Tim Sewell

It's hipster heaven. Will look great sitting next to my wooden headphones!

It's hipster heaven. Will look great sitting next to my wooden headphones!

What about a 50mm 1.8 bargain lens on the S1? @Beritar  That should be much smaller. The Sigma 45mm 2.8 is pretty small but is a relevant amount narrower regarding fov than a 40mm. No real equivalent to the nice 20mm 1.7 in the FF world other than the Voigtlaender 40mm F2 in M-mount or a Konica with a long flange and adapter.
I love the fov coming from a 40mm lens on a FF camera. A native 40mm 2.8 pancake would be sweet, with Af and a clutch for hard stops when in manual focus. The G9 II in S5II body is dwarfed by the gigantic S1.😂 Oly 35RC has a 42.5mm F2.8 lens btw. I loved that lens and focal length and that camera.:)

Having this morning taken delivery of a used Sony FS7 at an amazing price and in amazing condition, I'm going to throw a spanner in the works and suggest that getting something like that, initially, would give you the opportunity at little cost to find out if you actually enjoy shooting with a cinema style camera. It ticks most, if not all, of your boxes (especially the FS7 II due to the locking mount which would be great for adapting to PL) yet also gives a taste of the differences between hybrid and dedicated ergonomics etc.

Having this morning taken delivery of a used Sony FS7 at an amazing price and in amazing condition, I'm going to throw a spanner in the works and suggest that getting something like that, initially, would give you the opportunity at little cost to find out if you actually enjoy shooting with a cinema style camera. It ticks most, if not all, of your boxes (especially the FS7 II due to the locking mount which would be great for adapting to PL) yet also gives a taste of the differences between hybrid and dedicated ergonomics etc.

Good point!

My Sony Walkman from 1986 would like a word with you on that one.

Certainly has to be considered, but 'proper' video cameras are just so much nicer to shoot with. I'm a mere hobbyist, but I just far prefer the ergos of a decent dedicated video camera. In fact I'm currently eagerly awaiting the 370hrs FS& I just magaed to pick up for GBP695 (trading in my Lumix G9)!

Yes, they are painful enough as they are (bless ‘em) but to watch it back in ultra slow motion…to the point where the camera overheated and died just before little Jonnies only line, would be terrible.

For the money, this (and the many other versions available under different brand names) can definitely do a reasonable job:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00139W0XM/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Hmmm. My understanding is that a major reason for the almost exclusive use of Arri for serious movie making is the fact that if the camera goes down the Arri network is so good that another will be delivered within hours. I should have thought that kind of protection against downtime would be just as important (if not more) on a low-budget production.

I must confess I'm always a little mystified that people are willing to pay the Leica premium for digital cameras.

One of the most compelling aspects of a Leica film camera is that it's 'the camera you pass on to your grandchildren' - but how does that stand up for digital, given that the sensor etc in even the best of Leica's offerings will be obsolete in 10 years?

A truly beautiful piece of work.

At the risk of going off topic, I also remember when on video forums people would post videos that they had made!
It's the same everywhere else. On FB groups people post pics of their setup rather than something that they shot with it.
By the way I think it's worth pointing out that the original post of this topic was something along the lines of "does 14bit give noticeably better colour?". It's a perfectly valid question or talking point for discussion about one aspect of image quality, and has nothing whatsoever to do with lighting, story, frosted glass or frosted flakes or whatever somebody had for their breakfast... So to veer off into those topics is to miss the point of this thread.
Now, here's a video! This is the last project I shot on the 5D3. Hope you like slow cinema!
 

Honestly, I don't even know what we're talking about anymore.
I am just a hobbyist who has been using a 5D Mark III with 1080p ML Raw for the past 5-6 years as I attempt to make a few short films in my spare time. I'm hardly chasing cameras. I picked up a Sigma FP a few months ago, on a whim, and I like it. It has a nice image, I can't say for sure that it's a better image than the 5D though. I assumed the 14bit color from the 5D may be evening out the playing field, but what do I know... as I said... I'm not a professional like you guys are.
I've always been a writer first, so story is the most important thing to me, but I'm not delusional enough to think I am going to sell a screenplay or make a film that will have any impact on anything. I enjoy doing it, though and I suppose there are worse things I could spend my money on.
Next year I may buy a camcorder, making movies was a lot more fun back when camcorders were the only option for zero budget filmmakers.
I will end with this, though. Since we're all being so brutally honest... none of these cameras look that good. If you're shooting with a P4K and a Sigma zoom, or a 5D3 with ML Raw... they all look amateurish. So when you guys attack other people for their choices... remember your choices probably look questionable as well.
Then again, I've never seen any of your work, so maybe you guy's are artistic geniuses, but how could anyone know... only a few people share any of their work on this forum and when they do, the posts about the next best camera gets way more attention...
Good luck to you. 

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

Hmmm. My understanding is that a major reason for the almost exclusive use of Arri for serious movie making is the fact that if the camera goes down the Arri network is so good that another will be delivered within hours. I should have thought that kind of protection against downtime would be just as important (if not more) on a low-budget production.

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

Hmmm. My understanding is that a major reason for the almost exclusive use of Arri for serious movie making is the fact that if the camera goes down the Arri network is so good that another will be delivered within hours. I should have thought that kind of protection against downtime would be just as important (if not more) on a low-budget production.

I knwo that Amazon needs to cut costs, but close a website with THIRTEEN people on staff? Jeff Bezos have a bigger crew just to clean his balls.

Lifted directly from a Noam Kroll blog post that is so old it has cobwebs on it.
So you can fuck right off as well.

Got myself a 5d mkii yesterday. @Tim Sewell I went to buy a 24-105 f4 in great condition. I picked that lens up personally from the seller. Before I texted him if he would sell his 5dii for cheaper, which he had on offer as well. He replied he would talk about it with me in person when i pick up the lens. Well, he sold the body to me for 150EU, 22000 clicks on the shutter only, like new condition! I thought to get the 24-105 for my Fs700 with a speedbooster. Now i also have this beautiful classic camera, the legendary 5dii at my hands. Immediate love. Something the S1 still doesn't do for me. Now i gonna get a nifty fifty 1.8 for no more than fifty. Gonna love some awesome Dslr photo fun. My first digital Dslr. My first Canon L lens. Love it!

Well I just bought a 5D mkii, with a view to getting another, to relaunch myself into the wedding stills trade this year. Fairly impressed so far...

Well I just bought a 5D mkii, with a view to getting another, to relaunch myself into the wedding stills trade this year. Fairly impressed so far...

Well I just bought a 5D mkii, with a view to getting another, to relaunch myself into the wedding stills trade this year. Fairly impressed so far...