barefoot_dp

Granted the Mac Pro might not be for mass consumers, but there's a much wider market than just filmmakers. And It's not actually a niche product; it's just a high-end version of a product nearly every home and office uses. Any professional who needs a powerful desktop for any reason might consider it. And many more people with more money than sense will go out and buy it simply because they think "it's what professionals use and I want the best". The real genius of Apple products is in the styling and marketing, not in the design or features.

It's worth noting that if Apple put out a cinema camera they would likely not be able to include ProRes raw recording internally - they already challenged Red's patent in court and lost.

And being Apple, they would probably have a proprietary lens mount with very limited, overpriced lenses. You would have to buy an ipad or iphone as the monitor, there would be no headphone jack, the audio inputs would be some new proprietary type, everything would be touchscreen only, and the mounting threads would be 1/2" instead of 1/4" so that you have to buy a special Apple baseplate for $2499 just to put it on a tripod. Plus it would probably have an internal media and an internal battery that cannot be removed and which does not last for a full 10hr production day (and the charger would be sold separately).

Apple are the last company I would want to see release a cinema camera.

Granted the Mac Pro might not be for mass consumers, but there's a much wider market than just filmmakers. And It's not actually a niche product; it's just a high-end version of a product nearly every home and office uses. Any professional who needs a powerful desktop for any reason might consider it. And many more people with more money than sense will go out and buy it simply because they think "it's what professionals use and I want the best". The real genius of Apple products is in the styling and marketing, not in the design or features.

It's worth noting that if Apple put out a cinema camera they would likely not be able to include ProRes raw recording internally - they already challenged Red's patent in court and lost.

And being Apple, they would probably have a proprietary lens mount with very limited, overpriced lenses. You would have to buy an ipad or iphone as the monitor, there would be no headphone jack, the audio inputs would be some new proprietary type, everything would be touchscreen only, and the mounting threads would be 1/2" instead of 1/4" so that you have to buy a special Apple baseplate for $2499 just to put it on a tripod. Plus it would probably have an internal media and an internal battery that cannot be removed and which does not last for a full 10hr production day (and the charger would be sold separately).

Apple are the last company I would want to see release a cinema camera.

Granted the Mac Pro might not be for mass consumers, but there's a much wider market than just filmmakers. And It's not actually a niche product; it's just a high-end version of a product nearly every home and office uses. Any professional who needs a powerful desktop for any reason might consider it. And many more people with more money than sense will go out and buy it simply because they think "it's what professionals use and I want the best". The real genius of Apple products is in the styling and marketing, not in the design or features.

It's worth noting that if Apple put out a cinema camera they would likely not be able to include ProRes raw recording internally - they already challenged Red's patent in court and lost.

And being Apple, they would probably have a proprietary lens mount with very limited, overpriced lenses. You would have to buy an ipad or iphone as the monitor, there would be no headphone jack, the audio inputs would be some new proprietary type, everything would be touchscreen only, and the mounting threads would be 1/2" instead of 1/4" so that you have to buy a special Apple baseplate for $2499 just to put it on a tripod. Plus it would probably have an internal media and an internal battery that cannot be removed and which does not last for a full 10hr production day (and the charger would be sold separately).

Apple are the last company I would want to see release a cinema camera.

Granted the Mac Pro might not be for mass consumers, but there's a much wider market than just filmmakers. And It's not actually a niche product; it's just a high-end version of a product nearly every home and office uses. Any professional who needs a powerful desktop for any reason might consider it. And many more people with more money than sense will go out and buy it simply because they think "it's what professionals use and I want the best". The real genius of Apple products is in the styling and marketing, not in the design or features.

It's worth noting that if Apple put out a cinema camera they would likely not be able to include ProRes raw recording internally - they already challenged Red's patent in court and lost.

And being Apple, they would probably have a proprietary lens mount with very limited, overpriced lenses. You would have to buy an ipad or iphone as the monitor, there would be no headphone jack, the audio inputs would be some new proprietary type, everything would be touchscreen only, and the mounting threads would be 1/2" instead of 1/4" so that you have to buy a special Apple baseplate for $2499 just to put it on a tripod. Plus it would probably have an internal media and an internal battery that cannot be removed and which does not last for a full 10hr production day (and the charger would be sold separately).

Apple are the last company I would want to see release a cinema camera.

