jax_rox

Varicam would be just like Sony's 'CineAlta' branding. It's not devaluing their high-end brand - those who are buying (or hiring) at that level are not swayed by brand names - in fact, branding a popular camera like the GH5 as 'Varicam' could push brand and product recognition of their higher-end Varicam models. Even if you said that 'Varicam' branded models have the superior 'Varicam' colour depth or something like that. in terms of an MFT mount, it still could be possible - even if they brought out a seperate MFT body

That's why you'd have a 'Varicam' branded GH5 - the one with the S35 sensor. It would be no different to a m4/3 GH5, but if you wanted to you could turn S35 mode on. Would be a good little 'value add' considering so many adapt different lens mounts to m4/3 already. Do you mean the Flange depth? It is rather narrow at 19.25mm, but Sony's FZ is 19mm - I don't know the specifics of the swappable lens mount on the VaricamLT and how it's designed, but it's not outside the realm of possibility. Certainly, a smart designer could have (should have) designed with the m4/3 mount in mind as a possible option, considering it's the only lens mount Panasonic make lenses for. Exactly. ENG shooters aren't buying a DVX200 purely for marginally smaller file sizes.

The HVX200 was 4:2:2 (an 8 year old camera), though admittedly it was shooting to DVCPRO HD, an 8-bit codec. Realistically, an ENG camera should at least be able to record 4:2:2 internally, preferably at 10-bit (and most proper ENG cameras do). The HVX200 was chewing up 1gb/min in DVCPRO HD at 1080. Using SD Cards (already significantly cheaper than P2, both then and now), and more efficient codecs could easily allow much better record times than the 1gb/min of the (very popular) HVX200. Yes, and users of Sony have spoken very loudly about colour, users of Canon have spoken very loudly about everything... Doesn't mean it makes good business sense. When the GH4 came out, Panasonic weren't in a position to segment their camera line-up. The new Varicam was barely announced by the time the GH4 was shipping. Now, they're in a slightly stronger position, and certainly a position where they could do so, if they were interested in releasing an AF101 successor (and they should).

I thought XQD was a SanDisk/Sony collab? In which case, can't see Panasonic getting on board with that! -- Considering the DVX200 isn't recording 10-bit 4:2:2 internally, I can't see Panasonic putting that functionality into a camera 1/2 (or less) its price. I think the smart play for Panasonic would be to bring out an AF101 successor that has 4k 10-bit 4:2:2 internal (and V-Log) Then have your GH5, with 10-bit 4:2:2 1080p, 8-bit 4k with no crop. I'd brand the two as 'Varicam' cameras which would bring a bit of notoriety and 'professionalism' to the products. It would solidify a product line-up as per Sony, RED, Arri, Canon, Blackmagic etc. Panasonic is really the only major player that seems to be kinda flailing about - and they appear to be failing to gain traction on their higher-end models. Compare to Canon or Sony in particular who have a very solid product line-up, and manageable upgrade path. Panasonic has none of this, and they could have all of it. An even smarter play would be to have a S35 sensor that crops down to m4/3 size, so by default you can use all your m4/3 lenses seamlessly (as the APS-C mode on the A7 series), but Panasonic could then sell their own m4/3 to PL adapter, and productions using an AF 200/GH5/Varicam combo could keep their lens choice consistent. And considering the lens mount on the VaricamLT is interchangeable, it's possible that you could sell an m4/3 mount for the LT, so you could use your m4/3 lenses on it in a crop mode, providing both a cheaper alternative to those upgrading, and also the ability to make some more cash from sales of their own lenses - considering they must have a relationship with Leica, there's no reason they couldn't do something similar to the Sony/Zeiss lenses. To me that's a really strong product line-up and would serve them better than what they're doing now.

Rode's an Aussie company, so no reason why you shouldn't get the best customer service I had a Videomic Pro that had its battery door broken off and they replaced it for free! In terms of the product quality, I find their gear is generally punching above its weight in terms of price-to-performance ratio. Are there better mics out there? Yes. Are there better mics for the price? That's a harder one to answer, and you'll be hard pressed to find better value especially when you consider their customer service.

