Jump to content

martinmcgreal

Members
  • Posts

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from Liam in The £3-£4K Market   
    It's a valid point, but as I've re-iterated throughout the thread, I'm looking for a cinema camera, and more on the high-end, which rules out both the GH4/GH5, given neither system is built specifically for cinema.
    If I wasn't so picky about motion candence, such systems would come under consideration, but the fact I am so picky about it, limits me to a handful of cameras in this price-range, if that. It's frustrating - I wish I could look past it, but I've shot with so many CMOS cameras down the years that it's just become too big of a spec to continually skip on. I really would argue it's the key characteristic that defines the 'cinematic' universe viewers are so accustomed too, all be it a subconscious characteristic to everyone but filmmakers of course. Lighting, locations, production design, actors, writing etc. all vary from film to film, to different degrees of quality, but rarely ever does motion vary - it's the most common characteristic that remains the same in cinema, and as such, is the one we associate most within the cinematic universe/images - just most don't realise so. 
  2. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from Liam in The £3-£4K Market   
    Following another viewing session of footage from both the D16 and Scarlet X this past week or so, I'm now definitely leaning more towards the latter. I've actually not been overly impressed with what I've seen from the Scarlet X, or more so for a system in such a price-range, though this probably hasn't been helped by mistaking it for Scarlet W footage at first, which is in another league entirely.
    It's difficult not to fall in love with the D16 image, the more footage you view, and the longer you ponder on it. That CCD sensor .. Yes, it's not 4K, and yes, it's not a low-light camera either, but a fair argument can be made with the latter that such an inconvenience forces you into more considerate lighting, which can only benefit you down the road. It's also worth noting how easy the transition from the pocket camera to a D16 MTF will be, kit wise. Can you record ProRes externally via an Atomos Ninja with the D16? 
    I'm by no means set on a decision, and won't be until purchase time, which is a fair few months away yet, but it's interesting just how far I've swayed from my original image appetite, which I guess speaks volumes for the D16. 
  3. Like
    martinmcgreal reacted to webrunner5 in The £3-£4K Market   
    Found another Red camera chart comparison that might interest a few people.
      http://www.alex-stone.com/2016/10/14/which-red-camera/
  4. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from Liam in The £3-£4K Market   
    I actually haven't, come to think of it. I can't say I've ever heard nor seen evidence to suggest RAW influences motion candence, as such, I've never drawn comparisons myself. 
    The D16 is definitely creeping into my final considerations, alongside the MX and Scarlet. Of course, the RED's are far more versatile systems, which should be my main consideration when spending such money, but it's hard to ignore the image the D16 delivers; it has that magical filmic feel to it that nothing else in this price-range can quite deliver so organically. I still prefer the clean, smooth, digital look, but the D16 is making me fall for the 'film' look again. 
  5. Like
    martinmcgreal reacted to Liam in The £3-£4K Market   
    @martinmcgreal great images! Have you compared the pocket cadence in prores to raw? I heard raw is notably better
  6. Like
    martinmcgreal reacted to webrunner5 in The £3-£4K Market   
    I agree. The grading is just to die for in those shots. That is what we all strive to get, as least I do. Well done!
  7. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from mercer in The £3-£4K Market   
    I did both roles for that particular piece, but I'm a dp mainly. It was all shot in ProResHQ.
    It's daylight robbery how cheap the camera retails for, given it's superior to systems five or six times the price. I'd always encourage even amateur shooters to make the pocket camera their first ever camera purchase. Yes, shooting/grading LOG images can be tricky/daunting at first, but you'd rather learn the hard way early on, than later. The menu system is perhaps the easiest/cleanest interface I've ever seen too, compared to say an A7S. 
    I agree, and this exactly why it's perhaps worth me waiting even longer, to pull together the funds for say a Scarlet. I could make a purchase as early as next month, for a system that may last me a year or two, but for the sake of waiting an extra few months, I could purchase a system that would last me the best part of five years. It's a no brainer, when written like that. 
     
     
  8. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from webrunner5 in The £3-£4K Market   
    The pocket's candence, and blackmagic cameras in general, is far better than other systems within their price-range, but still not to the degree in which it feels truly cinematic, to my eye at least - though for the price, you can't really expect this either. I was on a shoot the other week in which shot w/ 2 x Amira's and a pocket as a C cam. I actually pulled the footage into post to compare candence between the two, amongst other characteristics. The pocket holds up really, really well to the Amira, as we've come to expect, but the difference in motion was there, and noticeable. 
    8-bit C-log is indeed nice, but as you point out yourself, best to have 10-bit plus and be covered, for either a more intense look, or encase anything goes wrong in-camera. 
    Your last paragraph sums up my current thoughts nicely. The plan is to spend the next few months mulling over a decision, especially with all this feedback now behind me. 
    Sure - here's a selection of stills from the last narrative piece I shot w/ the pocket back in March, and here's my Instagram for further examples (though I don't update this as regularly as I perhaps should) https://www.instagram.com/martinmcgreal/

    I could never debate that camera is more important than story, but if it wasn't important, we'd be out the job. Anyway, a debate for another day this, shall we say .. 
  9. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from Liam in The £3-£4K Market   
    The pocket's candence, and blackmagic cameras in general, is far better than other systems within their price-range, but still not to the degree in which it feels truly cinematic, to my eye at least - though for the price, you can't really expect this either. I was on a shoot the other week in which shot w/ 2 x Amira's and a pocket as a C cam. I actually pulled the footage into post to compare candence between the two, amongst other characteristics. The pocket holds up really, really well to the Amira, as we've come to expect, but the difference in motion was there, and noticeable. 
    8-bit C-log is indeed nice, but as you point out yourself, best to have 10-bit plus and be covered, for either a more intense look, or encase anything goes wrong in-camera. 
    Your last paragraph sums up my current thoughts nicely. The plan is to spend the next few months mulling over a decision, especially with all this feedback now behind me. 
    Sure - here's a selection of stills from the last narrative piece I shot w/ the pocket back in March, and here's my Instagram for further examples (though I don't update this as regularly as I perhaps should) https://www.instagram.com/martinmcgreal/

