Leaderboard

You don't need the upper part, its A7siii.

I once worked at a production house that produced TV movies for American TV. There was a guy there whose job was to go through the scripts and change things to make it cheaper. Replace expensive aspects of the story with cheaper things that had the same story progression, change the locations of two or more scenes to be the same location, etc. Pretty effective in lowering the budgets.

The 70-300 seems especially good with dual IBIS. I've seen some really decent footage. It's the only telephoto lens I'd consider. I'd much rather have it because you get an extra 100mm and only lose a stop over the 70 200 F4. That's an easy tradeoff; also, it's a bit lighter. I've heard good things about it terms of IQ, but apparently it's rather heavy for what it is.

Maybe but not really… 5 years, Nikon film cameras, 2 in 5 years, followed by Nikon D2x I think it was until the D3 came out. Stuck with those until the S model came out as it was quantifiably better. But then, around 2011/2012, getting a little fed up with lugging around 2 huge/heavy units when paired with the 24-70 and 70-200, - something like 2.5 and 3kg each (?) so when the Fuji X Pro-1 came out, jumped to that small, lightweight, prime based system. But then, every couple of years, Fuji did keep moving their game forward and I was also moving into video so needed more specific gear than my stills-orientated set up. XT3 was my pinnacle of Fuji and was great for stills but less so for video with no IBIS and limited stabilised lenses so during the Covid era, took a leap of faith into L Mount and full-frame with the S5. Wrestled with it ever since, (S5 AF wasn’t good enough for my needs, S1R great for stills but didn’t have the video spec, S1H has been great but iffy AF and S5ii great for video, but don’t like it for stills) never managing to find the right balance of; types of bodies, number of bodies, types and number of lenses…for my very specific niche in the market which is offering a 100% stills service at the same time as a 100% video one. As a one man band. There are of course many ways a thing can be done, but some are better than others and there is no such thing as a ‘right’ way, only the way that works best for us as individuals. Plus no manual or training so I have very much had to teach myself through trial and error and that has meant trying stuff/kit/combos that have not worked or not worked as well as I hoped. We are now at that point however where the tools exist. For me there is no more, “if only my cameras could shoot at 1600 iso”, then 3200, then 6400, or “I wish I had IBIS”, or 4K 50p internally or… spec-wise, I am more than done and I don’t know but I could make maybe 10+ different cameras work these days? For me, it’s no longer chasing anything I NEED, simply what I WANT and what I want, is quite simple and that is… A more compact set up that covers all my needs without compromise (at least anything significant) and is more enjoyable to use. To that end, Canon have the best option for me, a bit heavier than I’d like, but I could live with that, but without trade in, it’s an 18k investment and I don’t have it and even if I did, that would be a BIG commitment. So musing/fantasy aside, I have to scrap that non-starter! Sticking with what I had was not an option. Too big, too heavy, great for video, less so for stills, not enjoyable to use. Back to Nikon for stills with adapted Tamron lenses and it ticks every single box. My only debate is whether I continue with L Mount for video, which is great and I love it, but am I not better off trading 2 bodies and 2 lenses for 1 body and 1 lens to have everything in the same system, ie 100% Nikon? I think probably yes but not if that 3rd body was a Z9 because that would be overkill. Z8 maybe… Z6ii no because it’s not as good as my Panny S5ii never mind my S1H so any change has to be at least sideways, if not forwards…and I suspect the Z6iii will be better than the S5ii…and if it is, I will almost certainly go that route, but not because it’s simply better as a camera, but because it makes more overall sense as part of a total system. And part of me hopes it isn’t so I can stick with L Mount for video as I am not exactly trying to flip for the sake of something that might be better, ie, grass greener elsewhere, but only if it actually is!

Yes, the 70-300mm is a nice "little" zoom. I have both the 70-300mm and the 70-200mm S Pro f2.8. The 70-300mm is sharp across all focal lengths, maybe a bit softer at 300mm but still very good. The difference with the 70-200mm F4 is not so huge since the S cameras have excellent low light performances. The 70-200mm S Pro f2.8 is a different beast. Yes, it's sharp, but the rendering is outstanding, maybe because of the implication of Leica (or not), one of the best lens I own with the 24-70mm and 50mm S Pro.

