mercer

14 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I’ve been doing the maths…

Single Z9 + adapter + Tamron 35-150mm f2/2.8

vs

Pair of Lumix S1R’s + 28-70mm f2.8 + 105mm f2.8 (in crop mode 4k 50p, 42-105mm and 157.5mm)

Nikon based combo wins.

Single unit combo larger and heavier, but overall, lighter and more compact.

Can shoot 8k 50p Nraw internally (albeit at massive file sizes) for those brief, but critical times when I have to use an additional 3rd body (S1H) on a tripod to shoot video and stills at the same time, otherwise…

Flip back to 4k 50p + stills rest of the time (95%+) of my coverage.

This is HUGE actually for a hybrid shooter, specifically me. HUGE.

I still need 2x static 4k 25p units, but they would have just that single role at just 2 points in the day.

The downside though is:

A. The cost to buy.

B. The cost to change.

C. The fact that I can’t find a single Z9 for sale within the EU without a massive premium 🤷‍♂️

If I was going to switch, the window of opportunity is the next 3 days.

Ain’t going to happen, but I might just put in a preorder somewhere because it should be easy to sell it on with zero loss if the timing is not right.

Or start building a system off it.

Damn, it’s not just ‘peak camera’ but but ‘peak camera and lens combo’ (for me) for the first time in my 20+ year career. But I can’t buy the bloody thing! 🤪

Apparently, the IBIS only works with certain z mount lenses and it only has an electronic shutter.

With that, the Z9 really is an impressive camera.

@hyalinejim Since ProRes requires less processing, then theoretically you should get a little better battery life with ProRes as well, right?

On 7/7/2022 at 12:02 PM, PannySVHS said:

Heck, great image, this guy got out of his GX85! Great montage and camerawork as well. He shot with the native 25mm 1.7 and the pancake zoom 12-32. I heard good things about both lenses.

 

 

Dang, this looks great! Maybe I need to get another Panasonic... S5?

It kinda reminded me of Picnic at Hanging Rock.

4 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

1h 29m 17s

This is in 4k 60p LongGOP with DR boost.

Static scene exposed at +0, camera on tripod, IBIS off, LCD flipped out with backlight at 0 brightness.

That's not bad at all. I was starting to think that it was getting OG BMPCC type of numbers with how much I've heard about the bad battery life. 

3 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Heck those lenses are not going to work on e 35mm film camera, my bad.

I was waiting for the realization to set in... hahaha.

As far as film, I've been trying to keep it was cheap as possible... so a lot of B&W. Mostly Agfa APX100, some Kodak TMax and I just bought some cheap Kentmere which supposedly Ilford owns... so I'm excited about that. Color film is becoming really hard to find. I've shot some Kodak Gold, Fuji 200 and some Kodak Pro Image 100. Like I said, I'm trying to keep this new hobby as cheap as possible.

6 hours ago, kye said:

This post says that the 28–80 f/3.5–5.6 USM is great and has a metal mount (or the first version has anyway).  There's a couple of other lenses they liked too.

Thanks Kye. I actually read that article years ago. But thanks for linking to it, it definitely jogged my memory.

Quick question(s)...

I recently picked up a Canon Rebel G SLR and it has a plastic mount. The camera came with a 35-80mm iii which actually seems okay, but I was going to pick up a 24-85mm or a 28-105mm II and I wanted to know if anyone knew how strong the plastic mount is?

Also are there any other early EF lenses that are sleepers? I prefer older manual SLRs but I must say this little Rebel G is a blast to shoot with. The AF is near silent and fast. It's light and really ergonomic.

I figure I'll eventually pick up a nifty fifty, I believe the II version has a plastic mount as well, but with this camera, I kinda enjoyed using the zoom.

Thanks

Well... if you look at the best directors of the best films, they were very much in control of the visuals of the film. They ARE the filmmakers. It's their singular vision and the collaboration lies in the crafts that support their vision.

7 hours ago, kye said:

The deep DoF on the xc10 was definitely a downside, but perhaps an even larger downside was the autofocus performance.

If I remember correctly the XC10 could AF in MF mode by pushing and holding in the Push AF button at will and it would lock on until you let go. I remember it being one of the cooler functions of the camera.

In many ways, it was a semi-automatic camera. There was an impromptu element to operating it that made you feel like you were a character in the video you were shooting.

It was a fun camera... even with its flaws. 

38 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

But yeah, a lot of them still definitely judge on thematics, not craft.

This... except I would argue that theme is craft... just a different discipline. But I get your point. I'll take it a step further due to this thread. A writer/director with an inkling of visual sense could take any of these crappy cameras... or a camcorder and make a sale able or popular film. On the converse, most craftsmen on the technical side of filmmaking still need that writer or director to utilize or show off their craft.

