newfoundmass

6 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

I'm sure these give very good sound quality, but I'm not sure how I feel about a directional, mono mic. I think I prefer stereo for these travel/family occasions as the ambient soundscape is as interesting to me as the people/landscape. I think it gives you a better sense of being there.

The Sennheiser is probably better overall, but I use two Tascam TM-2X Stereo XY Condenser Microphones for my pro-wrestling work and I'm happy with them! Aside from the price, I like them because they're compact, which is a real plus when around a wrestling ring and filming through the ring ropes!

I've also used a Zoom H1 as a mic hotshoed to my camera before with good results!

I'm still rocking the Rode Micro and am quite happy with it!

22 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Everyone's needs are different.  As stated, some folks don't have the time/luxury/desire to setup external lighting and having a competent camera for lowlight would be very helpful.  If the noise was not a distraction/noticeable then i'd agree with you.  That said, I am unsure if it is on the FX30.  I'll have to dig in deeper to see how the fx30 compares in lower lit conditions to the fx3/a7siii to see if it is really a noticeable difference.  

I'm not trying to lecture you, so forgive me if it comes off that way, but I don't know that you're getting the point that I was trying to make. 

How do you think we used to film in a low light situation when running and gunning with cameras that were infinitely worse at it than even a modern M43 camera? As @IronFilm said, the FX30 is miles ahead of what we had available to us back then, but people were still able to run and gun with those cameras in low light situations because we knew how to get around that limitation. Back then though we didn't have the luxury of owning LED pocket lights that cost under $100 and could easily be added to the camera's hot shoe. 

Is the hassle of carrying a small Aperture light when you need it really worth spending more on a FX3/A7Siii for those low light situations? For some I guess it is? Just seems silly to me.

8 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

This video was helpful thanks! Makes me feel the fx30 is good enough for most situations, including lowlight with the right lens pairing.  

I'm not sure about this.  We're not living a decade ago and for those who don't have more than themselves and no lighting - ISO performance and options today are what's relevant.  Fault with the user ... could you unpack how that plays out in lowlight as a single operater?

Advancements in technology are great, but people are becoming slaves to it. Lets say for arguments sake the FX30 has very poor low light performance (it doesn't) but it fits your needs perfectly otherwise. What do you do? Decide to keep looking/wait until the "right" camera comes along, or do you buy it because it's the best overall option and work around it's low light performance by carrying a small light or two?

I've been doing video for 25 years, since I was 13 years old. One of the first things I learned was how to adapt and get around limitations. To me that's a big part of what we as videographers and filmmakers do. We are problem solvers! 

So yeah, when seeing people complain about a camera's lowlight performance because it can't see in the dark or gets grainy at ISO 3200 it makes some of us start asking "what are we doing here?!" There are 100s of affordable little lights that can easily fit into any bag. Grab a few of them and just start shooting!

13 hours ago, IronFilm said:

The FX30 has low light performance people would have given their kidney for a decade or two ago. 

The fault is with the user, not the camera, if you can't get good images out of it. 

Yeah, it's yet another example of how spoiled we are.

I came from the world of camcorders, so people talking about M43 being terrible in low light made me chuckle.

1 hour ago, markr041 said:

Yes, I acquired the a7siii when it first came out for its video features. It was the best option, then. As soon as the fx3 was introduced I traded. The fx3 was clearly superior as a video tool, even without the updates.

I agree not upgrading the a7siii is deliberate marketing. But if the new features of the fx3 are important and one's profession is video it seems odd to not trade up.

If a professional hangs on to the a7siii, then it is actually clear the new features are unimportant to her. The trade up cost is a tax-reducing investment and is a trivial expense, again, for a professional making a living based on video quality.

Just whining is not professional. Worse are those who say they will never buy Sony again over this. That is surely not professional.

Being a Sony apologist isn't particularly professional, either. You've argued that the A7siii isn't meant for professionals, even though the very first thing Sony said in it's marketing material was how this camera is for "movie makers."

