TomTheDP

Plenty of Star Wars BTS to see what camera they were using. I doubt they need to do trickery when you have Star Wars money. I imagine they went digital for certain VFX shots though. 

11 hours ago, IronFilm said:

 

Similar here. After the ARRI 35 / Mini / LF (which are all still very high priced), then the AMIRA would be the one I'd want. 

 

Top Gun 2 didn't use film, it was shot almost entirely on VENICE. 

Where did you read that?

Take a look at this list:

https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/cameras-behind-oscar-nominated-films/

Only one movie on that list was shot on film! And only because the director pushed hard for it. 

It is possibly my experiences in NZ are radically different, as we are a vert remote country with no commercial film labs. 

So I'm sure LA does more film movies than we do, but I do suspect that being shot on film is still very much the niche minority. 

32bit float internal recording??? Where did you read that. I don't believe it does that. 

Oh shit, I thought It had heard it had 32bit internal recording. Sadly it looks like I am wrong. 

After watching Top Gun 2 I remember looking at the spec list on IMDB and seeing 35mm film listed, but looking at it again I only see the Venice. I don't know what I have been smoking lol. It makes sense as it looked pretty digital aside from the film grain, which was added in post it seems. 

The last Jurassic World film was shot on film. Obviously Nolan and Tarantino always shoot on film. But yeah you're right it's pretty uncommon over all. Although I feel it's made somewhat of a comeback. The last Star Wars trilogy was shot on film. I guess for faster turn around stuff like most streaming films/shows it really isn't an option. 

 

2 hours ago, Django said:

General rule? there are no rules, only format choices and he explained his motivations. Of course its personal, but I think other people can relate. I know I can.. YMMV.

He also mentions tight spaces and narrow locations like shooting hallways etc. Going full frame means you don't have to step down to a wider focal length when you simply can't physically back up the camera to compensate for the S35 crop. Stepping down from 35mm to 24mm adds quite a bit of distortion. an alternative is to use a speed booster, but here again we're talking reasons for going FF.

I assume you could get a zero distortion fast 24mm lens that would look about the same. Not many lenses that can do faster than 1.4 without compromising the image though. 

In my price bracket I just prefer 35mm vintage still lenses over cheaper S35 cine lens options. 

2 minutes ago, kye said:

I disagree - those sensors are better because they're more recent.  The challenge is that 1) older FF cameras didn't shoot video, and 2) in stills cameras the FF cameras were the most expensive.

Most discussions also involve an element of "FF gives shallower DoF" only it's usually not spelled out like that, but instead it's phrased as "more cinematic" or some other nebulous thing that really just boils down to shallow DoF.  This is because FF lenses are made to have shallower DoF than lenses for other systems, but that's just a quirk of history rather than a fundamental limitation - they could have been made similarly for other sensor sizes but they just weren't.

FF does gather slightly more light, and all else being equal, that gives lower noise and therefore higher DR, but that means that in a decade or two we'll just be arguing about FF vs LF and the manufacturers will be trying to sell us 16K LF cameras and people will be saying how the cinema standard is FF (having forgotten about S35 completely) but the LF-Bros will be taking about how only the LF sensors can use AI to adjust the aperture to keep both eyes of a mosquito in focus at the same time and FF can't do that, and that's completely essential to them and that Sony will go bankrupt if they don't go LF dynamic mosquito aperture AF.

I am not sure what you are trying to say.

All the Alexa cameras before the 35 share the same sensor, the sensor just gets bigger and hence more resolution. Finer grain equals the appearance of less noise. Again the Alexa 35 changes this as it isn't the ALEV3 sensor. It's the cleanest and highest dynamic range Arri camera so far. This is what I find interesting. Will people choose the full frame LF which has worse high ISO performance, worse dynamic range, less color depth, and less accurate color reproduction just to get the FF FOV?

