fuzzynormal

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Let yourself settle for 1080, and you can get OM cameras for mere pennies these days:

 

Had it.  Also had the MII version.  Best ergos ever on the EM5II with the battery grip. The other thing you get with those cameras: moiré.

On 6/30/2023 at 7:27 AM, MrSMW said:

With a glass of gin in one hand

I do that with an Old Fashioned whenever filming with an Arri Alexa.  Gotta stay posh.

11 hours ago, MrSMW said:

concern whether they would even remain in existence as a company beyond this last ever ‘Olympus’ badged release.

I've chosen to believe that it's Olympus' attempt to outflank the Japanese regulations.  --And that the off-spun OM business will eventually end up back under the "Olympus" umbrella one day when the political opportunity is viable.  (They've been known to pull corporate shenanigans)

Meanwhile OM are positioning themselves into a more niche market of outdoor photography enthusiasts, so maybe they'll be able to make a go of it there?  Hard to say with consumer imaging technology.  But, man, if they can make in-roads against Canon with all the 'birders' out there in the world, perhaps!  

I also like to think OM is a more nimble company that has a better chance of surviving because of this.  Wishful thinking?

Regardless, it's cool that their cameras are getting recognition from the folks here on this forum.

8 hours ago, John Matthews said:

sticking with M43.

Same.  I hate large field packages.  Done enough of that in my life and whenever the gear bag gets too big I start to get frustrated.  There's a reason a GM1 with an Pentax Auto110 prime lens is my avatar!

I'll chime in with a contrary opinion and a dark horse suggestion:  Weathered sealed OM (Olympus) cams/lenses shooting 4k 8-bit --probably considered sort of low-end these days, right?  OM cams definitely fly under the radar with videographers, but they have some useful features.

The color and images look dang nice straight out of the camera, the cams aren't big, you get really good IBIS, and the file data sizes are relatively small.  OM's target demo is pretty much nature shooters, so they build their gear for outdoor use. 

Be careful though.  The video image might not be as 'meaty' as you'd like it to be if you're used to other pro cameras or doing a bunch of drastic coloring in post. Still, the wife and I are currently doing a nature doc and we're happy with what we're getting. 

ND... Man, that is the shortcoming on all hybrid cams though.

Yes.  Also when on sticks and or a monopod.

IBIS is a fun tool, but no when to say when.

I remember doing this too.

A robin nested outside my grandmother’s living room window back in the 80’s. I hooked up a VHS camcorder and we watched/recorded. 

Cute!  

Also discovered how mama birds make sure the nest doesn’t get covered in poop. 

As for your modern birds, nowadays I think I’d use a ‘cheep’ nanny cam.

52 minutes ago, Benjamin Hilton said:

IBIS is ... another really useful tool at times. For doc work

I really enjoy the field shooting flexibility good IBIS allows.  Once one knows how to really use it as a videographer it can become indispensable.

As a guy that loves shooting on sticks that no small admission.

Well, we're all 'Sailing to Byzantium,' eh?

On 5/2/2023 at 9:29 AM, ac6000cw said:

restored' old movies they see today are what they really looked like to the average cinema customer 'back in the day' 

Maybe at a movie's premiere!?  

I grew up in no-where's-ville-midwest-USA.  I watched a ton of movies as a kid, but almost exclusively at the second-run and drive-in screenings.  We also had a regional movie house that did 1$ matinees.  Ain't nothing that screened there that didn't look abused.

Ironically, I don't think I actually saw a pristine print of a film 'til I saw "Hateful Eight".

Also, I just watched "After Hours" again.  It's on HBOMax.  First time in almost 40 years.  THAT'S what a lot of movies really looked like.  Now add a ton of scratches and bad projection onto it and you'd get the idea.

36 minutes ago, PPNS said:

if i were to do documentary type work, i would rather use a camcorder than any mirrorless thing.

Depends on the doc.  I use hybrid cams and removable lenses for my docs.

I like smaller sensor cameras for the super-zoom capability they typically offer.  Also camcorders with built-in ND filers are nice.

Seems like you have a process that works and you're content with it.  Very cool.

I'm in the same boat.  Since I'm low low low budget, I shoot what I can with what I can and align as best as possible in post.    I just spent a month and a half filming with a shitty 500mm lens simply because that's all I could afford.  It's not great, but it's not a deal breaker either.  So, off into the field I went and I used it.

