IronFilm

Impressive. Interesting to read how they were using a camera which only got released the week before they started shooting!

Why not? Technology moves on. The size of the sensor isn't all that important to sensitivity.

I totally agree it *could* be better. But nooo... Canon hasn't done that. 

I'm sure if Canon had, then we'd be hearing about it in the blogsphere from a million Canon fanboys. 

That "kit lens" however adds an extra $1.3k! That is one damn expensive kit lens. :-o

Which very very strangely is *more* than it costs to buy that lens by itself:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1022903-REG/samsung_16_50mm_f_2_2_8_s_ed.html

What the heck is the pricing/marketing guy at Samsung smoking....    !

Shows how m4/3 is the strongest of all the mount systems!

Panasonic, Olympus, Blackmagic Design, Kodak, and now JVC are all backing the system! Plus many third party manufacturers such as SLR Magic, Sigma, Tokina, etc...

Heres a short clip from a documentary i'm working on. This was shot probably 50/50 full frame and crop mode. The opening slider shot was in full frame mode. 

 

I am not finding the rolling shutter to be an issue at all

Why did you shot half in crop mode? (as you say rolling shutter wasn't an issue for you)

rndmtsk: ha! The Alexa 65 makes the Sony FS7 look CHEAP! So yeah, don't think that is an option here for most of us.

I just don't like how people constantly state Canon was "first", which reinforces people's misconceptions about Canon. 

As not only is not technically true (as that is the D90, which I too started out with), but also the general gist of it isn't true either. As Canon didn't *bring* video to the indie filmmakers, not at all. They accidentally stumbled across it. (as can be seen in how they acted with their subsequent DSLRs, more or less no video improvement. As they were not "bringing it", was just a fluke)

I'll vote for the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 too, I use it on a RJ Lens Turbo on my BMPCC. 

As Canon was the first to introduce the DSLR video option to the masses and everyone of us probably owned one

False, and very unfortunately an extremely commonly believed falsehood. 

But it was Nikon who was first to implement video in a DSLR. With the Nikon D90.

tomekk, that would indeed be sadly (and unsurprisingly) true based on this and what we know about Canon. 

I would jump eyes closed on the sony a6000 if it had the new XAVC-S codec. I really like the fact of having an APS-C sensor, which makes me go more towards this camera instead of a panasonic one.

Well, the obvious answer for you then is to get the Sony A5100. 

Though personally for a newbie I'd recommend they get the Panasonic G6 as their first camera (if they have the budget for it, otherwise a Panasonic GH1 or Sony NEX-5N is the way to go). 

I wouldn't worry about the sensor size of APS-C vs m4/3, you often have to stop down anyway to get enough usable DoF, so that cancels out any benefit there of having APS-C. Plus, once you use a cheap RJ Lens Turbo (it is great, I use one!) on your m4/3 camera, you've got Super 35mm / APS-C FoV now. 

Surely if he got this "AMAZING" and very expensive Nikon camera, he must have lots and lots of very nice Nikon lenses? (well.... he should, but I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't?)

Thus logically a good camera to get is the Nikon D5200, it will be a huge leap up in quality (can match stills from full frame from only a few years ago, while matching 5DmkIII for video) while still being very cheap.

Or more likely, the D7100 as I bet his lenses don't have an AF motor built into many of them.

Another option is go mirrorless, and he can keep on using his lenses with that. Such as the Sony A7, which can be found for under US$1k on special.

If you want to go down the path of a fixed lens camera (rather than an intechangeable lens one, which I reckon is a way better idea), this article lays out good reasons to go for the RX10:
http://www.oldmaninmotion.com/four-great-still-shooting-feats-my-sub-1k-mirrorless-can-do-that-my-3k-dslr-cant/


I'm curious as to what camera he got back in 2003, I would guess a Nikon D100? (which isn't so terribly terrible is it? I started out on D50, which is much newer but only marginally better if that)

I don't own a single lens but have leaning to pull the trigger on either the GH-4 and the a7s, nonetheless; the a7s for its low-light capabilities (reducing the necessity to purchase/rent lighting equipment right away) and the gh4 in its compactness (I do a bit of traveling) and for the 4k .

 

I have read some post, from people with similar situations like myself (no repetoire of lenses or extensive experience behind the camera) and have seen people suggest getting something cheaper like the Sony a3000 and developing a lens kit and practice using that.