Granted the Mac Pro might not be for mass consumers, but there's a much wider market than just filmmakers. And It's not actually a niche product; it's just a high-end version of a product nearly every home and office uses. Any professional who needs a powerful desktop for any reason might consider it. And many more people with more money than sense will go out and buy it simply because they think "it's what professionals use and I want the best". The real genius of Apple products is in the styling and marketing, not in the design or features.

It's worth noting that if Apple put out a cinema camera they would likely not be able to include ProRes raw recording internally - they already challenged Red's patent in court and lost.

And being Apple, they would probably have a proprietary lens mount with very limited, overpriced lenses. You would have to buy an ipad or iphone as the monitor, there would be no headphone jack, the audio inputs would be some new proprietary type, everything would be touchscreen only, and the mounting threads would be 1/2" instead of 1/4" so that you have to buy a special Apple baseplate for $2499 just to put it on a tripod. Plus it would probably have an internal media and an internal battery that cannot be removed and which does not last for a full 10hr production day (and the charger would be sold separately).

Apple are the last company I would want to see release a cinema camera.

Well, that's a matter of opinion, as you say.

I think it makes sense and anyone who's worked in broadcast can instantly pick up one of these (or an FX9 or FS7), start shooting, and find most of the controls they're used to. Apart from setting the right res/codec for the project or formatting cards, you can often get through an entire days shooting without ever needing to enter the menu's with these cameras. And usually you can find the button you need without even looking.
 
You literally push one button. The video you linked shows you how to change your S&Q settings, but once that's done, it's a single push of a button to get into slow-motion mode.
 
It will be far from "less cluttered" once you have 2x xlr cables (+ adapters to full-size), headphones and HDMI cable coming out of the side with all those little rubber doors dangling around. Not everyone will need that, but it's just as easy to criticise the C70 design as the FX6 (even more so in this regard). The FX6 has the ports right where you need them on a set - on the dumb side. It even has the ports recessed enough so that you can avoid obstructions when using a battery plate.
 
Unless you need to shoot any high or low angles, or on a shoulder mount, and can't use the non-rotating handle. In that situation you have exactly 0 nice dials.  FX6/FS7/FS5 style handle is very versatile and convenient.
 
Fair point, in some cases. But if you're stripping the camera down, say to shoot on a gimbal or to mount it in a car, are you really going to want audio in-camera? All those cables/mics/receivers would just get in the way and go against what you're trying to achieve. You'd probably be recording externally anyway. A deal-breaker for some, (eg if you MUST have in-cam audio on gimbal), but for most it's a problem that is easily solved when it arises.
 
This comment shows just how out of touch you are with most people who will actually use a camera like the FX6.

The reason people will build a rig is to improve ergonomics (for their particular preferences) and reduce fatigue. It also lets them use all the tools they'll need when they work in a crew with a 1AC, soundo, director, etc. It lets them go from tripod to handheld to shoulder faster. It lets them put the shoulder mount and top handle directly in line with the COG for perfect balance. It lets them put the camera down on unbalanced surfaces without getting damaged or falling over. It lets them power everything from a single battery. It also gives the camera more mass which reduces shake and gives a more natural feel to the images (and if done right, makes it easier to balance and operate too).

The only people building rigs to impress other people are those who care more about THEIR image than THE image.
 
Again, we're all entitled to opinions. But you're also making pretty outlandish statements that show how much understanding you lack about this product and the people who will use them.

It's the equivalent about me writing an article claiming the Isuzu N series is a "monstrosity of stupid design" because it doesn't fit into the average household garage.

 

Well, that's a matter of opinion, as you say.

I think it makes sense and anyone who's worked in broadcast can instantly pick up one of these (or an FX9 or FS7), start shooting, and find most of the controls they're used to. Apart from setting the right res/codec for the project or formatting cards, you can often get through an entire days shooting without ever needing to enter the menu's with these cameras. And usually you can find the button you need without even looking.
 
You literally push one button. The video you linked shows you how to change your S&Q settings, but once that's done, it's a single push of a button to get into slow-motion mode.
 
It will be far from "less cluttered" once you have 2x xlr cables (+ adapters to full-size), headphones and HDMI cable coming out of the side with all those little rubber doors dangling around. Not everyone will need that, but it's just as easy to criticise the C70 design as the FX6 (even more so in this regard). The FX6 has the ports right where you need them on a set - on the dumb side. It even has the ports recessed enough so that you can avoid obstructions when using a battery plate.
 
Unless you need to shoot any high or low angles, or on a shoulder mount, and can't use the non-rotating handle. In that situation you have exactly 0 nice dials.  FX6/FS7/FS5 style handle is very versatile and convenient.
 
