newfoundmass

49 minutes ago, mercer said:

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

Yep, he uses a T3i and a cheap MOVO wireless mic (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1542503-REG/movo_photo_wmx_1_2_4ghz_wireless_lavalier.html) right into the camera. Budgets for local news have been cut all over the country; lots of reporters use their cellphones or their own cameras now. When I first did ENG work I was the camera guy that worked with the reporter and used professional equipment provided by the station. Now they all do it themselves for most stories, and only use the professional equipment (which is also mostly ancient) for major stories/press conferences/live feeds.
 

The Panny DVX200 was pretty ubiquitous up here as far as station cameras were concerned but those all went away and now my bud uses a T3i and a $40 wireless mic system haha. Wild times.

58 minutes ago, mercer said:

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.

When using the C100 mk2 recently I fell in love again with the body design and, honestly, the image looks good upscaled to 4K. I could very easily take three of those bodies and do my multicam work with them, upscale it to 4K and it'd be fine. Most people wouldn't notice or care. There was some voodoo going on, too, when it comes to that codec. 8-bit at 28Mb/s or whatever it was shouldn't have been as thick as it was, but you could do some pretty heavy color grading on such a small file. The only thing that I would miss is IBIS, but with a body like that it is less of an issue.

I know sites like Lensrentals sell them used for under $700 now, and you could probably find them even cheaper on eBay if you wanted to risk getting something that had no warranty, exchange, etc. It's a testament to the kind of workhorse that camera is that there are so many out there still going strong all these years later.

Yeah, I'd escalate it to a manager or something. This is nonsense!

For me I only really need three cameras, and they're what I have:

Lumix S5 (2)

Lumix S5II X (1)

They cover all of my professional needs and I also just enjoy using them for my own personal use.

I do plan on picking up a S1R when the used price goes down even more. Having a high resolution stills camera for promotional pictures I think would be useful. I could also use it for backstage promotional videos at my wrestling events.

I've also debated getting the Lumix S9 as an everyday carry camera. I really don't enjoy using my phone to shoot photos and video. It just doesn't give me that good feeling I get when using a real camera. I sometimes feel like I'm in the minority though in that regard.

7 hours ago, Django said:

The C70 wasn't that overpriced in the sense that its an actual cine camera with pro I/O, ND filters, large battery etc. It also had a pretty singular DGO sensor from the top of the line C300 mk3. FX3 was basically a rehoused A7S3.

The main issue is that C70 was RF S35 but with zero APS-C RF lenses so you had to get the speed booster to adapt old EF glass. Really convoluted approach.. C80 is what it should have been from the start.

Still for solo docu work I'd take a C70/C80 over an FX3 for the NDs, internal RAW, battery life & I/Os.

You'd have to step up to FX6 for a fair comparison. FX3's competition is R5C.

While I understand what you're saying and somewhat agree, there are more people using FX3s than C70s, and there are plenty of reasons people went for it instead of the C70, namely lenses, full frame sensor, and price. When you then factor in the FX6, which was similarly priced and had "better" features, the C70 seemed like even less of a good deal to those who weren't married to Canon. Not only does this graph support that, but just my own personal experience does too.

Between sports, weddings, conventions, festivals, commercial shoots, news gathering, and docs etc. I really can't emphasize enough how few people I see using Canon these days, let alone the C70 or C80. Compared to 10 years ago or so when I'd do these same events and there were tons of C100s and camcorders, it's really night and day.

Though the guy coming to do a story on my wrestling event this Sunday for the local NBC affiliate will be using a T3i, which cracks me up.

1 hour ago, Ninpo33 said:

I do remember cheering out loud when I saw the filmmaker Cullen Hoback using an S1H on some BTS footage of the HBO doc from 3 years ago about The Q-Anon cult. I think he shot the whole thing with two of them. 

Bo Burnham filmed his Netflix comedy special "Inside" on the S1H, too.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

But the big shift over from Canon to Sony happened in the 2010's, and I think back then the lens/camera mount was less of a big deal.

Yeah, by the time they released the C70 (for $5500) the landscape had radically changed. It was only three months later that Sony released the FX3 for $1600 less than the C70 and 18 months later that they released the FX30.

Unless you were a loyal Canon user there weren't many reasons to buy one of their overpriced cinema cameras when there were more affordable and, arguably, better options.

If Canon had released the C70 for $3500 things might be a bit different today. 

2 hours ago, mercer said:

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.