13 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

Yes, for sure! The 1n is reassuringly heavy and solid. It has an incredibly loud shutter sound which can be a good thing or not. And I forgot to mention it's one of the very few Canon EOS film SLRs with 100% or thereabouts viewfinder coverage.

Nice, the 1N sounds like a great camera. Since I already own some EF lenses, I'm looking to pick up a cheap rebel and get some auto features.

I must admit that I have a bit of GAS with film cameras lately. I started researching and shooting some film last summer. I started with P&S cameras and rangefinders but the first camera I bought was a brand new Nikon N6006 for $48. I didn't have an AF-D lens for it so it sat away in the closet and I eventually listed it on eBay... it hasn't sold yet. Since then, I started buying and shooting with the typical SLR cameras from the 70s/80s...

I'm narrowing down my favorites and will keep a few. I tried to make a rule to only buy an SLR that I had a lens for. Other than the N6006, I've held to that rule. Of course, this rule reminds me that I have too many lenses and I need to thin my herd.

And with that, I'm thinking of picking up an AF-D lens for that N6006... haha. It seems like a fine brick of a camera actually. Good news is that I have been looking for an excuse to buy the Nikkor AF-D 35mm f/2 for years...

Ugh.

26 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Well, The Canon is a 1d mk III not a Canon 1DX III. 

As to smartphone shots and videos yeah, I do like them for the convenience of having it with me all the time and not a lot of need to do anything with them in post. My friends and relatives seem to like them more than any other camera pictures or videos I show.

I see what people post on here and YouTube etc. and I am not that impressed with most of that output also. It is only the 12, 14 bit Raw stuff that stands out to me, and that is really pretty damn impactable to use data wise for the average person. If I take a Long video with my Canon 1DC or even my OG BMPCC it is going to take up tons of storage. What the heck on average do I need all that data for. I am not making a full feature movie. Sure it looks better, but how good has it got to be.

Filmic, Cinematic has went out the door a long time ago. All these modern cameras are clean as a whistle output wise. I can darken a lot of my footage and get a look like the Sigma FP has, Is it going to look just like it no, but it probably is not a ton off. HDR, HLG stuff adds a lot to these new cameras DR wise. 

My 1DC works well if it is spot on otherwise it is no beauty, OG BMPCC same way, it is even worse if off if not perfect exposure wise. I am into what I saw these days not trying to pretend it was different. I want memories not something that pretends to be what I saw.

I have thought about buying a Sigma FP but after seeing a ton of videos on them and the length of the thread on here about it, nah it is too big of a pain in the butt, and if you rig it like you need to get the best out of it, it is like the OG BMPCC, a huge rig by the time you are done. The PK4 is looking better now with the stabilization but not worth crap for photos. And I am not a super fan of BRAW to be honest compared to the original DNG's. Sony F3 really nice but big and no 4k. 

I just find less is better in my life anymore. And really don't have the money anymore for the lenses that I would need. I am going to start thinning out the herd, and not sure what to keep.

I don't agree with everything you said here, but I think what you're describing is exactly the spirit of this thread. Be it an FZ47 or a Canon t2i... a GH2 or an iPhone... beautiful images can be made with discarded or unassuming cameras. Some of them even have a look that is equally as interesting as old film or something very high end. I've posted these a bunch of times, but I love what the RX10ii can capture in sLog2 with Monochrome color...

Or this shot from the D5500 and an old Tokina 24-40mm zoom lens...

Now I'm not saying they're great images or anything, but I think they show that these old neglected crappy cameras can produce something interesting... good, bad or otherwise. 

12 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

Canon EOS 1n with Sigma 70-200 2.8. In truth, the camera body doesn't matter so much for image quality on film, only the lens and film stock. Aside from practical considerations of AF ability and perhaps minimum shutter speed

Right of course, but I think ergonomics can play a part. Sure it's psychological, but I know I am in better spirits when I'm shooting with a camera that feels like an extension of my arm. If I feel better about the process, then I see clearer and can enjoy the process a little bit more. Sometimes the tools matter more than just the specs.

@hyalinejim what SLR/Lens was that with? Beautiful shot.

Kodak claims 20 stops and Arri claims 10 stops of DR for negative film... so it's probably somewhere in the 13-15 stop range. 

43 minutes ago, kye said:

In the best conditions I think the 5D with ML images are right up there with the Alexa.  No, it's not equal, but within the 5Ds DR limitations, it really is an excellent image.  Canon sensors and colour science are famous for good reason.

How often do I mention that I'm interested in another camera? And then how often do I buy said cameras?

Even though I know the camera in and out, and could probably shoot with it now without any exposure aids, and even a blacked out LiveView, I still feel like I am scratching the surface with what the final output could look like.

Other than maybe the FP, I don't know if I could get a purer image without spending a lot more. At that point, I may as well just rent cameras.

On 6/23/2022 at 6:21 AM, Django said:

Right, now I remember! That was the build and settings that worked best. I just might pickup a 5D3 again at some point for nostalgic reasons and to experiment with ML RAW again. Good to know the workflow in post is simplified a bit too.