Quote

 

Imagination in Motion

Taking the S series to a whole new level of full-frame movie expression, spectacular new speed combines with supreme sensitivity and ultra-low noise to put previously impossible 4K movie shoots on the menu, with high dynamic range, breathtaking focusing, and extra-strong image stabilisation. Your new creative potential awaits.

For visual trailblazers
With extreme full-frame movie performance including high sensitivity (expanded ISO up to 409600), 15-stop wide dynamic range, 4K 120p1, fast and dependable autofocusing, and extra-strong image stabilisation, the α7S III again raises the bar for movie makers.

 

You've then faulted people for not immediately selling their A7siii and buying the FX3, because apparently that's a reasonable thing to expect people to do less than a year after they dropped $3500 on the A7siii. Frankly it's pretty ridiculous for Sony to have released the FX3 in the first place just six or so months after the A7siii, given it was pretty much the same camera in a different body, but that's a debate for another day.

And now you're faulting folks, many who use the camera professionally, for feeling burnt because they dare "whine" about features being withheld from their flagship cameras but not entry level ones even though it could be easily done in a firmware update.

This is silly. @Andrew Reid you should check to see if his IP address is located at one of Sony's headquarters! 😉

2 hours ago, markr041 said:

The fx3 and fx30 are cameras for people who take video seriously. And cameras like the a7s iii are not for them or other hybrids

People can repeat that until they're blue in the face but it won't suddenly make it true. 

It's kind of gimmicky, but I kinda like the different colors. They're fun.

Yeah JCC has always had decent gear. I'll probably purchase this with the summer coming, if only to shade my pale ass a little (there's a bigger version available!) From the sun!

3 hours ago, Davide DB said:

Never without it when shooting under tropical sun

 

Is that a real product? 

Edit: it is, I'll be damned!

2 hours ago, seanzzxx said:

Does anyone know what ProRes resolutions and aspect ratios the 5iix will be able to shoot internally? 1080p open gate in 422 10 bit would be awesome. 

I'm not sure it has been confirmed either way. I heard a few say it was 1080p only, but others didn't mention that at all 

4 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

In fact, if anything, scrap the f2 aspect which is only available something like 35-40mm and just make it a constant aperture f2.8 so maybe a little smaller and lighter…

I took would not be opposed to this.

I do hope more of these companies start making L-mount versions now that the system has seen an increase in interest.

34 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I agree, the next generation of us filmmakers will more likely have come up via a pathway of being aspiring youtubers/tiktokkers/instagrammers than because they were aspiring to be the next Richard Deakins 

The B Cam Op on the film I just finished was yet another example of exactly that, he was a fairly successful Instagram Influencer who has now transitioned over into the Camera Dept on film sets. (owns a RED Weapon and RED Komodo) 

There are good and bad things about it, I definitely get why people dread it, but it's the future. Social media is how they get their feet wet and THEN that's when their world opens up to filmmaking and videography. I mean, we're already seeing it happen. People who think my friend is a rare example aren't paying attention.

On 4/4/2023 at 2:53 PM, Kisaha said:

how is it possible to know that one will keep a camera for more than 5 years? Maybe the kid shoots with 3 Alexa's next..or what should have done when asked to film for 75$? Buy a 4.000$ camera instantly (which wasn't probably released yet?!?)? Moot point..

Whatever your way is, you never make ONE purchase, and stay with it forever..

You're still missing the point. No one is saying you buy one camera and that's it. Someone starting their video journey though probably shouldn't have to purchase a whole new camera in a year or two because the camera they spent $2200 on can't record for extended periods or in hot conditions without overheating. At least not in 2023, anyway. 

People need to stop making excuses for these companies.

21 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

 

He's a nice enough dude, but unfortunately he's a Sony shill. I probably wouldn't take what he has to say, re: whether you should buy a camera, very seriously.

6 hours ago, kye said:

I'm curious to know what cameras people are actually using?

By reading the forums I get the impression that everyone is using the latest and (so called) greatest cameras, but I suspect that's not the case.  I haven't been posting lately because I've gotten the impression that no-one would be interested unless I was pixel-peeing a Z9 or whatever, and I've moved past that now.

