newfoundmass

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I agree but it's hard to reason with someone with an IQ of 80...And there's a lot of them.

If the hatred for guys like Biden runs so deep with half the country, again a wake-up call is deserved and well overdue in the form of 30% inflation which Biden had at 2.9% but Trump will turn up to catastrophic house repossession causing figures.

My experience has been that there are a lot of dumb people (I'd describe them as being in a cult, to be honest) but the biggest issue is that most folks that voted for him feel like Democrats talk down to them instead of talking to them, that they abandoned them. They're not totally wrong. At the end of the day they just want to be able to afford to put food on the table and keep a roof over their heads. Democrats really didn't address that, while Trump (sort of, in his dumb way) did. 

Now, me personally, I don't understand how you can overlook the racism, the fascism, the misogyny, transphobia, his multitude of business failures, his felony convictions, January 6, etc. but again, if the Democrats couldn't convince people that the billionaire scumbag who shits on gold toilets doesn't have their best interests at heart then that's a huge problem.

Normally I'd say we're getting what we deserve, but the damage being done will last generations. My nieces and nephews will be feeling the effects of our failures long after I'm dead and gone, and that's a tragedy. 

It's an aggressive entry level camera with strong video specs, I love that Nikon is coming out guns blazing! Weird though that they aren't getting a lot of the same guff Panasonic gets for using "old" sensors and for "terrible" rolling shutter. 🤔 

The frustrating thing, as an American, is that lower income folks are among his most ardent supporters yet are the ones who will end up hurt the most by his heartless, cruel policies. 

I've said it on here before, I live in a mobile home. I made a choice to live as cheaply as I could, regardless of whether I could afford a nicer home or not, because I want to live a simple, affordable life. I own my mobile home outright, so I have no mortgage. I just pay a modest lot fee every month in the community I live in. My taxes property taxes are extremely low, and I live comfortably. A lot of folks here are lower income, though, and live here because it's what they could afford. They're decent, working class folks who struggle to make ends meet. A lot of them are on public assistance, like fuel assistance and food stamps. You want to know who most of them voted for, though? Based on the yard signs and flags, most folks here voted for Donald Trump. They voted for the man whose policies will hurt them the most. It'd be funny if it weren't so sad. 

It's a testament to the Democrats and their incompetence that twice they lost to a swindler and con man because they were unable to convince a majority of the electorate that the racist billionaire doesn't give a fuck about them. 

These kind of posts are always my favorite. Thank you for sharing!

8 hours ago, mercer said:

Idk, cinema cameras cost a lot for a reason. As far as mirrorless cameras have come, they're still not proper cinema cameras. In a lot of instances, the benefits of mirrorless may outweigh the benefits of cinema cameras, but at this price point, it's hard to argue against the Komodo if you intend to shoot certain types of projects. If not, then it's a simple pass. I will say it makes it a bit harder to justify a few other cameras at a similar price point. But this price will go away once they run out of the bins of RF mounts they have in stock. The questions is, what will Nikon do next? Will they replace it with a similar camera at a similar price?

The gap between mirrorless cameras and cinema cameras, when it comes to image, has narrowed so much as to almost be irrelevant outside of the more costly cameras that DO have a genuine "secret sauce." For instance, when you buy an ARRI you're not just paying for the hardware, you're paying for decades of research into color science. 

For other cameras cinema cameras, the premium comes not from the "secret sauce" but because you're buying a camera that is supposed to be built like a tank that can hold up under stressful situations and be serviced by the company if needed. I would say the KOMODO (and most of RED's cameras) fall under that definition of "cinema camera."

Then you have the even lower end ones, like your BMD Pockets, or the FX3/FX30. They might put out a good image (in BMD's case, I think there is a level of secret sauce to their color science) but they also aren't cameras that are built nearly as well as even mid-range cinema cameras will. I mean, you can get great images from them, but those Pocket cameras feel like toys.

