TheRenaissanceMan

It's Canada in late November. I'm not sure what you're expecting from that shot... I suppose he could've made it look unrealistic? 
I'd be more critical of his shot choice than his grading of Alberta when everything is gray and muted. 

Great points Andrew.  I think it'll be very interesting to see what the newly-enriched professional class produces on their own for less-lucrative ends after making more mainstream non-controversial works.

In the USA Disney/Marvel financed Black Panther, which was respectful of Africans (so rare in Hollywood) but otherwise just a competently-made superhero movie no more daring than any of the other Avengers.  However, because it made a billion dollars studios started financing other Black-empowerment vehicles, such as the HBO Watchmen series (the best show of all time), Black KKKlansman and the just-released Judas and the Black Messiah (a movie whose view of the police would never have been presented before).  Without Black Panther's success none of those other daring works could have happened.

So I hope other cultures and people can be empowered to risk their new success making original fare, even if only for their own creative vanity.

Also even if you're not a fan of history or tragedy you should watch Judas and the Black Messiah just for the beauty of it's rehoused Arri DNA lenses.  The film looks dreamy and aged despite having just been made.

Some of us really like that camera Shot in its sweet spot, that sensor cranks out gorgeous pictures with very little fuss. Think of it as digital slide film.
http://www.bmcuser.com/forum/blackmagic-camera/general-discussion/17753-no-more-love-for-the-4k?17318-No-more-love-for-the-4K=

What do Pocket to Alexa luts have to do with the cameras dynamic range? Those type of luts are pretty useful if you are trying to match the two cameras or if you just want better color without a lot of work. Juan Melara and GHAlex do great work with their color conversions. 

Honestly for the price it is like a Jesus camera. What else comes close to this anywhere near the $2500 price range, at least in terms of image quality. 

 

Sounds like a lemon to me. 
 
Did I say handheld camera anywhere? I said you can do handheld with an OIS lens. If you look at most of the Pocket camera product photos they are shown using OIS lenses. My Fuji xt3 with an 18-55 kit lens was fantastic for handheld and had the benefit of a zoom range. 

It's not misleading to say you can easily do handheld with this camera. OIS lenses are relatively cheap and light weight and many already have them. 

There are drawbacks to it of course like anything else.

man I didn't say it was a Jesus camera, I said it distributes its DR more closely to the Alexa than a number of other cameras that favor the shadows. If you somehow take that as "it's as good as an Alexa" then that's on you.

Yes, stand for most mirrorless cameras.
These are not things that are becoming standard for cinema cameras, in part because they can be objectively detrimental. Like I said, if someone wants those things, get a mirrorless camera with them. People seem to think that because of the price point of the Blackmagics that they're supposed to have these things, instead of them being affordable options to five-figure cinema cameras. No one is out here asking why the latest RED or Arri doesn't have amazing PDAF with eye detection or IBIS. These cameras are absolutely no different.

@tupp I give up.
You obviously think that working for years and learning the names of all the clamps is required for anyone to exercise any judgement or awareness of safety and that I'm an idiot because I think I might know things when I can't because I've never worked as a grip or learned the names of the clamps.
I wonder how much you could possibly know (beyond knowing the names of the clamps) if you fail to understand that the universe is literally maths and physics, and I'm also wondering why you haven't come up with literally thousands of photos of those little camera clamps sitting in the middle of piles of shattered glass - there are no shortage of images of people using them that way.
I could debate this forever, but your method of assessing judgement or practical ability seems to be one-dimensional and I don't fit that narrow definition, and am never going to because I don't aspire to the same career path as yours, so how about this:
you have fulfilled your legal and ethical duty to tell me (and anyone else reading this thread henceforth) to never even look at tempered glass until I am the god of all grips (and can name all the clamps), and I will go ahead and use the judgement I have and when it all inevitably comes crashing down just like you have predicted I will not hold you responsible.

Thanks for the link, but the article demonstrates everything that one shouldn't do when rigging on a balcony.
 
Nothing is safety'd, so that fact alone makes the rigs hazardous.
 
Also, the reviewed clamp happens to be a strong cam-action clamp -- they can generate enormous clamping power that can crunch through soft/brittle materials and tubing.  Only use Super/Mafer style clamps on solid metal, pipes with a minimum schedule 40 wall thickness or solid wood (be aware that these clamps can leave jaw indentations in wood).
 
