mercer

Is the S5 waterproof? With all you guys talking it up so much, now I want one.

Since this is essentially product photography, I'd say that the camera doesn't matter as much as your lighting. If you want full frame, probably any full frame camera that shoots video made in the past 10-15 years would do. Then again, on the opposite end of the spectrum, a camcorder will give you the unlimited run times you may need as well. I understand your point about media and that would be a major concern for me as well. The SD cards needed for high quality 4K are expensive so I would pick a camera that uses CF, CF Express or an SSD, although I personally loathe SSDs attached to a camera but for your use, it makes sense. So that narrows your options down a bit. From Canon, any of the 5D series cameras from the Mark II on would work. I'd imaging the Nikon D series full frame cameras would also be fine. The D750 shoots nice video. But you did mention 4K so that will complicate things a bit. Someone mentioned a GH5s, and if you did choose to go with a crop sensor camera, I'd look at the GH6. Professional codecs, CF Express or SSD recording, etc... But I'd also look into timelapse photography because you may be able to get a bigger bang for your buck? To add, not all of my suggestions will give you the 4K you originally stated you wanted, but based on the example you provided, I don't think you need it. Anyway, good luck. And thanks for the post. It's interesting to see what other people are creating!

Crazy thing is that your friends' co-workers probably think he is a snob shooting with his fancy DSLR while they're shooting with their iPhones. I actually have a friend that shot a feature film on a t3i that got distribution and was released in Wal-Marts.

Don't get me wrong, I agree wholeheartedly. I love cameras and want to try them all. But I am fairly poor, so I need to only have what I need. So, for me, as a hobbyist, wannabe, narrative filmmaker, I can only justify so much. That said... I have been itching to try something new. Have been thinking about looking at cameras and their picture profiles like different film stocks as opposed to shooting Log and creating a look in post. I suppose the smartest path would be Fuji for that endeavor.

I was thinking about buying a C100 Mark II to mess around with. Was using one of Canon's 1" 4K camcorders recently... the XA15 I think... and it was amazing. Hadn't had so much fun shooting since I first bought my 5D3 and the Canon 24-70mm f/4 L I used to own. I'd imagine a C100 is right up there.

To me, that's an eye opener right there.

As a hobbyist, it becomes a bit tougher to justify multiple cameras compared to someone who is making money with their tools. So the "proper" answer should be 1 camera. But as an enthusiast, that isn't always possible. I've tried to only have cameras that offer different features... AF, IBIS, etc... I also don't use cameras as hybrids. I have cameras I use for video... 5D3 ML Raw, the Sigma FP and R7 I have on loan from a friend and then I shoot stills on an old Pentax DSLR (K10D) and a few old film SLRs.

Sorry my reply was to this comment by @newfoundmass "I know so few people shooting video on Canon these days, and those that do are mostly in corporate work. I'm actually surprised that many films used Canon cameras." I assumed the people he knows didn't make Sundance accepted documentary films, and work on events.

Anecdotal evidence only, but at the trade shows I've worked, the majority of cameras I've seen are Canon cinema cameras. The C100 is still used a ton. Followed by Canon mirrorless and then Sony cameras.m and that's pretty much it. I did see an Ursa once but that was for a specialty attraction where attendees could stand in front of the camera and do some kinda green screen thing. Most of these lists are really only showing what people were using 1-3 years ago and isn't indicative of any current trends. I remember the list a couple years ago had a film that was shot on a 7D. That said, if I was going to shoot docs professionally, I'm sure it would come down to using either a C70/C80 or a Sony FX6. I've been thinking about my next camera purchase, and it was originally going to be between Canon and Sony but after some thought, I think it's going to either be Canon or Nikon. I must admit that the Red acquisition and Nikon's current line up of cameras... specifically the Z6iii... has gotten me more interested in Nikon.

I agree about the FP's size. It's the biggest complaint I have with the camera. To get the best codec, you're doubling the size of the camera. I know rigging up cameras can be fun and some people have made a career of it on YT, but the biggest appeal for the FP was its small form factor plus raw video. Without a dedicated color workflow, and the ability to keep it small, it's now just a 4K raw camera that isn't any smaller than the R5 (as you said) but without the AF and IBIS. Ive gotten some nice footage from the FP, but its hardly worth the hassle. All that said... it's still a pretty cool little camera. Am thinking about trying one of their native lenses with it before I give up and sell it.

I'm getting bored of putzing around with the FP. Great little camera, especially for what I paid for mine, but I'm tired of the SSD and although I like the internal 8bit 4K cDNG files, V90 cards are just too expensive, especially when you see what CF Express cards go for. That said, I still have my 5D3 and other than the inherent sharpness I am getting from the FP, I find the image from the 5D3 ML Raw to be more pleasant. Even though the last thing I need is a new camera, I know I need to upgrade at some point, so I'm thinking about which way to go. On one hand, I've always had the most pleasure from shooting with Canon cameras... and the best results, but Canon doesn't really offer what I want at the price point I need to be. I do enjoy my friend's R7 I've been messing around with, and find the h.265 files to be pretty good if you nail the WB and you gotta love Canon's AWB. But I really don't want to spend Canon money for their lenses. So that lead me to look at the Z6iii and I must say it looks like an amazing machine. It pretty much does everything I could need and want in a camera. Have you tested the ProRes Raw in the Z8? If so, how does it compare to NRaw? It doesn't seem to have much benefit in the file space size compared to NRaw when in Normal Quality? But as a FCPX user, ProRes Raw sounds pretty tempting. Also does the Z8 have the binned/skipped (unsure which it does) full frame, 4K raw? I saw a negligible difference even when zoomed in 200% in a YT video I watched.

FP X3? Did I miss the one and two?

Or the Sony ZV-E10ii with the PZ Kit Lens. A combo I must admit I am slightly interested in. Obviously, the Canon is for a different market and not for most people who frequent this forum. All in all, it's a solid release. Canon has been on a roll IMO. I must admit that I have been pleasantly surprised by the R7 I've been using lately. Not to mention the Canon camcorder. I know a lot of folks around here don't love Canon Log 3 but I think it's a very simple Log profile to work with. If the R6ii shot internal raw, I'd probably sell my FP and go all in on Canon. For totally different reasons, if Sony would give me an RX10ii (body/lens) with the 10bit from the E10ii, I'd be very happy. Or if Panasonic would release an FZ5000 with the internal ProRes... yes please!

You're no slouch either... I believe it was one of your older 5D Mark iii ML Raw videos that helped me choose to go with a 5D! I think it had "Wolf" in the title?

I hate those videos that try and compare a $1000 camera to an Alexa with a stupid thumbnail that suggests you'll be surprised by the results. Inevitably, you learn that the operator wasn't as good at using cameras as he was at making thumbnails, or they intentionally cripple the Alexa by shooting in ways to highlight the $1000 camera. That said, I agree that probably 9 out of 10 times, nobody will realize what camera you shot your movie with as long as the story is good and engaging, but I do think that a couple of those people may feel like something was off without knowing why. An Alexa costs 50K+ for a reason. And although I believe craft and resources lend to the final look of the film, the sensor, the Arri color science and its thick files are a piece of the puzzle. A long time ago, I got hooked on my Canon 5Diii with ML Raw because it was the first time I had shot something where I looked at it and thought... man that almost looks like a real movie. So there are some "intangibles" involved because I am not that talented, nor that skilled. I have shot with a bunch of cameras since... GH5, GH6, Sigma FP, S5iiX, Canon R7, etc... and although the FP comes close, but even its 4K raw image is no match to my trusty, old 5D3 in gross old 1080p raw.

Is that a Q7? I had one briefly for video about 10 years ago... the image wasn't horrible but it had the worst rolling shutter I have ever seen, but it was fun using old Kern 8mm lenses on it... which I still have. Now that I shoot more stills than I used to, I could see how it may be fun to throw in your jacket pocket.

Who wants to tell her that if she had just turned around and faced the setting sun, she could have continued using her iPhone? Not it.

It's good to know kids are learning that to take good photos, you need light... Science is fun. If society can figure out how history can help their social media creds, there just may be hope for the future.

If you like the 8bit 4K cDNG files, turn them to B&W in post and the raw textures shine and you get a little more latitude overall.