My point was this is the first time where the best sensor on the market is a S35 sensor with no sign of ARRI putting out a new FF sensor. We'll see what the big boys go with, time will tell. 

To be fair the full frame craze may just be because the best sensors have been full frame. The RED Monstro was superior to the helium, helium had a green cast in the shadows. The Alexa LF sensor was superior to the S35 variant being higher resolution, smaller pixels, finer grain, better high iso performance. There was no S35 variant of the Venice, well you could shoot cropped in 4k, but again you get better performance with full sensor in 6k.

The Alexa 35 is now the best sensor on the market and is also S35. Interesting. 

Back to the FX30, the C70 kicks it's butt in everyway, but the AF on the C70 is subpar, I have seen it first hand. Would be nice if Sony was actually innovative and gave us an affordable S35 mini Cine Camera with ND's. Could be a lot worse though. 

5 minutes ago, Django said:

that use to be the case but I think since the C200, FS5 and now BM6K Pro, C70 or even FX6, that is no longer the case. They have great battery life so you can stay away from Vmount. Built-in NDs mean you can avoid a matte box. And stellar AF avoids the need for a follow focus rig. A lot of DPs do love to over rig their cameras and that's fine, just not my ethos. I usually strip them down to the bare minimum, I like fast energetic shoots to keep the momentum going. Obviously you can't do that with URSA Mini, RED & ARRI. You need a crew if you wanna be comfortable. Different scenarios. Different applications. Different results also.

I don't really consider any of those cameras cinema cameras but maybe I am being snobby. If it can make it into a theater I guess you can't say it is not cinema though. 

1 hour ago, Django said:

Not sure what all this ARRI talk is doing in a FX30 thread but ok I'll bite. 

Locally, I've notice ARRI Classics are sitting for weeks/months on the marketplace, basically until the price hits rock-bottom.

They're usually beat up as hell with very high mileage. I guess they're built like tanks but like second hand luxury cars I'm always weary of spending couple thousand and end up having an expensive paperweight if a major fail were to happen.

Not to mention the giant form factor, not very liberating. unless you're shooting (budget) feature films I can't imagine a scenario where you'd pull up with this type of rig in 2022 lol

I think it's just relating to the S35 sensors and the Alexa 35.

I have noticed Classics sitting for a long time, but it's the same with the XT or Amiras. The market for these types of cameras is a lot more niche. Of course the Classic is at the bottom of the barrel for ARRI cameras being the oldest and first one. 

In terms of projects where you use actual cinema cameras most of the rigs end up being pretty big and bulky. The Venice or Amira are pretty similar in size. I do use my classic for corporate stuff, I have even shot a wedding with it, albeit a short one. 

In terms of the FX30 though I do think the recent Fuji releases are more interesting and better in almost everyway. But for auto focus nothing beats Sony and if you need a B-cam for any of the Sony cine cameras again this is a great option. 

In terms of glass too it makes sense to stick to a single system unless you are just using all manual glass. 

Sony is kind of killing it if you look at their entire line up. From the A7S3 to the FX6 to the Venice. 

If I had to just rock with a single camera it would probably be the XH2S, though I do like my Sigma FP a lot. 

 

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Nah, it is extremely rare for Netflix productions to be shot on film. 

But yes, a lot of Netflix shoots have been using the LF because 4K is forced upon them as a requirement. 

For productions without the forced requirement, then LF cameras are much less common. 

Hours don't matter for digital cameras. 
(how it was used is what matters)

 

I'd much much rather have an AMIRA than a Classic. (except for the cost 😕 ) 

Being able to use anamorphics is another reason an XT would go for more. 

Although there are Classics that do 4:3, but they tend to for a little more, and are never the cheapest. 

The PLUS does 4:3, the classic sensor is 16:9 unless they were doing upgrades at some point. You can get Classics fitted with the XR module, which gives you 2.8k RAW, but no 4:3 or 3.2k. 