Also, the article shows this:

There is so much wrong with what is happening in this photo that it is difficult to know where to begin.  There is no safety line. The rig's CG is off-axis which suspends most of it's weight precariously beyond the "rail's" edge, and which puts flex stress on a small, local area of the glass.
 
However, the big doosie is that a cam-action clamp that generates huge clamping pressure is tightened onto a sheet of tempered glass.  NEVER DO THAT!
 
Glass (and particularly tempered glass) isn't very stable/reliable when subjected to stresses, especially if more than one stress is applied to it simultaneously and/or if one of the stresses is focused on a small local area.  If the above clamp is reefed down to set up powerful, unseen stress on the glass and if there is any imperfection in the glass, the pane(s) could shatter if someone merely hits the pane with their wedding ring.
 
Here's what a little tap can do to unstressed tempered glass.
 
Here's what mere flex stress can do to tempered glass.
 
Here's a short primer on what can cause glass to inexplicably shatter (which happens occasionally).
 
Never rig to glass at a location, especially if it is on a balcony!
 
 
No.  It's not the size of the clamp.  In fact, if I was forced to mount a camera on a balcony rail of unknown width, I would likely bring a large (relatively light weight) Space Clamp and plan on at least one tag line, with a bailing wire run between the different rig items.
 
The main point is to avoid altogether rigging to a balcony rail.  Again, If one doesn't know enough about rigging to even know the names of the grip items, it is probably a really good idea for one not to attempt any rig on a balcony that could pose a hazard and/or possibly cause property damage.
 
Rigging items small or large to a glass balustrade on a balcony hugely complicates the risk.  You could have the lightest action cam mounted with a Super Clamp, and that Super Clamp could still crunch right through that tempered glass, or the clamp set up stresses that cause the glass to shatter at an imperfection when someone lightly bumps the pane with a chair.
 
Mount your camera on balcony rail at your own peril, or, more accurately, at the peril of those who venture below your rig.

I am dull enough to get my fun through utility though so it works on both levels for me.
I've decided that the German word for people who get their fun through the misfortune of others who have over tightened their glass balcony clamps and caused the destruction of said glass balcony should be "Shardenfreude".

Until recently I'd have said my most useful piece of equipment was my untethered glass balcony clamp.
 

Hello,
All filmmaking forums I visit are directly related to gear or craft but none have anything to do with the business side of filmmaking. Are there good forums out there on this topic, or is it an idea to create a subforum for this here?
- Finding jobs
- Marketing
- Keeping in touch with clients
- Sales/price negotations/best way to approach clients
- Accounting tips
- Tax writeoff tricks
- Dayrates 
- ....
Offcourse it will be different per niche and parts of the world, but I think there will be a great overlap overall. 

I'm not sure what the chances are for that - potentially lower than you might think.  
Consider the options:
The new models are impressive and expensive....  "it's the end of the world - $6K cameras have doomed civilisation" The new models are impressive and affordable....  "today our company is closing its doors due to low unit profit of recent releases and the failure of the compact camera market" The new models are modest upgrades and affordable....  "WTF that's not impressive - WORST CAMERA EVER" The new models are modest upgrades and expensive....  "what the absolute @#$$" Personally, I think the GH5 is actually very close to perfection, and so a modest upgrade of its weaknesses, even just some of them, would justify its existence.  The hype train that seems to expect new cameras to be spectacular won't let the "we've taken a solid performer and given it a solid incremental update" message gain traction.  These days things are either spectacular or despicable, and no logic of common sense can cut through the mania.

It's hard to say it's gone wrong. It's so-called creative destruction. There's simply no need for a mass consumer camera market any more. Every home used to have a camera, be it a compact, a SLR, a Polaroid or whatever. No-one needs those any more because everybody (even the children) has a phone that will take better snaps with fewer skills, in a format that allows instant sharing.

No, you'd just go through Lee directly for that.

I've got an A7Rii so make that 3.
Hard to see anything better value at the price if you are already invested in E-mount, particularly if stills are the primary use.
If you are using manual focus lenses with it, I'd definitely recommend looking at getting the TechArt PRO adapter as it will give you pretty good AF capability for them.
Its designed for M mount lenses but can be used with pretty much anything by stacking a "whatever your lens is to m mount" adapter on top.
It comes into its own with small M mount lenses like Voigtlanders as its like having an autofocus high res Leica M with an EVF and its overall size isn't that much bigger either.
Battery life isn't great of course but they're small enough (and cheap enough) to not be worried about carrying a few spares.
 