And also, combining multiple cam footage with different lenses is not that hard unless, as a filmmaker, you're incredibly intent on having an extremely tight cohesiveness to the IQ --and are desperately striving for seeking out that extra 5% of IQ.

Your test prove that consolidating various footage is viable, and my anecdotal experience follows.

I know a lot of us here really want to find the perfect recipe for all of the above, throw in some secret sauce to make it all work, and that'll make us sit back in the editing seat and go "golly, doesn't that look wonderful!"

However, since consumer IQ tech is pretty damn good now, as a documentarian my goal isn't about the tech, more often it's simply get the shot that tells the story, then tell that story.

These days, when it comes to IQ, I worry much much more about the floor than the cieling.

Well, I'm assistant editing with ARRI footage.  [name drop!]  

Seriously though, filming our own thing this month with a XPRO2, EM10III, iPhone, and a GH5.  I even used the old Canon 5DII the other day.  All over the map.  I guess you can throw in GoPro and DJI while we're at it.  7 camera manufactures, one project.  Also, all the different lenses we've been using are ridiculous.

1 hour ago, mercer said:

made me think of the old Bass and Rankin Christmas cartoons.

Funny you should say that because the mouse character was always supposed to be animated, but the budget wouldn't allow for it.  So the director put a puppet on her hand and we did it that way.

The film is free to watch this week on the website:  www.agiftforallagesfilm.com

Dang.  Now I sorta feel like shooting a short with the old 5DII sitting on the shelf.  

Although it's true that I never really wanted to dabble in RAW for editing back in the day --as the workflow was off-putting. Might be worth learning something old and make it new again.

Doesn't seem to bump up pace of reading much for me --maybe the bold print even got in the way a little?

15 hours ago, Tim Sewell said:

Anyone responsible for paying the crew's wages probably wouldn't choose to shoot a feature on a...

11 hours ago, rosco said:

Hacked cameras are fine if you’re a hobbyist

It's not a practical suggestion to actually do the thing.  Anyone with the means would choose Arri over a 12 year old hacked camera all day long.  This absurdist theory is just to illustrate that the separating degrees of IQ isn't the thing that makes or breaks a film.

4 hours ago, MrSMW said:

tried mixing it with that from the S1H and it was not even in the ballpark.

Fair enough.  Oly never has been the best at the video side of things.  Good, never great.  Always a little behind with their IQ, I agree.  Still like 'em though.  

I'm still shooting some stuff every now and gain with a cheap EM10II and I do like the colors.

With the OM-1 I have a specific documnetary on the agenda that includes bird photography and video --so that makes it a good fit.  Damn lens costs 8K though.  Sheesh...still that's cheap compared to other manufacturer's glass made for birding.

But, like you mentioned, buy it, use it, sell it.

47 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

returned the OM-1 and XH2

Have the XH2.  Thinking about getting the OM-1.  What's your real world "nope, it's going back" sentiment about the OM-1?

4 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

One of these silly things with cameras.:)

Yeah, I can't explain my attraction to Olympus, but there it is.

9 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

winning at an Oscar is more politics

You're right.  Helps prove the point, really. 

They shot Nomadland on more expensive gear because they like the prestige of it.  (among the technical niceness of an Arri, no doubt) 

In theory, I'm pretty confident that they absolutely could've shot Nomadland on a hacked 10 year old 5DII, claimed they used an Arri, and then were "stylistic" in the color-grade. 

Not too many in the Academy would doubt it, if anyone.

You can't tell me that most of us here have the technical skill to make an Academy Award Winning film like Nomadland.  It's brain-dead simple if you have an inkling of video production craft.

Storytelling maybe not so much, but that film could've been shot on a 5DII and no one would care or notice.

I vote for print.  Ironic that you say "short attention span" when the fact is one can read things a hell of a lot faster than watch the same words delivered in a video.

Myself, I'm probably going with the dark horse in this hunt; so much so it's not even mentioned:  The OM-1.  I got some pretty specific needs coming down the pike this year so that camera just makes sense. 

I'd wager there's not many of us out here in the wild that'll be using that body exclusively for video production.

Years and years ago I literally used a counterweight'ed lead pipe to do some stuff that I wanted to look smooth'ish, but still very much handheld.  The rig weighed about 10 lbs when done.  Not the type of thing you want to run around with ALL day, but for short stretches it was perfect for the look I wanted.

Something like this: