mercer

To add... this has been in the works for a while so I wouldn't be surprised if a cine camera pops up from Nikon/Red at this year's NAB, or if that new Nikon camera that's been rumored has RedCode built in.

This is crazy news. It'll be interesting to see what this means for both companies going forward... if anything. If Nikon were smart, their next generation of cameras should be utilizing RedCode... or is it ZedCode now? I assume it will have no immediate effect on Canon's RawLite if they had/have a licensing agreement with Red. I read somewhere that Red reversed engineered the RF mount, so it's possible that Canon and Red didn't have a real license agreement other than an agreement to leave each other alone for their individual patent infringements.

Since narrative filmmaking is my only interest, I'm kinda happy I decided to build a small set of Nikkor lenses... even if they're F mount ai-s lenses.

Personally, I would love to see Red make a video centric DSLR using the F mount... even though that's never going to happen.

Also Nikon made a couple fantastic Super 8 cameras back in the day, so it could be interesting to see them go retro with a Red powered, digital Super 8/S16 camera.

I'm not really interested in Z mount lenses, and have been looking towards Canon for any future camera upgrade but now I may have to start looking toward Nikon. Since I am only interested in Raw or ProRes acquisition, it'll be very interesting to see how this affects Canon going forward.

@kye we've discussed this a bit in the past regarding selling everything and moving to a new system and normally I would be against it... I still consider my 5D3 with ML Raw as my main camera... but if my main camera was a m4/3, I might consider it.

Unfortunately, m4/3 as a small camera system is a thing of the past. Any new cameras will be as big as Panasonic's FF offerings, so if you want any of the upgrades you mentioned, the only option is to change systems or deal with the bigger m4/3 bodies. Sony could be a great option, as @BTM_Pix mentioned because you can use some of your current manual focus m4/3 lenses with a simple adapter while you decide what lenses you'd like to invest in. Also, eventually there will be no m4/3... it may not be for a few years, but the writing is on the wall... so your Voigtlander lenses will become VERY expensive paper weights. Sell them while you still can.

Then again, if you are happy with the images you are getting with what you already own, then there's no reason to upgrade.

But if you want some of the features you mentioned, the only options are a change in systems... hell you can have a lot, if not all including size, by going full frame. In the end, after selling off/trading what you have, you could probably end up with more money. 

1 hour ago, Clark Nikolai said:

Oh, I'm dreaming of even more. I'm thinking of internal raw recording in a camcorder. (It would likely have to be uncompressed raw because of Red's patent but if I'm dreaming here it would be ProResRaw and/or BRaw.)

I'm thinking of the type of narrative filmmaking where you have actors and all but the filming situation is such that you don't have much control over the setting (or much time with the location). You need to set up fast and get the shots and move on. A camcorder is perfect for that. It would need some type of timecode jam sync for any external audio recorder(s). 

 

I have a lot more to say about this... but only have a few minutes to reply. I think I wrote a similar post years ago and one of my arguments for a camcorder is that when you are shooting a zero budget, guerrilla style film, you need to look as inconspicuous as possible and nothing says dorky dad more than a camcorder... nobody would pay you any mind whatsoever.

Now I could be content with ProRes HQ but being a raw video only shooter, I would much rather have raw.

I love the form factor of camcorders... but I also still prefer DSLRs to mirrorless so I'm basically a dinosaur in today's market.

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

How very strange, a cage for the X100:

https://www.newsshooter.com/2024/02/23/smallrig-fujifilm-x100vi-retro-cage/ 

It has 10bit so it's a cinema camera... I'm sure a future YT video will decide it's as good, if not better than an Alexa. 

1 hour ago, PannySVHS said:

FP 4K Raw looking clean is if course no slouch but I trust you on liking the 5D3 Raw better.:) How do you like handling the Sigma, battery life, screen etc compared to the 5D3? @mercer

I spent a lot of time testing different configurations to make the FP more ergonomic. I finally found the best cage and drive to keep it, relatively, compact without going down the Dark Labs rabbit hole...

With that said, out of the box, the camera isn't much bigger than the original eos-m, so when you add a cage, the ssd, lens adapter and lens, it morphs into a much larger camera that isn't much smaller than my 5D3 but much more cumbersome.

The screen is pretty nice on the FP and excuse the pun, but with the 5D3, you can see the "magic" of raw on the LCD. With the FP, although it's a better screen, the image has a very flat, dimensional look.

Battery life isn't that great with the FP either, compared to the 5D3... I'd say you can get about 45 minutes, or so.

In some ways, the FP would probably work better if fully rigged out or if the barebones camera was on a gimbal with the SSD attached to the gimbal's handle.

With my current setup, I'd say @BTM_Pix 's approach using M mount lenses would probably be the most compact route. I've been looking at some LTM lenses, so we'll see.

In a perfect world, I'd have the money to buy an R5C or R5ii when it gets released, but that doesn't seem likely, so I'll decide what to do with my FP.

To tell the truth, if someone offered me a good price, I'd consider selling it right now. I got OpenAI for video now. 

22 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

Allthough you need an external recorder. (something I don't like because it makes the setup too big and defeats the joy for shooting for me). + the IBIS is not to be underestimated.

But the sigma FP does have a nice image.  

As I'm sure you know and you just misspoke, you need an external drive for 12bit 4K, not an external recorder. You can shoot internal 12bit 1080p, but ML Raw has an undeniably better IQ, in all respects, than the FP's FHD.

I agree about the IBIS, but I don't really see a point for ML Raw with the R5? You can already shoot internal raw. But all of the Canon IBIS cameras are Digic X, so it will be a long time before they break that code.

It will be interesting to see what they can do with the EOS-R and hopefully the M50. I'd actually be really happy if they were able to enable continuous MLV raw on the 5D4.

But I'm still really impressed with what the 5D3 with ML Raw and a Canon IS lens is capable of handheld. So maybe I'm just easily impressed. 

23 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

Haven't thought about that. @mercer 🙂 How do you like the output and experience compared to the 5DIII?

Eos M50 would also be a fun little raw cam. Looking forward to that one. It has a Digic8 processor just like the Eos R. @Andrew Reid

 

4K raw looks clean but I prefer the look from the 5D3. The 14bit color helps with the highlights. But I do like the FP.

Somebody needs to give these OpenAI nerds a wedgie or a swirly and fast.

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

I suspect you've fallen foul of the "y" being adjacent to the "t" on the keyboard there.

The new "cheese"

2 hours ago, sanveer said:

Magic Lantern, how about 12-bit RAW on the Panasonic Cameras 😉

 

It's called a Sigma FP and I assume it's due for an update soon. 

Audio is annoying, that's why they still ADR, a good portion, of a lot of films.

Putting taste aside, I just don't understand why you would shoot this way? Unless you are a true run and gun, video shooter, shooting auto because  you're trying to get as many shots as possible in a short amount of time or you need to fudge your shutter speed to get a little extra light... exposure.

Cinematography is difficult enough, so why muck around with tried and true conventions when you can spend that time with lighting or sound or art/set design?

Maybe the OP just wants to "discuss" theory and that's fine, but the argumentative nature suggests otherwise. 

28 minutes ago, mercer said:

Shutter angle came to the FX30?

Hate to quote myself, but just looked it up... really cool that Sony is updating this! I love that feature on Panasonic cameras and my FP. The FX30 has been a camera I've been wanting to try for a while now, this adds to the reasons. Shame it won't be available until September. 

Shutter angle came to the FX30?

Not this again...

You were the one that made the case against 24p, so you provide the proof that it's inferior.

We understand, from your posts, that you are most likely a teenager or young adult, and maybe nobody has ever told you how the real world works but your claims, statements and wishes aren't proof that 24p is inferior...

1 hour ago, bjohn said:

As an amusing side note, Line Audio (a maker of fantastic and very affordable microphones, based in Sweden) had to change the name of their omni microphone model a few years ago from OM-1 to Omni-1, apparently at OM Digital's insistence.

Ironically, in 1971 Leica forced Olympus to change the name of their 35mm SLR from M1 to OM1... the cycle continues. 

11 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Komodo-X is a $10K camera just for the barebones brain. (although year the OG Komodo is a few thousand cheaper). 

The RED Tax still exists, it's just not as hefty as it used to be. 

Yeah the original is $6K for the brain, although the "brain" concept isn't as limiting with the Komodo as it is with other Red cameras.

And although I wish the guy luck... it's a really cool mod... it seems a little unrealistic at that price with the camera included.

That said, I'm not the target market for this. Even at $3000, I'd rather have an R5/R5C and if they didn't exist, at that price point, I'd still rather save up the money for the Komodo.

But if he can manage to keep the cost below $3K, I think it would be well worth a look if you're a BM shooter. 

2 hours ago, Tim Sewell said:

I've been following this thread and now have a related quandary myself.

This summer I'm taking my 15yr old son to the Cambridge Folk Festival - an event I used to attend yearly 'back in the day', but now only manage to visit to coincide with my decade birthdays.

Anyway. Naturally my thoughts have wandered into possibly making some kind of film - it would seem a waste to go somewhere where there'll be loads of colourful, noisy and interesting stuff going on and not, TBH.

Obviously I don't want to take my FS7. Even stripped down (the camera, not me) I wouldn't want to be carrying it around with me the whole time and I'll be camping, so there'll be nowhere secure for it either. Also there's a distinct possibility that the odd tipple might come my way!

The obvious answer would be my GX80, but the sound - as we all know - is abysmal and there's no mic input either, so I'd have to record externally. Will I remember to start recording? Did I mention the tipple situation?

I've had a play about with my EOS m and the newish crop_mood Magic Lantern build. It's an excellent build, but I'm still getting the odd bug-out and since my idea for a film includes vox pops, I just don't feel it's reliable enough.

So option one is GX80 and I'll spend GBP170 on a Zoom F2 for the sound, or I trade in the GX80 for around GBP200, then spend <GBP400 on a different small, interchangeable lens camera that will give me a nice image and an audio input. Question is - what?

All suggestions gratefully received.

I think there are a few wildly different, options...

1. Olympus mirrorless - excellent IBIS, decent AF on their more expensive models, good color science (better than Panasonic IMO)

2. Canon C100 - hear me out - they're wildly cheap now and rugged. Small, but hefty, files on cheap SD cards. Canon Log or WideDR. DPAF. Workhorse that's made for going handheld with a lens like the 17-55mm f/2.8 or even the cheap 28-135mm... both with IS.

3. XC10 or RX10 (I or II) both cameras have excellent lenses with good image stabilization, good mic preamps, log profiles for the XC10 and RX10ii (mark I only has the standard profiles and only in 1080p) and internal NDs

4. 1" P&S camera... RX100... ZV-1... Canon G1X Mark ii (it was a favorite for YouTubers for years for a reason. Fast lens. Built in NDs. Decent AF.

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah you can easily enough get a RED Komodo for $5K secondhand (even less by the time the Nexus G1 finally is available!). 

But personally I'd rather not pay the RED tax and instead have a Panasonic BS1H or ZCam E2-S6 for half the cost. 

With the mere existence of the Komodo, I think the "Red Tax" may not exist as much anymore.

That said, that is the point of BM, Panasonic and Z-Cam, I suppose... very good/great cameras for less. But it doesn't take too long of a search on YouTube/Vimeo to see why someone may pay a little more for the Komodo instead of those other cameras.

Of course, I can only speak for myself. Everybody has their own needs, wants or opinions.

For me, I am done with any camera over a certain price that doesn't offer some form of internal raw or ProRes. I'd much rather shoot 1080p raw or ProRes than 4K on some crappressed codec.

With regards to this post, I don't think this mod is really geared towards your average video shooter, so that in and of itself, puts it closer to Komodo territory. Even with the mod, at its heart it's a Pocket 6K and although I have seen amazing work shot with the camera, I'm unsure if the upgrades are worth the cost of admission with the other options on the market.

Assuming my price assumption is correct, a C70 with its DGO sensor or an R3 or Z9 may be better options.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Any guesses whatsoever at pricing for the Nexus G1??

It surely wouldn't be at Komodo pricing levels!! 😮 

But I bet a Z CAM E2-S6 would be a better buy (only US$2.2K) 

Just a guess, but I would assume this thing is gonna cost around $5000 (with camera) or more. So for that kinda money... yeah just get a Komodo. 

1 hour ago, QuickHitRecord said:

I remember your original post and this is still some of the most compelling footage that I have seen on this site.

My working theory is that I think less resolution allows the audience to subconsciously fill in that detail in a way that makes sense to them and sum of their life experience. And the very act of this can make a video more interactive and engaging, kind of like reading a book. And one can argue that this active participation is nostalgic in itself, since a lot of us grew up in the era of film projections and standard definition video.

To me, the same idea applies to keeping the monster in your horror film in the shadows until the last possible minute. It is always going to be scarier in the imagination.

It's also why we gravitate towards keeping half of the face in shadow. It's been proven that humans find symmetrical faces more attractive and very few people actually have them. But if you don't show half of the face, the audience creates their own idea of a face and oftentimes that is going to be more appealing than the actor's real face. This is why I think that some people look great on camera, but not so much in-person; possibly because we never actually see their whole face in flat light, as is more common in the real world.

Here's the same video from the original post, without any processing. To me, it evokes a very different feeling than the original:

 

I think it still looks pretty good, those old Panasonic CCD sensors were really cool... I had one of their P&S cameras back in 2009... I think it was an FX150. Loved that camera. The mjpeg files had such a thickness to them.

I grew up in the 80s and I agree about the footage giving a nostalgic feeling... I swear when I remember my childhood, I see it in 110 film.

Back in the camcorder days, there used to be a trick where you'd copy a clip and stack it on top of the other to make it have a little extra heft, you should try it with one of your film emulations. 

21 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

I've been round the 'should I buy an FZ2500 or RX10' loop several times over the last few years (to partly or wholly replace my micro43 stuff) but I've never bought one.

The main reasons are the size and weight of them relative to G9 or GX85 plus 14-140mm lens - see below (from the left - GX85+14-140, G9+14-140, FZ2500, RX10iv), and the high quality of the video from the G9 (including 4k50/60p and 4k24/25/30p 10-bit 4:2:2). The GX85 (or GX9) plus 14-140mm combo is noticeably smaller and lighter than the FZ2500 or RX10iv. 

Which option would you choose? 🙂

(and yes, I know the FZ2500 and RX10iv have a longer zoom range than the 14-140mm lens plus power zoom, and the RX10iv has PDAF).

I'm not really one to say... I still shoot ML Raw on a Canon 5D3...

I will say that the FZ2500 is hefty. It's kinda like a brick, but it's a solid camera. The all-i 1080p out of it is really nice.

I stopped looking at the newer RX10s once they moved away from the constant aperture lens and the built in nd filters. I've only had version ii and I liked it a lot. They also seem to hold their value. The last one i bought used back in 2017, I paid the same amount that i see them listed for now.

Here are a couple frames from it...

1 minute ago, BTM_Pix said:

It records everything internally to an ide drive which everyone swaps out with a €10 adapter to record onto compact flash cards instead.

I saw one on eBay that mentioned CF cards... so I guess that's what they did. 

41 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its a 24bit 18 track recorder and each track has 16 virtual nondestructive sub tracks for alternative takes.

28 channel fully automated digital mixer, per channel effects, global effects, mastering suite function with CD burning (which shows its age!) or disk metering.

Its a traditional recording studio in a box with the advantage of modern features such as copying and pasting etc so if its audio you're after then theres nothing it can't do really.

Again, its the dedicated nature of it that appeals which means its fast as fuck to operate.

Obviously Zoom do newer versions but they are fiddlier, lack a lot of ins/outs for aux sends, have no digital in/outs and most importantly for me lack MIDI timecode sync to use it with sequencers.

Also, none of them are as affordable as this one as It only cost me €150 !

Its a complete relic really (I got my original one over 25 years ago) but for the needs I have nothing comes close to it as a standalone product.

I'd say it has a reassuring heft to it at 7KG !

Size wise it isn't huge at 55 x 35 x 10 cm but it being a decent size is appropriate to the ease of use.

 

My workspace is my kitchen table so it probably wouldn't be great for me, but dang... I want to keep an eye out for one just to have for the future.

Is the CF slot only to import effects or can you record directly to it as well?