Cool topic! I look forward to seeing what you come up with. As you probably know, I have both the 5D Mark iii and the FP. In a lot of ways, they're redundant. I even use the same process and settings to render the 4K cDNG files to ProRes for editing/color in FCPX. The 4K helps with the FP. Some vintage lenses, most of what I own, are just too soft on the 5D. But I agree that there's some kind of funkiness with the FP's image. I think it's processed a little in camera with NR and/or sharpness. No way to know that for sure, though. I tried using the 800 ISO trick, but I really didn't notice that much of a difference... I guess a stop or so in the highlights. I think the main benefit of the FP over the 5D3, for me, are the two ISOs for night/indoor shoots and due to the 4K it's sharper, so it has a more "modern cinematic" video look compared to the 5D3 which has more of a filmic look. I heard the s35 crop is actually better on the FP, but I didn't really notice much of a difference there either. I've been tempted to pick up a Canon 24mm 2.8 IS and the Sigma adapter and put it in s35 for a better handheld solution, but I haven't gotten around to it. I completely agree about the 8bit 4K in camera raw!!! There's actually something so unique about the image. Anyway, I look forward to some of your tests with the FP-L and c-mounts. I just sold my BMMCC, so I need to find a new camera for my c-mount lenses. I don't have anything too fancy like you do, but I do like them very much.

I'm pretty sure they were announced at the same time and their release dates were pretty close to one another... about 4 months or so.

I was referring more to the companies cannibalizing their own models. The pricing is out of control within their own camera lines. Look at Canon... the R8 full frame camera is cheaper than the R7 aps-c. In this instance, the main feature difference seems to be FF vs IBIS... I'm sure there may be other differences as well but that seems to be the biggest. Panasonic... S5iiX ($1999) vs GH7 ($2199). Full frame vs M4/3. The only other main difference is that the GH7 has internal ProRes Raw and 32bit float audio with the XLR handle and CF Express cards. That's not nothing but does it justify the GH7 costing $200 more? I guess you could argue that the GH7 is the flagship and the iix is not and I suppose the iix has been out for about a year longer. But even still? Maybe it's time that they consolidate their camera lines a little. Does Panasonic really need an S5ii and an S5iiX... released at the same time? But I guess they know what they're doing... nickel and diming their sub-$2500 enthusiast customers generates a bunch of profits with the upsells.

So I had a look at B&H to see what DSLRs they still carry and I was surprised to see that they still have a pretty good selection. Obviously, older models. From Nikon you have the D7500 to the D850 and in between, and from Canon... the T7 to the 1DX Mark iii and everything in between. As others have mentioned, not too surprising... older stock. What I found the most interesting is that B&H has a lot of refurbished cameras and grey market DSLRs for sale. This transfers to their DSLR lens inventory as well. If B&H is selling grey market cameras (they even have a couple refurbished grey market models) then I can only assume that there is still a healthy little market for DSLRs. I also only searched for Body Only cameras, so there wasn't any duplicates in the search. Eventually, even the grey market stock will run out and I assume their mirrorless models will get a bump in sales. Anyway, just an observation that I found interesting. With all that said, I agree @Andrew Reid regarding your original point about the camera mounts. The Z mount has some great possibilities and would probably be where I will go once I upgrade. Of course, I am really intrigued by about 5 or 6 different cameras and they're all in different mounts. So who knows what will happen when I completely get bored with the FP.

You can get a brand new S5 for $995. This seems like Panasonic using old stock. It's a shame what happened to m4/3. I was so floored to get the G7 back in 2015 for $500 and then the GX85 a little less than a year later for a little bit more and eventually a G85. Other than a few Blackmagic cameras, I've also had a GH6 and used a friend's GH5 a bunch of times. I wish I had kept the GH6. The current deal on the GH7 at B&H is pretty amazing... $140 coupon and a free XLR handle (32bit float internal) but it's still overpriced for m4/3 when you consider you can get the S5iiX for less and also with a free XLR handle. The pricing of Panasonic cameras are all over the place. I guess m4/3 sensor may cost more now? Or the cost of the sensor is one of the lowest costs of production and Panasonic is basing their pricing on features alone, adding X amount of dollars for every feature they add to the checklist. To be fair to Panasonic, I think most manufacturers are all over the place.

I may be wrong but the consumer, enthusiast models were Canon and Nikon's bread and butter? That said, I know they still offer a few DSLRs, but I don't believe they're developing anything new? I'm new to stills. I started with video and only recently started shooting stills, but I started at the beginning shooting a little film and the previously mentioned Pentax DSLR. With my limited experience, I do enjoy a good OVF and I'm also interested in the hybrid viewfinders that Fuji has with their X-Pro line.