Really, when you look at it, the term "cinema camera" has kind of become just more marketing jargon. What does it really even mean anymore?

14 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

“I would love an updated original Pocket that is 4K, full frame with better battery life and shoots to modern available media, has an optional EVF and better autofocus”

”OK, here is exactly what you want then”

”No, not that one”

Maybe if we just called the Fp a box camera that happens to be rectangular then it might get some love 😁

 

None of the BMD cameras I've seen touch the original Pocket's look, imo. There really was something about that image that made it really special. 

13 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

So... a pretty old sensor that's a bit "meh" by today's standards.  It's a fantastic sensor to find in an $600-800 used camera - a bummer to find in a brand new $3,000 one.

It's old, but I really don't think it's a meh sensor even by today's standard. That S5 image still holds up, if you ask me. I was editing a multicam shoot today with the S5 and S5II X and the S5 is such a nice image. I really don't think you can complain much about it being in a $3000 camera. 

This is both pretty crazy and also kind of "meh." There was a time when I really wanted to buy a RED (or really any "real" cinema camera) but that was a long time ago. These lower end cinema cameras just aren't significantly better than what we all have access to.

If you're a working DP it might make sense to get this, but unless you're doing mid to high level jobs I'm not sure it's worth it. 

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

After being in a pretty heavy accident on Saturday that has written my car off, my new favourite art camera is the Ring Doorbell camera.

My car was hit at a 90 degree angle from the side by some clown who sped out of their driveway and across an empty bus lane flipping my car round and causing the rear tyre to blow.

The art that the Ring Doorbell camera produced was in two parts.

The first being a beautiful record of my hitherto unknown stunt car driving prowess to correct the induced swerving to avoid the trees on the pavement side and then the oncoming traffic in the other lane and bring the wreck to a controlled stop.

The second and best bit was when the homeowner of the Ring Doorbell came outside and showed the footage to myself and the other driver who had thus far ludicrously been somehow claiming it was my fault.

Upon which the other driver, faced with the reality did their own rendition of the Larry David fake fainting.

As the Ring Doorbell was still active, it caught that too 🙂 

Thank goodness you're okay! 

7 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Sirui might just be a little too late to the party however because I am looking at the Lumix 18, 50 and 85 which can all be had at decent used prices and are actually available.

It's very nice to see more companies joining the L-Mount Alliance, but I really, really, REALLY like those Lumix f1/8 primes and it's hard to justify getting any others, especially with how affordable they are on the used market. 

Now if someone released super affordable and compact f2.5 primes I'd be all over those, no matter who made them, especially if I end up getting the S9.

4 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

I love using the og pocket for the image, for the size and the whole feeling. The quirks are fun and a great challenge to grow on, though I would not include the battery in this category but rather name it what it is, a nervewrecking flaw

If they re-released the pocket with the same sensor but with a battery that lasts at least 90 minutes I'd buy it. That was literally the only reason I stopped using it. There were times I just wanted to go out with it and film some cool stuff without having to rig it up, but it was just a pain. I loved everything else about it, even the quirks, but battery life was such a deal breaker. 

To this day though that image is my absolute favorite out of any camera I've ever shot with. Using that camera made me better at my craft and I miss it. 

For me it's the original Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera. That camera, and all the wacky c-mount lenses I used with it, was just so much fun to use and everything I got out of it looked so much better than it should have, at least to my eyes. I FELT like an artist using it, as opposed to a videographer. That was such a special sensor, and to this day I still don't understand why every camera manufacturer hasn't switched to a menu system like it (and the other BMD cameras.)

3 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

As an dude that went to the local 1$ 'grindhouse' theater rather regularly as a kid, I assure you that the quality of the image was often nothing remarkable. 

This. Yeah, we can look back at older films and remark about how nice they look, but I can name you just as many (and, frankly, probably more) that look like absolute dog shit visually. Ironically, some of those are my favorite films! But most of them weren't made to intentionally look that way, they just did because of budget limitations. There is a lot of really bad looking films out there though.