I think the choice for the FX3 was the second native ISO of 12,800. That is two stops more than the Sony Venice's native ISO. The RED Raptor may be pretty usable at 6400 iso but the FX3 is still a stop above that. The less light you need the quicker you get it done. I have done projects using almost all natural lighting and it is so much quicker in almost everyway.

Yes, FAR too slow. The 70-200 f4 is borderline as it is, plus zero requirement for anything longer than 200mm and 150 would be enough for my needs and that is why I have the 70-200 f4 which is under 1kg, not much heavier than that 70-300 but nowhere near the size & weight of the f2.8’s I’m not looking for anything else in L Mount as I have all I need and it’s simply a question of whether I carry on with L Mount at all for my video needs. That’s the only fence I am currently on and I’m just sitting on it right now waiting on news on the Nikon Z6iii as that is now the pivot point.

To me the camera on the ronin is a Sony and I would guess is A7s III

I've heard this called "Availableism". Using what's available to you to determine what's in the story. It's something that has been done since the beginning of cinema really. The advantages over writing whatever then spending money to obtain those things is that it's cheaper. You use what you have around you. The other advantage is that it can be about a certain subculture and made by the people in that subculture giving it an "authenticity" I suppose. This is a good approach I've used a lot producing short art videos. In the mid '90s I applied for an arts grant for a feature length video (FLV) to be shot in S-VHS, using this exact method. I had the themes figured out and the cast, who were playing characters based on themselves, a skeleton of a story but no details figured out. This would be done with the workshopping as we went. No script but notes about what would happen in the scene and how it would end. The actors improvising. Anyway, the arts grant jury were all traditional film people and they thought this approach was sloppy and likely to fail. They were so used to the cost of shooting film determining the level of planning needed (in those days there was a big divide between video art and film art,). I didn't get the grant (But I'm not bitter... Anymore.) I ended up making it as a short video out of my own pocket a year later having wasted all that time and effort in the application that could have gone into just making the thing a year earlier.

I doubt if there is any combo I have not considered! Maybe some are reading too much into this, but I am more than happy with the direction things are taking. I like L Mount for video but not for stills. The lenses Canon offer do not offer anything over what anyone else offers other than the hugely expensive and heavy 28-70 f2 and the new 24-105 f2.8 ie, the only lenses from Canon that interest me are these RF lenses and these of course are not L or Z Mount compatible. These are examples of >1kg lenses I WOULD give a pass to because with a pair of R3’s would give me everything I need in a 2 body, 2 lens combo. Arguably, Nikon could with a Z8 plus the Tamron 20-40 and an R9 with the Tamron 35-150, but the latter is back up to being a 2.7kg combo which is too much. L Mount… For the video side, great, but until something comes along to replace the S1R, the bodies don’t exist and nor do the lenses. OK, at the wider end they do, but it’s the longer end where it does not and it’s actually a case of needing MORE lenses and needing more swaps to make it work as the last 2 years have proved to me. And whilst I have not tried every combo, I have most viable options and there have been too many compromises. As always, for me and my specific needs.

I'm pretty sure there are only 4 types of cameras: Movie cameras: these are what they use to make movies Big cameras, which are used by "professional photographers" or rich tourists Cameras, which are used by normal tourists use to take photos and phones, which are used by adults to take photos of the family: or by millennials when they're awake and have left the house: There is another type of camera though. When you take any camera and point it at yourself in public, you instantly turn into a narcissist and the size of the camera no longer fits into the above categories, but is an indicator of how much better you are than everyone else:

Ambient temperature was 30C/86F which isn't a real stress-test but is better than the stupid people that test these things practically in the freezer, either to game the results because they're dishonest or because they're too stupid to realise that there are warm countries on earth too.