Leaderboard

I think the opposite. Panasonic was a very known brand in the VHS times - their camcorders were some of the best, their VHS recorders sold millions of units. Could not be recognized as a stills camera company, but as a video brand, was on pair with Sony (at least here in South America). Lumix appeared with their point & shoot cameras. Is like Sony changing their logo in front of the cameras to "Cybershot" instead of Sony. Every non-camera person that ever saw me with a Lumix always ask "what brand is this, never heard", I say "It's made by Panasonic" and immediately people make a face of "oh, THIS i know".

Nikon / Vimeo have joined up to hand out $30k funding each to lucky filmmakers. https://vimeo.com/shortfilmgrant?utm_source=MKT&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=en_CA-vimeo-grant-3-12-2025&utm_content=btn&utm_term=ApplyNow&ET_CID=5558147&ET_RID=1080819395 You get the use of a Nikon Z8, Z9 or RED cameras too. Will be interested to see what comes out of this.

I can tell why he doesn't shoot now.

They are pretty silly not to have a reduced rolling shutter 24p mode straight off the bat to avoid the bad publicity. Just run the sensor in the 6K 48p mode with 1/48 shutter and conform in-camera to 24p. Job's a good-un.

I can't find where it was presented as "cinematic storytelling", could you point that out to us? When you see a latitude or color test video on Youtube, do you take that as proof that "the next wave of cinematic storytelling" will now be models standing still holding color charts?

Crazy thing is that your friends' co-workers probably think he is a snob shooting with his fancy DSLR while they're shooting with their iPhones. I actually have a friend that shot a feature film on a t3i that got distribution and was released in Wal-Marts.

Don't get me wrong, I agree wholeheartedly. I love cameras and want to try them all. But I am fairly poor, so I need to only have what I need. So, for me, as a hobbyist, wannabe, narrative filmmaker, I can only justify so much. That said... I have been itching to try something new. Have been thinking about looking at cameras and their picture profiles like different film stocks as opposed to shooting Log and creating a look in post. I suppose the smartest path would be Fuji for that endeavor.

To some extent I disagree. As a hobbyist I am always wanting to try something different - not being constrained by what I need to do. And, inevitably, that gets me thinking about what I need to buy to do it. Ok, yes, it isn’t possible to “justify” it but my cupboard tends to fill up with bits and pieces I used (probably badly) once. As a hobby it’s fun to play and having toys make playtime so much more fun. But you are correct, it isn’t justified. I’ll stop…

I'm a long-time Canon shooter and my next camera will probably be an R5C or R5 mk2. That said my on-going workhorse camera is an FS7 because it gives me work. Logic would dictate I get an FX3/FX6 but I'm just not a fan of the camera specs / price ratio in 2025: No 6K/8K, No open gate, No RAW, No EVF etc.. with a price tag here in Europe still at 4500€ for FX3. Sony's dominance comes at a price, to me they are the overpriced and under spec'd cameras today.

2 Lumix S5mk2 x2 for work. Often one on a tripod connected to sound filming for hours and the other doing B-roll, interviews and photos. Both being the same makes editing easier and quicker.

Canon never would've priced the C70 that low but they probably should've. By 2020 the winds were already changing in the camera space, whether it was mirrorless or video/cinema cameras. People were a lot less willing to pay the Canon tax when everyone else started releasing cameras with everything they could put into them for the same price (or sometimes less.) ESPECIALLY when it came to full frame and how the market was swinging in that direction. The choice is easier if you were already a Canon or Sony shooter, but in late 2020 if you're looking to purchase a camera and aren't already a loyal Canon or Sony shooter, I think the FX6 probably won out for most people. And then when the FX3 came out, if you hadn't jumped on either the C70 or the FX6, you had a compelling option for even less money WITH a upgrade roadmap to the FX6 right there for when/if you decided to upgrade. Nevermind when then the FX30 came out, adding another path you could take to get to an FX6. The C70 had a much pricier roadmap should you ever wanted to upgrade. I don't personally even like the image coming out of the Sony cameras. The Canon C70, in my opinion, has a much nicer image. But I'd still have gone Sony if I had to choose. As a tool it just made sense and was the direction the wind was blowing. Plus I know so many more people shooting with Sony, which would have made it easier to collaborate. All of my friends who work for major sports leagues and sports franchises have switched to Sony for both video and photo. I'm talking people who work for WWE, AEW, the UFC, the NBA, the Boston Celtics, etc. Ten years ago they were all Canon. Canon still wins with brand recognition. If you ask most folks to name a camera company Canon will still be the first one most people name. And if you look at your normal brick and mortar store, like Best Buy here in the United States, you'll see their best selling camera is the Canon EOS Rebel T7, a seven year old DSLR. At Walmart it's the EOS Rebel T100, another seven year old DSLR. But on the professional end Canon is losing ground and has been for a while. I'll ask him, but my honest guess is he's expected to provide his own camera and is using what he had. If it's what he had, or if it's what he could afford, I get why he uses it over his phone. He can still get decent shallow DOF when doing interviews, and good enough quality footage. After all, Vermont is a very small television market! It was still funny though; it feels weird to have so much nicer equipment to film my rasslin' events with than the local NBC affiliate uses to cover our event! But when people see it at home I don't think they really care what camera they used or if the audio sucks, as long as it's in focus and the sound is audible. With the way the journalism industry has collapsed he's probably not in a position to be able to purchase a nicer camera. Which is a bummer.

