MrSMW

I suspect that is it and it makes a lot of sense why you might be asked what tools you might bring to the party for a filming gig whereas nobody asks, or just assumes (that you have suitable tools) for photo work. At least I have never been asked in 23 years.

I think I’d be as happy with an FX3 and an FX30 instead of the S1H and S5ii that I have for video work. I prefer the look of the Sony bodies for sure as they look less ‘DSLR’ and are more compact and externally identical. They miss out on a few bits and bobs but counter with the ability to use Tamron lenses which as someone who has just shifted to Nikon for stills and 2 out of my 3 lenses are adapted Tamron, it would give me more crossover ability. After the 2024 season I will decide. Option A. Keep as is, ie, pair of Lumix for video plus pair of Nikon for stills. Option B. Swap the pair of Lumix for a single Sony. Probably FX3 so I can pretend I am in Thailand and capturing laser guns etc. Option C. Swap the L Mount gear for at least one more Nikon and make all 3 hybrid. Then again, may trade the 2 remaining Lumix cameras and 2 lenses I still have for a single FX3 and another Tamron lens… The financials stack up on this option and it does mean less kit which is a good thing…

Probably/most certainly but then anyone shooting high fashion etc is already shooting medium format and anyone shooting sports, is already shooting Z9/R3, has all the hugely expensive long lenses because you NEED this kit. With video/filmmaking I guess it’s partly necessity and a bit of sobbery? “Oh, you don’t own 3 Buranos? We could not possibly consider you”. Photo I reckon it’s just expected but video sounds like they ask? It doesn’t affect me so not an issue but interesting…

In photography at least, for sure and no one ever asks you what camera you use. Until recently (last couple of years on this forum) I did not realise what a big thing it seems to be in the video/filmmaking world where you can be hired or not based in the tools you have. My rule of thumb is which is the least pain in the arse and also gives me the greater joy to use. I’ve never used nor probably never will use a RED so would choose the C70 just on sheer use ability. But what do I know…

Ditto. The source as with any/all info is key, not just ‘some YouTube channel’ of which there are several million. And especially if it’s someone sat at their desk with purple backlighting, baseball cap on backwards, doesn’t have, never has had, nor never will have, said piece of kit, yet has an ‘informed’ opinion. I prefer the freelancers over the brand ambassadors also, for obvious reasons.

@newfoundmass I hope the time until April flies by for you. Bon courage mon ami. Otherwise ‘answers’… 1. Never tried but should not be too difficult? 2. Very weird. The original fits I believe but not quite flush? 3. Zero issues. 4. Impossible to say really… My go to’s are: 6k 25p or 4k 50p for short clips and 4k 25p for longer stuff. My M2 chip MacBook is less keen on the 6k, but to my eye, it does look better. Log or Flat profile. I’ve never shot externally and have the vanilla 5ii so long GOP for me. 5. Well said. Communities will always thrive if enough people actively participate.

Looks exactly like 'real life' but if anything, 'over-exaggerated real life' with brighter colours, typically deep DOF and everything in focus is clinically sharp to the point it looks a bit jagged. There is nothing necessarily bad about this and I have never said it is bad, just that I personally do not like this look because IMO, it looks SOOC and cheap and as if you have made no effort, ie, the camera did it all. At the same time, I don't want to spend huge amounts of time grading every individual second of footage to the nth degree so work to something I call the 90/50 rule which is if I can get 90% of the look I want with 'just' 50% of the effort, I am not going to spend another 50% of my time on getting that last 10% because that 50% extra effort I would be making would in fact be 200% of my effort (as my initial '50%' is actually already my 100%), so anything beyond that (initial 100% effort) is either not feasible (for any reason that suits me including being financially viable) or life's simply too short! So my capture could be from raw (never tried it but want to for certain things), from log or from an in camera profile such as Flat or Standard etc, but it is never solely going to be SOOC even with one of the profiles either at the capture stage, or in the edit.

