Leaderboard

Yep, I'm a (each time less) "enthusiast" 🙂 If this is my work, for sure would be using FF too. But just want to get good images, document family and trips. And when you're travelling and want to shoot on streets, nothing better than a "rangefinder" - noboy cares. You pull a DSLRish camera, everyone start to notice and get grumpy. And is perfect to record concerts, never was barred by security with a GX. Already said that a GX10 with a decent EVF, 10 bit video (even with 30 min limit) and PDAF would be a perfect camera for me. But...each day becomes more clear that m43 for Panny looks like GH and (maybe) a G9 sucessor. No more GXs. For OM Digital, god only knows. Lenses - only big Pro ones. All that I don't want. Waiting for my X-S20, arrives in a 2 or 3 weeks. Not rangefinderesque, but small enough to be perceived as a P&S. Solved or mitigate most of the problems that I have with the X-S10 (horrendous battery life, better af, better IBIS, with 10-bit I finally could try F-log), but kept one of the worst problems, common to all Fuji: no old school object tracking in video. In which Sony is very good. Than Sony releases a rangefinderesque camera with better ergos, amazing AF, probably the same sensor in a Bayer version...for sure not now, but in the future, could make me switch. Still hoping that Fuji hire some Olympus guy for IBIS and some Sony guys for AF, but is just hope.

Sony cameras have always overheated. I think it might be considered a feature at this point But I hear Panasonic's next camera is going to have a defrost setting for raw video and a popcorn button. Jiffy Pop in beautiful 6K anamorphic.

"Tascam has announced the DR-10L Pro, this is the newest addition to the DR-10L family. While the Pro version maintains a similar form factor and functionality, it adds the ability to record in 32-Bit Float and offers Atomos Wireless Time-Code-Sync Support." https://www.newsshooter.com/2023/07/06/tascam-dr-10l-pro-with-32-bit-float-recording-timecode-support/ Battery life has gone up from 10.5hrs to 24.5hrs (based on two AAA lithium batteries) Has a high-visibility OLED display, with lots of physical menu buttons for navigation. Has a headphone output so you can monitor the audio before/during/after recordings. Has an app for Android and iOS phones, you can add metadata (including project name, scene name, and take number) to the audio file. The app also gives you visual confirmation of the input audio with a waveform display over time. You can name each DR10L Pro via the app, for easy identification. The DR10L can now take MicroSD cards sizes up to a massive 512GB. (previous limit was 32GB) Comes with a free copy of iZotope RX Elements. Available now to preorder: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1773575-REG/tascam_dr_10l_pro_personal_recorder.html

I dunno. I honestly think that the same techniques and skill they were applying to work within the parameters of the medium then would have been adapted and transferred to work within the parameters of the new medium now. Of course, I'm not saying it doesn't look good. Far from it actually. But, in my opinion, its because they are proper productions and, again, its the skills of everyone and everything from the back of the lens forwards that is making the biggest contribution to that. In those terms, and its only my opinion of course, the difference made by what is behind the lens capturing the image is almost negligible compared to the difference that is made in what is coming into it. I've shot absolutely horrible looking stuff on both film and digital so I should know 😉

I'm also often impressed when I see something shot on film, but in addition to that, I'm often impressed by something that I think is shot on film, but when I look it up I see it was shot on something like an F35, which shot 1080p and was introduced in 2008. Often the things I see from pre-Alexa digital cameras are on TV shows, where they wouldn't have had the budget for a colourist to dedicate themselves to optimising every shot, so a lot of the look must have been from the camera. Also, and to partly counter what @BTM_Pix said about it being a team effort, sometimes the shot that is more impressive will be an external shot in full sun, which is something that most of us are much closer than 499 people away from being able to re-create. This is why I've turned my attention to colour grading - the camera companies are no longer trying to create the kind of images we're actually chasing. So it's either shoot on film or you're on your own.

