Davide DB

Even though the average movie goer (or even the average movie reviewer) doesn't know what "a Sony FX3" is, this still helps them massively create this underdog story of we're this plucky independent-ish film going our own way, doing things in our own manner, and we're not like those big studio films that some people are getting turned off by. 

And you don’t want the guy who did the Millenium Falcon.
Just ONE cup holder.
MAJOR oversight.

Just as long as he, she or they (you can never truly tell with Lego people) doesn’t have the standard Lego hands. Which are rubbish.

In terms of pure design aesthetics and handling, I also want this @Davide DB

Sony FX3, Atlas Mercury and P+S Technik Evolution Lenses (source: IMDB)
recorded on a Ninja V. other bits here: https://www.provideocoalition.com/did-the-creator-use-the-sony-fx3-as-an-a-camera/
 
From trailer it seems all the movie has a extensive VFX work.
 
From what I understand in my ignorance:
- the camera is the least of the costs in a large production/blockbuster.
- It is not the camera that makes the look of the film but the lenses.
- In a big production, where a serious DOP can afford to give vent to his fantasies about lighting, the technical characteristics of a camera are less important.
Ultimately, if Fraser/Edwards chose this camera, it is more because of their fixation on being minimalist as pointed out in the opening article.
About minimalism.... I still remember in 2009 when Howard Hall first took an IMAX camera underwater for the documentary Under the Sea. Minimalist to the point 🤣
 

Somehow relevant to my question.
Now they're comparing iPhone 15 pro 5x camera to 24-70mm lens at 70mm. 

Yes, DSLR image has higher quality, but the fact that we're now doing this comparisons shows that a $3000 camera lens combo should deliver a lot of value to stay attractive for younger generation. 

Those lens are 'only' 10k each. Probably makes a difference 😉

Hi everyone!
Another music Video coming along. Shot on the blackmagic 4K with Metabones and Sigma 16-35mm and Helios 55mm. On the outside shots i had ND filters with IR correction. Also there is a small DJI camera in the mix for all the shots from above ( Just put it in a stick) . On this shoot i really missed an autofocus feature.
Also i had some problems with the grading in the first half of the song as the lighting conditions were very different in each set up. Maybe i would have needed to have a closer look on the white balance. Maybe also a grading session in Resolve would have helped, i did the grading in premiere.
 

Let's assume you are product manager in a Japanese camera company. You want to add a new video oriented hybrid to your line up. By video oriented hybrid I mean a video camera that can be used for still photography, rather than a still camera that can shoot video very well.
Please be specific about the specs. And consider, as a product manager, you should have a clear plan for future updates releasing every 2 years, and at least one firmware update in between. Also be realistic to keep the price at $2k.
I don't want to know what you personally want. I want to know what you think the market wants.
 
Thanks.

I think they got quite right, people that can afford expensive glass will go buy them at premium and sell their EF ones that allow people with less budget to get great lenses. The sport example is a good one just look how affordable a EF 200-400 1.4x has become..

Would you buy a mid range RF 85 1.4 or a cheaper used EF 85 1.2? Would you buy a mid range RF 24-70 F4 when you can get a cheaper used EF 24-70 II 2.8?

Most of the people criticizing RF lenses they don't own them, is funny to observe. 

I sold my EF 24-70 II 2.8, EF 50 1.2, RF 35 1.8 (btw very good lens for the price) and EF 24 1.4 for a RF 28-70 2.0, one of the best decision ever, but this also allowed people to get really good EF lens cheaper.
If the EF lens support would not be as good as it is on the R cameras, I would agree but they mostly work better than on DSLR.... so plenty of good options and some gets cheaper and cheaper, it is a good thing for people with limited budget.

I wonder what you are more likely to find in most homes, an Ikea Billy bookcase or a Canon EF24-105mm f4?
Its a close call, I reckon.
They shifted so many of them in bundles with the 5DMK2 amongst other cameras because it was absolute bargain as an additional price standalone let alone versus buying a 24-70mm f2.8.
Do they do the same with the RF version ?
Because that would be the way forward to chuck those in with the camera as a bundle with the lens being at 50% of what it would cost extra which is exactly what Panasonic are doing with the S1 with their 24-105mm
As it stands, its the fat part of £1300 for the RF24-105mm which is just not appealing at all.
The Z and L mount both have the same problem to some extent but the third party range is what gives the other two the advantage not to mention E mount which just keeps motoring along with options everywhere.
Of course, there is the massive back catalogue of EF to adapt onto RF but, unlike Nikon with the F mount adapter, this is nothing unique as all the other mounts can do that too.
If I bought an RF camera, I definitely think that it wouldn't see a native RF lens for a very long time and thats probably been enough to keep me away so far as I can do that with everything else but also have affordable native glass too.
As it stands, the most flexible mount is Z mount (primarily due to the unique ability to have F mount with full AF) closely followed by the E mount.
E and L mount currently have the best options in affordable fast native lenses and Nikon are catching up.
The key to that, of course, is the 3rd party support most notably from Sigma.