    I could never debate that camera is more important than story, but if it wasn't important, we'd be out the job. Anyway, a debate for another day this, shall we say .. 
  10. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from webrunner5 in The £3-£4K Market   
    The only true conclusion I've been able to make so far from this discussion is that the pocket camera really is a phenomenal piece of kit for the price. I'm searching in a market for systems five or six times the price of the pocket, yet have failed to find anything that is a substantial improvement upon it, with regards to either specs or usability. Essentially, all I want is a system with the pocket's specs, 4K, a more softer digital looking image (one could argue this can be achieved through choice of glass), and something that isn't ridiculous huge. Yet for an extra few thousands of pounds, this can't be found .. Extremely disappointing, as it is frustrating .. Do appreciate all the comments so far though - great that so many of you guys are contributing, despite the lack of progress in terms of a conclusion .. We'll get there! 
    Regarding the 1DC - I love the image as much as I do the C100ii, but spending thousands of pounds for an image that falls apart under any substantial grading is a deal-breaker .. It hurts me to say that, since I do love the depth/colour to Canon's image, but I can't suger-coat 8-bit when there's thousands of pounds at stake .. I agree though, I have to make a compromise somewhere - I'd just father it be a spec less influential than colour bit .. 
    What I do have on my side is time .. I'm in no rush to make a purchase, and who knows, come March/April when I do make the decision, there could be a system that ticks all my boxes, or a price-drop for a system that currently does. If the GH5 has impressive low-light, I'll probably just settle with that, and invest everything else in some beautiful glass .. What's the verdict on Panasonic's colour science? 
  11. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from Justin Bacle in The £3-£4K Market   
    Cheers.
    The Sony F3 produces stunning results, but I'm looking to shoot 2x anamorphic w/ a 2.66 delivery, as such, need the extra resolution to compensate for cropping - and as we know, the F3 only shoots 2K. 
  12. Like
    martinmcgreal got a reaction from Justin Bacle in 'This' Look .. (Anamorphic)   
    Evening guys,
    Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera owner speaker here, looking to delve into the medium of anamorphic shooting, aswell as a potential switch to Canon’s 7D/5D line. Now, your probably curious as to why I’m deliberating such a switch, when some would deem it a step backwards .. I could spend three paragraphs deliberating exactly why, however I’ll keep it brief .. I’m looking for a camera that can deliver a more natural, clean soft image, deep in depth, and rich in colour, as apposed to the pocket, which - at least in my opinion - delivers an image that is more naturally sharper, clinical, flatter (in reference to depth, not colour space) and grainier (all be it this is subtle, and filmic). I appreciate such characteristics can be influenced or diluted with softer glass, filters or DI work, but I’d rather a camera that can deliver this look more naturally and effortlessly  Let me be clear too .. I’m not hear to slam the Pocket .. It produces a fabulous image .. I’m just merely in search for a ‘different’ image/look. (References below - by no means breathtaking material or examples - but you get the gist .. natural, soft, clean looking images, deep in depth etc.)
    https://vimeo.com/71901747
    https://vimeo.com/71912369
    https://vimeo.com/89787652
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRIA-xlAYvk
    The only two line of cameras on the market - in and around the pocket’s price range - that I believe can deliver ‘this’ look, are Panasonics GH line, and Canon’s 7D/5D line w/ Magic Latern. (Not a fan of Sony’s colour science .. ) Issue with the GH line is, despite how versatile they are, that ‘video-ish’ look still creeps through too often in my opinion, either with regards to its dynamic range, or motion .. 
    I guess this leaves just Canon’s 7D/5D line w/ Magic Lantern .. I have to confess, the Canon’s, especially when paired with decent glass/anamorphic adaptors, and in the ‘correct’ hands, deliver ‘this’ look more consistently than anything else I’ve seen within the price range. The way the camera naturally renders everything in the frame so softly and full of depth, whilst delivering natural colours so richly in the process, really does scream ‘Alexa’ or ‘RED’ on occasions. The image just feels more alive and three dimensional than the Pocket’s image too. I guess the issue w/ moving to Canon is, the con’s of the ML workflow when compared to BM’s internal workflow, and the compatibility wth my current glass (Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Nikon, Sigma 50mm F 1.4 EX DG HSM Nikon, Metabones Speed Booster Nikon G). If needs be, of course I’m open to selling such glass, but ideally I’d rather avoid the inconvenience, especially given it’s decent glass too.
    So, thoughts? Worth picking up a used 7D/5D and making the switch? (I may even keep the Pocket regardless, if possible)
    Nb. I’ve spent a fair few weeks deliberating the switch, viewing hundreds of anamorphic material w/ either camera, and the Canons just deliver ‘that’ look far more consistently, effortlessly and accurately. Of course worth noting the fact I’m wanting to shoot anamorphic is playing a part here too, given Magic Lantern is more anamorphic friendly than the Pocket. 
    It’s hard to discuss anamorphic adaptors etc. yet, until of course I’ve decided on a camera, since if I’m sticking with the Pocket, then I’m routing more in the 1.5x-1.8x range due to my dislike of 3:55:1 ..  Whereas with the Canon and Magic Lantern, 2x adaptors suddenly become an option .. 
×
×
  • Create New...