The classic in my opinion is not a bad choice for small budget features. I just used one on a short 7 day feature and didn't find it getting in the way. I don't think people realize that the OG classic sensor is basically the same as the Alexa mini. I do plan on getting the Amira at some point, it is defiantly the best run and gun ARRI camera besides the 35. Although I think the Amira would still be better for shoulder rig setups. 

Yeah Netflix doesn't shoot film as far as I know of, but for big Hollywood it's the LF or Film usually. The Venice gets some use but even on Top Gun 2 it was only used for cockpit shots, the rest was film. I honestly think we'll see way less RED usage now that Arri has both the LF and 35 as 4k options, for higher end stuff that is. 

I am really just talking really high end Hollywood. Yes you get a lot of big indie films that win festivals shooting on the OG mini or RED. 

I am still very interested to see where the Alexa 35 puts everything. It is a way better choice than both the mini LF or S35 mini, just in terms of handling. It's basically better in every way. For low budget you get higher ISO options that aren't as noisy, for bigger productions you have a camera that is suited way better for AC's, 32bit float internal recording. I suppose the price is still going to put it outside of a large amount of productions.

That said the Venice is actually similar to the Alexa 35 in terms of body design and you get compressed RAW and high iso options. It is a bit heavier, but with the benefit of full frame 6k or 4k S35 options. The Alexa 35 dynamic range kicks the Venice's butt though. 

ARRI is still the golden standard and I have to say I'd rather shoot with the mini or Amira than the Venice despite the downsides. I am kind of loopy though. 

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

When you look at the cameras winning Oscars, it isn't exclusively dominated by ARRI LF cameras. 

S35 remains very popular at the highest levels. (funnily enough, each time I have worked with an ARRI Mini LF, it has been on a smaller sized production!)

Oscars aren't but movies that you see in theater or big TV/netflix type stuff are almost always the LF or Film.

You see Amiras at 14 grand but they have like 7000+ hours. 

You can find a classic for 2k hours for 4500 for the entire kit. XT's are staying a bit higher though probably because 3.2k raw at 120fps is still more commercially viable than HD even though the difference is next to nothing as downsampling retains almost all the detail. 

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

For me personally (as a Sound Mixer, who works with a wide range of DoPs), I more often work with the OG Alexa Mini, then the Mini LF. 

And even when there is a "full frame" camera on set, such as a VENICE or FX9, then it isn't uncommon it is being used in S35 mode (as was the case on last weekend's film) so they can use it with the S35 lenses of their choice. 

I think it depends on the tier you are working in. For like bigger theatrical releases it all seems to be the LF. I mean I definitely work a lot with S35 but I am not Hollywood. I am probably sounding pretty arrogant right now as Hollywood isn't the only place in the world making films, especially nowadays. 

1 hour ago, ade towell said:

I like shallow dof but only when it's motivated ie adds to the story. I just realised it's the same director who did 300 - I hated that too and mainly cause it was basically actors plus some cgi background. I think the constant ultra dof in Army of the Dead made it feel similar - like it had all been filmed in front of green screen, there was nothing that would ground a character in their environment, they seemed completely seperated from each other, makes me feel kind of nauseous after a while. Maybe I'm just too old and sensitive. Anyway yes sorry back to the fx30...

They also did do a lot of green screen, one of the main actors was completely removed from the film and replaced later with someone else lol. 

In regards to the Sony it would be nice if it was priced even a bit cheaper $1500 territory. 

Why didn't they just go all out and give us open gate?

50 minutes ago, Django said:

Lol I know your being cynical but I think (or at least hope) most people are aware that S35 is the cinema standard!

I almost feel full frame is the standard now for digital. The Alexa LF pretty much dominates, if not that the Sony Venice or RED monstro both of which are full frame. Of course we still see film being used quite a bit which is S35, larger than APSC tho. 

It'll be interesting to see how the Alexa 35 might change this. 