But then it wouldn't be SLog. CLog was designed for the C300 - a camera that recorded compressed footage at 8-bit. Slog wasn't. The implementation of Slog seems to have been to bring their product line-up into, well, line, with each other, so that whatever combo of cameras you shoot on, you should be able to pull something together that will cut and grade quite similarly. If anything, Sony should have included other PPs that were a bit more user-friendly, a bit more C-logish. Less drastic a curve than Slog... Oh wait, they did include that, as well as the ability to custom dial in whatever combination of settings you want. The problem isn't Sony, the problem is misinformation and lack of education. People tended to equate 5D's Cinestyle with log (which it wasn't) and I guess assumed that Sony's log would be similar (which it isn't). I think the biggest problem is people not really understanding what log is, and not really knowing why you should/shouldn't use it. The A7s(II) isn't an Alexa, RED, F55, or even a C300. It's recording in 8-bit. Does that mean you can't use log? Of course not. If you need to/want to, and know how to, you can. But so many people seem to be using it 100% of the time with no thought as to how they're exposing, or to why they're using it other than 'well, because log gives you better dynamic range' and then being overall disappointed with the results. And then they blame the camera for being 'terrible'. By all means, don't use the 8 other Picture Profiles, or dial in your own settings to get it looking how you like, just blame the camera for being wrong. Some of my favourite A7s footage I've shot has been using PP OFF - i.e. no Cine gamma, no SLog, no S.gamut...

But therein lies the problem, surely. If you want a Canon look, why the hell are you shooting on a Sony?

You can also get quite good non-stylised colour out of a Sony. I've done it plenty. Colour is subjective. At the launch of the VaricamLT, I watched footage on a 4k projector from the camera, that had all been graded. It was incredibly accurate colour, especially when you look at a vectorscope. But the grade, overall, was pretty boring. I actually found the grade to look very similar to what I can get out of a Sony... That doesn't mean people can't choose whatever camera they want and whatever colour they like. There's just a lot of anti-Sony talk because of colour. Sony's colours aren't bad, but they are different to what you get out of a Canon.

'Despite many, many other shooters across the world being able to get at the very least quite pleasing, if not simply great (or stunning) looking footage out of the A7sII, my inexperience with the system meant that I was unable to shoot and grade to get the look I wanted. Therefore, instead of attempting to further my knowledge to be able to get the best out of a camera system, I'll blame the camera'. If you were so happy with the D5500, why did you rent the Sony at all? And why rent and shoot on a totally new camera system without doing tests & research? Anyway, post up some screengrabs, or some footage and I'm sure there's many of us who would happily help you out.

Learning to expose manually is an important skill, and I'll guarantee you'll be much happier with your footage. Testing ISO to find your happy 'sweet spots', and juggling that against your aperture is important. 1/50th Shutter speed mimics a 180 degree shutter, so unless you're after different motion cadences, I wouldn't stray from that. Your aperture doesn't need to be set. You can certainly change it to adjust your exposure. It obviously affects your DOF, but it doesn't affect noise like changing your ISO does. An ND allows you to keep your aperture set, ensuring a consistency of DOF. Personally, I'd recommend learning to expose fully manually before you grab a vari-ND (it will just help you get your head around what you're doing), but NDs can be very helpful. Changing shutter speed will give you different looking motion. 1/50th mimics a 180 degree shutter at 25fps, 1/48th at 24fps (1/50th is the closest you'll get to 1/48th on most consumer cams), 1/60th at 30fps and 1/120th at 60fps. etc. Lowering your shutter speed will make your motion blurrier, raising it will make it 'choppier'. You can also encounter light strobing with different shutter speeds.