If you are determined to get one of the FULL FRAME cameras you listed in your first post, then the only real viable option is the a7R II, since it will have significantly better autofocus than the other cameras you listed and at least has internal 4K. However, the full frame 4K is pixel binned, so you will need to shoot in super 35 mode anyway for the best 4K image. 
You most likely will want to shoot in 4K, so the older a7 and a7 II cameras (that only shoot in 1080p) would probably best be avoided. (Sony 1080p is generally pretty bad with lots of aliasing and moire, unless you get an a7 S, which only has 12MP for stills).
However...
Since FS5 is aps-c (super 35), and since it seems like you are on a tight budget, it probably makes more sense to get a sony aps-c camera so you can share lenses between them (instead of having aps-c glass for the fs5 and full frame glass for the a7 camera).
I would suggest looking at a used a6500 or a6600 if you want IBIS, or something like an a6400 / a6600 for HLG profile (the a6500 doesn't have HLG, but has 8-bit slog 2 and slog 3).
4K on Sony cameras is nice and detailed, although the issues are overheating (more so on the a6300 / a6500) and a dim screen, and again, only 8-bit for SLOG.
 
 

No offence taken!  
I've played with shutter angle and waving my hand on front of my face and I've gotten a sense of how 24p is different to reality.  The subjective experience for me is that 24p has a 'look' which is made to look the least un-natural by having a shutter angle somewhere in the 120-240 degree range, depending on your mood and if it's dark etc.  
But the thing is that 60p doesn't look more neutral to me, it looks like it has about the same amount of a 'look' in comparison to reality that 24p does, but the aesthetic of that look is very different.  
24p seems to have a kind of 'heightened sense' aesthetic, like realty can have in moments of strong emotion.  Kind of like the visual component of "time slowed down" and in a sense it's an effect that kind of increases the romance and emotion and depth and pain and very texture of experiencing the world as an emotional animal.  
60p has an aesthetic that makes reality seem like every atom has been lubricated and everything is kind of slipping all over itself, kind of like everything is falling in slow-motion except that it's doing it at the speed of reality, and perhaps a little bit too fast for comfort.  It has an aesthetic like the love child of slipping over in the bath, being scammed by a con artist that was so good the only warning that you got was that everything was happening slightly too easily, and what I imagine it would be like taking pills that make you smarter and give you superhero reflexes.
In my mind, 24p has a more relatable aesthetic, it fits with things that I occasionally experience in my sober real-life, but it's also familiar from watching movies and TV, so that's an advantage too.  60p has an aesthetic that I have never experienced in sober real-life.  24p disappears but 60p never seems to fade-away into the background, it's like I've had my brain downloaded into a robot body and somehow they got the code wrong.
My answer to your question about what to film for a simulation ride was 60p, but not because it mimics reality, but for two reasons - the first is that in motion-simulations it's been shown that lower frame rates make people nauseous and that it doesn't look like reality or like 24p.  So people would come out of the ride having kept their lunch and having had an experience that they'd say "wow, it really was an experience" rather than say "I watched a movie and the seat moved".
Talking about frame rate and shutter angle to mimic reality is like talking about drawing with crayons to mimic a moving sculpture - there's enough similarity to make it seem reasonable to ask the question but only good enough to choose between fundamental challenges that cannot all be met.

