M Carter

I'd skip the D7000 - the sensor was very jello-ish to me, no audio levels, no 60p (as I recall anyway) etc. The 7100 is fantastic for the $$ and I've shot many a corporate interview and broadcast spot with it. The 5300 is also gorgeous and gives you full 1080p at 60 fps (the 7100 only has 720 for 60p - for music videos, you may find 60p to be pretty handy for nice smooth slowmo). The 5300 is more of the "toy size" with some feature limits though. The 7100 has the screw drive for older AF lenses without internal motors. I find AF to be very handy for initial focus on steadicams or on cranes, especially on a crane with wired remote and monitoring via HDMI - the 7100 takes a cheap $9 wired remote that will set initial focus via AF and trigger recording, the 5300 doesn't have the remote jack. You can also cut into the remote cable and splice in mini 1/8 stereo m/f jacks, and use a headphone extension to get a longer cable, and simply plug the cable back together when you need the short size). Many, many music videos I do, I speed up the synch tracks enough that I can record 30p, and then transcode the video down to 24p to match the original track. This gives a very slight slowmo that gives a little weight & "gravitas" to many types of shots. (I use audacity or protools, speed up but same pitch). And then transcode (not re-render) so you have frame-for-frame footage. Both Nikons will shoot 30p so no problem there. 60P is really too fast to synch anything but the slowest song. With either camera, aperture ring lenses are a pretty big deal. Being able to click through apertures in live view is pretty useful. But there's decades of used Nikon glass out there. The killer cheapies (people will throw in lots of choices, but there are CHEAP for what you get): 28mm AIS (not AI, not AF): a classic, low distortion, super sharp. Usually under $300 - the perfect "normal" for that sensor. 50mm 1.8, any flavor - under $100, slightly tele FOV on the sensor. Sharp. The 1.4 is loved for bokeh, but pricy. Find an old Nikon film body with a 50mm 1.8 and get both for $25 if you shop around, cheapest way to find a 50. 85mm 1.8 AF or AF-D - usually well under $300 and just. Fucking. Gorgeous. Magic lens on people. 100mm 2.8 Series E - the only series E prime worth a hoot (other than the 50). Great on faces, usually under $100, about a 150mm FOV on APS-C. (the 105 is legendary and priced accordingly). 80-200 AF 2.8 push-pull AF zoom - beaters for $300 if you shop around. Mojo for days. Needs a decent lens support, it's huge. 35-70 AF 2.8 push-pull zoom - a classic lens, great macro 1:1. it can bite your ass with white-out veiling flare that kills focus and depth though. Light sources hitting the full-frame lens aren't visible on the sensor and can flare big time. Needs a really good hood or (better) a matte box with a top flag to "dial in" the flare (sometimes a little is very pretty). Under $300, but take care with this lens. Get some black foamcare or flags for shooting with this one, too. Best case sorta cheapie scenario: the big beastly 28-70 2.8. Kinda monstrous lens, but covers a good range of uses, $1k or so used.

That's pretty impressive - and that's far shakier than I ever handhold and holds up well. Shoulder mount, fig rig, or steadicam, I can get pretty smooth with a DSLR - and with Nikons I still see some jello. The more I see about this camera, the more I think it'll be my next one.

​Yes, but that's the same as a DSLR or BMC workflow. I have a really great "video" camera with NDs, XLRs, the works. As far as beautiful footage goes, it can't touch even my lowly D7100 - there's some real magic and mojo that has a lot more to it than just sensor size. I've done events where the local small-market news sent a guy with a DSLR, and I watched him fumble with lenses and ND and on-camera mics and miss a ton of shots. For fast-paced, non-scripted stuff, yeah, it's the video camera and maybe a couple G3s for audio, if I can't hire a boom op. For sit down interviews or cool b-roll or something I want to be beautiful - DSLR (or BMC) wins every time vs. a smaller chip all-in-one. Neither system is optimal for all situations.

The only moire I can recall seeing in the real world is polarized-pattern stuff - two window screen overlapping, or a black net with a wave or fold in it. Beyond all the math, moire is an interference issue between the "pixels" of a physical pattern and how they get mapped to the pixels of a sensor. Film being random (grain vs pixels in a grid) it's much harder to get moire with film. In post, I attack moire the way I often attack other issues that need masking. Try a color-based keying effect, and if that doesn't work, experiment with color channels - R,G, or B. Find one with the most contrast in the area of trouble. Use levels or curves to make a luma mask from that channel (when you want to isolate a sky, often cranking the contrast in the blue channel will make the sky are white and trees/etc black). Then you have to roto a soft mask to black out stuff you don't want masked, and use that precomp as a luma matte to control blur or noise reduction. This is crazy-useful in Photoshop, but can be a life saver in AE as well.