In fact I'd say most films from the film era aren't any more remarkable looking than what is filmed today digitally. There certainly are exceptions, which is why I do agree to a certain extent that it's unfortunate that most everything has moved to digital, but I can't say that every film I watch today would look substantially better if it'd been shot on film, especially lower budget ones. It's really easy to look back with rose tinted glasses and say "everything looked better back when it was shot on film."

I think the bigger issue with the move to digital is how disposable images have become in general. We all shoot thousands of pictures on our phones every year but most we never look at again after taking them. In fact, most of the time we put little thought into taking them. Or at least I am guilty of that. They just sit on our phones, taking up digital space waiting for the day when maybe we remember that we documented this moment or that moment. Whereas with film, or even video tape, aside from the camera itself, you were limited by how many pictures were left on the roll, how many rolls you could afford to buy, and then the cost of developing them. You also didn't get that immediate feedback of looking at a photo you just took to see how it turned out, instead you had to wait until it was developed.

I remember going to sports events as a kid with my camera and only having two rolls of film. That was roughly what, 50-60 pictures total? I had to choose carefully what pictures I took less I run out of film and miss something extraordinary. I couldn't just waste pictures! Now though I'll take 60 pictures in the span of 5 minutes with my phone! Taking photographs or moving images was a much more thoughtful experience in the film days.

Today that doesn't really exist, because content is so disposable. Even if you are fortunate enough to create something that breaks through, something else rapidly comes along to take the viewers attention away. With the rise of TikTok it has gotten even worse than it was during YouTube's peak. 15 seconds and then it's on to the next thing!

Still, that isn't to say it all is bad. But it's not all good either.

2 hours ago, j_one said:

The internal processing of the S5ii is almost offensive when compared to the previous gen, but I hardly notice it in practice since it’s less aggressive in Vlog. And I really only shoot in vlog or burnt LUT.

I very much prefer the image of the OG S5 over the S5II X, but people really make a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to the "worse" image. It's really not that bad. In the year I've had it not one client or viewer has complained about the image; in fact it has been the exact opposite! I feel like cameras have plateaued so now people over analyze and overstate every little thing. But virtually all of this stuff doesn't matter to the audience that we are creating these images for.

Anyone with any discernible talent will be able to take the S1RII and create compelling images with it. That bride is going to love the pictures you take, the corporate client is going to be ecstatic with the talking head interviews you shoot, the MMA school is going to be psyched with the promotional video you film, etc. As long as it's in focus, the colors are okay, and it's framed well, these folks aren't going to really care if it's a little noisier than the R5II or if the rolling shutter is slightly worse than the A7RV.

I don't know how it is where you all live, but there are literally people making money using cheap Canon Rebel DSLRs and kit lenses in my area. I see friends post their wedding pictures, their kid's senior portraits, baby pictures, and all of that stuff on Facebook all of the time. Most of the time these photographers aren't even good at what they do, put people I know still go crazy over them and post these photos they paid for proudly on social media! These photographers still get paid work, not just because they are cheap (that certainly helps!) but because the average person's standards aren't all that high. That's not to say that we should lower our standards, just that we should remember the big picture (no pun intended) and stop worrying about the small things that aren't going to matter to 99.9% of our clients/audience.

1 hour ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Since we're still talking about Gerald's rolling shutter nonsense with the S1R II, it reminded me that he did a review of the R4D 8K (which, again, has either the same or a very similar sensor).  Note that DJI paid him to do tests on it.  Then note how his discussion of dynamic range is actually very measured, sane, and accurate and without dwelling on things.  In its 8K DRE mode with 30ms rolling shutter, it's basically "this is too slow for some people and content, but for a lot of people, it'll be absolutely fine."