Possibly because it kind of demonstrates that one of the least most important components of movie making is the camera itself?
Beyond a certain point. 
I’m sure they were not using the f4-5.6 kit lens but some 20k$ cine lenses and maybe less than in some other productions, but whatever lighting etc was needed.
We know that even just in commercial jobs, the type of camera you have can get you or at least deny you, the job.
’Average’ tool in skilled hands etc…
In terms of sensor though, just how far off a Venice is that of the FX3? Barely anything.

What i am really looking forward to are the information that will come out of the postproduction companies, as these will apply to most "prosumer" cameras.
Also "The Creator" is going in the direction of the "Sony" look and taking advantage of it - and many shots are just the basis for extensive VFX work.
I assume these cameras would not be used for a feelgood rom com where you want to get soft skintones from 45 year old actors...
 

I think I understand where @IronFilm is coming from - the advantage of a larger body is that you get dedicated buttons and other things that are useful on set.  Think about it, if there was no use for something then they wouldn't add it to the camera, regardless of how large they were allowed to make it.
On a controlled set you'd imagine that they'd have a proper cinema lens with remote follow-focus etc attached, matte box, v-mount power, monitor, and the whole thing would be rigged appropriately.  By the time you add all that then the difference between an FX3 and FX6 is maybe only an extra 25% to the size of the whole rig.

Started by buying an EM5 cuz it was small.  Then Bought a GX7 cuz it was small.  Bought a GM1 cuz it was small.  Bought two GH1's cuz they are small.  Bought an EM5II cuz it was small.  Bought two Gx8's cuz they were small.  Bought an EM10iii cuz it was small.
Bought GH4's and Gh5's along the way as well.  They are not small.
I like the smaller cameras better in my hand.   Too bad the small cams didn't have the same features/specs.  Andrew is onto something by saying there was a missed market there.  At least in my world that market exists.
Doesn't take too much to wonder if OM can make a run at that market with trying to niche their way through the wildlife photographers. M43 for super long lens stuff is a relatively small kit.  (Not the body, however, but the lens)  Is it enough to keep the format viable?  Probably not, but here's hoping.

I doubt Sony is put out much by these numbers. Sony has never been that much of a 'camera' or 'lens' manufacturer - the 'camera business' is just a show case for their sensors. And in the sensor business they totally dominate (do Canon even use their own sensors anymore?)
Of course Sony's really big market is smartphone image sensors. There was a time that a smartphone had one image sensor - my latest phone (Xiaomi) has '5' (all Sony) and including a 1 inch sensor.
So I would reckon Sony are pretty ok with Canon dominating what is essentially a declining niche mirrorless camera market, Sony have essentially capture the fastest 'growth' area of the photo industry...

https://petapixel.com/2023/09/05/canon-has-nearly-50-of-camara-market-share-nearly-double-sony/
 
"As reported by Digital Camera Info and Digital Camera World, an annual Inspection World Share data report from Nikkei Shimbun — a Japanese business publication — shows that Canon, far and away, dominates the camera market with 46.5% of all units sold in 2023. The data, provided by Techno System Research, found that Canon sold over 3.348 million camera units in the same period that Sony sold around 1.879 million units. The report does not make a distinction between mirrorless cameras and DSLRs.
Nikon holds 11.7% of the market in a distant third, with Fujifilm and Panasonic following with 5.8% and 4.2% market share each. These top five companies account for 94.3% of the entire camera digital camera market share.
Comparing this with a 2022 sales report published by Digital Camera Life, it’s likely that Canon continues to rely heavily on its DSLR sales, at least in terms of volume. Canon’s mirrorless market share is still higher than Sony’s, but the race is much closer: 1.54 million units versus 1.25 million units.
Further, Sony is actually ahead of Canon when it comes to the value of those sold cameras. Canon’s higher number of camera bodies sold equated to 506.7 billion yen, while Sony sold fewer units for a sales value of 565 billion yen. Canon seems to be excelling when it comes to selling more affordable cameras, while the opposite is true for Sony.
All of this said, the breakdown of the market share leaders isn’t that different than in previous years, as Canon’s lead has only increased by 0.7%. Sony’s fell by a scant 0.9%. Nikon’s rose by 0.4%. There is not a lot of movement from any company on the top five list."