Events are my bread and butter and they are dominated by Sony. I really don't know many Canon video users outside of corporate shooters, where the C70 is a big hit with them. A friend of mine is also using C100s and I got to use them again recently, which reminded me how much I loved that camera and wanted to get one so bad for the longest time! But here, at least in the northeast, Sony really has taken over from my experience.

Meanwhile I'm over here trying to do all of it with my Lumix cameras! Haha!

The decline in Canon's cinema lineup started a while ago. It took them too long to release a 4K successor to the C100, and what they have released are too expensive. I mean, the C70 was $4500 on release which is a lot when you compare it to what else was out there in that price range.

Before that your options were the C300 mk III ($9,000) and C500 mk II ($11,000). That's a lot of money when Sony had cheaper options.

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 really do think this is a solid release. I do hope that we get more overheating tests and if there is an issue a firmware update to somehow fix it. Having overheating issues with active cooling is wild.

I do think I'll end up picking up a S1R. Having a higher resolution stills camera for taking promotional photos of performers in higher resolution could be really useful.

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Why? What did he say

He essentially said he doesn't need/want to create "art", that it's not relevant to what he does or what his videos are about. He said he COULD if he wanted to, but doesn't want to. "If you want reviews like that, go somewhere else" was basically what he said. He said he doesn't care how these cameras perform in those scenarios, and says he really doesn't even care about things like DR or rolling shutter because he only makes videos in his basement set where he has lighting and the cameras are on tripods. He just tests that stuff because it's what people asked him to do. 

If you take that, and then go back to the video last year where he complained about Lumix and bragged about going on these exotic trips and never actually shooting anything, it just makes you wonder why he is even interested in cameras to begin with because he seems to have no real interest in creating anything with them other than videos of himself in his basement. 

I guess it's a living, but he seems miserable.

11 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Yes, I think he is in his own right to only be a seller or using his channel to promote whatever he feels like. The fact everyone thinks because someone is somehow connected with cameras needs to be an artist is pure nonsense and even some lack of knowledge how an industry works.

I don't think it's nonsense at all. Cameras exist to create art. If you're not interested in creating art with them then why dedicate your time to them? 

It's like someone owning a bunch of guitars but not knowing, and having no desire to learn, how to play them. 

14 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

How come? Well, cameras are one of the main points for marketing to each release... ;- )

Because most people aren't going to ditch the convenience/familiarity of their iPhone for a camera focused phone from a camera manufacturer even if the photos and videos are significantly better than what the latest iPhone offers. And those that would be interested in such a product are so few as to make it extremely difficult to make a profit, I imagine.

I don't hate Gerald or think he's a bad person, I'm just bummed at what he has become. He genuinely seems pretty miserable doing this stuff, and the more he shares about himself (the comments about why he doesn't create anything were really illuminating) the more I wonder why he is even into cameras to begin with. If you aren't inspired to actually use these things to create art or entertainment, then what are you even doing?

Those comments in particular brought me back to a comment he made in his previous video last year, where he bragged about being brought on these press trips to exotic places and filming nothing. Say what you want about those trips and whether they are ethical or not, how are you not inspired to photograph or film the sights and sounds of these exotic locations and the elaborate sets these marketing folks have created for you if you're even remotely into cameras?

Surely your interest in cameras has to go beyond what you film in your basement and the tests you run on them... right?

Gerald DOES get a lot of dumb criticism, but he also uses that to deflect valid criticism by lumping it all together.

This thread, which also is related to another time Gerald got upset and decided to rant to his subscribers to make himself feel better, discusses most of the criticisms and his hypocrisy. He helped create the beast that bothers him so much today.

I remember making this post in October 2022, which is around the time I kinda realized what Gerald really is about. It still rings true, too. 

Quote

 

Watching the Gerald Undone video, and it's really a bummer to see how much of a Sony shill he has become. He will bring up negatives, but then downplays them or just outright dismisses them as not important. Meanwhile, he'll temper his compliments of other cameras. The titles of his reviews from the last year or so really sum it up, honestly.

Sony a7R V Review: A Fantastic Camera!
Sony a7 IV Review: The Best Hybrid Camera for the Money!
Sony Alpha 1: A VERY IMPRESSIVE Camera! (Sony a1 Review)
Sony FX30 Review: Good Camera. Great Value!
SONY ZV-E10 Review: Sony's BEST Budget Camera
The SONY a7S III: A Technical MASTERPIECE!
The SONY a7C: Why THIS Camera Is IMPORTANT!

vs.