And that review was on a camera that was made to move around and to be used handheld.  He even goes on to say in the conclusion how it's a "best of both worlds option" since it gives the user a choice between great DR or low rolling shutter.
 

 

I'm sure he'll argue "that was almost two years ago!"

15 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Every point about audio, also applies just as well to cameras 😉 

But cameras are funner and this is a camera forum 😉

14 minutes ago, alsoandrew said:

Any horror stories re Lensrentals used stuff? They have the S5 for $810/730 depending on quality but they are also a rental house so a bit cautious on their quality. https://www.lensrentals.com/buy/panasonic-lumix-dc-s5

KEH is $880 https://www.keh.com/shop/panasonic-lumix-dc-s5-mirrorless-full-frame-digital-camera-body-black-24-2-m-p.html

MPB is $870 https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/panasonic-lumix-dc-s5

Adorama is $870 https://www.adorama.com/us1914794.html

I've never bought anything from lensrentals, though I've rented from them! I found they kept their gear well maintained, but obviously when buying something from a rental house you're buying something that was heavily used and there's always a risk to that. Do you know if they have any warranty? The good thing about the other places is they give you a warranty, which is always nice. 

44 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Oh.

 

Right? Haha. 

51 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

How much are used Sony FX30’s?

Still about $1500!

7 hours ago, IronFilm said:

It's more the extreme mismatch in equipment that grates me, picking a camera with an 8 out of 10 image quality but choosing for audio a 3 out of 10 (as sure, 3 out of 10 is good enough audio quality for casual YT videos, but then again so is a 3 out of 10 quality video camera.... such as a cellphone or a T3i)

 

I get it, but you can get fine audio from almost any mic, as long as it's close enough to the source. Add some tweaking in post if needed and 99% of those watching aren't gonna notice the difference between a $100 mic and $500+ mic. As long as it's not peaking, there's no hum or other noise, it will be sufficient for YouTube.

I mean, heck, going back to my buddy that uses a cheap Movo wireless mic going into a T3i that has terrible audio preamps! That gets used on the local nightly news on the NBC affiliate!

4 hours ago, alsoandrew said:

That guys seems to be right up my alley with the janky alternatives lol. Hmm definitely leaning towards the S5 then if record limit is not going to be an issue. How are the colors SOOC? Like I said to start I tend to overthink things so hoping to get a few videos out there with minimal editing/setup and learn the more advanced stuff as I go.

I quite like Lumix colors, and the natural profile on the S5 is what I usually go with when I don't need to do heavy grading. As long as your white balance and exposure is set correctly you'll get very good results, and 8-bit is good enough to do some tweaks as long as you don't try to push the colors too much. 

Markus is great in that he thinks of some creative ideas, especially outside the box ones. I quite like his video/photo content, though when I read up more about him I cringed quite a bit when it comes to his health/motivational speaking stuff. Aside from disagreeing with most of it, he is accused of hiring people to attend tapings so that it looks like he's giving these motivational speeches in front of large crowds that uses for promotional videos when they are just paid actors. So I just stick to the video/photo channel, haha!

4 hours ago, alsoandrew said:

Is manual focus such a huge issue with focus peaking and a static subject? I plan to tape where the tripod sits and mostly never move it. 

I've never had an issue with using manual focus on the Lumix S5, and I usually use the screen instead of the EVF (I know, I know!) You can also buy a cheap 5 or 7 inch monitor if you have trouble nailing focus, but I've never had that problem personally.

Also auto focus really isn't that bad on the S5, especially if you are there to monitor it. I definitely understand why people who are used to PDAF complain, but I've used it for year and really don't have a ton of complaints about the auto focus, especially once you get used to its quirks. I know @MrSMW, who also used the S5 a lot, has similar views. Having PDAF on my S5II X is nice, but I still use AF on my two S5 bodies and it's "fine."