Canon was always going to have an advantage because of their legacy lenses and near native performance on their RF cameras. Plus the name is just massive.
 
I think though that camera sales are only part of the picture. Are those people buying new lenses, or are they using their legacy lenses on the new bodies?
 
Also, what is the regional break down? I see A LOT Sony cameras these days, especially professionally. Most social media and web content teams use them for photo and video, from local companies to national companies (my friends working for WWE, All Elite Wrestling, and the UFC all shoot on Sony, for example.) The social media teams for most major venues in my neck of the woods, like TD Garden in Boston, also are using mostly Sony. But I'm also located in the Northeast United States/New England, so it might be different in other parts of the world or even other parts of the country. I also want to, but cannot for certain, say that Sony has the edge here for wedding shooters, though Canon has a heavy presence there too, especially amongst older professionals.

I agree with you except for the LX10 and LX100.
They are not cameras that fall into the category that can be replaced by a smarphone.
There is the whole audience of Youtubers/vloggers and both Sony and Canon have recently dropped machines aimed at this group of users. Basically a compact with perfect AF and good microphones.
Speaking of my niche: Sony has sold tons of RX100s (seven generations) widely used as compact solutions for underwater shooting. Panasonic proved that both the LX10 and 100 were far superior for underwater use but then they became obsolete and left completely the market to Sony and Olympus.
There are a lot of people who still use them with great satisfaction and would welcome an updated version that also competes with the newly released Olympus TG7 (another best-selling camera).
In short, it is true that smartphones have eaten a chunk of the market but there are niches where there is still great demand for more specialized tools.
Do all these users who buy action cams die with gopros or should they go straight to an R5C?

If the goal is to renovate all the cameras....
They started with the FF line. They probably were not ready for the flagship so they started with the entry level S5 model (perhaps the best selling).
They revamped the older flagship G9. In my opinion even if they had started with the GH6 the result would not have changed in terms of total destruction of sales of the other models.
Following this logic, the next step could be:
- a new PDAF machine in the rangefinder line (GX80 etc.) OR even in the smallest line, LX10 or LX100.
- new SH1x II flagships with PDAF

It seems to me a suicide decision.
It is bad enough that cameras receive fw updates, let alone hw. It would be the first time in history.
I simply believe that the sensor is a derivative of that of the GH6 and the marketing sells itself that they are identical. But the devil is in the details.
I've read too that they have the same sensor but who is the source? I guess it's just a PR statement. Nobody disassembled it.

It's simply not possible thay are the same sensor. A modern PDAF sensor ha specialized pixels on it. It's not something you are adding later. Only old real DSRL had the space to implement PDAF out of the sensor.
If G9II and GH6 have the same image It means that the G9II sensor is a derivation of the GH6 sensor but it's a completely different one.
So I think I'll pass the mic to Harry Callaghan
https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/124306/confusion-about-the-principle-of-on-sensor-pdaf-technique
 
 
 

The quote is from Panasonic themselves, it is the writer that is making an illustrative comparison with the Fuji and Sony models so I'm not sure a conclusion can be drawn from that.
It is more complicated with Panasonic because unlike those two with FinePix and CyberShot or Canon with Powershot etc, they don't have a differently named sub-brand.
Lumix is the name whether its the LX10 or the S1-H so it makes it less clear cut what exactly it is they are stopping doing compared to, say, Sony announcing they are stopping all CyberShot models.
The proof of the pudding will be in if they make anything other than an interchangeable lens camera again as I suspect that is what they are referring to.
They have also walked away from a successor to the king of their fixed lens cameras which is the FZ2000/2500, which is a great shame.
 

