IronFilm

"Virtual Reality" is a very new term and can be a very broad term. So some people could arguably classify 360 degree video content under "VR", but other people who are VR snobs wouldn't regard it as "proper VR". For "proper VR" they'll say you need to not just have 360 degree vision around yourself, but also have complete freedom to move through the space you're in as you wish (just like you can do in real life). So how can you create that freedom of movement? Well you'll need to create all the items in that space (& the space itself) painstakingly from scratch, just like they do with video games. This can be very difficult and expensive (this is why video games can cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make, just like big blockbuster movies do). And the downside is it still won't truly look life like!! Instead it will look like you're in a video game. 360 degree video has the downside of you lose the freedom of movement, you are instead constrained to take the same path of movement through the environment as the filmmaking took during capture. It is like you're on an amusement park ride, once you're strapped in then you're going to go through it the same way the rides are going to go, following the tracks. But the upside is 360 degree video has the benefit of looking waaaaay more realistic, as you're filming real life itself! Also 360 degree video has the benefit that it is relatively "easy"-ish to create content. Well... still quite tough! Just check out my other thread where I'm discussing hardware requirements: Then you have software needs as well! Which are themselves quickly a very complex issue, and can be very expensive to purchase. A slight tweak to this 2nd approach is to do 3D 360 videos, this gives you stereoscopic vision in your VR headset, rather than seeing just a "flat" looking video. A potential big improvement for sure! However.... this means double as many cameras, which means more the double the hardware complexity, and more the double the difficulty in post production. But all of this is a walk in the park compared to trying to do "proper VR" in a truly photorealistic manner. For that you need a capture rig kinda like the bullet time rig from "The Matrix", but even more complex and comprehensive. Then a vastly more complex software step to turn each capture into a moving 3D model with the filmed texture overlayed on top. Another big downside of this approach is you can't do large/complex scenes at once. For instance if you wanted a VR experience of a party via this method, you couldn't just a capture a crowd of people drinking, dancing, and having fun. Nope, instead you'd need to do each person one by one, then insert them one by one into the scene you're creating in the computer. On the upside, it does make it heaps easier to edit the scene in post if you wish to move or even remove elements from the scene! Want to move that idiot with the jerky spazzy dancing to the back of the scene instead of at the front? Done! Maybe the promise of "The Edit Button" will come true one day... The other downside to this approach of using videogrammetry is that currently the quality you get is usually absolute rubbish, here you can see one I took of myself last month (it is a moving 3D model, which you can fly around it as you wish, or place it anywhere within a 3D space you create in Unity): As you can tell, the quality looks like absolute trash compared to what we're used to from our BMPCC / URSA / Sony FS7 / Samsung NX1 / etc cameras!! However, that was just a very rough and quick test capture I did (for instance I didn't bother with lighting it at all), and I could significantly improve this. But it still is at best rather bad, unless you wish to pour millions into this! And even the companies which have tens of millions of dollars of funding behind them still are not hugely better than this, and have a looooong way to go. But I expect "soon" this approach will be mainstream (it is an open question as to when "soon" is, maybe just a couple of years away? Or maybe a decade away.... ). So each of these three approaches have their own serious pros/cons list to consider, and I wouldn't consider any one "better" VR than the other. They're just different tools to use, depending on the task at hand to complete. Looking into the future, I think that although the 3rd approach is clearly the most undeveloped of the three, as tech improves it will likely become the main choice for creating high quality VR content. But all three approaches will remain valid approaches to VR creation for years to come.

Xiaomi Yi is rather good however. Not GoPro 4 good, but up at GoPro 3+ BE level quality. So the biggest downer is the lack of 4K, which would be ideal for VR needs, however.... higher frame rates are also really important. So dunno if I'd want to use the 4K 30fps of the GoPro 4 anyway, instead using the higher frame with the lower resolutions. By which point the gain over using the Xiaomi Yi's 1080 60fps is not much at all, if any. I hope the GoPro 5 puts greater priority on achieving 4K 60fps than doing 8K, as I'd much rather have 4K 60fps than 8K 30fps! I'm starting to lean towards skipping the Soocoo Cube 360 x2 as a stepping stone into this, and instead leap straight for the multi sided action camera approach! It is a bit of a risk, but I will be using the much cheaper Xiaomi Yi. Then hopefully by the time the GoPro 5 gets announced with 4K 60fps, I'll have the 360 degree reputation and clients to justify the US$4,000+ investment which is the cost required to build up a 6x GoPro 5 360 degree video rig. & then I'd likely reuse the Xiaomi Yi cameras as one half of a 3D 360 rig (which needs twice as many cameras as normal, at least. And if Xiaomi Yi has seen a further price drop by then... that would be extra nice! They've already come down in price somewhat since their release last year). Or..... maaaaaaybe, if the GoPro 5 doesn't come this year, or it disappoints us, I might opt for a BMMCC rig with Rokinon 8mm lenses on focal reducers. Maybe, but now I'm speculating and dreaming too much!