That said it's so easy to throw on a speed booster and get the FF look that the FX30 isn't suffering much from being S35 imo. My main appeal with FF is being able to use vintage still glass to its full potential. 

On 10/7/2022 at 9:34 AM, Django said:

yup saw that one in my feed this morning.. as he says at the very end though "we haven't tested out mixed lighting where a lot of the time the camera will break apart".

RIP

3 hours ago, PPNS said:

reading this forum is so frustrating. why would you ever use a speedbooster on a s35 sensor (or ever really)? it's the most standard format for moving images. if you need "proper full frame" on s35, just shoot a stop wider than you would on FF, and open up your iris an extra stop, maybe add a stop of ND if you're clipping. that's it. there's nothing special about this sensor size.

if you want a 24mm t/2.8 on FF, just use the 18mm of the same lens set, and set it to t/2 to match the dof on the fx30 or xh2s. if you want to match a 24mm at t/1.5, then sure, that's most likely not possible, but it's not gonna look very nice anyway, is it?

how about just using the right lens set for the right camera, and being a bit more thoughtful, instead of bulking up your camera with oversized lenses and a low quality layer of glass in between?

how often do you need a dof thinner than t/2.8 on s35 (or t/4 on ff) for that matter? if most of the image is blurred out mush, i tend to assume its not worth watching anyway.

I'd say the biggest benefit is being able to fully utilize older stills lenses which are all designed for 35mm film. Razor thin DOF is also a lot of fun. But yeah in practical reality I rarely shoot at F2 on S35 let alone full frame. It is fun to do once in a while though. 

2 hours ago, Django said:

A7IV overheats in 4K60p though. Also has a whopping 26.8ms RS vs 15ms on FX30. 

FX3/FX30 are entry cine line cameras. Now with Cine EI & LUT import they do feel a little bit more worthy of FX range.

As an FS7 user, this would be the perfect B-cam for me.

That said, yeah strictly nothing exciting about it. Another utilitarian Sony camera.

Like it or not auto focus is likely to beat out almost any other feature. Being able to easily match to Sony cine/pro cameras is a big plus though. 

The camera feels a little late and a little boring. It doesn't really feel like a cine camera. But Sony auto focus and 10 bit for $1800 is a compelling. I guess for $700 more you could get the full frame A74, but no external RAW or 4k 120 options. 

Cancer is the worst and its equally as awful to have to watch a loved one go through it. It's easy to get lost in a loved one during a time like this I hope you can find the time and energy to take care of yourself as well. 

5 minutes ago, Django said:

where did you get this info? FX3 has the same heavy NR as A7S3. so I'd assume FX30 will have it also.

Gerald. He said its very similar to the XH2S and noise looks very organic. 

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

Well my XH2 arrives tomorrow. Yay 😀 

Between 11am and 2pm.

I’m leaving 8.30am latest for my last job of the year. Boo 😒 

I preordered with the hope of testing on at least this last real world job, but was resigned over the last few days to it not arriving in time.

Hey ho, would have been good and I’ll just have to run some post-season tests against my S1R’s to see how it stacks up in non-wedding environments.

Hard to beat Fuji color out of the box! I'd love to get the XH2 or XH2S but I went with a Sigma for a small gimbal camera instead. 😳

Great price and great features. 

Honestly prefer it over the A7S3 because it doesn't have the horrible in camera noise reduction. Also $3500 for a 10mp camera is a lot. 

This is cheap enough where I might buy it just to have. Definitely B-cam energy or "videographer" energy. But hey it has 10 bit up to 4k 120p. Yes I'd get the XH2 over this unless I wanted auto focus. Honestly Sony just has the best video AF. Canon is nice too but it is only good on some of their bodies. The C70 AF sucks. 

I am recommending this to my friend. Great for quicker/budget shoots or as a B-cam or gimbal. 

The dynamic range ratings are lower but honestly its probably around where everything else is these days. 