Fair point, in some cases. But if you're stripping the camera down, say to shoot on a gimbal or to mount it in a car, are you really going to want audio in-camera? All those cables/mics/receivers would just get in the way and go against what you're trying to achieve. You'd probably be recording externally anyway. A deal-breaker for some, (eg if you MUST have in-cam audio on gimbal), but for most it's a problem that is easily solved when it arises.
 
This comment shows just how out of touch you are with most people who will actually use a camera like the FX6.

The reason people will build a rig is to improve ergonomics (for their particular preferences) and reduce fatigue. It also lets them use all the tools they'll need when they work in a crew with a 1AC, soundo, director, etc. It lets them go from tripod to handheld to shoulder faster. It lets them put the shoulder mount and top handle directly in line with the COG for perfect balance. It lets them put the camera down on unbalanced surfaces without getting damaged or falling over. It lets them power everything from a single battery. It also gives the camera more mass which reduces shake and gives a more natural feel to the images (and if done right, makes it easier to balance and operate too).

The only people building rigs to impress other people are those who care more about THEIR image than THE image.
 
Again, we're all entitled to opinions. But you're also making pretty outlandish statements that show how much understanding you lack about this product and the people who will use them.

It's the equivalent about me writing an article claiming the Isuzu N series is a "monstrosity of stupid design" because it doesn't fit into the average household garage.

 

Well, that's a matter of opinion, as you say.

I think it makes sense and anyone who's worked in broadcast can instantly pick up one of these (or an FX9 or FS7), start shooting, and find most of the controls they're used to. Apart from setting the right res/codec for the project or formatting cards, you can often get through an entire days shooting without ever needing to enter the menu's with these cameras. And usually you can find the button you need without even looking.
 
You literally push one button. The video you linked shows you how to change your S&Q settings, but once that's done, it's a single push of a button to get into slow-motion mode.
 
It will be far from "less cluttered" once you have 2x xlr cables (+ adapters to full-size), headphones and HDMI cable coming out of the side with all those little rubber doors dangling around. Not everyone will need that, but it's just as easy to criticise the C70 design as the FX6 (even more so in this regard). The FX6 has the ports right where you need them on a set - on the dumb side. It even has the ports recessed enough so that you can avoid obstructions when using a battery plate.
 
Unless you need to shoot any high or low angles, or on a shoulder mount, and can't use the non-rotating handle. In that situation you have exactly 0 nice dials.  FX6/FS7/FS5 style handle is very versatile and convenient.
 
Fair point, in some cases. But if you're stripping the camera down, say to shoot on a gimbal or to mount it in a car, are you really going to want audio in-camera? All those cables/mics/receivers would just get in the way and go against what you're trying to achieve. You'd probably be recording externally anyway. A deal-breaker for some, (eg if you MUST have in-cam audio on gimbal), but for most it's a problem that is easily solved when it arises.
 
This comment shows just how out of touch you are with most people who will actually use a camera like the FX6.

The reason people will build a rig is to improve ergonomics (for their particular preferences) and reduce fatigue. It also lets them use all the tools they'll need when they work in a crew with a 1AC, soundo, director, etc. It lets them go from tripod to handheld to shoulder faster. It lets them put the shoulder mount and top handle directly in line with the COG for perfect balance. It lets them put the camera down on unbalanced surfaces without getting damaged or falling over. It lets them power everything from a single battery. It also gives the camera more mass which reduces shake and gives a more natural feel to the images (and if done right, makes it easier to balance and operate too).

The only people building rigs to impress other people are those who care more about THEIR image than THE image.
 
Again, we're all entitled to opinions. But you're also making pretty outlandish statements that show how much understanding you lack about this product and the people who will use them.

It's the equivalent about me writing an article claiming the Isuzu N series is a "monstrosity of stupid design" because it doesn't fit into the average household garage.

 

I'm pretty sure the setup from Sony's video is just that, the initial setup for choosing framerate. (the same thing you have to do on a mirrorless camera) Once you have that loaded all you have to do is push the S&Q mode then the record button to be shooting your high frame rate. I don't see the clunkiness here but maybe I'm missing something. Seems to be about the same as most mirrorless cameras, maybe faster since they actually have a dedicated S&Q mode. To do that on my GH5 would take a dive into the menus to select basically those same options as on the FX6, only I have slow motion assigned to a custom function, basically like the S&Q mode.
 