NTG2 is not a hot mic, it is too weak for instance to make a good pairing with the Zoom H4n because the Zoom has absolutely awful awful pre amps. I'd suggest instead getting the Tascam DR-60D mk2.

Noticed the Soocoo Cube 360 would be just US$150 for two (as each would cover half of the sphere), before I pull the trigger on it, is there anything else which is an even more frugal 360 degree video purchase than this? I'm thinking to get this just to dabble in making a few 360 degree videos, perhaps a short film or two, and then move on up to multiple array GoPro capture rig once I'm confident in it. http://www.gearbest.com/action-cameras/pp_311067.html Specs: 360 x 190 degree panoramic camera Achieve a certain range of 360 degree no dead angle shooting Hemispherical, circular, segmentation and panorama 4 recording modes controlled by smartphones through WiFi Support recording on while charging Support WiFi function, can connect to 2 devices at the same time Compatible with iOS and Android smartphones WiFi protocol: WiFi 802.11 b / g / n With standard 1/4 screw interface Ultra small mini appearance Video resolution: 1280 x 1024 at 28fps USB cable length: 80cm approx. ( USB cable for charging only, not for data transfering)

I think the JVC LS300 is the AF200 everybody has been waiting for ages and ages and ages. (hey, if the D400 dreamers can have their dreams come true.... then maybe Panasonic will finally release the AF200! But until then, there is the LS300) Preach it brother! I shot a fair few days with the R1 MX as the DoP on a feature film, which lead to my conclusion to get a Sony F3 :-D A far more versatile camera overall as as an all round camera. Yes the R1 MX does win if you go head to head specifically comparing just its strengths against the F3 (raw / 4K / slow motion). But the R1 MX loses on practically every other count! So yes, I can understand and even agree with people who wish to claim the R1 MX is a "better" camera. But I can look at the bigger picture and prefer the F3 overall However.. if anybody wishes to offer me a free R1 MX then I wouldn't turn it down! ;-)

I think diminishing returns hits in really hard long before that $3k mark for DSLRs. You can get two Nikon D750 or two Sony PMW-F3 for that price! Or heck, get a D750 *and* an F3 for $3k!! :-D Or 3x BMPCC/BMMCC. Or you could get *many* G7 bodies. Or heck, even Sony FS700 secondhand are dropping under that price. Or near that price for a C300 mk1. Or you could get lucky and maybe find a R1 MX for near that price. So at the $3k price point I see the options are: a) go waaaay cheaper, and get multiple bodies (if that is what you need) and/or invest in other areas which need it (never a shortage of that! Audio/lighting/lenses/etc) b) go with an older professional cinema camera such as a FS700 or R1 MX or C300 mk1 c) go *BIG* by not spending the money, and instead save up for an FS7/FS5/F5/F35 d) bonus wild card option: a new JVC LS300, or new URSA Mini 4K (or used URSA Major). Personally I fall most strongly into camp a) But sometimes sometimes tempted by b) but only specifically by the FS700. But not yet... maybe once it gets under $2K c) is my hope, one day! I'd love an F5, or an FS7 d) sometimes is a very mildly tempting option to consider..... but I think I'll wait for the LS300 to show up for crazy low prices secondhand first, such as $1k ish, should only take a year or two I suspect!

But that would price it above the brand new C100 mk1 with Dual Pixel AF :-/

Just simply getting "low cost, high quality offerings" from Canon would be a massively huge surprise in itself! :-o So in other words, more of the same same. ("only our existing product line") As for "a few surprises".... likely just something minor, or some hints. Not any new products (because: "only our existing product line"). Or in other words..... nothing new! Again. Same same. Canon has already displayed a working 8K camera. http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/10/13/canon-expo-2015-8k-cinema-eos-technology-demo-camera-recording-to-four-external-recorders/ Hahaha, but Canon guy didn't say it would be coming from them! ;-) Again.... more of the same same, nothing new here. Canon has displayed that before: http://www.theverge.com/2016/1/7/10725492/i-was-taken-for-a-ride-by-canon-s-8k-experience

Oh snap! I was just thinking about this myself, as already working with VR (but using photogrammetry), thus thinking getting into 360 videos would be a good related sideline. I'm thinking the cheapest way to get into this is get two of these and stitch them together in post: http://www.gearbest.com/action-cameras/pp_311067.html Total cost is only $150!! :-o Super super ultra cheap. Next significant step up in quality would be using a heap of GoPro cameras all carefully aligned around each in a sphere, but that would be a far more expensive approach. My thought is maybe take the very cheap approach to make a few videos, and then hopefully leverage that to end up getting some jobs which will find the GoPro sphere approach.