Fuji avoiding FF and sitting both sides seems like a good call to me also. I have often thought about going back to them for cropped video and GFX stills.

Late last year I saw Goodfellas projected on 35mm film. Absolutely incredible movie. I've been going back and watching more classics, some that I've seen a long time ago and some I've never seen. Lots to watch and enjoy if you zoom out and watch the best from the entire catalogue of cinema history.

Yep, he uses a T3i and a cheap MOVO wireless mic (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1542503-REG/movo_photo_wmx_1_2_4ghz_wireless_lavalier.html) right into the camera. Budgets for local news have been cut all over the country; lots of reporters use their cellphones or their own cameras now. When I first did ENG work I was the camera guy that worked with the reporter and used professional equipment provided by the station. Now they all do it themselves for most stories, and only use the professional equipment (which is also mostly ancient) for major stories/press conferences/live feeds. The Panny DVX200 was pretty ubiquitous up here as far as station cameras were concerned but those all went away and now my bud uses a T3i and a $40 wireless mic system haha. Wild times. When using the C100 mk2 recently I fell in love again with the body design and, honestly, the image looks good upscaled to 4K. I could very easily take three of those bodies and do my multicam work with them, upscale it to 4K and it'd be fine. Most people wouldn't notice or care. There was some voodoo going on, too, when it comes to that codec. 8-bit at 28Mb/s or whatever it was shouldn't have been as thick as it was, but you could do some pretty heavy color grading on such a small file. The only thing that I would miss is IBIS, but with a body like that it is less of an issue. I know sites like Lensrentals sell them used for under $700 now, and you could probably find them even cheaper on eBay if you wanted to risk getting something that had no warranty, exchange, etc. It's a testament to the kind of workhorse that camera is that there are so many out there still going strong all these years later.

I mean even iPhone could achieve 12 stops! with NR.

So meanwhile let's look at what that means in the real world away from pixel peeping tests and number of stops. 14.2 stops so you can get an unusably bad image 5 stops under exposed? Or does it have a genuinely big creative impact / image quality benefit. After all it is "class leading above all other mirrorless cameras" so it must be pretty special and not just 1% better dynamic range than a 3 year old Nikon Z9, right? And just because it has 1% more "test setup" dynamic range does not make it a better mirrorless camera than the Nikon Z8, because it's a lot more expensive than one for a start and with a far worse range of native lenses, and a less flexible system mount. I do like the sRAW codec for 4K/60p, smaller file sizes, huge EVF, and the body design is a decent evolution from the original. But the DR and C-LOG2... Meh. Many more important things to consider overall like the system mount, codecs, handling, prices used and new, and so on.

One topic I find missing is discussion of the creative aspects of our own film-making. Maybe there are too few people shooting things, or too few that are willing/able to share, but to me this is the only topic worth discussing. We all know that the pros can take most equipment and create great images from them, proving that creativity and skills are far more important than equipment, yet the discussions focus on the equipment, the industry politics, the changing media landscape, and everything except what matters - the skills. As much as there are many reasons to hate on other social media platforms, there are many places out there where people post their own work and discuss it on both technical and non-technical levels, creating an opportunity for constructive feedback and creative growth.

I'll quite often link to your past content when it's relevant, for instance when I talk about how Nikon was better in the past at video than people normally give them credit for, I'll link to your D5200 coverage (it's what made me get an D5200 back then!), or even the D750 review. Maybe invite people to do guest blog posts? I'm saddened that all of the facebook group discussions are behind a Walled Garden, thus in the long run they're doomed to an extremely high risk of being lost to the mists of time. https://justapedia.org/wiki/Walled_garden_(technology) Vs what's out in the open here on forums such as this, are more likely to saved by Archive.org and similar. Also searching social media posts is horrible, while searching forum posts via Google is still somewhat quite good. 100%, I'd love to see more of this. It's one of the reasons I really like watching Tin House Studio, even though I'm not working in the photography industry but in a totally different niche, a lot of the business talk concepts he discusses are largely transferable to any other niche that's also an artistic field / freelancer. https://www.youtube.com/@TinHouseStudioUK

Yes, even with the adapters and speedboosters the wides are pretty compact. I would like to do a shootout with all the various Vivitars and find the best ones. I just recently discovered the older Soligor lenses built by Tokina as well. All f/2. And yes, S1Rii has Prores in all the different crop modes I believe.

