andrew00

Thanks for the comments so far! On the auto focus point, she's an amateur with video so I'm trying to think in terms of what someone who doesn't know what they're doing would want. Auto focus + macro would be a bit odd but for a general shot, I thought having it just keep her in focus would be smart. My thinking being, how many things can someone who doesn't know what they're doing do without being overwhelmed.

Heya, My partner is an expert tailor and is starting a YouTube channel to showcase her talent. She wants to do videos of herself making things and has an idea of what she's going to need. She's looking for a 2x camera setup, locked off shots, with good colour and autofocus. She's trying to be budget conscious to start with, so won't spring for the A7Siii yet. In fact, she's looking to keep to ideally a £800-1000 range for the two cameras and two lenses, looking at one general and one macro lens. The video at the bottom is her model, you can see the style. Very nice and pretty, quite slow and contemplative, nothing crazy but quality appreciated. I've been trying to think what to suggest to her but I'm so out the camera game I have no idea what to suggest. Should she go second hand, is there a budget option now that's great etc etc. My brain says a pair of Canon 70D's but I don't know. Can anyone suggest something she should be looking at? As above, budget is an issue to start, and she needs two, so second hand or entry level is the deal atm.

Hey y'all, I've been out the filming game for a good five, six years now, but am looking to produce some more work for my company. I've not idea what camera system to look at now, so would really appreciate some advice. I'll be shooting mostly doco style pieces, and want as good quality as I can (i.e. cinematic doco vs video doco if poss), so I'd like a good codec and good colour. I'll be mostly shooting handheld/on my own, so I'm looking I can run and gun with. Also something with some sort of stabilisation (body/lens) and realistically good auto-focus. I also want a system that has good, fast, ultra-wide lenses, as that's an aesthetic I prefer (ideal range is around 16mm-21mm). I've literally no idea if there's a system out there that does that in one package, but I thought I'd ask if anyone can suggest something that does. Thanks everyone!

Hey, I'm looking to get a Sony A7S II for a few projects, one of which is filming long podcasts. I want to hack it for this with the play memories hack. I've also been reading about the Pocket 4K diff versions and BRAW/Cine dng choice. So I'm asking here - from what I gather I need to have a certain firmware that can use the hack, and that newer A7S II cameras can't do this because they can't go back far enough to get the firmware that can be hacked. Is this true? Or can a brand new camera be downgraded to a compatible firmware? If I do need an older one, how can I identify on cameras for sale if they can be backwards 'downgraded'? And is this even possible or do I need to get a super old camera? Can anyone help clear this up a little please, thanks!

Not exactly the same, but La Jetee always stands out for me. It's an amazing time travel short with dialogue and still photos.

Can the 70D record Slow Motion in Raw? Afaik the 70D records 50p in 720p. Can it do 50p RAW at 720p?

Had a play with a LX100 this weekend, I liked: IQ is, in general, pretty good. It's not as good as an APS-C stills camera at 100% but viewed from a monitor or, I'd imagine, a small print, I doubt anyone would notice the difference. Tends to meter and white balance differently to my Ricoh GR, not sure which is more accurate. Dynamic range seems, anecdotally, ok but not great, about the m4/3 average. Either way, the zoom works well and can compensate for any resolution/detail issues as you can obviously zoom closer. I've never been a zoom fan tbh but I actually like it on the LX100 as the camera is still small with it. I also like that, as you zoom, it gives you 35mm equivalent focal lengths, so I know 'oh ok now I've shooting w/a 50mm' etc, that's useful. A note on the zoom, with the sensor having it's multi-aspect, in video you actually get, I think, a 26mm-81mm lens, not a 24-75mm (in stills). Prob doesn't make practically any difference but still. The 4k is good, no Cine-D/V which is a shame (and no log when that comes out presumably), but it's solid otherwise. The camera also triggers my wireless flash, which may not be useful to most but other cameras like the GH4 and the GX7 didn't. What I didn't like: Picture profiles for stills and video aren't separate despite both having their own menu option - set the video to a low contrast and you'll get the same for Jpegs. Obviously shooting RAW removes this issue but I found it was a shame; I often like to shoot high contrast jpeg b+w's (hence the Ricoh GR!) and it'd be a chore to have to unpick any settings for when I wanted to shoot video. The LCD and EVF are sufficient but not great. The LCD has a colour shift towards blue I think and the EVF is pretty small and, whilst useful as a compositional aid, isn't especially clear for critical work. Again, it's all fine but it's not great. The biggest issue I have is with the sensor. It starts as a M4/3 sensor but as it's multi-aspect when you take stills you end up with a 12mp (not 16mp image). You also end up with a sensor crop that goes from a 2" sensor to a 1.5" sensor. This means the sensor is practically similar to the 1" RX100 sensor vs a m4/3 sensor, and is therefore quite a way from an APS-C sensor in characteristics. This means if you zoom in and shoot wide open you still can get shallow DoF if you're in tight, but not really if you're in a wider shot. To be fair, you can't have it all and I don't have any 'problem' with it, just observing that it was always a bit of a challenge w/m4/3 sensors, and it's even more of one with the LX100. The other big issue is the lack of built in ND. I think above anything else if the camera had've had this it would be a truly great camera, but even on a rubbish London day with dark greys skies I was having to stop down to f/7.1 to get a properly exposed image when shooting at 1/50 and ISO 200 in 4k video, at least going by the cameras histogram. It would be such a cool feature to have an ND built in that would let you shoot wide open. That's what vari-nd's are for of course, and the LX100 does have a filter thread, but it's not an ideal shooting situation as the lens protrudes, but likes retracting in various playback modes, and looks quite fragile and I'm not sure how well it'd do as a throw in the bag type longevity if I was having to jam an ND on it the whole time. Video IQ is also typical of M4/3 cameras. Personally I was never a big fan of the GH4 video IQ as I preferred the naturalness of the colours from a BMPCC, even despite the resolution advantage. I'd say it's decent thou, 90% of what the GH4 can offer and obviously in a much cheaper, smaller, more convenient package. tl;dr great camera, lots of great features, 4k video, decent stills, good zoom, small and light and really easy to use. has issues that will either be deal breakers or simply things to work around, depending on your opinion.