...and SBK makes a pretty direct knockoff the the everyone's-favorite-carry-on Pelican, $20-$30 cheaper.

AT made (or makes) a sub $150 wireless, came with lav, some included a handheld mic, and transmitter & receiver. I ended up with one somehow, it was "OK" at normal distances, some BG noise and hiss. Compared to a G3 it was pretty sad, but lots of you tubers use them. Hey, Full Compass sells it so it must be pro, right?? http://www.fullcompass.com/product/400554.html Anyway, they're likely all over eBay (they've been made for years). I still have one, but the line out is screwey, only outputs audio from the headphone jack. I assume your problem isn't just "cheap" but that you need 14 units that will all pick up from one transmitter - I don't know if that's even possible with off-the-shelf wireless though? WiFi is likely the future for wireless, I'd expect you could get someone to build you something for far less than the money you'd spend to test off-the-shelf wireless stuff.

The added "what's the point" by the OP seems a bit troll-ish to me... I bought a killer super-8 camera for music videos - I've yet to find someone who wants to pay the added costs though. But man, pushing tungsten reversal film about three stops - magic, gorgeous. But as a still shooter - I only do digital for work and have restored my wet darkroom. There are things film and paper can do that photoshop simply can't even approach. And every time I get a beautiful process dialed in, seems like one of the elements needed for it gets discontinued and I want to go have a good cry. So you go, Kodak.

I really don't understand why anyone uses foam vs. dividers... yes, dividers cost a bit more in most cases, but you can quickly reconfigure the case when you upgrade or for specialty gigs. Pelican (and SKB makes cases which are pretty much knockoffs but a bit bigger for each class, and Nanuk makes nice ones as well) are investment-type cases. You'll own them long after you've sold the gear you kept in them. I think replacement foam for the 1550 is like $60. I've found it breaks down after a few years though, but it gets hot here in TX. If money is really tight, check Craig's list of you're in a decent sized city, search things like "ATA" and "Surplus" - sometimes you can luck out. Use all kinds of search terms on eBay and check the "used" box (I found a custom-made roller case that was for a 4x5 film camera and all the holders, lenses, etc for $100 with dividers - it's my main camera case now for motion gigs, was probably $600 new, holds a fully rigged camera, all my NDs, and main-squeeze lenses). There's military cases, military-spec pelicans, all kinds of stuff.

​Film really separated the men from the boys. I did a two year portfolio project, 35mm 320T tungsten film pushed 3 stops, then duped (in my enlarger with a flash unit taped to the condenser) to 8x10 velvia or EPP (the shot above is the same technique). Multiple exposures on glass sheets with a different focus point for each layer, and different lights for each exposure. Three to five exposures per frame. No comps of course, Photoshop still shipped on floppy discs back then (I learned Photoshop from version 2.0 - came on like seven floppies and the manual was like a phone book!) - one shot (with brackets). I went through a lot of tungsten Polaroid pack film (which only came in 64T but I was shooting 320T at 3000 asa). Polaroids shot with a Nikon and Forscher fiber-optic back and layers of ND. Bracket like hell and cross your fingers. Came out gorgeous. The worst part about film shooting? Trying to sleep after a $20k shoot with the film at the lab, no snip tests til morning. You try to sleep with that hanging over your head! What happens when you push 320T 3 stops (don't worry, it's no longer manufactured):

Like any film, you should be telling a story. Establish things, build momentum, reach an emotional climax. I'm not a wedding guy, but if I were forced to do it - I'd get a vest and a steadicam - just a sub $1k Came/Laing (I have the Came and it's dynamite for the $$, no vest though - vest and steadi for a DSLR is about $600 or so). I don't know if any wedding guys do that, but for the way I shoot, I'd totally try it. And... I'd guess the best-shot weddings have (at least) 2 talented shooters.

The incorrect info was that S35 = full frame DSLR or 35mm stills camera. Just need to get into your head that s35 is closer to APS-C (really DX) - similar width, S35 is a bit taller aspect-ratio wise - not exact but ballpark.

Good points - though this was really "inspired" by newbies who seem to think c-stands are the only pro stand out there. And every stand I listed has a baby pin and will take a standard grip head & arm; the juniors have pop-up baby pins with Jr. receivers, and would have you prepared for that first 1.2k HMI you buy from eBay. @Ieeys, I'm in the US and used US links and only posted items with free US shipping, but many of these should be available on your side of the pond. I have plenty of $50 black steel light stands, many that came with flo's, etc, and they're handy and lightweight. Once you try to boom even a small card with 'em, not so great. Again, I'm suggesting people new to all of this become aware that their heavy-stand dollars can be better spent than just c-stands. For the same investment (or a few bucks more, or even a good deal less) you can get a lot more stand with more versatility. There are times on a complex shoot (especially product shots) where only a c-stand will fit in that maze of tripod-leg stands - that seems to really be their intended use. Those of us with a product background have been there - the jewelry tabletop with a forest of chrome all around it, a stylist and client trying to get their heads in with a camera on an arm and a giant softbox overhead... I've even loved those little "mini" c's at those times - with the 18" footprint! This shot took every light stand I owned (film days, shot on EPP) - and I ended up grabbing two microphone stands (products on individual sheets of glass, etc)

