Leaderboard

This is what happened and they asked for the Nisi ND’s because they’d seen a video on YouTube, but the guy in the store (shoots weddings on Saturday’s) reckoned the Urth’s were just as good and anyway, in Adobe Premiere, you can easily remove the color cast. Pretty sure that’s how they rolled on this. It was also the camera store guys tip re. saving money and spending that on donuts.

I personally disagree that it was marketing, because we are in a fishbowl where we "affordable cine camera enthusiasts" are seeing saturation coverage on it. But outside of that world, hardly anyone knows that - and that would actually be Gareth's and Oren's point, that hopefully no-one would know any better. Other films don't attract press for the camera they shot on because they're shot on an Alexa or maybe a Venice, and that's not news. There is also the fact that the film did really badly, so at best it can be seen as a failed experiment. I think Gareth is just a guy that came up using affordable cameras and After Effects and he wanted to get back to that to some degree after getting somewhat reamed by the Disney machine on Rogue One. It also seems like a pretty compelling story that he went on holiday to all those locations and took the FX3 with him, and he probably just really liked using the camera. Then he had a bunch of camera techs who were able to solve all the problems for him of making it usable in production for a feature of that scale.

Yep and BTS filming glasses rather than sticking a Go Pro on your chest or hot shoe is now a thing. Progress.

Yep, as do a few others here. Considering it's size and weight, it's performance is nuts on FF cameras such as the S5ii and S1H. Having said that, I prefer it's bigger, but still compact brother, the 28-70mm f2.8 OK, it's an equivalent DOF of f4 on a FF camera (but still f2.8 for light gathering) and 27-75mm focal range. I don't think any lens on the G9ii can compete with that and stick this lens on a body such as the XS20 and you have a superb compact set up for photo and video. Compared with those f2.8 4/3rds zooms, they have an equivalent DOF of f5.6 with sensors less good in low light. Take my preferred option of the FF Sigma 28-70 and stick that on the Fuji XS20 and that makes for an exceedingly interesting combo as you now have a focal range of 42-105mm which for me, is 90%+ of where I live. It depends on your use case of course, but I personally would use...and did use, the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 for certain day light tasks, but really only liked the f1.7 and f1.2 lenses. Because I like me a bit of shallow DOF. Not ridiculous razor thin, but around the f2.8 mark using less than 75mm FF equiv lenses and OK with f4 above. Distance to subject and all that... There's always some kind of trade off somewhere...

Yes, especially as some full-frame cameras (e.g. S1, S5, S5ii, S1H, a7 IV, a7C II) have an APS-C crop in 4k50/60p, so it's a sensible video lens option for those in addition to native APS-C cameras. I think MrSMW uses it sometimes on his L-mount cameras?

That's what I have been saying all along! I reckon "marketing reasons" was a big factor. Just like why people sometimes choose to "shoot on an iPhone" for a project, to promote it like this. Would any of us be talking about this film for 6+ pages if he'd used a FX6?? (or FX9) Good point. The FX6 was incredibly new then. And although the FX6 was announced a few months earlier than the FX3, the demand for the FX6 was white hot. It took a very long time until you could easily source a FX6, especially a large number of them like Gareth needed. Yet the Sony FX3 from basically day one you could walk into any camera retail store and grab a couple off the shelf. Many of us do underestimate just how very long pre-production takes on these big productions, they'd have long before been running tests on their cameras before they started shooting. So they needed the cameras ready and available to buy way back then.

I'm saying "in the real world" as shorthand for saying in a professional setting working with and for others on a filming production. Of course, if it is just for your own personal pleasure, then just use whatever warms your heart! Even the Barbie Doll Camera could be the right choice for you! Nice!! Start up your own thread @QuickHitRecord to track your Scarlet MX journey? Would be fascinating to follow. Why was this so difficult and expensive? Just need a setup for V lock to lemo power ? Such as: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1597736-REG/indipro_tools_vmrdk_v_mount_plate_with_15mm.html https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1470774-REG/hedbox_unix_0b_v_mount_adapter_power.html Interesting... more prone to failure than the Scarlet-X?? That's curious Isn't the Dragon sensor a bit better at low light? As well as a stop more dynamic range? Thought Dragon also has more naturally accurate colors and better skin tones? Cheers for that detailed analysis! I would have thought the newer DSMC2 body of the RED Raven vs the older DSMC1 makes it a slam dank case for the RED Raven (if they're both at the same price. Unless you want PL lenses, which the Raven can't handle. Which to be fair, is by itself a strong argument against the RED Raven) That is just begging to be reversed engineered.... ! Make your own DSMC2 I/O module. Even though they've both got "the same MX sensor" I've heard others who prefer the RED ONE as well. Perhaps all that extra weight and processing power gives it a little extra magical something?

It was marketing. If it was shot on FX6 there would be zero press, but look at the social media frenzy that this film is enjoying - including this thread. There are normally multiple feature films released per day, but how much press are you reading on photography / videography websites about any of the others? https://www.statista.com/statistics/187122/movie-releases-in-north-america-since-2001/

I really like the first one. Here are two other proposals.

Such a shame the Varicam LT never took off. It really is an incredible cost/performance camera. Thought I guess it just sat in that awkward place between smaller and bigger projects.

