojocaru27 said:

i have read the interview and he's certainly talking about the stills series, not the footage. So 7D and 50mm 1.2 is for the photography series.

I meant even for photography, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he has changed up what he is using for stills. 5yrs is a long time. 

34 minutes ago, leeys said:

Once you become more established and have cash to spare you can always come back for a much nicer Nikon camera, like say, a D900.

Problem is greater than 24megapixels is kinda a pain for high volume real estate photography.  (I'd happily do it with the 12 megapixels of an a7Smk1 or D700)

Thus from that perspective, either the D5 (which is crazy overkill!! Bad idea) or the D750 is the perfect FX Nikon DSLR for him.

Personally if I was the OP I'd stick out with the D750 forever, until a suitable upgrade comes along. Then still keep the D750 as a B cam / back up camera (as a pro should always have at least one back up. Heck, I might even recommend buying a D5200 right *now* so as to at least have "something" as a back up!).
 

3 hours ago, mercer said:

The genius of the C200 is that it is at a good price point for two totally different budgets. If you have a large budget and want to work with Raw or if you have a low budget but have the time to invest in Raw.

I would be a uniquely unusually odd owner op who only does raw or 8bit 420 shoots and never ever had any demand for anything else?!

1 hour ago, mercer said:

If the C200 was Canon’s only cinema camera, then I may agree with you, but since they have multiple cameras for almost every budget level, then I have to disagree.

It is exactly BECAUSE they have multiple cameras that they cripple their C200

Have to protect the sales of the C300mk2!

2 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

Here he talks about his (minimal) gear:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/content/brandon-stanton-chat-human-photographer-new-york

Was five years ago, I'm sure it has changed. 

31 minutes ago, Micah Mahaffey said:

Thanks everyone!! We ended up picking up a Sony A3000 for $149 USD at a pawn shop

Wow! :-o

Seems whenever I go into pawn shops they just have crazy wildly optimistically overpriced shit instead.

Prada or Gucci? 
Ferrari or Lamborghini?

Tough choices man!

6 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

For the GH5 that should be true. I was a cinematographer for a short (done with it in beautiful 8bit 420 HD glory, because it is so good already:). G85 has been out for a while, G7 for more than two years but hardly any shorts done with these, which one can find in the www.

Another point to keep mind, is even on very small budget short films, if they have enough resources to still do it half decently looking with art department / actors / crew / lighting / etc, then they're probably not going with the cheapest of cheapest Panasonic cameras such as the G or GX/GM/GF series, they've got a GH (or better) camera instead. 

Thus those shooting shorts with a G7/G6/G5/etc tend to be only the most ultra of ultra low budget people. (thus even if the camera is capable of much much more, that probably won't be shining through at all)

Anyway, I'm sure there are plenty of short films shot on a Panasonic G7. A quick look on Vimeo shows up a few.


And of course how could we possibly forget our own andy lee, who shot an entire feature film with 6x (yes, SIX!) G7 cameras:
 

(however it is still in post production)

50D is very outdated for a stills camera, likely even just a humble Panasonic G7 would be nicer. 

And the 50D lacks 1080 internal or any sort of internal video at all.

10 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Yes, that is true. But while I like tilt shift lenses, I just can't afford to spend $3K on one. I mean, I already feel kind of miffed that I normally haul about $4K worth of equipment to a photo shoot where I am only going to make between $150 to $250. Hauling $7K worth of equipment would probably make my head explode.

Considered the Rokinon TS? A fraction of the cost of the Canikon ones!