Just to pick one example that struck me recently, The American Friend, Wim Wenders, 1977 It's also interesting to consider documentary. The Maysles brothers were early proponents of cinema verite in the US (or direct cinema, or run and gun you could call it!) So it would have been one of them with a 16mm camera and a sound recordist. Here's Gimme Shelter (1970): If you're interested in cinema (as opposed to endless franchise regurgitations) then the Criterion Channel is incredible. Non-US users can Google how to sign up.

Yes, but if that movie had been shot on a digital camera it probably wouldn't have looked as nice. I watch a lot of old movies on the Criterion Channel and am regularly impressed by how good film looked.

Indeed, it is far too much to expect actors to give their best possible acting performances and to operate the camera too

I'm impressed too after having watched some of those same films on standard definition TV years ago. The new scans of the old films are amazing. I was working on a project recently where I was wanting a 1960s and '70s film look applied in post. At first I was looking at adding grain, scratches and instability(gate weave) but then realized, the look of old films now is of high quality scans of film so scratches and instability are no longer what people associate with old films.

But what about the stills from Gimme Shelter, above? "Albert ran the camera, shooting his subjects with a zoom lens from across the room; David did the sound" https://www.rogerebert.com/mzs/cameras-keep-rolling-at-maysles-films That wasn't 500 people, if was 2, one of whom had a camera that shot film. If it had been a C300 or whatever, the documentary would be just as interesting, but it wouldn't look as good in my view. We should celebrate the look(s) of film, and try to recapture some of the magic that has been lost in the gradual enshittification of colour that has transpired over the last 10 years. I blame log for this btw!

They are now!!! But back when I was a serious running (twice a day running training! Every day, all year round) then I think in my city (Auckland, the biggest by far in all of NZ) we only had one ultramarathon each year! It's only in the last 10-ish-ish years that ultramarathons have seen their massive boom in popularity.

Back at the start of the covid era I worked on a major tv advertising campaign, bankrolled by the govt with oodles of cash to raise awareness about covid, with a top notch tv advertising agency running the show, with top flight director / DoP / etc, skilled crew of a 1st AC (and all the other ACs) and a Gaffer (with all their LX Assists) and full size lighting truck, and an Art Department, video village, etc etc... oh, and me of course! 😉 Doing sound. Of course an ARRI Alexa was used. But how they did they shoot it? With as much emphasis on "natural looking" lighting (even if there were a dozen lights used in the process of crafting that look!), and in absolutely every single case the talent (big name famous celebrities/personalities/sportspeople) would always be "holding the camera" (of course it's impossible for them to hold this big heavy ARRI! So they'd just have their hand on the edge of the mattebox, and both the talent and Camera Op would be carefully timing their movements to stay in sync with each other, this might take a few goes). Why was this done? To make the videos look as "authentic" as possible, like they're just causally filming something themselves to be sharing personally with you the viewer.

If you google the net worth of family then they could make a decent fist of buying a fair chunk of Arri in its entirety let alone one of their cameras 😉

I have seen various snippets over the years of influencers talking about the craft and lots of them have a far more developed sense of things than you'd imagine. Not all of them of course, but definitely a lot of them. One of the things they're often very aware of is the aesthetic of various types of production. In todays terms, things shot on a phone have a certain look that tends to be viewed as more authentic and less produced. If you're making content that plays better if your viewers think that things are unplanned and 'real' then this aesthetic would help that, and if you want to appear as a professional authoritative source then maybe some nice lighting and shallower DOF would suit better. As a few examples, Gerald Undone seems more like an authority figure with a nice studio setup rather than shooting on a phone while unboxing things on his floor, Chefs that want to be taken seriously have professional looking kitchens and have nice lighting and cameras, but not everyone wants to look professional. A bit of searching revealed this channel - a kids show that looks like it's shot on a smartphone. https://www.youtube.com/@KidsDianaShow/about BUT, the channel has 112M subs and 93 BILLION views! I have no idea if they do paid content but the YT ad revenue alone would probably buy them an Alexa. I suspect part of their allure is that the content sort-of looks like it was made by the kids themselves. Maybe it is, and maybe there's an entire production team, but the aesthetic is deliberate. Cinematographers choose lenses deliberately because they're professionals, you'd be crazy if you thought that professional YouTubers weren't aware of the difference between filming on a smartphone vs a cinema camera 🙂