@kye indeed. My own preferences regarding any scene is a wider establishing shot or picture that basically tells the viewer ‘where’. Then a tighter ‘mid’ shot that introduces ‘who’. Followed by tighter still ‘what’ imagery. I may end any chapter going wide again but as with all these things, rules can be broken. The above is really all the focal length stuff and next up is handheld, floaty, or locked off… For the wide stuff, always locked off. For candid, steady handheld. I detest the ‘handheld jittery’ look personally as is used in a lot of modern productions. Hate it. The camera/production should be invisible and not intrusive ‘found footage’ style. Personally. Couple stuff, especially walking, gimbal. Warpy backgrounds do my nut. Guilty, but back to using the gimbal 100% for this next year. And then we have all the stuff such as lighting and grading etc, the latter being very individual indeed. Personally, I prefer a more modern rendering rather than the softer and more granular older style, so prefer say full-frame over say 16mm, but again, just personal taste. I can’t abide the camcorder look though which is why in the past I have always used a lot of slow mo as it’s an easy fix (partially anyway) to removing that look. Going forward, I am backing off quite a bit from the slow mo approach and using capture techniques and grading instead to eliminate that ‘digital’ look. The one thing I can’t blame is the tools however as they are all ‘perfect’ for my needs so it’s just a case of what I can produce with them…

I’ve always been a longer lens shooter myself. For weddings, it used to be the ‘classic’ 24-70 plus 70-200 combo for zoom users and 35 + 85 or 24 + 50 for the prime users with the more photojournalist types opting for the 24 + 50 approach. I tried the 24 + 50 and hated it finding the 24 far too wide for well over 95% of my work and the 50 OK indoors, but far too short outdoors. The 35 + 85 was much more me and when I moved from Nikon DSLR and the twin zoom set up, it was to something around these focal lengths, especially by the time I got to the X Pro2 and then the XH1 with 35 and 90 equivalent lenses. Today, post-Covid and social distancing etc plus simple preference, I would put my two ideal focal lengths as 40 and 100 with outlier focal lengths of 28 and 150. 28mm is my preference for a medium-wide because I feel the 24 is just that bit too wide, but for those very few occasions when I do need something wider, 20mm is where it’s at for me. I have had various 20mm lenses recently and now switching to Nikon for stills (possibly hybrid at a later date), the imminent arrival of Tamron’s 20-40mm f2.8 ticks all my ‘wide’ bases of 20/28/40mm. Checking off 40mm and purely 40mm is the SE version of this lens that will be welded to my Zf pretty much all the time because there is no better option in terms of preferred focal length, size & weight and aperture (f2) for this candid unit. For the longer stuff, I am one of those odd people that likes the 60/65/70mm focal range. It could not be my longest focal length without major compromise, but I use and prefer this focal length over 50mm. In fact, 40-65mm for me is something of a dead zone. It’s rare I ever shoot in this focal range even with zooms as it is a kind of ‘nothing’ range to me, not being quite wide nor long enough. Too ‘normal’ I guess? For longer stuff, outdoors especially, I find the classic 85mm just a bit short in recent years and prefer 90 or 105mm and for my longer/longest lens, was going to invest in Nikon’s own macro 105mm f2.8 but in the end decided I really needed to cover off ‘100-200’ because I do have a need. On that basis, I opted for again, another adapted lens, the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 G2 model. Nikon’s own 70-180 is based on the previous gen Tamron lens and is over-priced and only a couple of hundred less than the Nikon ‘old Tamron’ and is hardly a compact or light lens, but much more so than a more trad 70-200mm being ‘just’ 855g. Pair that with a Z8 instead of a Z9 and it’s a MUCH more compact and ‘lightweight’ set up compared with a Z9 + 70-200 or my old D3s + 70-200 set ups. So 2 bodies + 3 lenses and I am done. The Zf rocks the 40 all day everywhere as my candid lower res ‘snap’ unit with the Z8 pulling more ‘considered’ wider + longer unit of 20-40 or 70-180 as required. This is for stills, potential hybrid but the same focal lengths apply for my video work which is essentially a mirrored extension of my stills photography. To that end 28-70 on one camera and 70-200 on the other and the only thing I cannot do with Lumix, is shoot wider than 28, but for 90% of my video work I am actually shooting 28/42/70/105 with the 42/105 being crop modes making a very versatile compact lens out of Sigmas 28-70mm. ’Cinematic’? Depends on the definition according to our own preferences I guess but for me, longer lenses and tighter compression are part of that equation.