Any idea how either of the new Nikon's grade? For me, digital files generally look rubbish out of camera and need grading to at atmosphere. Nikon stills are great in that respect b/c they're really malleable with high DR and can generally be pushed and prodded into good colour and mood. Wonder if the video is forgiving when graded.

Do you know anyone in the UK? Get it shipped over

This is now sold, thanks!

From the pov of music copyright, the issue is that there's two types of copyright - the copyright for the person(s) who wrote the song and the copyright of the person(s) who recorded/performed the song. So you could take a classical piece a few hundred years old - the writer copyright will have expired, but if you're trying to use a recording from an orchestra who recorded it ten years ago, then their recording as the performers will still be valid. That's why classical stuff can get flagged even though it's an old piece. The problem here is that Youtube, Vimeo etc, have to take into account the aggressive claims of multiple groups of people/organisations 'protecting' the interests of their members. In theory this is a fine thing but it just isn't the way the modern world works, hence why Youtube generally do ok with their fingerprinting imo, at least it means musicians are generally represented. The problem is who 'owns' the copyright, this is something that is multi layered that isn't represented in a thick lacquer of action. I've had scenarios where a video I've made has had the agreement of an artist to use, then a year or two later he's switched labels and his new label have done takedown requests and the video has been taken down. But I have permission to use - but because they act first and think later it means I have to go through a big process that makes me feel like the criminal to try to win the right to put the video back on. I've had situations where a label I've worked with have had their music, that they funded from artists signed to them, removed from a copyright claim from a digital distribution service who have 'registered' the music with Youtube - this service being used to push the music to iTunes, Spotify etc. The distributor have no rights to the content but they've still aggressively claimed it. Again the battle ensues. I've had friends working for music licensing companies who commission composers to create music, which they've then sold. They've had situations where companies who have bought that music for usage have make takedown claims for any other video that uses that same music, despite the fact they just have a license to use it and not rights of its ownership. Again, trouble comes. Basically it's a minefield that all these hosting companies have rarely bothered to actually figure out because they don't care, they're a volume game.

Here's the front

UK is it's own beast, alas

Hey, I've had a GH4 for nearly two weeks now. It's a brilliant camera, obviously, but my BMPCC is more suited to my needs, so I'm going to sell the GH4. As they're still out of stock in most places I thought I'd see if anyone on here wants it before I put it on Gumtree. (Hope that's ok) Two weeks old, never been out my flat, less than 50 shots and a bit of video to test, that's it. Costs £1299 in shops but you can have it for £1149. I'm in London, UK. We can deal in person around London or I can post. Let me know if interested! I'll take pictures tomorrow and add them to this thread, but it's in perfect condition

I'm curious about pulling stills from the motion, maybe as the stills compliment to a motion campaign. Anyone think the stills will do the job or not be enough? I think you end up with an 8MP still. We live somewhat in an acquisition world where we always look for more even if we don't need it, but 8MP is still low compared to stills cameras. Any idea what MP you'd need for, say, a magazine image?