I would assume - for most influencers the phone is good enough. I remember seeing some person's home tour - may it was on queer eye (can't remember) and they setup an area because he was an "influencer" - all they had was a ringlight with phone mount.... and I thought... well... record, edit and throw it on the platform - done.

That's why any videographer should buy a Sony FX30/FX3/FX6 instead of the A7 series or a6x00 series

There were over 500 people involved in the creation of Born On The Fourth Of July. It was nominated for 8 academy awards. The writer, director, editor, cinematographer, composer and sound department have all won at least one academy award. The actual camera and film stock only captured the end result of the direction production design, lighting, composition and performance of what was in front of it. As such, it was the least influential aspect of what you were watching. Resolution matters, "colour science" matters but being realistic matters most of all. Waft the same camera loaded with the same film stock around without any of what they had in front of it and it will look as shit as if you did it with whatever the next great thing in cameras is. We've all got the means now to capture a great image but still lack everything that goes into creating that image in the first place. In this case, what we would be lacking would be the other 499 people.

The Barkely Marathons though is a bit like having a 100m race and saying "a requirement of the race is that you must be finished in under 9.7 seconds", of course only very very few athletes would ever be able to "complete" this race. I feel that's a bit of what The Barkely Marathons has done, to make it artificially even harder. As neither the distance or the terrain is outrageously super exceptionally hard when you compare it to some of the hardest ever off road ultra marathons there are in the world. It is the artificially extra very low time constraint (along with all the other weird things they do) which exist to great "the legend" which is The Barkely Marathons.

Plenty of us here need to be able to record for an hour or three while recording interviews / documentaries / conferences / weddings / etc

If they overheat then they're not for influencers... The best way to shorten your record times is to: Develop script & storyboard Shoot in controlled situations Create the excitement deliberately Most influencers, except the serious ones that have mature and controlled processes, just setup crazy situations and then see what happens, recording the whole time, then edit it down. If it overheats, it'll be yet another floater in the camera specs pool, along with cameras without wide angle lenses, selfie screens, external audio inputs, etc etc.

Even watching a movie trailer on YT, then watching "cinematic" videos on YT will show, very clearly, that despite the movie trailers being right there, just a few clicks away, most online film-makers are in a parallel universe. I understand that not everyone wants "cinematic" results, and that's fine, but it's just incredible that those who do are so far from the mark and it's so obvious. Maybe we're in a post-truth moving image design world?? 😂😂😂

I swear this forum won’t be satisfied until everyone is shooting on Flip Cams. Get serious, or don’t, and just use your phone.

49 people?? That's WAY more than the Barkely Marathons... only 17 people have finished that since 1989 😉 (For anyone not familiar, the Barkely Marathons is essentially what a cross country race would be in hell, and was specifically designed so that high-achievers would be able to experience failure.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barkley_Marathons) Seriously though, the two races couldn't be more different, how fun. I've never needed to do crazy things to find the limits of myself as a human being - just watching anything shot on film and then trying to colour grading your home video footage to match will show you your limits in about an hour!

And good parts of the body, judging from the first image leaks in Sonyalpharumors. Sony are completely tools for me, zero feeling. But this one get my attention - a "rangefinder" body (which looks like, with the looking death of the GX line by Panasonic, and the rumors that there will not be a X-E5 from Fuji, will be the only one in the market, together with the A7C), good AF, dual dials (finally)...

WHOOPS!! Yes indeed, that's obviously one very very big typo.