This grew out of a discussion over on DVX user, thought I'd add it here if anyone is interested. A poster asked "what is the best c-stand" and my reply was "usually, not a c-stand". C stands are designed to get small lights and flags into a maze of light stand feet. They're not intended for overheads or big 2K fresnels. They tip easily, they're hard to pack, and the way the column meets the base at a single point makes them even more prone to tipping. For some reason, "c-stand" has become a sort of knee-jerk must-have for people starting to build a kit. I like having c-stands, but especially on a tight budget, I'd shop for stands that are more versatile, can hold more weight with greater stability, are easier to pack, and could reasonably be used for, say, an 8x8 overhead in calm conditions, and (hopefully) cost the same or less. Something that can take an XL softbox or a big octagon without 3 sandbags and prayer. I'm comparing stands here to the Avenger Turtle-Base (unless you are 100% studio, you really don't want 1-piece C-stands - I feel they're a pain to pack). And turtles do give you the floor-stand option with a butt plug. Yet I'd take a Beefy Baby over a c-stand any day, in most cases. So - Stands in the $200 or less range you should consider. In the US, all the stands below can be found with free US shipping. There's probably a few more choices out there, but here's what's top of my radar: BEST VALUE: Matthews Steel Kit Stand 25 lb load, 37" footprint - 9.5 ft. tall (Actually better height, load and footprint than the Beefy Baby) $87, free shipping Not as heavy steel as Beefy Babies (and thus lighter to pack)... and, DUDE, eighty seven bucks!! That's two c-stands!! THE KING OF AFFORDABLE STANDS: Kupo Master Combo HD $156 88 freaking pounds max. load! 55" footprint! ELEVEN FEET high. baby pin AND junior receiver. Leveling leg! Cons: a very very wide footprint (very stable) that might be overkill on a tiny set. OR SAVE A FEW BUCKS: Kupo Master Combo Alu Senior Stand $144 26.5 lb load at a maximum height of 12' 4". Footprint: 46" - still pretty big. Aluminum construction, a triple function universal head and a leveling leg. THE KNEE JERK C-STAND, (most agree) THE BEST VERSION AVAILABLE: Avenger turtle base c-stand $169 9.8' feet height, 3' footprint, 22 lb max load, baby pin. Anyone who puts 22 lbs. on a fully extendedd c-stand may be asking for trouble though... If you shoot strictly in the studio, you can save some money and get 1-piece (non turtle) c-stands. Which are a pain to pack. If you use turtle base stands, you should invest in some butt plugs at $20 or so each. Makes a great floor-level stand. Or buy the narrower turtle base and a butt plug. BEST ALTERNATES TO THE C-STAND In addition to that $87 Steel Kit Stand... Matthews Beefy Beefy Double Riser $173 8.5' height, 22 lb max load 33" footprint. An industry standard. Essentially same price as the best c-stand. (Was manufactured with a 12' aluminum column for some time, and those show up cheap on the used market - I wouldn't extend those fully or use in the wind, as the column is weaker than steel. I have two of the aluminum stands and I feel the column could buckle with enough stress. Great lightweight stand to get smaller flags up very high though, great for big softboxes at reasonable heights.) Matthews Beefy Beefy Triple Riser $203 12 ft height, 20 lbs max load 33" footprint. A killer stand. WANT WHEELS ON A KILLER STAND? Kupo Junior Roller $199 17 lb max load - 45" footprint - 8.8' high With super useful and good-sized braking wheels - bigger wheels than the Matthews roller in fact, which don't have brakes (well, mine don't). (Avenger roller is same price, 1 foot shorter, only 28" footprint.) The giant footprint of the Kupo roller suggests it could be used for smaller overheads in calm conditions if big height isn't needed. This type of stand is a dynamite thing to have - I use them for microphone booms, they're sturdy and reposition fast, rarely need sand bags.

Y'know, with Samsung really taking a shot at the pro & semi-pro still markets... I wonder if we'll see native mounts from Sigma, Tokina, etc. Probably will come down to market share.

​I'm curious as to how many camera in this sort of list get a really noticeable quality increase with external recorders. Workflow and clip length, sure, Prores til the hard drive fills up. But with so many cameras putting out essentially 8 bit 4-2-0 via HDMI (even when they call it 422), I haven't seen many convincing tests. I assume the GH4 is another story with its true 10 bit out.

