Derek Weston

Here is a supercell in 4k I found: (will say the despite retaining highlights and looking natural, the storms would've looked more spectacular with better contrast, would pop a lot more. )

No doubt. Landscape photography is my passion and I've been shooting raw for a number of years now. I remember when I first shot video of a DSLR, naively thinking that I'd be getting all of the sensors dynamic range. Imagine this:

So this is interesting. Blackmagic hyperdeck shuttle 2 offers different qualities of prores. 220mbs,145,101, and 44mbps approximately. At low end you're getting file sizes near what you would with gh3 and quality, I'd think, that should be comparable. Plus you have all the other options for higher quality plus raw. (on an awesome sensor) The hyperdeck shuttle is pretty affordable too, at only 350 or so. This puts the pocket camera back in play. (I've already found a 6hr battery source) The question then becomes... how economic is it to make the setup ergonomically suitable with an external recorder and battery source?

Ergonomics require that you buy some tools that allow it to be a handheld. Honestly, I don't see how it's not much different than a dslr -- especially the pocket version -- if you just pimp it out a bit. (cage, handles, etc) The killer part, though, is the storage. Especially with the pocket, which actually has decent hand-held functionality. I mean, if the blackmagic pocket had the ability to hold lots of recorded data, and the data wasn't so large, that'd be one thing. But not the case. (there are some good battery options since it'll take external power) Hell, I'd probably be up for a blackmagic option if only it included 50mbps encoding similar to what the gh3 offers in addition to the other modes. As it is... I'm pretty much resigned to eliminating the pocket option due to its inability offer more robust storage without going to an external. (and then it just becomes too much.... external power, external storage, special cage, lens adapter... the add ons total up about 1500, on the cheap end)

Probably a good idea to have one weather resistant zoom. Image the whole system is compromised if one piece isn't weather resistant. Anybody used video autofocus at all with any of the zooms? I wouldn't use it for critical things, but it'd be nice for the in-the-car junk and other odd-ball shots. Is it usable? Also. . . does the camera do a good job adjusting exposure while zooming variable lenses? (I'd be surprised if it did, but) Think my plan of action would be to get one good all around zoom and then a metabones adapter. That way my 14 2.8 and 35 1.4 would turn into (approx) 20mm f2 and 50mm f1. Not too shabby for low light work.

So, looking at the footage from the gh3 on vimeo. Some really sharp stuff, like it a lot. This may be my most painless option. Looks to be way ahead of anything from the rx10. (think you're going to have to use hdmi out to get anywhere near high quality there) The 14-140 is a pretty good range, actually, and is cheap. If it's good enough, that could work. Is this one halfway sharp and OK in distortion? Maybe that and a fast/wide prime. (my fast nikon lenses wouldn't be that wide)

Thanks for the thoughts. I haven't read extensively about the gh3, but would consider it. Know it's probably the top DSLR offering, if I understand right. Didn't know how big of a seperation between something like it and the d5300. I need to be able to get a 24-150ish field of view, though, and didn't know if I'd be able to pull that off with my nikon lenses. Looks like there is an adapter that will take me to 1.5x from metabones. So I suppose I could that could work with nikon lenses potentially. Didn't want to have to invest in 4:3 lenses. Most of the motion I have to worry about is driving along fast in a car while sometimes having to get a tight shot. In certain situations (tight shot on a tornado) the motion can be pretty insane if it's strong and kicking stuff up. Doesn't have to be perfect, but does need to get me the shot. Thought rolling shutter on blackmagic was pretty well controlled? (at least as compared to most offerings in its price range)

For the last few years I've been shooting with a canon t3i and a few lenses. Does OK but the compression is pretty mediocre and I feel I could do better video wise. Own a Nikon d800 now, but want to use that mainly for stills and as a secondary cam.(when not taking stills) Going to sell the canon stuff for a better setup. (working with d800 raw ruined me) I'd really like something that can really produce some high-quality landscape video.. something that doesn't destroy highlights easily. (and I'd love to shoot raw totally, but it's not feasible yet with storage) But it needs to be portable and easy enough to use for documentary on the go. I'll be jumping in and out of cars all day. Focusing on people in the car, and zooming outside to shoot the storm. Sometimes I'll get enough time to setup a tripod and let it roll on the storm, but plenty of times not. I need a good field of view. Around 24mm (full frame) to 135mm ish zoom wise. Needs to be decent in cloudy skies low-light wise. Storage wise, probably not going to break 4hrs in a day. Is worth noting that I'll have one DSLR/tripod to go along with this setup when I need it. (mostly for times when we have time to stop, get out of the car, and setup on a storm) Here are the options I'm mulling over: (and I go back and forth between A and B mostly) A) Blackmagic Cinema camera. (pocket or non) I'm floored by the footage provided by this beast. Their prores looks amazing and on top of that you can go RAW. Works with my Nikon lenses. The drawbacks are file size, even when not raw, and cost of assessories and storage. I have a so/so shoulder/handheld mount I could use hopefully. A DSLR loupe that might work. Plus good Nikon lenses. Another plus is the RAW ability would allow me to dabble in landscape videography. (nature/landscapes is my passion with photography) Am I crazy for trying to make this work in a fast paced shooting shooting situation though? Would it be any worse than working with a DSLR? B) Sony rx10. Feature set is silly. Lens is great. (although disappointed it's slightly cropped to 26mm in vid mode - wonder if a wide angle adapter exists?) Would be lovely to have a power zoom. 60p is a definite plus. Good with aliasing/moire/rolling shutter. Actually decent autofocus for when you need it. ND filter would be awesome too. My one question is the danged codec quality and dynamic range. I've only seen a few videos where people handled highlights intelligently. Most of the video is overly contrasty mediocre DSLR looking. But if it doesn't have to be that way, I'm really interested. Honestly, I sort of want this option to work, as it would make my life so much easier than BM or even most DSLR rigs. For my really wide shots I could just throw a DSLR on a tripod and let it go. This seems amazing for documentary work. I just don't want to be disappointed by video quality. Also a bit worried about cloudy evenings with poor light and that sensor. C) Nikon d5300. I like the quality of my d800 video quite a bit better than my old canon t3i where compression is concerned. I've read that the d5300/5200 are supposed to be pretty dang close if not as good as the d800 in video. Plus, from what I've read, you can implement a more flat picture style if you wish. Makes sense with my nikon gear... D) Other options? Hit me. Any ideas or suggestions on other setups < 2000? Thanks.