I also think there's no point over-glamourising a camera or camera system. Being able to take a step back and critique the pros and cons of a camera system is exactly what we do in camera tests for new projects, and is the reason there are so many cameras on the market these days. Back in the day, if you wanted to shoot outdoor really cleanly, you'd shoot 50D, and if you wanted to shoot indoor you'd probably shoot 500T (and probably rate it at 320). Sure you had differences in Fuji vs Kodak, or Vision vs Vision2 for example. These days there are options galore, and to suggest that there are no differences in the look between RED and Alexa is IMO sorta disingenuous. Sure, the layman may not be able to tell - but let's be real, the layman can't pick the 5D shots in Captain America. Does that mean we should shoot all blockbusters on a 5D? With a skilful colourist, the two cameras certainly can be intercut very seamlessly, however there certainly are differences in the looks, and certainly differences in the ease with which you can get to the look you want. Some find it easier with a RED. Others an Alexa. Depends on the look you're going for. Not to mention the major differences in the way the camera systems work. But we pick cameras based on what we like and how we like to work, not whether or not the layman can pick the difference. Both cameras and systems are perfectly viable. Each have their quirks, their pros and cons. I do think this forum can sometimes be quick to bash cameras they don't necessarily understand (particularly Sony!). At the end of the day, pick the camera you like and use it. I've seen utter garbage out of REDs and noisy crap out of Alexas. I've seen beautiful images out of GH4s. I've seen amazing stuff on Alexa and RED, as well as F55, Varicam etc. I've shot stuff on Alexa and RED that doesn't look noisy or like utter garbage. And also on the F55, F5, F3, Blackmagic, A7s etc. etc. Personally, I generally prefer Arri cameras to REDs, but overall it depends on the project. I've deliberately requested REDs on projects for certain looks in the past. Just as I've deliberately requested particular lenses to attain certain looks. There's no doubt the RED is a very capable camera. I've not used the Raven, so prefer not to comment on it. But there are many reasons I may not pick it for a project. I still find it kinda interesting that the Alexa Mini is the best parts of the Alexa in a RED-style body. I also wouldn't be surprised if the whispers I hear about a 4k Alexa being not far away are true, considering the push towards 4k. I do find it amazing that given the relative age of the ALEV-III sensor, it can still produce the kinds of images it does. Will be interesting to see if Arri can/do better it.

No way. Red, Alexa, Panasonic (Varicam line) and Sony F55/65 are true cinema cameras Canon C-series are prosumer cameras that can be and have been used on some cinema releases. You still get great images out a C-series camera, but it's no RED. That being said, a C-series camera is a quicker and easier camera overall to learn and use, and is a much more 'run-n-gun' style camera. Personally, I'm a big fan of the F5 as well - which can now be had for ~$15k.

It's an Alexa image in a RED-ish body. Best of both worlds, if that's the kinda thing you're after. I know some are using it as an A-cam because of its 4:3 sensor for anamorphic glass - find me a camera at a similar price range that has that!

That's why I think there's plenty of good deals to be had on both Varicam 35s and Varicam LTs from rental houses that don't want to see their investment sitting on the shelf (the same thing happened with the F900). Totally. Arri cameras aren't without issue, but I've had very few issues, certainly never had an issue that couldn't be fixed with a quick restart. Not so with RED. Admittedly, the cameras are significantly more stable now than they've ever been, and are much less issue prone... But they're certainly cumbersome and can be very frustrating to work with, even when they run smoothly. Funnily enough, I was talking to a friend about the Alexa Mini recently and was saying that it's essentially an Alexa that's been made to work like a RED. Not all, but certainly some of the frustrations of working with RED also come with the Mini.

This. Most productions I work on are now shooting Alexa Mini where they may have previously been shooting Dragon. Netflix now only want 4k acquisition. Alexa can't deliver that, though I've heard rumours that a true 4k Alexa is not too far off. Seems most Netflix productions are now shooting Varicam or F55. Considering a VaricamLT and Alexa Mini are priced similarly to a Dragon, I see no particular reason to go for a Dragon unless you desperately need 6k resolution. WIll be interesting to see how the Varicam/LT fare - one might imagine that a rental company that invested too heavily into these may be able to give you a good deal on them..

Well, if you're comparing a camera with in-camera noise reduction to one that doesn't have it, then it probably will be cleaner. The question is what does it look like blown up on a cinema screen? What did you rate the Epic at? I never liked going too high on the ISO on it, despite the 'claimed' native ISO of 800. Of course, you're testing a camera shooting raw with no NR applied in camera, to one that shoots highly compressed, with significantly reduced colour on a sensor <1/2 the size of an Epic, with in camera NR... I mean, shoot on whatever you want, but make sure you know the pitfalls of each, and that you're able to compare apples to apples.