Canon R3 Review: 10 Things I Love/Hate
Fujifilm X-H2S: A Very Nerdy Review & Technical Guide
Nikon Z6 II - Video Review & Blackmagic RAW Discussion
The PANASONIC S5: A STRANGE but POWERFUL Camera
Sigma fp L Review: A VERY CONFUSING Camera!
Kinefinity MAVO Edge 6K: An Undone Review

I don't even think he does it on purpose (or maybe he does?) But it feels like we're far ways from what made him appealing to me in the first place, which was a measured analysis of a camera's capabilities.

 

I don't think any camera company could enter the phone market and be successful at this point. As @ND64 mentioned, even the Chinese companies are having trouble. Heavy hitters like Microsoft and Google have tried to enter the market to little success; Microsoft failed while Google has a very small piece of the market despite being the primary developer of Android. And I think trying to appeal to folks that want better photos and videos is such a small niche that I don't think it'd work.

On 3/5/2025 at 6:51 PM, Davide DB said:

Sorry guys, I had to do it.

I really don't get this guy anymore. This video would be perfect for the "Rise of the salesmen, Death of the artist" thread.

@Andrew Reid feel free to delete this post 

 

 

He could probably save himself all these headaches by giving more context in his videos if he feels that they are being misconstrued or misunderstood.

It's hard to feel too sorry for someone who created the problem he now has. He pigeonholed himself into being THAT guy because it was what got the most views aka generated the most revenue, and now he hates it.

Seems less like "Rise of the salesmen, Death of the artist" and more "Rise of the salesmen, Reaping what you sow."

Hopefully they fix that for you, because it really doesn't make sense to limit it to certain modes. 

4 hours ago, John Matthews said:

After ralphing up my lunch from watching rolling shutter comparisons, I can safely say the Lumix S1Rii is pile of crap comparatively speaking. It's completely unusable in this regard and I'm sure Lumix will either be releasing an update or submitting a recall. Here's the proof: 

 

Forgive me because I've been terribly sick and am just waking up, but the rolling shutter only seemed really noticeable when dynamic range was on. For everything else it looked fine.

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I agree the original S5, and S1 have a lovely image.

Both great for the price.

10bit codecs.

S1R with 4K/60p only a 1.1x crop.

They should be in my top 10 but I still don't think they suit as many people as an E-mount or Z-mount camera.

Sigma Fp OG should be in my list as well but again it's more of a niche tool.

The S5 and S1 practically have no autofocus to speak of.

The non-nerds I speak to regularly complain about it and want to switch to Sony.

The S5 also has a very pokey little EVF, which makes the S1 a better deal as they're both around 800 used.

But the S1 compared to a Sony a7r III or a7 III is clunky... heavy, too large, bad AF, wrong mount in most people's eyes, and doesn't play well with adapters.

Whereas the Z6 has the same sensor, very similar image quality, but much better ergonomics, is smaller, lighter, excellent AF, and I believe most people would pick the latter qualities over just having 10bit codecs.

The S5 auto focus isn't that bad, really. The biggest issue it has is when the subject is moving forward, which you would actually think was one of the easiest things for it to do. When in a scenario like that it can be quickly remedied with back button focus, but it's not a smooth transition obviously, but for my wrestling filming it really doesn't matter, people don't notice the quick pulsing to fix the focus. For other stuff, I do manually focus in those situations, though.

For me, why I'd choose the S5 over anything pre-A7III, is the image, the colors (Sony has come a long way since then, but I hate that era of Sony color science), no recording limits on 4K 30P (a big deal for event videographers), no overheating, the IBIS (again huge for event videographers), the video assist features, etc. Plus there are the things I've never actually even used, but could if I wanted, like adding an external recorder and recording RAW. That's a lot of bang for your buck for under $1000 and with it's only real weakness being the auto focus (and the crop in 4K 60, though that has never bothered me.)

The Z6 though is more of a closer battle, and Nikon entices me more than any other camera company right now as they've made huge leaps forward in their video offerings and, with the recent firmware update, are throwing everything but the kitchen sink at video users. Still, the Z6 had some quirks that just didn't make it an option when I jumped to full frame. If I was making the jump today though the Z8 would be very tempting, especially at the used prices. 

7 minutes ago, ND64 said:

For some reason, and for just few hours, Rakuten offered A7cii for $1000. Not living in Japan was one of my many strategical mistakes in my life.