I have been considering the Scarlet as well. I do prefer the Epic image. But Scarlet's are so cheap these days.

I just bought a Scarlet-X that I am looking forward to working with. So that's my answer to the question posed in this thread. I already had lenses, batteries, and a monitor, so I purchased: Scarlet-X brain with mini mag side module with dual fan replacement 2.0 (important!) 2x 480GB mini mags Side grip Red Pro top cheese plate Red aluminum EF mount V-mount battery solution (pretty difficult to find at a workable price!) Nitze top handle and monitor mount All in all, it set me back just under $3K. I did a lot of research on the other legacy Red cameras before making this purchase. The Epic-X brains seem prone to failure. The Dragon-upgraded Epics and Scarlets have three OLPFs to choose from: Low Light (which is basically the same as the OLPF in front of the MX sensors and offers clean shadows but more limited highlights), Skintone/Highlight (nice highlight capture but noisy shadows above ISO 200), and the "Standard" OLPF which seems to fall somewhere in between the two extremes. Ultimately, I decided that clean shadows were more important to me than extra highlight range so I opted for the older MX sensor/OLPF. Regarding crop, the more budget-friendly Scarlet-Xs are in the same boat as the Raven. The max resolution (disregarding the 12fps at 5K) on the Scarlet-X has a 1.14x crop when compared to 3perf Super35 film while he Raven has a 1.12x crop but is limited to a wider aspect ratio at that resolution. So they are pretty close in this regard. One thing to consider is that the Raven requires the ~$1K IO module if you want to plug a non-Red monitor into it, while the Scarlet comes with both SDI and HDMI ports standard. This pushed me over the edge and I decided to go with the older camera. I did some side by side shots of the Scarlet-X with my Red One MX and have to say that I slightly prefer the image from the older camera (which is softer, cooler, and less contrasty). My original plan was to sell the R1MX, but now I'm having second thoughts.

Look around what are people local to you shooting with? Most likely they're using Sony FX6 (or perhaps FX9) bodies. So just follow the herd and do the same. But there are pockets of local groups of people around which have gone in another direction, such as they're mainly using Canon C500mk2 for documentary / corporates / etc which have a reasonable budget. Often all it takes is just a few key leaders or production companies in that local region to go together down a certain path, and the whole local region follows them, and there isn't a single Sony camera in sight. However, if you are working purely for yourself / in house, then it doesn't matter what brand or camera model you choose! But if you are working for others, then following what others use matters a lot. Had a friend who purchased the Sony FS7 right when it was released, did pretty well working with that, and he got to a point that he felt like he was "outgrowing the FS7" and had the money to buy something better. By this point in time the ARRI ALEXA Mini had been out for a couple of years, had proven itself, and no longer did you have crazy insane long wait list times if you wanted to buy one himself. But a ALEXA Mini was way outside is budget range. So what is the natural upgrade from a FS7? The F5/F55 are "upgrades", but are more similar than different. Definitely not what he was seeking. What then? He settled upon the Panasonic Varicam LT, which had recently been released (came out the year after the ARRI ALEXA Mini). He sold his Sony FS7 to raise extra funds, with his extra saved up money, he purchased a brand new Panasonic Varicam LT. (but he only got the Varicam after very extensively testing it, renting and borrowing it from others. Not just to run tests on it, but to use it on real world productions too. I worked on a couple of those productions which he shot with a Varicam LT, prior to him buying his own. He really did very very thoroughly all of his homework before settling on a new camera to buy) Seems like a rational decision. Was the next step up in price (over double the price of a FS7) and quality from a FS7. Has much better low light performance, & much better color science than the FS7. Plus did timecode and raw better than the FS7. In a way, the Varicam LT was even "better" than the ALEXA Mini, with better slow motion, better low light, better audio, and true 4K. (only downsides being it is bigger/heavier than a Mini, and it is "not an ARRI") Well, what seemed like a great idea on paper, in reality was one of his worst financial decisions. Because for the higher end jobs above the FS7 level, then usually they only want an ARRI camera. He's not landing the higher end jobs with the Varicam LT. (plus ARRI cameras are cheaper than you think, relative to the total cost of a project. It doesn't make sense for them to pinch pennies and settle for the cheaper Varicam LT) Thus he wasn't earning any extra money due to spending almost double the FS7 amount on a new Varicam LT camera. But it was even worse than this, the Panasonic Varicam LT was losing him money. Because the bread and butter FS7 jobs were no longer hiring him as much, as they don't want to go with some weirdly different new camera, they want the tried and trusted Sony FS7 which all their other shooters use and slots perfectly into their workflow and productions. Owning the Panasonic Varicam LT was a lose-lose situation for him. Quite sad really, even though on paper the Varicam LT was undeniably a much "better" camera than a Sony FS7 (even "better" than an ARRI ALEXA Mini in a fair few ways as well).

Nikon Zf for me. If anything because it gives people like me who are already in the Nikon ecosystem a good body upgrade that isn’t Z9-price-level. Internal 10 bit, better AF, built in waveform, really exactly what I’m wanting.

Colors looked like a overly graded GH1, muddy bloody hell. I had to stop the video after the 1st half. Why? Please don't ask. Too many things.😅 But thanks for posting, so we can reflect on it.