They're pretty cheap now. I still love the image and I know that any limitations there are is more based on my skill than the IQ of ML Raw.

On 6/23/2022 at 6:21 AM, Django said:

Absolutely. I actually also simulate the film workflow with my Leica M9 as the playback is totally useless on the super low res display, no live view and it only takes small size SD cards that I fill to the max with only 24/36 pics available. Changes everything. I did a pro portrait shoot recently with this M9 setup and the R6, end result was well 36 shots on the Leica vs +400 on the Canon. There were great shots on both cameras but the clients favourite was by far the Leica ones (and I did not tell them which came from which camera). There was just more work/effort put into the composition, direction etc.. was an interesting experiment!

That's pretty cool. Slowing down makes all the difference sometimes... artistically and practically. I'm sure I would love a Leica, but they're a bit out of my price range. I follow Mattias on IG and he's been shooting with a Pixii camera lately and it's some of his best stuff. Gotta love rangefinders. I just picked up an old Minolta 7s II rangefinder. The damn thing is TINY and the rangefinder patch is just dull enough that it slows me up a touch more. A lot of fun to shoot with. 

3 hours ago, mkabi said:

I don't own a Canon DSLR anymore.... and may be someone can verify/confirm what I'm about to say...

I vaguely remember the optical viewfinder becomes disabled with live-view enabled??? I'm assuming that in video mode because it depends on live-view in a DSLR... optical viewfinder becomes disabled there too... so... they are really blind in video mode if the live-view goes black... can someone verify what I'm saying is true/false???

You are correct, the optical viewfinder does not work when in Live View on Canon DSLRs.

But I have never heard of any Canon DSLR's Live View going black

9 minutes ago, projectwoofer said:

First attempt at B&W grading with the S5, Canon FD 50mm f/1.4 and Helios 44M-4 58mm f/2. These are shots from a street fait in Athens. Shot on two different occasions. Music is done by me, I was feeling a bit melancholic at the time hence the title "Low". Hope you enjoy it!

 

Well done!!! I just love this. Great shadow work. It reminds me of Ilford Film. Was this shot in vLog? I knew the S5 would be great for run & gun B&W!!!

I agree about film for stills, though. It really makes you slow down and find your shot. 

20 minutes ago, Django said:

I can deal with no playback, but no Live View + No playback? Is that how it really was (I forget its been so long)?

So what you're basically shooting from the optical viewfinder or guesstimating focus? metering exposure etc?

If so that's actually good for skills (its why I still love shooting film for stills) but damn thank goodness for "modern comfort" as well!

Nah, the stable Nightly Build is 1080p Full Frame 14bit 16:9 Raw. It shoots continuous with proper live view. Playback was wonky when I tried it back in '17 so I never tried it again. It has exposure meters including a Raw Histogram with an Over Exposure Warning including which channels are clipping. It has peaking and "Magic Zoom" ... punch in while recording. Everything is stable and I've never had any hiccups.

Only the Experimental Builds have a crop and a wonky Live View.

15 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

I'll take about 5 without even thinking. 

Ha.. $999

47 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Tilt screen and higher capacity NP-F battery.

I had been pondering taking the financial hit and trading my 6K in for the Pro so this will make the hit bigger!

I thought the next one they would bring out would be the 4K Pro (or even the 6K with an MFT mount) so this seems a bit meh to me and I’m not sure why anyone looking at the 6K wouldn’t just stretch to the 6K Pro.

More details here

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicpocketcinemacamera

 

Hmm... what an odd upgrade. I think your idea of a 4K Pro would have made more sense. Every 4K owner may have traded up to a 4K Pro... but I'm not so sure they'll trade up for a 6K G2. They could have dropped the price of the 4K to $99 and introduced the 4K Pro at $1499. I may have been interested. 

8 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

That's a MAJOR "gotcha". 

I suppose, but filmmakers shot feature films for years on film without any playback. It's a modern comfort. Now I'm using an old build from 2017, so it's possible they've figured that out since then. For me, the 5D3 was so very liberating because once I used the camera, I didn't look back... or forward. The image was MORE than good enough for my humble hobby. I wish I could have that epiphany with some lenses.

Neat trick for the F5... let me guess... 9 out of 10 times you got the shot?

Just now, kye said:

It converts on the fly, I believe. It's a great option because it's one less step in the workflow and you don't have to have extra disk space etc. Of course you pay for the conversion when editing and rendering because the conversion is being done every time a clip is accessed, but it's a raw to raw conversion with All-i files so shouldn't be anything like editing from an IPB codec.

That may be the case, but so notice zero difference in the time it takes to render converted files vs MLVFS. There is a difference if I'm working from the cards as opposed to a drive... but I assume the card reader is the bottleneck in that scenario.