9 hours ago, OleB said:

Suggest that you go through the previous pages of this thread. Usually the complains in regards to DR latitude and highlight rolloff are coming from people who are not understanding how this camera works. Especially the part about ISO 100-800 being same base ISO but with different digital gain levels, thus showing different previews while monitoring and highlight rolloff handling.

This camera is tricky and needs a lot studying, but once you figured out it is capable of producing top notch quality images. Meanwhile there is even a way (via Atomos Ninja V) to have a predictable workflow based on V-log and appropriate LUTs.

To give you some examples about the ISO handling and rolloff.

ISO 100 recorded and left untouched (put through ARRI Rec709 LUT workflow as mentioned earlier in this thread) = bad highlight rolloff

 

ISO 100 pushed to 800 (3 stops to restore shadows as per Sigma guidance), now there is plenty of DR and a nice highlight rolloff

ISO 800 recorded and left untouched in post despite the LUT, for me the best of both worlds and matches what I saw in reality pretty closely

There is also an extensive white paper from Sigma stating exactly what ISO to use and when. 
 

Can only recommend to invest the time to learn the gear inside out. (and that applies most likely every other cinema camera out there as well)

I was switching to 100 iso to actually see my highlight information than back to 800 to see my shadows and then recording in 800. 

Now with 3200 iso you are kind of just winging it, but you are probably also usually shooting at 3200 in lower light situations where blown highlights are not as critical or to be expected with say a street lamp. 

9 hours ago, Ty Harper said:

I captured a post film screening interview last night between the director and his mom who is one of the first Black filmmakers in Canada... nothing prepared ahead of time just a capture of the moment for his family archives. I seriously considered pulling out the 5D MKIII to pair with my R5C but ended up going with the R5C and 1DC bcuz the second shooter wasn't familiar with ML. The R5C's footage was obviously great but the DPAF struggled at times to keep focus on the director's mom - and while it was happening, all I could think was maybe I should've just stuck with my trusty 5D MKIII/1DC combo. All that to say my relationship with the R5C has been kind meh so far (altho the image and cinema options in essentially a 1DC sized body once u add the grip are great!) - but the biggest takeaway I've had so far is that now more than ever, I know I will never sell my 5D MKIII. 

Damn that is a strong testament to the 5D MK3. Full frame 14 bit RAW is still compelling in 2022. 

I am about to sell mine once again. Just can't find media for it. 

1 hour ago, deezid said:

The GH6 is my favorite MFT camera atm.
Best processing and color science to me and already asked Panasonic Lumix engineers for an optional Sharpening OFF (maybe -1 sharpening like the S1H did with NR).

To be fair no other MFT cameras but the GH5 II was completely sharpening free and maybe the BMD P4K with CDNG before BRAW became a thing but had heavy Gen 4 color science flaws like gamut clipping.

The S series line up is a bit cleaner, perfect for greenscreen work but color science on the GH6 is definitely better.

The X-H2S doesn't work for me with its heavy chroma filtering, especially in dark areas, but also heavy oversharpening.

 

Yeah the XH2S indeed looks over sharpened. It's obvious when compared to the bmpc6k and Komodo, because it looks a good deal sharper. 

11 minutes ago, kye said:

Yes, the FX6 is a much more 'complete' cinema camera in that way, no doubt.  I mentioned it just because I think that's the only real venture that Panasonic has made in the direction of a more cinema camera since the EVA1, which was what - 4 years ago.  

Considering the headway that other brands have made in the small cine form-factor (Komodo, C70, FX6, etc), maybe there's a place there for an appropriately sized Panasonic camera?  Would be interesting to see what they'd come up with.

I guess the EVA1 was never a big seller. They really skimped on the quality with that one though, felt so cheap. It kind of has a new life now with the BM Video Assist RAW capabilities. 

I have been interested in the BGH1, but I heard that there is latency from the SDI, which would be a bummer if true.