35-150 = 1165g 70-180 = 855g 20-40 = 365g The 20-40 is obviously a lot smaller, but not so much difference in size between the 35-150 and 70-180 at 158mm x 89mm and 156mm x 83mm. It's the flexibility of the combo that wins it for me because with having a second body (Zf), I can cover another focal length if needs be at the same time, ie, without any kind of lens swap. There is a benefit to the 35-150 though in that it's available native Z Mount and the other 2 are not. At least not yet...

For a while it was my favourite lens and as a ‘one & done’ or for perhaps a single body user, it can’t be beaten other than by perhaps Canon’s new 24-105mm f2.8…providing you are in the RF Mount system and can live with a max focal length of 105mm. And it was going to be my ‘one & done’ on a single Z9 for mainly stills and some hybrid, mainly for the 8k raw. But in the end I decided a pairing of ‘adapted’ Tamron 20-40 and 70-180, gave me far greater range and use ability with a Z8 making for a much more compact, lightweight (in comparison) and discreet package. Pretty much the same cost for the 2 lenses vs one new 35-150 as I snagged a used 20-40 at an excellent price. So I know have…or will shortly have, ‘a’ 20-180mm f2.8. Kinda…

This for 23 years. Since I moved to a payment up front system (for me it’s 1/3rd at the time of booking, 1/3rd 6 months to job date and final 1/3rd 1 month prior), I have never had a single issue with payment. But payment of course is not the whole story and booking the ‘right’ kind of clients is the rest of it. OK easier said than done in some industries and some financial situations but as Kye says, having a contract with T&C’s is key when it comes to any dispute. Not opinion or any other factor, but what does the contract state that in my case reads, “We the undersigned have read, understood and agree to be bound by the T&C’s of this contract”. The T&C’s are essentially 10 points on a single side of A4 for clarity. In business, some folks will try and test you from time to time and it feels personal and there is always that concern in your mind about how far someone might take something and whether your case will stand up. But if it’s clear and it’s factual and you remain calm and professional, they always go away empty handed. I have been tested I think 7 times now out of 800+ clients and despite the threats and blustering from some, not a single one took it beyond that when I said very politely, “no”. Sadly it is just part of running any business and you have to make sure you have covered your own back. Fortunately…at least on my case, awful people are a rarity.

Same for wedding clients and probably ALL clients everywhere, every thing. Despite doing all the filtering prior to them booking and then educating from the point of booking to their event, about 1 in 20 slip the net. And then it's always a case of a long list of impossible questions to answer after the fact. "No, you are right, it doesn't look anything like your sisters wedding. I've never met your sister, wasn't at her wedding, and certainly didn't shoot it". "Yes, in different light, your bridesmaids dresses will look a slightly different colour to Pantone 317884. In the results I have provided to you, those are not dresses. That is not sky. Those are not trees, or people, or anything put millions of different coloured pixels. And then do not get me started on your monitor/device screen calibration, because unlike you, I actually have a life". Yawn... Given the choice...and I try to ensure this situation, I'd rather take a lower paying client who gets it over a higher paying one that does not. Every time. Unless they are paying CONSIDERABLY more.

6k raw vs 8k raw, me also which is (part of) why I prefer the R3.

