fuzzynormal

I used this camera for awhile and liked it as well. Some of us just want that smaller form factor I guess. Honestly, my fav cam of all time was the imperfect but really fun GX7. Man, that was 10 years ago already?

FYI, went for a used Xiaomi 12S Ultra. Will report back after using it a bit. Thanks yet again for the advice.

How about massive HMI lights to create the crazy over-exposure while shooting the light through motorizing reflective flags --which would be on some sort of a slit cylinder and forced through a big snoot? That might create a neat randomizing strobe effect? That idea might be more fun in theory than practice. I bet it would look cool though. I've also once made strobe type of effect for a cheap low-fi music vid simply by having a bunch of people turn the lights power on and off and rapidly while they were waving the light toward and away from the stage. Very organic look when you have people do it. 😉

Also, just an aside, but Xiaomi is absolutely horrible at naming their devices.

Trying to track down reputable sellers of these Chinese cameras in the US seems to lead into some scammy corners of the internet. Be that as it may, I'm still considering going all in on a The Xiaomi 12S Ultra 'cuz I'd like something to use for a long stretch before upgrades, say, 5 years or so. If I can find a cheap used Mi10 from a vendor that's not too sketchy, I might use that as a trial run and see how I like the Android side of things. Thanks for all the suggestions!

M43 @f2.8 is a nice sweet-spot DOF for me, especially on vintage lenses. Soft, but not too much out of focus, ya know?

Thanks for the heads up. Luckily, I'm not locked into any specific carrier so I can bounce to whatever is required.

My old Nikkor lens is like this. I can't take it to 1.4 without the halo'ing and chroma aberration, but that stuff is mitigated when I put it on my full frame 5D. That said, not really a fan of FF for video. It still hits me as just too weird when it's super shallow DOF.

Appreciate the insight. My tendency is to hang back behind the tech curve so it's good to hear advice supporting that.

Anyone using the Samsung S23 Ultra?

Nah, definitely looking for a phone.

Anyone know what’s best? I’m occasionally shooting supplementary doc footage with a iPhone12. It’s okay However, I’m wondering what the superior options on the market are right now. I’m platform agnostic.

I like a single prime around the "portrait" focal length. For me, that's a fast MANUAL 50mm on a 4/3rds sensor. I'm near-sighted so using the cam's display is very easy for me. That's about as simple as it gets. Camera. One lens. You want a wide shot, move away from things. Want tight, move in. The longer focal length almost always makes people look flattering and cinematic. I also like footage where focus can drift and the shooter pulls it back into focus. Feels real and organic to me. I don't want perfect, I want something that's a deeper truth than that. "Quiet" handheld is a technique I've practiced for years. Finally, another technique I use is to "dirty the frame" to add to the aesthetic. Overall that's kind of my jam anyway. I'd suggest trying it; you might like it. Less techy, more human. It's a loosey-goosey way to shoot and, personally, I do find it low stress because gear is minimal, I don't fret about anything but the shot, and it's just fun.

It's a "no excuses" filmmaking world now. Obviously the new tools basically mean that creative folks can make studio level cinema. For instance, there are super-talented colleagues in my town that have made feature films on their own with pretty much zero crew. Their latest is a wild and lovely silly movie, but it's better than most things out there and looks just as good. Literally made on 1% of a studio budget. https://www.heavenofhorror.com/reviews/the-island-of-lost-girls-2022-fantasia/

Working on a doc and my wife and I use it every now and again to grab stuff off the cuff. Works good when doing car tracking shots, for instance. We're not trying to make studio level color grades with our work, and typically we just push and pull iPhone footage by eye to get it close to our Acam and call it good. But, yeah, our standards are a bit more loosey-goosey than most, probably. Still, we're plenty happy with the results. It's not hard to get them close. At the end of the day, in my world having the shot is more important than have the correct bit depth and all that pixel-peeking stuff. It needs to exist first, then we'll worry about it.

Indeed. I couldn't even push it to 3200 without worry. Had a fast lens with a speed booster to take it as wide open as possible, but then you suffer from the glass making things soft and mushy, so the struggle was real. Always a trade off. Regardless, having small cameras for docs is default mode for me. Not a fan of demanding attention with big gear when you're trying to get intimate; still a bit amazed when I see industry folks being okay with a lot of gak on location for a documentary.

Started by buying an EM5 cuz it was small. Then Bought a GX7 cuz it was small. Bought a GM1 cuz it was small. Bought two GH1's cuz they are small. Bought an EM5II cuz it was small. Bought two Gx8's cuz they were small. Bought an EM10iii cuz it was small. Bought GH4's and Gh5's along the way as well. They are not small. I like the smaller cameras better in my hand. Too bad the small cams didn't have the same features/specs. Andrew is onto something by saying there was a missed market there. At least in my world that market exists. Doesn't take too much to wonder if OM can make a run at that market with trying to niche their way through the wildlife photographers. M43 for super long lens stuff is a relatively small kit. (Not the body, however, but the lens) Is it enough to keep the format viable? Probably not, but here's hoping.

Oh, wow, I never thought about this. Kind of an obvious head-smacking solution. Thanks!

Let me know if you're able to break the laws of physics and come up with a compact solution that'll do what you want.

If you want to complain about bugs in Premiere, you'll be a busy boy. What Premiere is supposed to do and what it actually does are not always the same thing. FWIW, I've noticed this too. My workflow doesn't run into too much so when it does I just cope with it 'manually'.

I feel seen. For me, it's a double whammy. Lord knows I could do all the tech stuff necessary to create beautiful wedding videos and could have a stable lucrative career in that, but I did those gigs early on in my career, didn't like it, and vowed I'd never do it again. I'm literally avoiding making money in a readily available well rewarded market because of some very old "reasons". Nah. I'll make documentaries! That'll pay the bills!

Another great bit of advice I got in my early days was to go study paintings. Particularly Vermeer's and Caravaggio's. As an idiot that didn't understand what made a nice image work and a bad one fail, just analyzing and deconstructing the craft of painting helped a ton. Absolutely brand-dead simple ideas like having your subject brighter than the background (contrast) confounded me as a newbie, but once I started seeing the techniques like that in practice I couldn't unsee it, and I got better. Which is why I'm pretty camera agnostic these days. There's so many fundamental techniques that need to be in place and exercised to create awesome images. Grabbing the most expensive camera/lens doesn't accomplish that for you, it only assists.

I’d say even try up-rez’ing it to 4k and then upload. See how YouTube handles that one.

Pffffst, not watching Godel. They changed his costume too much.

"Pffffst, extreme lighting isn't art" -some person in 1941 after watching Citizen Kane.