 

Can I get some opinions from you guys? If I were to get a GH-4 or a3000, would I be doing myself a disservice by buying native lenses in the event that I upgrade to a full-frame camera in the future?  

If you have budgetary constraints (don't we all!), and this is your first camera, then certainly don't get the GH4 or A7s. I'd get a cheaper camera, and learn on that (will be a steep learning curve! But that can be a good thing). 

But I wouldn't pick the Sony A3000. it is a very cheap and decent camera, there is worse choices a person could make. But I'd recommend you instead go with a Panasonic GH1 or Sony NEX-5N for about the same price. 

Then get perhaps a couple of native mount lenses (such as the kit lens, and a normal FoV prime, as each would be fairly cheap and versatile). Then invest the remainder of your budget in Nikon F mount lenses and a focal reducer. 

Then in 18 months from now (or who knows what time period, more or less, whenever you feel ready), you will be able to pick up the Panasonic GH4 or Sony A7s super cheap, or get whatever the latest hot new thing is (GH5/D7300/A8s/5DmkIV/NX2/EM-2/K-4/etc, or who knows what!) and you'll be able to take along all your Nikon lenses to your next platform! :-)

Nice shot man!

 

By the way my A7S review part 2 and conclusion are coming this week. Sorry it took a while.

Is it still coming or have I somehow missed it?

Really looking forward to more info from you on the A7s, it is looking like a very tempting camera. 

Am trying to decide between getting the A7s to shoot a feature film with, or using the BMCC EF and BMPCC which we already have. 

 

How beneficial is the Shogun for the GH4?

If I am planning to buy the Ninja Blade right now, and I have no 4K camera, but I know I will be buying a GH4 in six months from now, does it still make sense to get a Shogun instead of a Ninja Blade??

So 43rumors linked to this in reference to a possible raw recording firmware update for the GH4. 

http://www.43rumors.com/atomos-and-panasonic-confirm-raw-4k-444-could-come-on-the-gh4-via-firmware-upgrade/

Last update to this was a month ago, wondering if any progress/news has happened recently? (especially from Sony, or firmware updates)

@Julian, for a hundred bucks there is a lot of other decent microphones I can pick up (especially second hand).

Rather not use Sony's one! Probably is only to the level of quality that my SG-108 is anyway.

Well damn, keeps on making my decision even harder for what to upgrade to from my current Panasonic GH1/G3/GF3 kit.

First the Panasonic G6 came out, and this looked like the one to keep an eye on for when its price came down a little (like it has now, when you catch it on special for under US$500).

Gave you Focus Peaking and better performance than a GH2.

Then the Nikon D5200 came out with its exceptional performance (low light win!). And it would be easy for me to move over to Nikon again, as most of my lenses are Nikon F mount that I adapt to Micro Four Thirds (it helps that my first ever camera was the Nikon D50, ages ago).

Then the Nikon D5300 came out.... does even better! Though not enough for me to consider currently, the price is too much higher than D5200 for what is largely a fairly similar camera.

So here I am tossing up between:

Nikon D5200 => live HDMI out, but no focus peaking. Better low light, but is not Micro Four Thirds which is a plus and minus. Mostly minus as I greatly prefer mirrorless. But it could replace not just my GH1 for video, but also my Nikon D50 for photography. Killing two birds with one stone.

Panasonic G6 => has focus peaking, but no live HDMI. Is mirrorless! (yay, can adapt zillions of other lenses and use focal reducers)

Now it seems the Sony A6000 for only a little more in terms of cost, can give me the best of both the G6 and the D5200?? (focus peaking, live HDMI out, mirrorless, low light performance, etc)

Hmmm.... sooo tempting.

Only negatives I can see is a little higher cost, isn't an adjustable screen like the D5200/G6 (but you can at least tilt it in one way, so I'll give it half marks here), and isn't a Nikon F mount that could also be my main photography camera (though I suppose this a pretty minor issue). So a few minor issues.... plus one big one, no microphone input :-/

Of course ideally I want the Panasonic GH4!! But that is over $1k more than I'd like to spend. And I'm going to get a camera *this year*, if I went for the GH4 I'd have to wait until next year probably. Not going to do that.

A fellow Aucklander (New Zealand) has just got the green light from Blackmagic to share this footage from the BMPCC!