Don't worry about it. Yep. I'm off to see a venue near me next week where they had contracted a so-called pro to take interior shots for them. There's a wedding planner involved. She asked me to cast my eye over them. Utter trash and having access to the exif data, I can see why, - auto everything; aperture, shutter speed, ISO, WB, - dimwits. Interiors/commercial property shoots are not my normal thing, but I have been a pro event photographer for 23 years and so understand you don't auto anything with this kind of thing. It's a switch the house lights off, light it yourself, manual from start to finish. Hey ho, their loss will be my gain as I'm already on the referral list now and the other idiots who were on briefly, are now off. But I digress... Always a good call...and the reason I can't go to my 'ideal' gear scenario, - it will not make me a single extra penny. Make my life very slightly easier and give me slightly greater job satisfaction, but quantifiably, only one of those factors I would be aware of. No problem. You generally get solid advice here. Unlike say YouTube comments where opinions are all over the place and a lot of the time, coming from sources of zero credibility. Most folks on here will give you their credentials privately if asked and you can mthen make your own mind up whether they are muppets or not 😜 A good call in my opinion. I have been wrestling with the right gear combo for years and it's only very recently I finally cracked it and not being able to flip to that 18k Canon scenario, have 'settled' for remaining with my L Mount set up, 3 out of 4 pieces that I bought used, as the next best (incredibly good) option.

I suspect this is because it's 'only' 24mp and it's main rivals such as the Nikon Z8/9 and Sony A7RV/A1 are 45 and 60. For me, it's probably the only slight 'weakness', but otherwise, the 'Perfect' camera in every area. For my specific needs and as mentioned before, if it was financially viable, I'd be over to Canon faster than you can say, "Ciao Lumix/Nikon/Sony et al". Add in my 2 'perfect' lenses and it's a dream set up. I just can't afford it, even as a business... 😒

Find me some that are less 'grey' (no way I'd spend circa 5k on something with potentially no security) and my research shows they are going for as much on the reputable used market as new: https://www.mpb.com/en-eu/product/canon-eos-r3 Only dips under 5k if you opt for 'good' or 'heavily used' and don't wish for 'excellent' or 'like new'. Reputable dealers here in the EU the going rate for new is approx 5.5k+ https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&sca_esv=581173241&rls=en&q=canon+eos+r3&tbm=shop&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiF9uKWqLmCAxUpT6QEHa8JAwoQ0pQJegQIDBAB&biw=1728&bih=913&dpr=2 Someone like MPB is asking just 100 euros less for a used 'like new' item vs cheapest reputable dealer. The prices for used did seem to go up, dramatically, within the last few weeks as I had an 'excellent' in my shopping basket a month or so back at 3950 euros. Should have bought it... 😔

I should add that yes, for video shooting say 6k 25p at 1/50th, f4 at 6400 is pretty clean, it not being so far off the second native ISO of 4000, but it’s stills where f4 becomes a problem. Especially where there is movement. It depends on the specific shot doesn’t it and at times, it’s possible to get away with 1/60th, 1/30th or even 1/15th, but more often than not, we’re looking at 1/125, 1/250 or 1/500 to freeze action and at f4 in lowlight, without insane ISO, it can’t be done. Even with software such as Topaz or PureRaw, we can’t fix unintentional movement blur and that’s where IMO, we need to use lenses f2.8 at least. I actually don’t find I need anything faster than f2/2.8 for my work and cap out at 6400 ISO, rarely shoot any slower shutter speed than 1/60th and do use PureRaw batch edit on all my files. The difference though, for stills, between f4 and f2.8 is literally night and day. Recently I have been VERY tempted by Canon with their twin offerings of their 28-70 f2 and their new 24-105 f2.8 which are an absolute dream for an event photographer such as myself, but then I’d need a pair of my dream cameras, the R3, to shoot the things and that is about 18k euros…so err, nope 🤪 Back on with Lumix, there are other equivalent options from Nikon or Canon or Sony and for hybrid use, I’d probably be more tempted with Canon, but I think the best bang for your buck and probably in outright overall capability, right now is the S5ii.