Yeah - this is why I went for the Shogun flame. Single price, cheaper than the 7Q+ from the get-go, and comes with everything you need to get shooting (minus SSD, but I had one from my original Shogun, and it takes standard SSDs). 7Q+ the base price is for monitor only, which means you then have to tack on the cost of SSD, codec licensing, battery plate, batteries, charger(s), D-tap and/or 12v Lemo cables, sunhood, etc. The sale price at the moment is not bad, but you can easily add $1000+ to it quite quickly

F3 doesn't do HFR, and only outputs at max. res of 1080p. As an all-round (regardless of camera), a 7Q(+) or Shogun makes more sense, but if buying specifically for the camera (and on a budget), then it makes no sense to spend more on a recorder that has features you won't use.

There's a reason they used to call it a mini-Alexa

If you can't go wireless, you sometimes have to just compromise to get something close to what you want. Whether that means using a wider lens, stopping down for deeper DOF (and inherently needing more light/higher ISO - which could lead to noise problems) or not getting as close with the stabiliser/not doing the circle moves you want. I don't know what stabiliser you're using, but there are accessories these days that can put a focus thumb wheel at your fingertips - it's not the most elegant solution, but it can be better than trying to do the focal length vs f-stop vs ISO dance.

My thought would be you want something soft, so you'd be wanting something a lot bigger, but with a much lower output - maybe a larger panel on a very small output level, or something bounced - whether it's an actual light or just the sunlight. My preference is generally for something bouncy. A small light is going to be a harder light by definition, so you're probably going to end up softening it hugely, in effect making it larger anyway

If only I could find a Producer who wouldn't laugh when I say 'let's shoot film'.....

Instead you'd rather have to pay an extra $8k to 'unlock' 4k with a new camera purchase?? Do you also harbour the same feelings for RED, with their Epic/Scarlett pricing? Who are you to say that such features 'should have been included with the camera when bought new'? Anaemic colour is the fault of the people operating and colour grading, not the camera itself. If you do some research, learn the curve, and expose correctly, you'll find you have no troubles. It's like any other camera. If you pick up a RED, or even an Alexa and assume things about it, you'll very quickly end up with noisy images, or crushed DR. Sony menus are a PITA. I disagree about depreciation though (unless you're talking about those Pokemon cards that have appreciated?? ). Sure, if we're talking consumer division. But FS7,FS5,F5/55 etc. have not seen the agressive Sony depreciation - mostly because cameras like the consumers and even the F3 were depreciated by Sony themselves - bringing out newer models to stay competitive and forcing down the price of the previous model. It may annoy some, but it seems to work, at least to some extent. Certainly better than the lethargic Canon IMO. Compare current models 5DmkIII vs A7rII. Even previous models - 5DmkII vs A7r or A7s. It's no contest, really, in terms of features. You still don't even get proper 1080p out of a 5DIII. Meanwhile, you get internal 4k on the Sony. Say what you will about colour etc etc. But let's not forget that the average consumer cares about what the salesperson tells them in terms of features, not about which has the better colour rendition. And you've now got three players in Fuji, Sony and Panasonic pushing each other that weren't even a factor beforehand. Canon's main benefit at the moment is still their glass ecosystem, but no company can rest on their laurels and fail to innovate and expect to keep their crown, especially in today's day and age with the rapid pace of technology.

The point is - there's an option available to you right now to get 4k out of your A7s. Not even paid. There's no option to get 4k out of a C100. Paid or otherwise. Being able to survive doesn't mean you're making good business decisions. Sony's imaging division was 'able to survive' because it's Sony and it was propped up by it's many other divisions. That doesn't make it successful. It's bad business. If Kodak were still a profitable company, it wouldn't mean they didn't fail to anticipate video, expecting it to never penetrate the film market. Sony seem to build this into their modelling - it must work quite well for them!

Well, yeah - depends what deals you're picking up... Certainly, you can pick up secondhand Atomos HD recorders very cheap.