newfoundmass

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.

I don't see why you couldn't get a used Lumix S5, a used 50mm f1.8, a tripod, mic, and lights for $1.5k.

If you get the Lumix S5 for $730 and the Lumix 50mm f1.8 for under $250 (https://www.mpb.com/en-us/product/panasonic-lumix-s-50mm-f-1-8) then you're already under $1k.

That leaves you with $500 for a tripod, mic and lighting. That's very easy. There are so many decent affordable options in those categories these days. 

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

IF I was in his shoes, I'd still be getting something like a FS5 / C100 on the cheap, even if the local TV market is not demanding anything better from me. For three reasons:

1) providing a bit higher quality footage than expected will help reduce the odds he gets fired/cut at some point over the next 5yrs+, even if it just improves the odds slightly by 10%, that still makes it worth it 

2) this next point is kinda the same as the previous point, because having a proper video camera means there is less fluffing about, and he'll be able to get the shot / get better shots when under pressure, thus "getting better quality shots" (in terms of content that is, not just image quality)

3) he can diversify out and dabble in doing videography work too for local companies / events

With the way the journalism industry works, especially in television, in five years he'll probably be in Wyoming or some other small market, assuming he doesn't become one of the anchors or lead reporters!

1 hour ago, Django said:

You must consider most network channels in the US (ABC, NBC, CBS & FOX) still use 1080i; 720p HD resolution. This opens up or rather holds back quite antique video shooting standards versus Europe that has vastly transitioned long time ago to FHD and even 4K with 10-bit 422 requirements. Of course cable TV & streaming services in the US have higher requirements too.

I haven't had cable in 8 years, but yeah, I think a lot of them are still in 1080i. I think you have to pay extra for anything that is 4K, including on streaming services like Netflix.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Doubt Canon would ever have priced it that cheaply right from the start. 

Maybe if Canon had announced their C70 six months (or even better, a full year plus) before the Sony FX6 (rather than what happened is the C70 was announced me weeks before the FX6) then maybe Canon could have at least made a substantial move in closing the market share gap between Sony and Canon.

Although, I am doubtful, remember back in 2020 then Canon's RF lens lineup was pitful, while Sony E Mount ecosystem had been built up over years and years. 

Canon never would've priced the C70 that low but they probably should've. By 2020 the winds were already changing in the camera space, whether it was mirrorless or video/cinema cameras. People were a lot less willing to pay the Canon tax when everyone else started releasing cameras with everything they could put into them for the same price (or sometimes less.) ESPECIALLY when it came to full frame and how the market was swinging in that direction. 

The choice is easier if you were already a Canon or Sony shooter, but in late 2020 if you're looking to purchase a camera and aren't already a loyal Canon or Sony shooter, I think the FX6 probably won out for most people. 

And then when the FX3 came out, if you hadn't jumped on either the C70 or the FX6, you had a compelling option for even less money WITH a upgrade roadmap to the FX6 right there for when/if you decided to upgrade.  Nevermind when then the FX30 came out, adding another path you could take to get to an FX6. The C70 had a much pricier roadmap should you ever wanted to upgrade. 

I don't personally even like the image coming out of the Sony cameras. The Canon C70, in my opinion, has a much nicer image. But I'd still have gone Sony if I had to choose. As a tool it just made sense and was the direction the wind was blowing. Plus I know so many more people shooting with Sony, which would have made it easier to collaborate.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Yup, there has been a big shift over the last decade.

All of my friends who work for major sports leagues and sports franchises have switched to Sony for both video and photo. I'm talking people who work for WWE, AEW, the UFC, the NBA, the Boston Celtics, etc. Ten years ago they were all Canon.

Canon still wins with brand recognition. If you ask most folks to name a camera company Canon will still be the first one most people name. And if you look at your normal brick and mortar store, like Best Buy here in the United States, you'll see their best selling camera is the Canon EOS Rebel T7, a seven year old DSLR. At Walmart it's the EOS Rebel T100, another seven year old DSLR.

But on the professional end Canon is losing ground and has been for a while. 

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

It really is quite sad, when you could pick up a Panasonic DVX200 or a Sony FS5 (with a lens) or a Canon C100 (with a lens) or a Sony PXW-X70 or Canon XC15 for just a thousand bucks or less.

I'll ask him, but my honest guess is he's expected to provide his own camera and is using what he had. If it's what he had, or if it's what he could afford, I get why he uses it over his phone. He can still get decent shallow DOF when doing interviews, and good enough quality footage. After all, Vermont is a very small television market!

It was still funny though; it feels weird to have so much nicer equipment to film my rasslin' events with than the local NBC affiliate uses to cover our event! But when people see it at home I don't think they really care what camera they used or if the audio sucks, as long as it's in focus and the sound is audible. 

With the way the journalism industry has collapsed he's probably not in a position to be able to purchase a nicer camera. Which is a bummer. 

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!