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/926394-REG/rokinon_tsl24m_n_24mm_f3_5_tilt_shift.html

Personally, if I was making a little money with real estate then I'd go with this on my current Nikon D5200:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1165600-REG/venus_optics_laowa_15mm_f_4_macro.html

But if I was to go all out and get a new body (which I'm not! As I don't earn money in the real estate world), then it would be either the Nikon D750 + Rokinon 24mm TS, or a secondhand Sony a7S mk1 (as 12 megapixels is plenty for low budget real estate shoots! And lighter file sizes will speed up workflow) +  Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D lens with their Laowa Magic Shift Converter (turning it into a 17mm F4 TS! :-o ). 

https://***URL not allowed***/laowa-magic-shift-converter-wide-angle-lenses/

On 11/3/2017 at 5:55 PM, ssrdd said:

I need on board RAW[some form of]

Realistically most people don't need on board raw. Just a solid 10bit (or 12 bit) codec. 

Even many higher budget shoots don't do raw. (or even 4K)

And lower budget shoots don't have budgets to justify it.

13 hours ago, leeys said:

That's a good question, why?

I was joking around in response that nothing can be shot unless it is 4K 10bit! :-P 

But seriously, to answer the question, here are two reasons why:

1) the 1st Panasonic GH1 was my first ever camera (which was video capable, I did already have a Nikon D50), thus holds a dear place in my heart, I'll probably never sell it?

2) the GH1 holds so little value now secondhand, it is worth more to me to keep them for when needed for multi camera shoots (as they do a decent enough image, are compact, good battery life, and have unlimited recording length! All great stuff for low budget multi camera shoots)

Hands down the D750 will be a superior camera both for stills and video (non-ML raw). 

Tricky point is you already have three Canon lenses, but none of them are super special fancy ones so I'd feel no hard feelings about selling them and getting instead the Nikon 24-120mm f4 + Nikon 50mm f1.8G + Nikon 70-200G F4 / Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D / Nikon 80-200mm 2.8D (or a totally different mix of lenses instead, if you feel they'd meet your needs better than your existing collection of focal lengths). 

13 hours ago, leeys said:

Wow, this caught my eye. That seems low for a video job; you're right you'll need to minimise time while keeping a certain level of quality. Mirrorless definitely has its advantages here.

 

Unfortunately for real estate video this is not unusual, in fact in the market I'm in for the people I know, that would be higher than average!

Just earlier today on FB I recommend a camcorder (the X70, or XC10) to a person looking for their first camera. 
As I could tell they were  not at all technically minded, and just wanted it for interviews/docos. 

So while I greatly prefer mirrorless, I am not so much of a camera snob that I can't identify times when it makes sense not to recommend mirrorless but something else instead. 

Dunno, but sharing a link for context for others:

https://www.facebook.com/honytheseries/videolist/2352311818327650/

If I was you, I'd start by hunting around to see if you can spot BTS pics. Such as maybe on their instagram. Check out the credits at the end of who shot it, then check out their social media as well. Etc

20 hours ago, liork said:

Well, the A7SII does 4K 30p only, they will have to give us something more. It can be either 4K 60p or 10 bit, maybe both. Also, the sensor will be a new one, I don't think Sony will keep the same sensor tor the third time.

I'm almost certain it won't get 10bit. Could be 50/50 as to if 4K 60fps happens.

As for a new sensor, if they go higher resolution to say 20 megapixels then that totally defeats the purpose of the a7S line up?

So they'll either stick with 12 megapixels, or will only get a very modest boost to say 16 megapixels (but doubtful, sampling is no longer so straightforward).

21 hours ago, Justin Bacle said:

Not the same kind of camera as listed above (all are very good recommendations BTW), but you can get an old 50D / 100D for that kind of price, if you want to shoot raw (thanks Magic Lantern)  

They'd suck big time as an "all purpose" camera however.

16 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

I like the a6500... to an extent.  As a stills camera, for shooting real estate like I do, it really is just about on par with the D750.  I use the LCD for shooting (since I am almost always shooting at waist level), and despite having a worse LCD monitor, the AF using the a6500 is so much better than the liveview AF of the D750 that it is hard to give that up. 

 

For real estate stills the FX sensor of the D750 should be very handy for tilt shift lenses.