Take raw stills! But not raw video. And yes, no matter what you pick, bringing along an RX100 as a back up in a wise idea.

Use a flash bracket to mount your microphone and keep it clear of your flip up screen. If a flip up screen is very important to you then consider a Sony A5100 or Panasonic G7 / G6 / etc

But if a person is selecting a camera for the purpose of raw then I feel they're better off going with a BMMCC instead.

For such lightweight run and gun usage, perhaps a Sony RX10 mk2 or even a Panasonic FZ1000? Get yourself a monopod too :-)

Yet even so a Panasonic G7 / Sony A6000 / Nikon D5500 / etc I'd still find a better deal than Canon 5D mk2 As I reckon no matter how low a Canon 5D mk2 / mk3 goes, others will have fallen even further to be an even better deal than a Canon (especially as Canon fanboy photographers will keep their prices artificially high, above their true worthwhile value).

Yet even if they drop low.... a Nikon D750 will still be a better buy

If you're in no rush just wait otherwise, get a Nikon D750

You might want to go with the heaps cheaper Aputure FineHD VS-2 over a Shogun. http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/12/21/a-7-full-hd-hdmi-field-monitor-for-less-than-200-aputure-launch-vs-1-finehd-monitor/

Agreed, that is a point I have also often made about the FS5 when people complain about it. While it is a bummer it lacks proper 4K, it should be viewed as more like a direct C100 mk2 competitor, which doesn't have *ANY* form of 4K at all! So the fact FS5 has any 4K at all is a bonus over the C100 mk2 Doubtful, as the FS7 raw was a disappointment. Squeezing 14 stops into 12bit linear raw doesn't work out well... this is one area where the F5 keeps a large benefit over the FS7.

Still faster than my Atomos Samurai Blade I think? That takes foreeeeevvveeeerrrr!! So we can give the PIX-E5 a bit of slack, as it is a recorder after all. Not just a monitor. Ditto the extra size, if you look at the picture you can see the small increase in size is entirely thanks to the extra direct buttons (& a little bit because of its more rugged build, also a good thing). Something which many of us would greatly prefer over the SmallHD UI inputs! Thus I don't see the PIX-E5 as the loser here at all, just "different".

So what??? RED has been doing this since what... 2005??

HAHAHA! Me too :-D Be puuuuuurfect for my next cellphone camera ;-)

I think a lot of people just don't have experience or understand how engineering of physical products plus software development works, it can be risk and unpredictable! Timelines can balloon. Unless you're doing boring simple cookie cutter stuff that has all been done before or are nearly nearly nearly almost finished. But that simply is not how BMD operates, and I don't want them to operate like that either!

Yay, the URSA Mini 4.6K ships! Nearly exactly a year after it was announced. (as NAB 2016 is now just around the corner....) I spent a good few weeks last year thinking hard about pre-ordering the URSA Mini 4.6K, but in the end decided to go with the Sony F3 when I found a great deal on it for only US$1.2K Now that I see how long it took for the Mini 4.6K to ship (plus who knows how much longer mine would take because I wouldn't have been in the first week of pre orders, so might have been a loooong way down the order queue), I am feeling extra good that I went with an F3 instead! :-D Yup, taking all this extra R&D would've cost a lot. The BMMCC will still be a great camera! After all what the top three things people complained about: 1) poor screen, well... it is gone now! ;-) & as a bonus you get a much smaller camera! A thing many other people hoped for (like drone pilots, or for use in action shots) 2) the poor battery life 3) no slow motion (every music video wants that cool looking 60fps shot) Well, BMD has fixed all three big issues on the BMPCC now! True for people who already own a BMPCC like you and I, but for the many people who still don't have a BMPCC... then they just got an even more compelling reason why to get a BMD camera now they can buy a shipping BMMCC! But yes, you and I can wait a little while long for the BMMCC to go on sale or pick one up secondhand for cheap Because it is silly to even plan a project seriously on the basis of a camera which is not even shipping yet.

Awwww..... disappointed you passed on the F3 :-( Would've liked your review on that! Especially head to head with the R1 MX! :-D As I've used both, but never used them directly next to each other, or even used them in the same month (as I purchased the F3 sometime after I'd stopped helping out on shooting the feature with a RED). Don't see it so much in top Hollywood movies, but heaps and heaps of popular TV shows with big budgets show quite severe rolling shutter on it. For instance "Suits", nicely shot TV show with a big budget but I notice rolling shutter in it all the time. However, is likely the average viewer never sees it!