I've been beyond pleased with the D7100 for a couple years now, using aperture-ring glass. The 5300 has a similar & very pretty look as well. The 7100 is only 720 when shooting 60p, the 5200 gives you full 1080. I shot this with a 5200 and a 7100, just jumped in a car with the singer and a makeup artist/assistant and spent a day driving around Texas with a few cases of empty wine bottles. The opening shots were last and very late at night, in a tiny room with me outside the window on a crane, not really optimal! But great cameras for the $$ if you own Nikkors (really need aperture ring glass with these bodies though).

There are so many variables to this, without knowing your specific scene it's impossible to really answer. Some looks can be graded to match, others are more difficult. FOV changes really depend on the shooter. Has it occurred to you to just do a test? Testing is time well spent... Not trying to be snarky, but about 25% of questions on forums like this should just be tested instead of asking. Your answer lies there. test test test!!!

Can't the nice folks at MPEG Streamclip just give us an H265 update and be done with it?? Or is there something I'm missing here... that's been a go-to for years now.

​Just don't forget the negatives. Nowadays I shoot with the more modern (and more huge) Nikkor 28-70 2.8 - it's my "video" lens maybe 75% of the time - and I have zero flare trouble (when I want flares, they're very pretty and controllable). The 35-70 is pretty notorious for white-out veiling flare, a different beast altogether. Some examples are worse than others, but I've worked with two of them and they were both equally prone. You can do great work with them, but eventually you'll find a case where they'll bite you - I'd keep some primes in your bag for those occasions.

Events where I'm chasing down things as they happen? Full-on video camera, XLRs, shoulder mount, etc. - with great OIS. Planned and rehearsed stuff that's got some handheld shots? I much prefer DSLR/BMC look whenever I can use it... never have used stabilization in those situations. I've found you can get a pretty manic level of handheld feel (if that's what you're after) and never look jello-DSLR if you learn to move smoothly with a good rig. And man - if you have any sort of walk/run/following-up-the-stairs kind of shots... even a $200 Came/Laing will blow away your best efforts on the shoulder. And when your story just needs a whip-pan, the only people that notice it will be other shooters, trust me. My wife has never once said "Wow, all that sh*t just slanted!!!" I wouldn't turn a down a stabilized lens, I'm not being a purist... I've got Nikon glass I've shot stills with since the 80's though, mounted on all kinds of cameras, and I've really only missed IS for still shoots. If Samsung gets the NX1 rocking, It'll likely be my next camera, and it seems silly to own those without one of the new zooms. There are a lot of people (kids, I seem to want to say, or beginners?) who try to shoot something that should be lit, blocked, rehearsed, mic'd, and so on... with no lights and a PVC DIY shoulder mount, who wonder why their stuff doesn't look "cinematic" and say "but I'm a run & gun guy!!!" Run & gun is not a style, it's a circumstance. A situation you are hired to capture.

I shot a good amount of footage with the 35-70 over a couple years. It can be a stellar lens. It can be a whopping pain, too. The real issue with this lens is the veiling flare. I found I needed a matte box with a top flag almost all the time, and I could use the flag as almost a "flare level" knob. There were some critical green screen shots with some light sources outside the (APS-C) sensor crop and viewfinder - but being an FX lens, we were still getting flare - the light sources were still hitting the lens and being blocked by the smaller crop. Very minor flare, but we just couldn't get sharp focus until we really flagged the hell out of everything. It's very hard to get sharp focus on any high key scene (some examples may be less plagued by this - but my glass was very clear and clean, lower key stuff looked sharp). I'd say for the money (often under $300) it's a nice lens, it's just a killer-fabulous macro lens, in many situations it's gorgeous... and in some it just won't work. You may not "need" this with the focal length coverage you have - I'd say, get a 100mm 2.8 Series E if you feel a need to be longer (the best of the E's - just avoid the 28!) at a budget. Still, I shot this entire video with the 35-70, using the top flag as described (except the crane shots from behind the audience, those were all an AC-130):

​If you're cool with a tiny sensor, no really wide glass, needing a speedbooster, and if you never need 60p slow motion - for starters. This is the kind of question that usually isn't taken very seriously... the OP has a lot of research to do. Sensor size, frame rates, codec... you need to define what a "filmic" look means to you, and if that $2500 covers lenses, batteries, loupes, monitors, recorders, if you need decent audio, and on and on. The only thing you'll find out definitively: one man's best is another man's joke.

Get a pad of inkjet static cling from the craft store. Mark it with a fine point sharpie. it will stay on for months and peel right off with no residue, no tape, nothin'. I've used it on big monitors and on camera screens. Had it on a T2i for two years and it peeled right off when I sold it. When you have an effect shot that needs to key over a specific plate, trace the plate and stick it on the screen if you need perspective, angles, etc. to match. Stuff is priceless.