Right now I'm shooting with two Lumix S5 bodies and a GH5. I don't intend to "upgrade" anytime soon. Before getting a second S5 I was still using a G85 and GX85! I do miss the GX85 though, it was so nice to have such a tiny camera with good video quality. I might end up getting another one, we'll see.

Welcome back! To be honest I wish there were more threads about things that weren't about the latest cameras!

20 minutes ago, Snowfun said:

Aida HD for Teams meetings…

P4k for work related videos.

P6k for fun.

Photographs - primarily iPhone, occasionally A6000.

 

Any reason why you use the P4K over the P6K for work?

Times change, as does how people get into video production and videography. You're unable to see things from a perspective that isn't yours @Kisaha. If you're a 21 year old kid (that's how old he was when he got his first paid gig) that is offered $75 to film a theater performance because you happen to own a camera for a YouTube channel you're trying to get off the ground, you're not going to have the experience and knowledge of someone that has been doing it for years and years. You're also probably not going to turn that opportunity down, either, because that's a credit card payment for the camera you put on credit.

I was only relaying how his path into videography began, and how he first purchased a camera that was limited and how that impacted his unexpected, but ultimately successful, transition into doing paid work. He now shoots with three A7siii bodies and is doing well for himself. His criticism of the ZV-E1 is pretty valid, because 5 years ago he would've been the target demo for this camera, probably purchased it, and found he'd spent $2200 on a camera that he couldn't use for the work he'd eventually end up doing. As he put it, there's dozens of better options that won't limit a person from following whatever path they end up taking, whether it's being a YouTuber or becoming interested in filmmaking or videography as a job.

His perspective was different from mine, and obviously yours, so I figured it was worth sharing.

I'm loving the videos @Andrew Reidhas been posting on YouTube lately. They're cracking me up, because he's saying a lot of the things I'm thinking, but doing it with the British humor and wit that I lack. The Matt Granger one did me in this morning! If you haven't watched them you should! Keep it up, Andrew!

40 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

This is just one rare case..

most youtubers do not even care for "normal" jobs, and most blue collar videographers do not even know any youtubers..

As I said it might not be typical, but I don't think it's one rare case at all. I think quite a few YouTubers end up producing video work for others, whether it's a friend asking to film their kid's recital or a family member asking if they'd film their wedding. Once the ball gets rolling it can lead into something else. Many of us "blue collar videographers" started out as hobbyist and got our first paid gigs because we were known as "the video person" or "the person with the video camera." My first paid work was because as a 13 year old I'd bring my video camera to pro-wrestling shows to film for my own enjoyment and one time I was offered money in exchange for the footage. In many ways the aspiring YouTuber is the modern equivalent of that. To say that it's rare I just don't think is correct.

I was talking to a friend this morning who started out planning to be a YouTuber but ended up doing actual paid work and losing interest in YouTube. He's a Sony user and he gave me a different perspective for why this camera sucks and it is a pretty simple one: given it's limitations it can't grow with you.

His first paid jobs were because people knew he did "that YouTube stuff" and they wondered if he could film something for them. He was of course stoked about it, but ended up having a problem: his A7iii was good for his YouTube channel but the 30 minute record limit didn't cut it for the theater productions he was asked to film. Suddenly the camera that he bought because all the YouTubers he wanted to emulate were using it, and that he bought on credit (he was 20 at the time and didn't know better), wasn't the right tool for the job. He was able to get around it when he found out the trick to remove the limit, but he still found it'd overheat sometimes. His parents eventually helped him buy an A7siii once they saw the potential in what he was doing, but it was a costly lesson. 

Obviously his experience might not be typical, but his point was that if he was just getting started now he'd probably buy this camera but end up regretting it because of it's limitations. People's intentions/priorities change over time. People buying this camera might only intend to use it for YouTube and short takes, but what happens when your co-worker offers to pay you to film their kid's play? Or you're asked to film your cousin's wedding? 