Human vision is fundamentally different to the way that video works, so there is no frame-rate & shutter angle combination that makes sense.
To expand on this, imagine you have a fan with only one fan blade, and imagine that it's spinning quite quickly.  We would see the fan blade as a blur between (let's say) the 12-oclock position and the 6-oclock position.  Then a tiny bit of time passes, and now we see the fan blade as a blur between 1-oclock and 7-oclock.  etc.  
To put it into traditional video terms, the shutter angle is much much more than a 360 degree shutter.
There have been attempts to actually simulate this.  They filmed scenes with a very high frame rate and using a 360 shutter, and then you can combine many frames together, let's say that output frame #1 has capture frames 1-100, then output frame #2 has capture frames 11-110, etc.  In this way, you can have a shutter angle that is larger than 360 degrees.
You could also do things like have the motion blur be a fade rather than all parts of the motion blur be the same.
I think this might be what we're running into when we talk about 24p vs 60p.  Maybe 24p has the right motion-blur, but 60p has the right refresh rate, but can't have a shutter angle more than 360 degrees.  I believe that computer games have worked out that the human eye can't detect anything more than a certain frame rate, ie, 120fps or 240fps or something, so in that instance there's no point rendering a game at faster than that.  So what we need is a frame rate at that pace, but with motion blur around 1/50th of a second (corresponding to 24p 180 shutter) which with current technology isn't possible.
Thus, the 24p 60p debate will never be resolved because the technology isn't the right kind of design.
Actually, it's that 24p is a problem because people who do video use equipment designed for computer gaming, but don't know that that's what they're doing.  Do you recall my earlier post where I said that film-making is deceptively simple and that people don't know what they don't know?  This is one of the things I was talking about.
There's no real effort required to get great 24p - just buy equipment designed for film-making and not for computer games.  There are a huge number of external display adapters that are available for purchase, and they're very affordable too.
BlackMagic sells a bunch of them here: https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products including the Decklink which is $145 for 1080p and $195 for the 4K version.  I suspect these only work with Resolve, but there would be others that work with other NLEs.  These will also give you support for 10-bit, HDR, and SDI if you have SDI monitoring equipment, and perhaps best of all is that they are a completely managed colour pipeline, so the operating system and display drivers and all the crap can't stuff up your colour calibration, giving you a completely calibrated display to work from.  
Most monitors will happily display a 1080 or 4K signal at 24p if that's what the hardware is giving them, so all you need is one of these interfaces and all the problems you're facing will go away.
You could make the argument that this gives you a great 24p pipeline but it doesn't solve it for everyone viewing your videos, and that's true.  For them, it will be a mixture of watching on computers designed for gaming, phones, and smart TVs.  People watching on computers probably aren't going to have good 24p playback, but as has already been mentioned, will they even notice?  I'm not sure about phones, but smart TVs may do this happily, considering they're designed for media consumption, not for gaming, but it might well be a patchy.  I remember setting up my media boxes to be PAL and not NTSC (before I had a completely smart TV) so they were definitely broadcast focused rather than PC/gaming mentality.
Also, you'd be surprised at how many people can spot the 50p "soap opera effect".  I doubt that many would spot the difference between 24p and 30p, but you never know.  If you ever sort out your equipment to give you proper 24p (or 25p)  playback you could test your friends and family and see if they can tell.  You might be surprised.

I think as others have stated...maybe its not the 24FPS that is the problem its the content creators not putting in the additional work needed to make it work. I think because 24FPS is at the edge of what we perceive as smooth motion, if the shutter speed is not right, if the panning is too fast, if the clip was not properly conformed to the timeline, if it was shot at a higher framerate and not slowed down by the proper percentage...etc. it will appear to stutter more so than 30FPS.
30FPS give you 6 or 8 more frames to screw up before it stutters, and the math is simpler when shooting at 60FPS then slowing the footage down by 50%. Just my opinion but I still think all of the extra work needed to ensure 24FPS looks good in the final product simply isn't worth the motion blur that I think most people won't notice anyway when it comes to YouTube / Vimeo content. Hollywood, high paying commercial work, etc. has the budgets to justify the extra time/attention/work needed to put it all together but I know in my own case; not one of my clients has ever said the final project didn't have the motion blur that they expected. Maybe if I had the chance to work on more "cinematic" or "creative" projects I would feel differently but for the work I do (fashion, modeling, events, real estate, music videos, weddings, etc) 30FPS is the better fit.

Yes.

But the shipping will bankrupt you.

I think 95% of this forum would've preferred for Fujifilm to release the X-H2 instead. 

You are correct in your research.
Let me rephrase what I said. I believe that if you're after that overall softer / filmic look, the bmpcc will get you there easier and quicker. There's no sense shooting with a GH5 if you can get that look with less work. A colorist friend of mine often says, "the least amount of moves wins.

You have boring arguments. Ofc 3080 would be faster than M1, but it is a francinstain solution - unportable, expensive, the one that doesnt work without its own power socket. If you need more power it is logical just to go desktop or wait for M1X. 

Go to see the difference between M1 vs eGPU performance and you won't think the same : ) Let alone heat management.