EduPortas

Guess only time will tell, friend. I agree that Red has brand recognition, but only with a very specific subset of the imaging crowd. Nikon has A LOT more recognition from almost everybody, from the absolure noob to the hard-core pro. And, let's be honest, Nikon was already hitting home runs with their new lenses and video features with pro-photogs. Now they WILL go full-hog with the video guys. That's the new slice of the imaging pie. Integrate, fortify the brand (Nikon) and capitalize on a new growing market. Hence, my original snarky comment about Red's Dead with no sight of Redemption.

You said it man, Nikon N3 and N30 are practically a given. That's would place them in a very attractive position for these new "professional content creators".

Red's dead, bro. I highly doubt they will ever release ANY new camera. Japanese companies don't operate that way. Maybe not now, but soon enough they will start to slim the American arm until everything is 100% integrated in the new and profitable Nikon N-Line.

I think the only thing that's more or less certain is that Nikon will try to move user upstream and pay MORE for the privilege to use de RED Codec. I don't see them including this tech in their lower-end MILCs. Time to pay up.

It's safe to asume photography has taken a back-seat to video. Yeah yeah ppl take lots of (crappy) photos each day, but the real growth is basically in video: TikTok, Instagram reels, Twitch and YouTube. Those are videocentric social media platforms that people have embraced and nothing seems to be able to stop them. I think Nikon will aggresively try to capture this market with new N-Line devices. We're talking amateur and pro-gear with high-quality codecs and lenses. These devices will NOT be designed in the mold of photographic cameras of Nikon. They will be an entirely new line that will merit a new badge like the C-Line cameras from Canon. Video gear for a video centered world. In about a year we'll see the first Nikon N-Line camera.

You're totally right, friend. That makes all the diff in the world for such a small device.

Hmmm. Not really comparable since the BMMCC has no LCD or EVF. It's a cube that functions as a heatsink and makes huge ergonomic sacrifices vs any decent MILC or DSLR.

Pretty sure the size of the camera is the big culprit here. Sony's tend to be smaller devices and lots of them overheat. This is well established ten years plus after the first A7 came out. My Z50 gets hotter than a young female American tourist in Cancun during Spring Break while recording just 10-15 minutes of 4K in an indoor setting. Again, it's a smaller device. So if you want more reliability you're going to have to chose a bigger camera. DSLRs rarely ever overheat. They are bigger units, in general. Most of them have recording limits, yes, but overheating was not a problem just a few years ago. Bigger MILCs like Pannys don't experience this problem.

Jeez that sucks bro. Hope you found a way around it.

Ay caramba! It's real easy: "worse" means the technical aspect of the film makes it harder to watch bc it distracts you from the story. That's why 24fps is the standard for cinema. If you're willing to deviate from that standard you better have a very good reason to do so. The Hobbit DID NOT have a valid reason for doing this 48p stuff. None. Jackson learned this lesson the hard way.

I guess you're in the 1% who actually liked the horrendously artificial movement fluidity of the movie. And that's coming from a guy who has read every Tolkien book and movie ever produced (yes including the animated ones). The contraste between the CGI and the real-life characters of The Hobbit is jarring and imposible to "un-see". Progress is great except when it makes something worse, friend.

No. 60p = sports 30p = TV 24 = cinema Sorry Tony, some things will never change.

One of the weirder moves in the YouTube sphere lately. Prob some kind of lawsuit by an ex-employee or something, seeing the way the channel imploded was not amicable at all. Management, talent, producers, the new guys. It was all really embarrassing considering they were one of the premier tech channels out here. They basically deleted their history as a brand (no one really visits their site, and if they did it was thanks to the YT channel). We'll see.

Modern fast lenses were originally requested by journalists. Specially zooms. At large apertures you solve two problems: 1) Poor lighting 2) Unpleasing backgrounds usually encountered at press conferences, the average street, and most offices. The "cinema look" was not even a thing in video up until about 2010, since most video productions were a variation of journalism: documentaries, long form news stories, tv broadcasts. All of those requiere deep DOF about 99% of the time. As you say: if you know what you're doing you actually want to show the background of your shot. Say, asking your subject to stand for the interview in front of the coffee shop were most patrons are visible vs. asking the interviewy to stand in front of a wall of the coffee shop. So the question is: ¿does this particular background need to be softened or not?

I'm confused: just recently I recorded ON CARD while doing clean HDMI out from my now ancient 7D Mark II to a cheap monitor. My low-tier Z50 can also do clean HDMI without a problem. Like a lot of people around here I do this just for monitoring reasons since I don't like to fiddle with external recording devices. Internal codecs recorded on SD cards are fine for me. You're telling us one of the most expensive Canon cameras CAN NOT perform this basic function?

Thank you.

Just out of curiosity and as a fellow teacher, how are you implementing two cameras for an English class?

And also the fact that most of digital media today is being consumed on 6 inch screens at 480p or 720p where a higher resolution is almost impossible to differentiate. That goes for movies and YouTube "content". We lot are doing this camera stuff for the pleasure of actually holding the damn camera or videocamera (not talking about the high-end production professionals, of course)

Thanks man, much appreciated. With the prices of newer cameras, it's always good to have more options that are not insanely expensive, especially if the actually AF correctly like you said (I only use Nikon Z lenses for fan boyish reasons, though).

That's great, man. At the price used Z6s are going right now it's impossible not to consider it for serious work. What's your opinion of the AF in video? Can it hold it's own in talking-head scenarios? (I've only used my Z50 for this purpose and it was good in AF-F mode with the kit lens. It has no eye-detect AF, though, just face AF)

Nikon Z6 looks very good. Considerably better than the other cameras. And it's FF, as a bonus. Also, it has competente AF for video. Not Canon or Sony level, but certainly good.

Yes, they cost more or preserve most of their value bc the people who sell then know they will solve most of the user's needs years down the line. Take a look at the famous 3CCD Panny cameras still being sold for ridiculous prices. The ones that record on P2 cards or SD cards. They are almost 20 years old! The videocamera world seems less prone to "feature differentiation" like the MILC and DSLR environment, since the form factor has remained intact for a looooong time. Once every 10 years or so a new technology will come around and make videocameras lose a huge amount of their original price, but we can count those eras with one hand: Cassetes-->miniDV MiniDV-->SD cards CCD-->CMOS HD-->Full HD Full HD-->4K

Bleh. I find no pleasure in shooting with my phone. It's just there to register. Besides, holding the phone to take a picture or shoot video doesn't look cool :p A dedicated camera or videocamera requieres more work, yes, but there's an artisan's process that offers "something" that's not just there with the phone. The technical aspect of our job can be spiritually rewarding.

Sorry about that. You are correct. I was talking about the XA50, which is more expensive. Either Panasonic or Sony will prove useful tools within their limits. You can't go wrong. My experience with video cams from both brands since the mini-dv era has been very good.

Get the Sony. If you want a cheaper videocamera take a look at the AX100. One incher. 4K. Canon has one interesting 4K offering that is in the same budget range you are at (XA40). I find videocameras have a spot in any pro's rig because they magnify the image during recording with the press of a button, have unlimited recording times, and of course dedicated microphone and headphone jacks. Only very few MILCs offer all these functions as standard. So unless you're recording caves for a new Werner doc you'll be ok.