I do really really wish manufacturers would start giving us built in NDs on mirrorless cameras though, seems to simple to do comparatively and so incredibly helpful.

Everyone: Please Sony, give us an A7sIII with professional video features! If you do I will buy at least seven of them.
Sony: Ok, here it is!
Everyone: Meh it's just a rehashed A7sIII. This is lame and I'm not buying it. 

Everyone: Please Sony, give us an A7sIII with professional video features! If you do I will buy at least seven of them.
Sony: Ok, here it is!
Everyone: Meh it's just a rehashed A7sIII. This is lame and I'm not buying it. 

Everyone: Please Sony, give us an A7sIII with professional video features! If you do I will buy at least seven of them.
Sony: Ok, here it is!
Everyone: Meh it's just a rehashed A7sIII. This is lame and I'm not buying it. 

Everyone: Please Sony, give us an A7sIII with professional video features! If you do I will buy at least seven of them.
Sony: Ok, here it is!
Everyone: Meh it's just a rehashed A7sIII. This is lame and I'm not buying it. 

Lets hope so, I want to get a good deal.

Yeah it's definitely got a "start up" feel to the company. However the good side of that is that they are constantly improving the camera through firmware updates. It's actually a better tool now than when I bought it.

 

I also got a Z Cam E2M4, though somewhat unwillingly if I'm honest. I got it for the image quality, frame rate options, and wireless control. If such a thing existed, I might have gotten a DSLR-shaped E2*. However, the benefit of the boxy shape is it's easier to balance on a gimbal, and I do intend to swap out the mount for a turbomount at some point, which is a useful modularity. I also really appreciate the NPF sled, which lasts forever without the bulk and extra accessories for V mount. The other aspect that I really like are the numerous 1/4-20 mounts. I generally use the camera pretty bare, but I have a NATO rail on either side and can slip on handles in 2 seconds for a wide, stable grip. A DSLR would need a cage for that.
Most of the annoyances with DSLR-shaped camera come down to photo-oriented design, not the than non-modular design. Lack of easy, locking power connectors, lack of timecode, fiddly HDMI D ports, incomprehensible menus, lack of NDs--all could be solved while maintaining a traditional DSLR shape, and some camers do come along with some of them from time to time.
On the other hand, cameras like the FS7 and C100 are packed with nice features, but I really don't use any of them apart from ND's and they just make for obnoxiously large bodies that are even harder and more expensive to use. My perspective though is from narrative shoots where we spend more time on rehearsals and lights than anything else, so we're never concerned with setup times for the camera.
 
*before anyone mentions the GH5S, the E2's image is much nicer in my opinion and has way more video perks.

I went Z-Cam earlier this year.

I was planning to go with the UMP G2 but then Covid happened and all my work dried up so that went on hold. When it started up again, I decided to grab the Z-Cam E2-S6 instead as it covered a lot of the same bases (my prerequisites were Prores, 4K100p, Internal ND & v-mount power option) for a lot less money. It was also a small, lightweight package that I didn't have to spend half a day prepping/packing/charging/rigging before a shoot. This was important for me as when bookings started to come back, they were a lot different and instead of being multiple-day crewed shoots plus travel they mostly became local half-day affairs with no other crew. I needed something where I could instantly say yes when I'd get called and asked to do a 3-hour shoot the following morning, and still know it would be worthwhile and effortless and that I could get everything prepped in time easily. The camera sits on my desk or shelf and when I have a small shoot, I just put a battery on the charger the night before and then I'm good to go for about 6 hours of shooting - no other prep required.

While the camera has served its purpose for this - especially once I had a decent handheld rig - It has its shortcomings. The eND kit which I ordered in May is still backordered so I'm stuck with rectangle filters for now (in a Tilta mini matte box). Some of the controls are clunky. Audio is a pain - the mini-XLR breakaway cable I have does not fit when using my v-mount plate, so I've got a Zoom H5 due this week, which I plan to mostly use a mixer & pre-amp (rather than purely as a recorder).  I've had a few producers ask me what camera I shoot with and they've never heard of the Z-Cam - though luckily this didn't lose me any of the jobs because most of the work lately is local and I'm in a regional market so I'm often their only option (unless they want a hybrid shooter who can't do sound or lighting).

The image is fantastic though. I don't shoot charts or do tests, but for actual in-the-field performance it is great - there's never been a time when the image quality has been the limiting factor in any way - and there's not many cameras under $10K where that can be said.

I went Z-Cam earlier this year.

