EduPortas

I'd lime to know why the GH7 was used for this particular movie/documentary. Practical reasons regarding size? Cost? Absolute technical image quality? We just don't know. I also think camera choice is the most important reason any creator is going to make, aside from script. If the piece doesn't look right no one will watch it, even if it's Citizen Kane Part Deux. That's why some Hollywood creative trios are almost set in stone: director-writer-photographer. If I go to an IMAX I expect to see something spectacular. If I go to the cinema for an indie doc, my expectation changes. If I turn on my TV and watch channel 6 I pretty much expect soap opera visuals.

Owner of an R8 here. Those big phat sensels and sophisticated AF will help you big time in low light. 1080p is very good, if you need it. I've had zero problems with overheating in indoor situations, but the body will get warm if you push it all the way to 2 hours of recording. Same goes for SD card. Remember that you can use EF APS-C lenses with the official adapter and that opens up a huge panoply of options for the R8 which were never available for EF bodies. You'll get the APS-C crop in video, of course, but it's still a great option. Since my R8 lives on a tripod I use mine with a venerable EF-S 17-55 F2.8. That's it. For video I need nothing more, save for some lights and a good Rode wireless lavalier mic kit. Minimal set-up, every good results. P.S: if you'll be swapping SD cards in long recording sessions and the camera has to remain on a tripod, avoid the R8. The SD card is placed on the bottom, so you'll be hitting your battery constantly. The battery door is the worst I've ever seen in any Canon camera irregardless of price. Go for the R7 and its side-loading SD card slot, in that case.

Yes, just a one shot fixed-lens model in the X100 body or similar. Any other strategy would confuse their own customer base. Right now, they have some very clear buyer differentiation in the extremely expensive MF and the fragmented APS-C lines. So a FF body makes sense but only as a curiosity for the deep-pocketed aficionado.

How about ProRes? The ZR has ProRes HQ and ProRes RAW. That should be easy to edit on a Mac, right?

Any of Canon's recent MILCs are more than enough for your needs. - Cheapest for interviews: R8 or R7 (HD is also very good on both of these if you need to save on SD cards) - Best for Docs and everything else: R3 (for the money it's a lock for just about any application). You already know the best qualities of these cameras: rock solid AF, great color science, best in class reliability and dead simple usability. New Nikons are also very very good in this regard (Z5M2, Z6M3, Z8, Z9). Just try to stay with first-party lens options. For Canon you can add the official adapter and get the whole EF catalog. Maybe not the most exciting models, but if you're looking for real world usability it's hard to go wrong with the big two right now.

Damn, that's unfortunate. Maybe they blame the Angry Photographer for their divorce. They went at each other hard some years ago very publicly with non tech related personal stuff.

You forgot Chris and Jordan LOL

Def getting there. As you said, bokek is better when it's not distracting, like in most of your recent images. That and the very contrasty-darker frames make the image better. I think that's it. You'd just have to add a couple of actors that move within the frame to fill the last piece of the visual puzzle.

Nice! The contrasty light makes this images much more interesting than the previous flat ones.

Sounds good, can you name that specialized AI and the purpose it serves in your workflow? Thanks.

It is, but true artists love the craft. That's why they are artists and not accountants. When talking about AI for creativity it's always about the program used, never the person doing the work. "How do I make this easier?" is the question of an engineer or someone who wants to cut corners. Now we all use some sort of AI for our day to day jobs. I get it. It's either that or get out. But no self-respecting artist goes into the daily creative grind thinking I should embrace tech to increase my output and spend my free time on TikTok.

As the poster above said, the cinema look is hand-crafted. I would add dramatic lighting to your list. Think of the great Italian chiaroscuro painters from the XVII century. By nailing that artistic expression you're 99% into cinematic. Lots of light makes things uninteresting, didactic.

Put a lady's stocking on the mount of the lens to soften the image, maybe?

Well, that's something. It's clear that key and fill lights are the main differences between all the high-quality movies you mentioned and your samples. Hours upon hours go into the cinema aestehtic so it will be very hard to replicate via YT without the proper means. Add some very good actors and the bar stands incredibly high. Ever shot with older tape-based digital cams? Maybe you'll get some better results with a different media altogether. Newer sensors are just too clean.

Thanks for the detailed answer. You're right, only the more advanced videocameras will allow to you record at different fps, either higher or lower than 24fps (8, 12, 18, for example). Not sure about your GH7, though. But as you mentioned, you can play around with a lower shutter speed to break the 180º rule. Try 40 or 30 instead of the usual 48 or 50 and see what happens. Can't lose anything for trying, right? I don't mean to be rude, but it's hard to make innanimate objects feel "cinematic". We'd get a much better feel of the cinematic vs. video aesthetic you mention by recording human movement.