Anyway, it was an interesting perspective from someone that started out as a YouTuber that I thought I'd share.

No offense to the other posters, but the original poster mentioned taking stills with the camera so Blackmagic isn't a good option.

17 hours ago, GregButcher said:

I'm looking for video camera and lens suggestions for filming modelling shoots and close-ups in as high definition as possible within my budget of $3,500.

Being compact is not a concern as it will be kept in one location. 

I would be happy to go refurbished/used if that's advised.

There would be very minimal movement when shooting (e.g. video camera will be mounted on a tripod or held by a cameraman for a slow-moving modelling shoot or interview). It will also be used for taking still photos but this is much less important than the video quality.

I would be very grateful for any advice please as I'm quite new to this - I've used a Sony RX100 iii for several years and I feel like now is time for a considerable upgrade.

The S5II with the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 if you're looking for a zoom lens

Or

The S5II with Panasonic Lumix S 24mm f/1.8 and the Lumix S 85mm f/1.8 

I went with 24 and 85mm because it'll give you a wide shot and a great portrait lens.

The Sigma primes are also excellent, and are faster (f/1.4) but the 24 and 85mm would put you over budget.

12 hours ago, Amazeballs said:

Listen, guys. I love my A7S3. Yes I would love to have new dynamic stab, and better AF. I also would want a new video oriented clean on-screen menu layout, but I can live without it. The camera still rocks. The problem is not about it beeing crucial feautures, its the attitude to the community, to us, its customurs. And this attitude stinks. In our age not giving your hardware avalible software updates is really really unexusable. Showing support to your older product is showing love to your customers. And feeling abandoned for a new youger girlfriend is not exactly a stimulating emotional experience. 

It's one thing if the hardware can't support it, or if the camera is ancient, but the only reason these new features aren't being added to recent cameras via firmware is because Sony doesn't want to. As you said, they are features you can live without, but that's not really the point. These companies want brand loyalty without giving it back in return.

On 3/27/2023 at 9:49 PM, SRV1981 said:

To what degree does this matter for you?  To bring focus to the questions let’s consider 3 scenarios:

 

1. you’re shooting weddings, events, and documentaries  output YouTube and other mediums clients want

 

2. you’re shooting narrative filming mostly and some event work as in 1  output YouTube and other mediums clients want

 

3. you’re shooting for personal use, run and gun personal docs, narratives, sports, travel. Output: YouTube 

 

 

Unless you're shooting in a log profile or doing lots of color grading 8-bit is fine. I film the majority of my event work in 8-bit because 10-bit just isn't necessary when I don't need to do a ton of corrections. I film in the natural color profile on my Lumix cameras, set my custom white balance, and I'm good to go.

10-bit is great to have for narrative, commercial, and even corporate/interviews where you're going for a certain "look." It is also very good for green screen work. Since getting the Lumix S5 and full v-log I've filmed more in 10 bit. I really like it, but it's just not necessary for a lot of stuff.

I've seen some really good stuff from the S5II, so I think overall it's a very good release. But they do need to fix the issues that are there and let people know that they're working on them. Given their track record I am confident that they will, but I hate how poor their communication can be.

48 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

As for the reason behind a lack of firmware updates, it's because the A7S III is still selling well and is already feature-packed... so it doesn't matter what Gerald says really, if it is selling well, they don't need to change it.

I'd also argue that they've already got people's money, so they don't care. They want you to buy the next camera, not increase the value of the camera you've already bought. And it works, because more than a couple notable YouTubers ended up getting the A1 and the A7RV after selling the A7SIII, which I'm sure then influenced others to do the same since that's how it works. I just wish more people cared about this shitty behavior.

2 hours ago, Evgeniy85 said:

Do people expect to film 2 hour interviews with it? 

If you're dropping $2200 on a camera you probably should be able to in 2023.

50 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

It is not just while recording, but simply being on that apparently it can overheat under certain conditions 

These tests also don't take into consideration things like humidity during summer, which can make it feel a lot hotter than it is.