I was planning to go with the UMP G2 but then Covid happened and all my work dried up so that went on hold. When it started up again, I decided to grab the Z-Cam E2-S6 instead as it covered a lot of the same bases (my prerequisites were Prores, 4K100p, Internal ND & v-mount power option) for a lot less money. It was also a small, lightweight package that I didn't have to spend half a day prepping/packing/charging/rigging before a shoot. This was important for me as when bookings started to come back, they were a lot different and instead of being multiple-day crewed shoots plus travel they mostly became local half-day affairs with no other crew. I needed something where I could instantly say yes when I'd get called and asked to do a 3-hour shoot the following morning, and still know it would be worthwhile and effortless and that I could get everything prepped in time easily. The camera sits on my desk or shelf and when I have a small shoot, I just put a battery on the charger the night before and then I'm good to go for about 6 hours of shooting - no other prep required.

While the camera has served its purpose for this - especially once I had a decent handheld rig - It has its shortcomings. The eND kit which I ordered in May is still backordered so I'm stuck with rectangle filters for now (in a Tilta mini matte box). Some of the controls are clunky. Audio is a pain - the mini-XLR breakaway cable I have does not fit when using my v-mount plate, so I've got a Zoom H5 due this week, which I plan to mostly use a mixer & pre-amp (rather than purely as a recorder).  I've had a few producers ask me what camera I shoot with and they've never heard of the Z-Cam - though luckily this didn't lose me any of the jobs because most of the work lately is local and I'm in a regional market so I'm often their only option (unless they want a hybrid shooter who can't do sound or lighting).

The image is fantastic though. I don't shoot charts or do tests, but for actual in-the-field performance it is great - there's never been a time when the image quality has been the limiting factor in any way - and there's not many cameras under $10K where that can be said.

I've spent a lot of time as an AC rigging up Red's and I have to say they are truly a pain. The problem is the body is too tall, with the lens mount (ie all the weight) up quite high. It makes most shoulder-mounts impractical, as the center of gravity is too high and harder to balance. It also means you need a heavier duty tripod and very specific base plates to get the correct vertical spacing of rails so that all your lens motors will fit.

The URSA cameras are ugly as hell, but they are very fast and flexible when switching between handheld, shoulder-mount, easy-rig, and tripod.

I've spent a lot of time as an AC rigging up Red's and I have to say they are truly a pain. The problem is the body is too tall, with the lens mount (ie all the weight) up quite high. It makes most shoulder-mounts impractical, as the center of gravity is too high and harder to balance. It also means you need a heavier duty tripod and very specific base plates to get the correct vertical spacing of rails so that all your lens motors will fit.

The URSA cameras are ugly as hell, but they are very fast and flexible when switching between handheld, shoulder-mount, easy-rig, and tripod.

I've spent a lot of time as an AC rigging up Red's and I have to say they are truly a pain. The problem is the body is too tall, with the lens mount (ie all the weight) up quite high. It makes most shoulder-mounts impractical, as the center of gravity is too high and harder to balance. It also means you need a heavier duty tripod and very specific base plates to get the correct vertical spacing of rails so that all your lens motors will fit.

The URSA cameras are ugly as hell, but they are very fast and flexible when switching between handheld, shoulder-mount, easy-rig, and tripod.

I've spent a lot of time as an AC rigging up Red's and I have to say they are truly a pain. The problem is the body is too tall, with the lens mount (ie all the weight) up quite high. It makes most shoulder-mounts impractical, as the center of gravity is too high and harder to balance. It also means you need a heavier duty tripod and very specific base plates to get the correct vertical spacing of rails so that all your lens motors will fit.

The URSA cameras are ugly as hell, but they are very fast and flexible when switching between handheld, shoulder-mount, easy-rig, and tripod.

They knew it existed... but they also knew that their crazed fan base would buy whatever they release.

Red are kind of like Jeep. They beat everyone else with their original products - one of the first of it's kind - then cashed in on their reputation and started selling overpriced, unreliable products, but with very focused marketing. 

They knew it existed... but they also knew that their crazed fan base would buy whatever they release.

Red are kind of like Jeep. They beat everyone else with their original products - one of the first of it's kind - then cashed in on their reputation and started selling overpriced, unreliable products, but with very focused marketing. 

They knew it existed... but they also knew that their crazed fan base would buy whatever they release.

Red are kind of like Jeep. They beat everyone else with their original products - one of the first of it's kind - then cashed in on their reputation and started selling overpriced, unreliable products, but with very focused marketing.