fuzzynormal

Barreying, binning, codec, etc. "Cut to the chase": Which camera is best for walking around a major metropolitan area, grabbing random images, adding copyrighted music to the shots for an upload to Vimeo, and then having bragging rights that I've got the latest and greatest budget filmmaking gear? GH4, right?

Shhhh...nobody mention Michael Bay.

Since buying a wireless mic that has great fidelity, extended transmission range, useful monitoring, and is rock solid mechanically costs about 4 times that amount. Good audio gear is expensive for a reason. You're paying for the value of reliability. If you want cheap, you can always get a mini-jack lav and run it into a smartphone to record. I've done it. It works, but since you can't monitor the mic, you just gotta hope... If you can do shoots that can afford the luxury to fail on the audio side --and that risk is manageable, maybe that's a better way to go?

Proxy is a pain for shorter form edits. When one's doing long documentaries and the footage to edit ratio is something like 400:1, it starts to make a lot of sense however --as the log and transfer stage can also be a step to cull the footage.

Yeah, I don't even have the Gh4 yet, but shooting 4K, backup/archiving the raw files, and then transcoding it into 1080 will be my standard workflow for most stuff. Other times, for larger long form documentary work, I'll probably do low-res proxy editing and then re-connect only the large res clips that make it into the final cut. (it's like it's 1993 all over again! That's how AVID used to handle "hi-res" 640x480 stuff back in the day) Or not...might get a new computer this year too so we'll see how it goes.

"Loupe" it when you need it. Works. At any rate, I didn't buy the GM1 because of the image quality, even though it's pretty awesome. I bought it 'kuz it's the right size to be a stealth camera for documentary shooting. (also a good flying cam) That's what lead me to the GM1. The fact that it grabs superior video to a lot of cameras was a great bonus. It's a good camera size that fits it into a very useful niche for some of us. If you fall into that category the value is awesome.

That's the bulk of the consumer camera market you know.

35mm or 16mm?

How cropped sensor lenses behave is common knowledge among informed m43 shooters. "Impressive" is a bit subjective, ain't it?

Thank Alfred Hitchcock for that one. Well before the 80's too.

Sorry, it's not in anamorphic so it's not really a cinematic film. Right?

A full set cost me $100...and I got the cool old 110 camera to go with it.

Turn down the sharpness on the c100, bump it up on the 5D. Adjust 'til they're similar. Do it in camera, do it in post, either way. Crop factor I wouldn't worry about, but that's me.

Sennheiser MKH-416 - Short Shotgun Interference Tube Mic. It's awesome. Float it a few inches over the subjects head just off frame for interviews and it's every bit as good as a lav. You'll need a rig to do get it in the right spot... or a PA. I use a c-stand when I'm on my own. That said, even a cheaper (ME67) shotgun will capture passable audio with proper PLACEMENT. Honestly, without putting the mic in the right spot all your audio will sound bad, lav or shotgun. It's not a difficult skill to learn how to engineer decent audio. I'm constantly amazed so many people in video production don't actively study it.

If you want to be a DP then I suggest truly fretting about lenses, cameras, and all that. However, if you want to be a true filmmaker, get your hands on anything and make something compelling with it. Can you tell a story? Ideas are free. Organize and shoot a compelling narrative, let the tech stuff follow. The stream doesn't always flow so much in the other direction. It does sometimes, just not as often as tech-centric websites would have you believe. Cart. Horse. I've recently been shooting documentary B-Cam stuff with a GM1 and a Pentax auto 110 lens. Every time I look at the footage I think, man, I could easily shoot a narrative film with this thing. Perhaps that's next...?

If I were to believe half the nonsense I read about aspect ratios, I'd have to conclude I shouldn't enjoy my favorite film of all time because it's shot in 4:3

Here's my experience: I use both ZOOM devices. And while my H4N is perfectly useable with my Sony ECM-77B wired lav mic, the H1 with the Sennheiser EW100 wireless system actually delivers superior --and very clean low noise floor audio. Plus the flexibility of wireless shouldn't be overlooked. It comes in handy. Being mobile with audio is a valuable tool.

It's even better when they jack up the shutter speed to 1000 when they're outdoors on a bright day.

I, for one, appreciate the sentiment this thread has evolved into. As the technology rapidly becomes more democratic the tools become a commodity. What you do with that tool matters more. I love watching the march of development as much as the next guy, and I like to buy video/film cameras. Canon, Panasonic, Nikon, Hitachi, JVC, Sony, Fuji, Bolex, Arri... I've owned 'em or rented 'em all. But I'm not a fan boy that projects their purchasing commitment/ownership into some sort of brand proselytizing. It's not too hard to imagine that in a decade we'll all have access to numerous small DSLR cameras shooting over 4K with incredible low-light sensitivity, full frame, uncompressed internal flash card recording, 5 axis-stabilization, and over 15 stops of dynamic range. And it'll be pretty cheap to boot. Digital moves fast and we'll have those goodies before you know it. Those that concentrate on the craft rather than the tech will stand out from the numerous numerous people that will also own this gear. As it has always been and and it will always be. It used to be that purchasing a superior camera got you into the realm of "pro" simply by ownership. After all, six figures for a well lensed and rigged camera is serious business, and DOES have value. However, I really think that legacy of the industry will be more and more irrelevant.

Or minutes upon minutes. I've never notice any difference between time spent on color-correcting with any camera, honestly.

Are other cameras different? That's not been my experience.

I think that ballerina short film recently on the web is an officially endorsed Panasonic PR video. It's no great shakes either. Again, not because of the camera, but for unremarkable production reasons...for instance, the editing is not innocuous. Lingering shots on bad acting=narrative distraction. I go to enough film festivals to get my fill of that.

A vintage lens on a Panasonic looks fine and cinematic@24p, and that's without color grading. I often use the same prime Nikon 24 and 50mm lenses on the gx7 and 5d. The images are both pretty cinematic to my eye. I shot a concert film with a gh1 and a 5d; cut together fine.

Good for you. Find something that works and fits your taste. I like m43 photography though, so I'm cool with small Lumix cams.

This played in my town a few weeks back. The thing I find ironic about the film is that Wiseau made a movie that'll be more popular and memorable than anything most people with actual talent will ever do. Even when I own the magic GH4, I'll most likely never achieve his level of success.