I'd love a monthly "challenge" (as long as it isn't a competition) to inspire the creativity of members. Perhaps the one suggesting the theme could change monthly too, with the previous month's suggester choosing the next month's suggester along with the suggestion!

I think you're onto something. Getting people out of pixel peeping and into actually making (and sharing) stuff is an unmet need. Think about all of the hobbyists who caught in a cycle of constant upgrading and never shoot anything other than their cat or their significant other making coffee. I know that EOSHD has done this at least once in the past. DVXuser used to do it too. A couple of brainstorms that I may have shared before: 1) A monthly challenge that imposes a creative limitation each time (i.e. shoot everything at f/8; use only natural light; shoot in standard definition; shoot something in the style of Wes Anderson; use a pre-2012 camera; capture a short scene about a conflict between two joggers, etc.). The prompts can come from Andrew or member suggestions. 2) Old camera "round robin". Established members pitch in a low-value camera body and ship it to the next member, who tries to get the best footage possible out of it before shipping it to the next member, etc. All results are shared and discussed. Maybe there would have to be several of these going, one for each continent.

I will certainly look at it. Through my bifocals. After refilling my pipe and changing my pants, naturally, decorum and all that. One does not go on-line without upholding certain standards. I will be surprised if there isn't one, although it could just be a load of wishful speculating chatter?

Can't say I agree. As a Leica user, I absolutely care about manufacturing, build quality, country of origin etc. Call me a purist but that's what I pay for not the badge, in fact my Leica MP has no badge/red dot. I'll go even further and say the only real Leica's to me are the M, Q & SL series. As for Panasonic, they have a strong and long legacy both in audiophile world via Technics (started in 1965) and broadcast/video/cinema with the various ENG/camcorders & Varicam products. Video cameras like the DVX100 were cult among indie docs, film and music videos and game changers as they introduced 24p alongside 3CCD sensors in affordable packages. Sony also has heavy legacy in video/film with DVCAM in the 90s and CineAlta the first digital cinema cams used by Lucas in the Star Wars prequels. So while both Panny & Sony don't have CaNikons & Fuji photography background, they actually precede them in the video/cinema world hence the head start they got on that side in mirrorless. Nikon up until basically Z9 was seriously lagging in the mirrorless video market. There were even bad speculation about their financial health and future viability. They made a surprise U-turn with Z9/Z8/Z6iii and the shock acquisition of RED. Still very curious about what RED will mean. Nikon didn't have a cine line to protect, now they do so will RED tech trickle down to the Z line or will it be more of a Z-mount ecosystem?

Hasselblad. I think something will come from DJI that will make them more relevant video wise. They might also be eyeing the fixed lens market (not to mention the eye watering prices X-Pans fetch) and thinking they could have a slice of that. Let’s not forget that DJI are also L Mount alliance members so a an L mount full frame or APS-C (as no one is doing one) Hasselblad could also make a splash. Although Leica would probably lose their minds over that possibility so maybe it is contractually forbidden to do anything other than DJI branded.

Sony and Panasonic without the film heritage but there right from the start with digicams. Sony always put the Sony logo on the body. Panasonic didn't do this, and I suggest it's Lumix that's the problem not Panasonic. "Lumix" doesn't have the worldwide brand recognition of "Sony". The problem is Panasonic doesn't have the brand appeal of Sony or Nikon either. They were never quite there in Hifi, Walkmans, game consoles, and so on... Panasonic are bigger in white goods and appliances, like LG, where Sony has always put the emphasis on consumer electronics and gadgets. I'd rate the camera companies brands in order of camera-ness like this... 1. Leica, they're as synonymous as it gets. Panasonic should buy the brand. 2. Canon, for they are the most popular 3. Nikon, for being second only to Canon in terms of success 4. Sony, for pioneering the digital market from the late 90s onward - but no SLR or film heritage unless you count the Minolta buy-out. 5. Fujifilm. Arguably should be higher but their film-era SLRs were rubbish and they didn't catch the mainstream wave of DSLR says with the niche S5 Pro and so on. They were known not as a camera company but for film. Nice digicams aside, Fujifilm are only a recent success story in digital. What saved them was getting into mirrorless with the X100 and X-Pro in early 2010s. Then I rate the dead brands highly... Kodak RIP Olympus RIP Minolta RIP Contax RIP Lumix RIP (only joking) And then in no particular order there's a lot of variation between what's an active brand (Lumix) and what's camera-ness (Pentax). Obviously Pentax is a high-cameraness brand, you will hardly think of microwaves with them. But today they are almost anonymous on the market, from a top 5 brand to basically nowhere and nobody can decide if it should be called Rioch or not. Sigma. Very high lens-ness, not so much cameras, still a niche. OM System. Feels like a Temu Olympus Panasonic / Lumix on their cherished 5% market share doing admirably but never seem to be capable of troubling the top 5 despite great specs, pioneering models and a loyal bunch of customers. Did I forget anyone?