3 hours ago, mercer said:

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

It's weather and dust proof! Haha! I am not trying to be a shill, but it really does blow my mind that this camera is so readily available for under $1000 on the used market. I just don't think you can beat it when it comes to video features, especially when it comes to full frame. It is very easy to overlook the EVF and auto focus when you take into consideration how powerful it is in every other way. And it's a camera that will still stand up 5 years from now, in terms of image quality and usability. 

I've had it for a couple years now and I still haven't used all the features, like anamorphic and external RAW. So it's literally a camera that technically I could still grow into using if I decided I wanted to use those features down the road.

3 hours ago, MrSMW said:

An XT3 would be an excellent choice and something like the XS-20 (under 1k used) would also make a good option.

The only thing that I would warn about those is they can overheat when filming for long times and the X-T3 has recording limits in all modes, from what I remember. I really looked hard at Fuji a few years back; if not for the bad IBIS and the recording limits/overheating it was the system that I honestly thought would have been the perfect, as I really like Fuji colors.

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

Actually, a used ‘like new’ LUMIX S9 with all the bits & bobs will just sneak into this budget and would double very well as an EDC non-pro looking camera.

It's still over $1,000 here in the States. I've been keeping my eye on the used prices because I increasingly want one haha!

I wish more companies would do stuff like this. I'm looking at you, Panasonic. 

1 hour ago, mercer said:

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.

You can film 4K on cheap v30 cards. You can get a 256gb SD card for under $40 and a 512gb SD card for under $60. I use them on my S5 and S5II X.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Both of these pain me so much. 

I get it, but it's probably the best mic under $100 that he can get and better than the Deity he was considering. 

For someone just shooting YouTube videos that aren't generating revenue it's more than enough. 

Also, instead of the Deity I would go with the RODE VideoMic GO II. It will sound pretty good as a boom mic if boomed close enough and is surprisingly decent directly plugged into your computer if you need to do voice overs, since it has a USB-C connection.

4 hours ago, Walter H said:

If full-frame is a requirement for you, the Panasonic S1 has no record time limit but the S5 does - 29:59 (although that limit might now exist with an external recorder). But the S5 does have a screen that flips out and twists so that you can see yourself and see your framing once you get to work and make any adjustments. Helpful. 

Just a small correction: the Lumix S5 has unlimited record times in 4K 8 bit except 60P. Record limits are for 4K60p and 10-bit.

2 hours ago, alsoandrew said:

What lighting would you suggest? I am thinking of buying a main light + parabolic diffusor and a panel light. Maybe some reflectors, a matte panel, C stands, and some paper lanterns. And repurposing a few desk lamps and floor lamps for the rest. 

There are SO MANY options when it comes to affordable lighting these days. I mean, realistically, you could get away with $7 clamp lights, cheap LED bulbs and using shower curtains as diffusion to start off. Especially if it's only ever gonna be used in your "studio". 

Here are a couple videos that might be of some help when it comes to lighting. Markus is an eccentric, kinda weird fella and I don't always agree with his conclusions, but his videos are always interesting and he buys a lot of stuff to try out (just try not to get suckered into his health/motivational grift):

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Just a 50mm? Probably won't be wide enough for everything they want to do. Thus why I suggested they get three lenses. 

I was just going by what he wrote in his original post! He mentioned wanting a camera and a 50mm. I'd recommend he goes with the 20-60mm kit lens too. f3.5 isn't bad at all on the wide end and it's a really good quality lens to the point that it's kinda insulting to call it a kit lens when compared to every other kit lens out there. I use it on almost every professional shoot I do.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

If you're seriously committed to the idea of going FF, no matter what, then at least go for a S5mk1 instead of a Z6mk1.

Yeah, the Z6 is a lot more limited when it comes to video than the Lumix S5 is. The S5 is very much a video focused hybrid, while the Z6 was a photo camera that also did some video. It was a big step forward for Nikon in the department, but the S5 is superior in every way other way when it comes to video other than maybe autofocus.