 

Possible sign the A7C III is coming? 

My hope, and it's very unlikely, is that Panasonic releases a video camera similar in shape to the C100.

I used the C100 today and was reminded of what a joy it is to use. I don't know why Canon abandoned that form factor for their lower end cameras, but it really was perfect. Great to use handheld and on a tripod. 

It is interesting how worried people are about Lumix when the S1R II has had the opposite effect on me. I think it's the best sign we've gotten in years what Lumix's direction. Certainly though, they need to address those who are nervous about their future and should, as I continue to say, be more transparent and keep folks updated. I know that's not something big corporations tend to do, but they aren't in a great position and need to change the way they do things to reassure their users while also trying to attract new ones. 

I really don't think there's a better camera under $1,000 than the Lumix S5. 24mp for photos is enough for me most of the time, and the footage is really, really nice, some of the best I've ever worked with. It's capabilities are pretty much unmatched for the price. 

I'd also add the GH5 and G9 as really great values. You can get the GH5 for around $600 and if you know what you're doing you can still get great images from it. The GH6 is also under $1,000; that's a lot of pro features for a camera under $1000 and is only a few years old!

9 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

5. Panasonic S9 - Maybe the best video quality of the whole bunch but the stills side is too limited with no mechanical shutter, EVF and a mediocre AF system.

I've heard it's better than the S5ii X and I think the S5ii X's AF is very good.

I love Emanuel because even though i can't understand 70% of what he says, I can tell from what I do understand and how long his posts are that they are pretty thoughtful. Haha

My friend, maybe speak in your native language? That might help, I think we can translate it can't we? Maybe that's an option we can add of this forum? 

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I agree it's not entirely fair to compare new to used but it's a reality of the market, if you had the chance of a better spec for less money, and it was in mint condition, you'd consider it and so would I.

Anyway let's compare new.

New Nikon Z8 is currently $3396.95 at B&H, and 3600 euros in Europe inc. EU 20% VAT.

The S1R II is $3299 at B&H and $3599 in Europe (including tax)

So the new S1R II is not really meaningfully cheaper than a new Z8.

But it's a worse camera in several important ways.

Although you do get open gate and anamorphic modes.

True, if you see it in isolation to the competition (new or used) and just come at it like you are as a Panasonic user, as an upgrade to an S5 or the original S1R then it's a decent upgrade.

The original S1R however it must be pointed out is now almost SEVEN years old, so that's a long time to wait for an updated sensor and codec.

I get your point and hell, I'd consider a used camera for less money even if it wasn't in mint condition! But we can't expect any camera company to price a camera based on what the used prices are, you know? $3300 is still a competitive price and if the Z8 stays at $3400 I suspect we'll see the price edge downward by the fall, along with bundles to make it even more enticing.

There are also ways in which the Z8 is a "worse" camera, too, like IBIS, auto focus, cinema assist tools, etc. It doesn't even feel right to call one camera "worse" than the other though, haha, because in the big picture both are really great cameras.

2 hours ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

I'm honestly a little shocked at the reception to the camera on some forums. It provides a fair bit of upgrades to both the S5ii and the S1R while still staying at a lower price point than the competition, and even it's own predecessor. It seems to me that every brand's offerings are more or less the same with little differences here and there while also offering their own distinct competitive advantages. I can't help but notice that many folks want Panasonic to do everything Sony or Canon does, PLUS their own thing. Or that these manufacturers have running checklists that they compare and contrast to each other line by line when developing a camera versus largely doing their own thing. 

I preordered the S1Rii so my bias is clear, but as someone heavily invested into the Lumix S system I can't see this as anything but a solid camera for their lineup.

Agreed. For a new camera you can't beat the value. It's not really fair to hold used prices against it, either. Is Lumix supposed to price it to match the R5 or Z8's used prices? I don't fault anyone that decides to buy those instead, but Lumix can't control that. 

15 hours ago, John Matthews said:

Yeah, it certainly seems more like a S5iiR than anything else. Getting 2 S1H cameras (used) would still be a great starter setup for shooting weddings I imagine.

The S1H is a camera you could buy used today and it'll still hold up 5 years from now, similar to the S5. Both of those cameras have such a lovely, organic image. And as @MrSMWnoted, the auto focus isn't nearly as bad as people made it out to be once you learned how it works. 

It's a reminder of how fortunate we are that cameras released 6 years ago are still able to hold up to cameras released today.