Oh dear. Not US and was waiting until the Spring of ‘24 to replace my original set but maybe I should get it sooner rather than later just in case… There are alternatives, but the Rode WG just worked for me. When I remembered to switch both units on anyway… I hate that long hold on, long hold off system. I’d rather just a flick switch and a lock. Ditto for my little Sony pocket recorders. Forever switching recording on just touching my bag sometimes. Then trawling through 10 hours of recording the interior sounds of my camera bag before eventually finding 2 minutes of Captain Correllis facking Violin being read by cousin Karen 🤪

Pretty sure the S5ii ‘beats’ the G9ii… Not got or tried that particular 4/3rds camera or that lens, but have the FF stuff and had the 20-60 which is great I think as a wide angle 20mm f3.5…which is pretty equivalent to the wide end of the 4/3rds 10-25. This conversation is spread over 3 threads now 😂 I will stand by my opinion that the S5ii is the better option for low light. In good light, not a lot in it. For stills, the FF. Easily. APSC such as Fuji, there’s not so much in it, but 4/3 vs FF, pretty clear cut to me based on extensive use case. I could fool 99% of my clients 99% of the time…at least, but I’d know the truth. Plus I’d have to work a lot harder in that ‘fooling’ and could I be bothered? Nah. There’s a place for 4/3rds, but it’s not low light theatre photography, not when full frame options exist. In my opinion.

Second that. Pros for both S5ii and S1H, video and stills.

If you need any more stable than the IBIS, there is always the dual option with certain lenses such as the 24-105 f4 which is great for outdoors/daytime, but less so in low light.

Great and the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 is a compact high performing zoom and this pairing is my go to for ALL run & gun, indoor, outdoor, after dark… I have had several 4/3 cameras and lenses including the EM5ii and the most recent OM-1 and whilst they may have marginally better stabilisation, performance-wise, beyond that, no contest, the full-frame S5ii is just better everywhere, stills and video. Even with the f1.7 lenses. Nah, weight and IBIS aside, the S5ii kicks any and all 4/3 backsides. GH6 and G9ii users may disagree. Get in a ring with the S5ii though and we would see who the real champ is 😉 My other choice would be the S1H which are now available at very decent prices on the used market, below new S5ii’s I think and you essentially trade a more compact, lighter, better AF frame for a better built (tank) unit with far better rear LCD, beautifully damped shutter and sound (for stills and important in theatres I reckon without resorting to electronic?) and a more ‘filmic’ image. Funnily enough, I have and use both… Gone over to Nikon for stills but can’t give up my Lumix for video…

OK, decision made, locked & loaded, lenses ordered! Keeping: S1H + Lumix 70-200mm f4 as my static set up. Keeping: S5ii + Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 as my 'run & gun' strap/monopod/gimbal unit. Have: Nikon Zf + 40mm f2.8 as my EDC/personal plus work candid stills unit. Getting: Nikon Z8 + Megadap adapter + Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 + Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 G2 as my 'pro' stills set up. This way I have a dedicated 2 camera/2 lens video set up I know intimately plus a separate 2 camera/3 lens photography kit and combined, a 'perfect' (for me) hybrid set. Phew, had to go around the houses a bit to get there, but finally I feel (know) I will have the no compromise set up that I need for specifically what I do. I'm getting the adapter and lenses in now because I have a chateau (interiors & exteriors) shoot to do plus some land/seascape personal projects over the Winter, but the Z8 body itself will have to wait a few months until I can refill the coffers a bit!

Covers all my bases whether I use Nikon for purely stills or decide to shoot them fully hybrid. I haven’t tried the Zf for video yet but seen plenty of very nice examples and the Z8 of course can do 8K 60p internal raw which I would very much like to try.