This is an interesting point about the lenses. Also Nikon DSLRs I seem to remember had weird quirks with the aperture in video mode which took them an age to change. Cameras design has two major fields... ergonomics and tech specs. Get both right and you have a good chance of producing something nice. Which is what the Z8 has achieved. The best ergonomics and best tech specs. Now the third thing is price and if you can do flagship specs and the best designed camera for cheaper than your rivals can, the only things stopping people buying it are lenses and brand loyalty, which are tough issues. Panasonic for example has a brand and lens mount problem, in a way they always had during MFT as well. Nobody can decide if it's a LUMIX or a Panasonic. Or whether Panasonic stands for LUMIX or kitchen appliances. Nobody can quite be comfortable switching wholesale to L-mount, they don't know how committed they are to it after the big gap between flagships and the focus on mid-range tittle tattle. Plus Canon and Nikon just have so much momentum behind them from the prior DSLR mounts whereas Panasonic have had to start from scratch. Anyway I don't mean to keep knocking Panasonic, there's still life in the old dog yet, I just think they could learn a LOT from what Nikon are doing right now.

Nikon's zealousness in keeping backward compatibility for lenses made their early efforts for DSLR video almost fruitless and hurt them badly in market share. Canon's fully electronic EF lenses, on the other hand, made the DSLR video "useable" for the first time. Nikon's engineers were always ahead of competition in increasing the data bandwidth; the reason they managed to make D90, but the overall performance of a camera is dependent on many things, and bandwidth is only one of them. They're still amazing in bandwidth, as they introduced 8k60p raw with no serious overheating issue, and now they're not handicapped by ancient mount system. Every Japanese camera maker had a modernizing issue somewhere in the last decade. Nikon with modern lens, Canon with modern sensor, Sony with modern codec/storage media, Panasonic with modern AF. But there is one that all of them are equally incapable of: modernizing the menu and UI.

Without wanting to drag the topic off into DSLRs, I was talking about Nikon's history in mirrorless cameras starting with the 1" sensor 1 Series cameras. The DSLRs from Nikon were never all that popular with video users. T2i > D90, 5D II > D800 and any number of cameras > D5200 but at the D5300 / D750 stage Nikon did at least start to take video more seriously. But ever since the Z9 they have been giving us way more. The Z6 III, Z8, Z9 and Zf are all better than Canon for video. Z8 > R5 Z6 III > R6 II Z9 > EOS R3/R1 Zf > whatever Canon has for the same price Just overall better specs and handling. So that's a big reversal since 10 years ago and the DSLR era for Nikon. RED purchase only going to supercharge this trend. They are ahead of Panasonic on value for money, specs and sensor tech, including especially AF and codecs. They are ahead of Canon on specs, handling, ergonomics, mount, and dare I say it also value for money. Ahead of Sony on some things too but perhaps not in terms of sales or user numbers. And Fuji is a different kettle of fish altogether so it's harder to compare.

I really don't think there's a better camera under $1,000 than the Lumix S5. 24mp for photos is enough for me most of the time, and the footage is really, really nice, some of the best I've ever worked with. It's capabilities are pretty much unmatched for the price. I'd also add the GH5 and G9 as really great values. You can get the GH5 for around $600 and if you know what you're doing you can still get great images from it. The GH6 is also under $1,000; that's a lot of pro features for a camera under $1000 and is only a few years old! I've heard it's better than the S5ii X and I think the S5ii X's AF is very good.

Canon R8 does cropless FF supersampled 4k60p which none of other model can do for the same price. No IBIS but luckily most RF lens have IS which compensate for that. So for pure image quality R8 is really out there, just DR is not so hot vs other FF cameras.

All the ex-BBC cameramen left to become wedding videographers ages ago. I know this because they were always telling me so when I met them at weddings as a photographer. Which was really special for me.

Haha. Nice. Must be confident in the autofocus performance then! Although perhaps I am reading too much into it and it tells us more about the state of BBC News than anything camera related!!

um... huh. Unsure what to make of this.