fuzzynormal

Personal anecdote: Lost a LUMIX GX7 a few years back through ebay. Used them to move a ton of gear back in the early 'aughts, but stay well clear of them now.

My work flow is to edit with proxies and let the ultimate transcoding happen upon completion of the project.

Saw lots of Iceland volcano footage online lately, reminded me of this shoot. Straight from the source. No color grade. Play guess the camera with this one:

My wife shoots Fuji. Great cameras. I shoot Oly. You can do 4k with an Oly for half of a used X-T3. I do like Olympus cameras --they never got much luv from video enthusiasts though, not sure why.

If budget is a concern, however, the EM10iii for under $400 ain't a bad alternative Oly option. LUMIX camera have better resolution IQ, no question about that, but the Oly shines in different ways --really gotta know what you want to do with the camera and how much you want to spend when making choices!

I posted footage from my EM10iii last year, you can see the discussion and URL link here: It's not the most tricked out camera, but that's why I like it.

I do think it's the way things are at the moment, across all brands. Prices are going up for these used low-end cams. The original Andrew challenge was to find a decent 4K camera for $200 --which doesn't seem possible right now. I would have believed a year ago it would be doable; surprised the prices went north. The best I could find is a really beat up GX7 'buy-it-now' listed at $190 ($80 shipping) ...and that's a camera with a sensor that's capable of doing 4K, but the camera itself only delivers 1080. It's a mighty fine 1080, but not 4K. These are just observations. I got no real dog in the hunt or desire to be contrarian to other's opinions.

Yet my EM10iii I got new/refurbished last May for $299 is close to $400 used now in 2021. The market is goofy.

You mean manufacturers abandoning the format? I hope it'll find a niche for a long while, even if/when Panasonic leaves it.

Why the bump in used camera prices? Is it because brand offerings of enthusiast cams in the mid/low tier range have restricted a little over the past few years? More YT kids trying to buy in on the used market?

This is what I do and it's been a very productive way for me to do my work. As for that last bit you mentioned, I'm still amazed at the IQ I got from my modest GX7 all those years ago. Something special about that one, even though it only did 1080.

30 foot extension painter's pole with a camera on the end of it. Easy way to do "drone" shots without the drone.

I think regardless of this particular model, the sales of traditional DSLR type cameras are going to wane so much that the market will be niche in the immediate future. Speaking for myself, a handful of what I'm already filming now is done with a phone. And the other camera I do use and find perfectly acceptable for my doc work is a very modest cheap m43 camera. And I'm a quote/unquote professional. As phone tech advances and offers computational imagery with video, I don't see how the consumer market could be anything but dominated by mobile devices leaving camera enthusiast with slim pickins'.

I believe diversity sells. "Kumbaya" is a conflation. I didn't say that.

Yeah, the thing about Olympus is that it ALWAYS falls short of providing top-notch specs...but then the sum of the parts, even if they're not the best (although in a few cases some are), really has appealed to me for an undefined reason. Luckily, I just don't do things that require uninterrupted filming for an hour.

Checking prices from early 2020, looks like the EM10iii actually went up in price a little. Kind of amazed I got one for $299. Interesting. Still, at $350 or there-abouts it's a good deal for 4k. The two-function IBIS offers a really ridiculous stabilization feature set. As mentioned, I'm shooting with it right now for a job...it keeps delivering good footage; can't complain at all about it.

Oly em10iii owner for the past year. Can be had for less than $300 on eBay. Got mine refurbished “new” Was filming with it today for a gig, actually Nice camera all around. Fiddly with a few things, but really just a great value.

I love variable ND. I hate variable ND.

Welcome to show BUSINESS. I truly hope you don't think you're entitled to have it work the way you want it to work. You can easily find a niche in it, but if you're condemning the overall market, I'd recommend you pull back your angst a little. I also worry that too many people conflate the modern diversity trend in filmmaking as solely a sort of social justice woke movement. (One they don't agree with, perhaps?) I'd suggest anyone that truly believes the industry is going woke because they're compassionate humanitarians, simply ask themselves, "In a global market what sort of movie has a better chance of appealing to as many people as possible?" These are business decisions that might be championed as "woke," when, if anything, that woke-bragging is simply a useful marketing ploy to use after the thing is made to increase product awareness. Tail, dog, wag. As for Netflix, you're basically complaining that Netflix understands it demographic analytics. Netflix has data vectors on it's viewers that understand modern life better than the people that actually live it. I mean, c'mon now, the only reason for them to do that is if the entire organization would rather be racist than make as much money as possible. They want a product they can use. Offer it to them or, as you indicated, don't. https://towardsdatascience.com/how-data-science-is-boosting-netflix-785a1cba7e45 Here's a hypothetical: if it was somehow possible for Disney and it's shareholders to make 200 Billion $$ next year with a 3% annual growth by marketing to, say, aboriginal Pygmies, would they do that in a heartbeat and immediately ignore everyone else?

No one tell him about "Birth of a Nation"

There ain't much of any kind of shot I capture that you can't find something very similar to it elsewhere. I think that's true for most people, even the pros. In fact, I was watching some of Roger Deakin's work from Sicario earlier this week and realized there's an almost identical shot from the David Lean's 1946 "Great Expectations" that's a direct copy. (soldiers defending into darkness, shot by Guy Green) Pretty cool homage/rip-off. But, even still, every combo of shots and audio is definitely a new context. So what we do with those shots is what matters. Often I get paid to create mundane context, but it's context the client wants. I'm okay with that. I'm not super creative. No genius stuff here. Ultimately I'm rock and roll, not progressive jazz.

Of course, but the claim that art shouldn't be offensive...? Not sure about that. Certainly being offended is subjective. Personal anecdote from me, a kid raised Catholic: Monte Pythons' "The Meaning of Life" has, what I consider, a hilarious bit of satire mocking Catholics. I was shocked yet amused the first time I watched the "Every Sperm is Sacred" musical number followed by Gram Chapman's character ranting for 5 minutes about "bloody Catholics!" while 50 Catholic children exited a single household. My Mom, on the other hand wasn't amused at all. She was very offended.

Being a devil's advocate here, do you really believe that's an accurate statement or is it a bit of hyperbole?

What would be a good example of this? Is it? If you pay attention to the people that actually make decent stuff that'll endure, they'd necessarily be considered accomplished artists, wouldn't they? Those that aren't won't really deliver anything unto us that we'll be collectively celebrating 30 years from now.

Certainly not denying any of that. You can watch films from 70-90 years ago and notice the same thing. "It's Wonderful Life" "Sullivan's Travels" "Modern Times" heck even "42nd Street." And those are the films that have endured. As I mentioned before, there were a lot of mediocre films from that era that never made it beyond the zeitgeist of their times. Nothing special that. On the other hand, the thing that's being challenged in these days by "woke" culture (which I'm not a big fan of, really, just observing) is less the championing of soft socialism, but the cultural entitlement of white dudes. Thus, imo, a lot of said white dudes are upset they're suddenly being held accountable by new standards...or are seeing their cultural significance diminish...and they're bummed they're not being represented as much as they used to be. Pretty tragic that, right? [sarcasm]. Can you imagine being pissed because some movie heroes aren't as white and male as you're used to --or want them to be? So, I don't know, out of all the problems in the world, being upset with that sort of narrscism seems silly to me. Maybe some disagree with my assessment there, but that's how I see it. But, yeah, it's "show business." The market is simply expanding gender and race variety to attract the global masses. That's what happens when corporations do things, appeal to as many as possible. And in that global market melatonin doesn't really count for shit, does it? Oh well.