"The company has not released any new product for the price range below 50,000 yen ($370 at current rates) or so since 2019 and has no plans to develop a low-priced model going forward. "We've halted developing any new models that can be replaced by a smartphone," a spokesperson said.
... These companies are following in rivals' footsteps. Fujifilm has discontinued production of its FinePix compact cameras and will develop only the X100V series and other pricier models."
Canon has not released any new Ixy cameras since 2017. But the company acknowledges that "entry-level models continue to enjoy persistent support, so we'll continue development and production as long as there is demand." 
Sony Group has not offered any new compact models under its Cyber-shot brand since 2019, although a spokesperson said that "it's not that we'll stop developing new products." Casio Computer halted production of Exilim cameras in 2018.
Camera makers had long competed with one another by increasing the number of pixels and by shrinking the size of their devices. But then smartphones came along, offering apps for editing pictures and allowing photos to be easily shared with family and friends. This changed the way people took photos.
Smartphone makers are racing to offer advanced photography features in their devices. "It'd be a challenge for camera makers to be successful with keeping their compact digital camera businesses," said analyst Ichiro Michikoshi of research firm BCN.
Compact digital models accounted for 36% of global digital camera shipments in 2021, according to CIPA. The broader camera market will likely shrink even faster with Japanese companies, many of them big players, scaling back operations in compact digital models.
The bright spot is the mirrorless segment, with global shipments jumping 31% on the year to 324.5 billion yen in 2021. Mirrorless single-lens models offer fat margins, and users replacing lenses and other parts will keep contributing to the manufacturers' bottom lines.
Retailers are focusing on this segment as well. "These days we recommend mirrorless cameras even to novice photographers," said a salesperson at electronics and appliance retailer Joshin Denki."
 
 
I am guessing the reference is to point and shoot cameras, with fixed lenses, including the LX100 family. If Panasonic feels the GX and GM do indeed have a market, and they can profit from them (maybe with price increases), they may add some to that group. Strangely the Japanese are not really good at very quick turnarounds, and making products at lower manufacturing costs. Two reasons why they aren't the top players in the smartphone industry.
It's therefore a strange conundrum. They don't wanna integrate absolute smartphone features likes 4G and 5G chips for uploading data on ILCs. And Sony has been slowing its development of ILC replacing smartphones, by not pushing 1inch and larger sensors (they have a massively cropped 1inch sensors). Sony is arguably one of the hurdles for both Smartphones replacing ILCs, and in some ways possibly causing sensor development (like not giving PDAF to Panasonic) slowdown in Pro and Prosumer Cameras. 
 
I wanna write more, but I have to rush. 

I'm only reporting it, not agreeing with it as my own position.
The LX10 and LX100 are not to you or I or anyone else on here that owns them something that a smartphone can replace like for like of course.
But to the wider public, the ship has sailed for virtually all of them that might have bought a compact camera as they are happy enough with their phones.
Thats the position that Panasonic are taking.
Funnily enough, in the past couple of months, I have offered my daughter both my LX10 and LX100 when she has gone on trips to places that I have thought merited more than a phone but she's been "thanks but no thanks".
We are going to Tokyo at the end of next week and I've upped my loan offer to my Sigma Fp or Leica T but she is still not interested.
I don't think she is an outlier either, even though she is over 30 so she has grown up around "real cameras"  from my work, let alone what anyone 25 and under must be like.
What is the demographic at the present time for YouTubers though?
I'm guessing its nowhere near as youthful as it once was and far more affluent too.
TikTok is where the younger generation are and they have grown up without "real" cameras.
They don't mind paying €1500 for a phone that they can run their entire life on (particularly as they all pay monthly for it anyway) but dropping that amount on a camera that brings them a marginal gain as they would see it is a tough sell.
Before we even get to the aspect of whether the current financial climate makes that even viable.
The distance from capture to audience is absolutely minimal and that is something that camera manufacturers have failed to grasp and act upon.
I've said it on here before but even with the absolutely fastest cameras, highly optimised workflow with the fastest cards, readers, computers, transmission infrastructure etc then by the time I'd got an image edited and away onto newspapers and published (even online let alone the printed versions) from pitch side was glacially slow compared to the kid sat behind me on the terraces with his iPhone.
Real cameras are just not equipped to compete with that and with the dwindling attention span of the creators and the consumers it just doesn't appeal to them.
YouTube content was too long so they went to YouTube shorts and now that is too long they're on TikTok.
And its worth bearing in mind that actual "content creation" as we would describe it is a niche anyway so longer form, more thoughtful, content is now a niche within that niche.
Requests for advice about getting a camera from my family or friends that even 5-7 years ago were still pretty frequent have now dwindled to absolutely nil. This could be because of the terrible advice I gave them but that is another matter and I'm sure they would all be happy with those Sigma DP2-Ms if only they concentrated on technique a bit more 🙂 
I'm not advocating what Panasonic have done with leaving the compact market but I do understand it.
Camera manufacturers did themselves absolutely no favours in terms of compact cameras by the obsession they all shared over not giving cameras like the GX80, RX100, LX100 etc etc a microphone input.