aaa123jc

I recently purchased a tiny set of microprime (5 lenses). I've only done some minor testing though. Still I think for the price, they are very very nice. They are compact and quite well-built. The focus ring is pretty smooth. The images are beautiful, with a slight vintage feel, but the lenses are not very sharp, especially at the widest aperture. It really depends on your taste or the project.

Unfortunately, looking professional does matter to some clients. They have to look for something to justify hiring an "expensive" videographer. But I also believe it is more important to have a camera set up that works for you. Rigging up the camera to impress at the cost of usability is stupid, IMO. I don't really have this problem because I usually bring my FS7, but I've seen people rig up their mirrorless camera to a point where it is absurdly big and heavy to use properly. The client may be impressed by his look. I highly doubted the client will be impressed by the video he made though.

It's amazing to see what people are doing with this little camera! The EOS M always has a place in my heart. For some unknown reason, it just comes with great colors. It only requires some minimal effort to get it to look good in my taste. Not to mention you can install Magic Lantern and add in many useful features. Anyway, a camera which can shoot RAW costing around $100 is unbelievable. It's unfortunate I had to sell it last year. Maybe one day I would buy it back and play with the RAW feature more😅.

It really comes down to what kind of work you're doing. Event videos, corporate videos, short films...etc. All of these requires a tripod, while a gimbal may not be essential. The YouTube community makes many believe working in video production professionally is about making cool shots with gimbals or any other fancy new technologies. Making those shots are cool, but the majority of works are usually done in a more traditional, even boring manner. And I'm not even talking about working in a proper film set (I have only worked in no budget short films). I usually work solo or with one or two partners. It is safe to suggest I am the average (or below average) working professional.

I'm looking forward to the movie. And it's a great idea to go back to the root of filmmaking, which is to actually make a film. And I'm really interested in the new direction of the forum. Talking about gears and technologies is great, but sometimes, it is easy to get caught up with all these things and forget filmmaking is so much more than just cinematography. It was after I started to make my first short film have I realized there is so much to learn about filmmaking. And with each short film I make, I learn something new. This is much more rewarding and exciting than talking about gears all day.

After using the Sony A7S3 in one occasion, I quickly realized how reliable and convenient modern AF systems have become. It makes me question why I have decided to stick with my FS7 and not upgrade to a A7S3 or FX3 (well, because I have no budget😆). The new AF system just saves so much time. Why Panasonic still doesn't offer a good AF system is beyond me. Almost always the improvements on the AF system are for stills. For stills, that system is great. Very accurate and fast. Somehow the AF for video mode is just bad, and in my experience, worse than even some older contrast detection AF systems. I suspect the problem is not entirely the DFD system. Panasonic cameras are always very close to a perfect camera. IMO, they just have to fix the AF system, and they can easily out sale other brands.

The FS5 is indeed a very capable camera, even in 2022. The eND is a great feature to have. RAW output is nice to have as well, but the FS700 also has it. But the KEY is to find a secondhanded FS5 with all the upgrades. Without the upgrades, the FS5 is kind of meh. The only exciting feature is the eND. And the offical upgrades are far too expensive. In my local market, a FS5 with the upgrades usually doesn't cost more than $1700 USD. I've got mine for $1300 in 2020. I wish Atomos would releast a smaller version of Shogun Inferno, say, a 5 inch version. It will make so much more sense ergonomic wise for the FS5 and FS700. The Shogun Inferno is just too big and heavy, IMO.

As a clean out. The job was to do a long interview so I had to use an external recorder for my Sony A7 III. I pressed record and left it unmanned to operate another camera. What a mistake. Missed a lot of focus. Luckily I had another camera angle to cut to so it wasn't too obvious. That was a long time ago though. I find manual focus for interview looks more natural, given the subject doesn't move like crazy. But I guess that's purely personal taste. The cameras I own right now can't do proper autofocus at all anyway.

Sadly, I learned it the hard way. Almost ruined the whole interview. 😆

IDK. Where I live, the rental houses don't even offer Nikon. Nevertheless, if certain brand is popular and beloved, the retnal houses are going to buy tons of units of that brand because these products are profitable. At the end of the day, profit is what matters for most businesses.

The 8bit S-Log2 is not going to cut well with the S1H. The differences between the color science and codec are too big. It is possible to match them but takes too much time. Shooting with a deeper DoF with MF is much more doable. If you want a blurrier background, just create as much distance between the subject and the background. The real issue is budget. Within that price range, you can only get 8bit internal, let alone the highly compressed codec, from Sony (or Canon?). I find recording with an external recorder helps a lot, even though the HDMI output may still be 8bit only. But a recorder adds a lot to the cost and for certain Sony cameras, the face detection simply doesn't work with an external recorder.

I wonder why the Canon 5D Mark IV is at number 2? Even for stills, the R5 and R6 are both better. Nikon is not doing well, kind of as expected. It's sad to see. I still remember the days when Canon and Nikon were the most popular brands, but Sony and Panasonic were doing the right things again and again while Nikon waited and did nothing.

This is such a great idea I wonder why no one had started such a thread. 😄 Buying quality gears for cheap is probably the most exciting thing for a videographer, especially one with GAS. It's not very healthy for the wallet though. And my girlfriend ande I used to have quite intense arguments because of that, until she gets GAS herself. Anyway, I think the BMMCC is already a great camera. I used to want it very much but could't get myself a good deal. I really like its form factor and what it is capable of. The sensors of older Blackmagic cameras are almost magical. The Varicam, on the other hand, has a very unique look. Very vibrant color, but the skintone might be a bit too meganta. However, I believe it is better than the EVA-1 in this regard. The EVA-1 has great color except for skintone which almost always requires some tweaking in post. The FS700 you own is also a hidden gem, IMO, even more so than the famous F3. Pair it with an external recorder, it is as capable as any modern camera. I even use it without the recorder for lower budget jobs and the clients love it.

EOS R makes the most sense to me. The crop in 4K actually works in your favor because the majority of your lenses are EF-S lenses anyways, which are APSC and not full frame. It is much easier to adapter vintage lenses with the RF mount too. So the EOS R is more future proof. Or you can try out other brands as suggested by other posts. Panasonic and Sony are both great camera brands for videography, for example.

I have watched the movie a few days ago with my girlfriend in the cinema. And what a disappointment. Didn't really have a high expectation but still the movie managed to disappoint me. The acting is quite good. The cinematography... just meh. The story though, is REALLY REALLY REALLY bad. But for me, the hyper realistic, video game like look in the matrix world kinda works. It looks funny and ugly and uncinematic, but probably this is what the directors want the image to be? The cinematography in the real world is fine, maybe a bit boring.