mercer

You just need the right sized pocket...

I don’t see how his budget isn’t realistic? He laid it out pretty specifically. A used 5D2, and a few lenses for 1100 euros... that sounds doable. I doubt he really needs a monitor when he stated he’s looking to get into DSLR video. Hell, this guy shoots ML Raw with a 5D2 and some old non ai Nikkor lenses. You’re right nobody was being rude, but these posts come up often and rarely do people actually listen to the OP’s requests.

It’s funny, I was so much happier and maybe even a better filmmaker when I tested lenses instead of cameras. Obviously, finished work is the overall goal but most of us don’t come here for that. Now that I have finally decided on the camera I will use to shoot the short films that float through my head and ink the page, I am much happier testing lenses for those projects rather than cameras. Luckily I already own a buttload of vintage glass. But I am still searching for those forgotten chunks of glass that add a little more dimension and character to my image.

I feel like I just had a class in Hollywood optics... glass like master primes or Cooke or even compact primes are so out of my budget that I’ve never done much research. Thanks for the tip of the iceberg... it gives me something to read about as I pine over stuff I can’t afford... lol. I tend to veer discussions off topic but I don’t know about this one... how can we have a discussion about cinema cameras and not discuss lenses? Because let’s be honest here... any one of these cameras can be used for great work, but the lenses used can really help differentiate the films’ aesthetic. There’s a reason why a lot of the GH5 footage looks the same on YouTube... there’s only so much the 12-60mm lens can do. But pop a S16 Arri Super Speed on that bitch and a whole new world opens up.

Fair enough, but he also shoots with an Alexa. In my opinion, all of the cameras we discuss aren’t in the same category or on the same planet as they’re using in Hollywood. Putting a master prime on a GH4 isn’t going to make GH4 footage look like The Revenant. What I think these cameras can do, is mimic older film pretty damn good. So I’ve always looked at it as this... there is no way in hell with my resources that I am going to get an image that even minutely competes with an Alexa... even if I was insanely talented. But I may be able to get an image that looks like a 70s or 80s film. And for me, the mere thought that it’s possible with a $2000, or less camera, is pretty astounding. Your mileage may vary.

Ugh... why do all of the posts from people asking for opinions on specific cameras turn into discussions why the OP should buy an entirely different camera instead? I get why someone might say, have you thought about a D750 or a7s but to say just get a small sensor mirrorless and a speedbooster... sorry but that is not the same thing as a FF camera. And it’s nowhere near the same thing as shooting FF Raw on a Canon 5D.

Although the foggy haze definitely helped him with that video, so did that Fujian lens and this is one of my favorite GH5 videos... so... thanks for finding it!!! I love crappy lenses. Be it cheap new lenses, or cheap vintage lenses. One of my most watched lens tests, on Vimeo, was from a Sony 3n and one of those aps-c c-mount 25mm lenses. Everybody has different needs and opinions. Some people want the cleanest, and sharpest image. For me, I just want something interesting... sometimes you can get there faster with a clean, sterile image, other times a funky lens will do the job. Hell, sometimes an iPhone and a Moondog Anamorphic may do the trick. Traditionally, I have chosen lenses based on practical reasons... money. And honestly that’s as good a reason as any. Recently, I have found myself in a rough financial patch, so I am revisiting a lot of my old lenses and man there are some unknown gems that cost next to nothing. Will they give you a perfectly sharp image across the frame, no... but they will lend a little character that these modern sensors sometimes need to quell the inherent sterility of 4K sensors. In some ways the P2 is too good, I really hope the final version has some of the funk and edge of the original Pocket and BMCC. If it is too good, maybe it will be popular enough for me to snag a cheap GH5 on the used market. I already own a camera that shoots Raw, so if I’m going to buy a second camera... something with IBIS, or one of the dozens of other things the GH5 does well, could be equally as appealing as a P2.

So cool. Did you shoot with the regular build for your 60p? And which shot was RX10ii... I couldn’t pick it out at first glance on my phone.

The funny thing is, other than the constant 2.8... I didn’t think the 12-35mm was any better of a lens in build or optical quality... but that constant 2.8 was nice... the question is... is it $500 more nice?

For starters, could you quote me entirely? In my opinion, they could get rid of the dual iso and the 4K Raw and for the price it still should be the best camera under $3000. It doesn’t much matter to me anyway, right now. I’m not buying one for at least a year. I expect a lot of hiccups along the way, including the Sept 3rd shipping date to be moved back. I also expect some sort of issues that will be addressed either by firmware updates or through returns. For those reasons alone, I don’t want to be an early adopter. But I also believe a good 25% of the early adopters will end up selling their camera when they realize it’s not as easy as shooting with IBIS or the lowlight isn’t as good as their a7sii or GH5s... so I’ll swoop in then for some Open Box or used deals.

Yes, BM has had a few issues in the past but even if they give us 75% that they promised, this camera should be the best camera on the market under $3000.

I remember seeing that picnic video, it was one of the reasons I started exploring ML Raw. Sorry to hear about your 1DC sale... eBay buyers suck. But I think that’s a sign from God... keep it!

Maybe not old but there have been two generations since the G7, so it is a little long in the tooth. The G6 is another great example of old tech that still holds up today, thanks for mentioning it. I’ve never used one but I always liked the rounded design of the camera, it looks like it would fit well in the hand?

I’m in the middle of some projects, so I am going to wait until the spring or summer of 2019 to get one. I think this camera is pretty ambitious for BM, so it may not be ready by September anyway. So between my projects and my cautious nature, I’d rather wait to see what kinks the camera has before I throw down the money for one. Those Panasonic kit lenses, although slow, are pretty sharp even wide open. I had the 14-42mm, first version, last year during the second time I briefly had a Pocket cam. At the time I was looking for a get up and go alternative to my 5D3 when I wanted to be incognito, and shoot in ProRes for a quick turnaround in post. I did a test or two and decided to just roll with my 5D3... long story short... I had too much expendable income at the time... wish I had expendable income now. And although I could afford both cameras, my color grading skill set was better suited for the 5D3 and the few little things I would have used the Pocket for didn’t really justify the cost to keep it. Anyway here’s a short and dumb little, handheld test I did with that lens, a Hoya IR filter and a Bower variable ND. Surprisingly, the OIS was pretty decent. And even with the small sensor, on the long end, wide open, I could get some shallow depth of field. Turn down the audio... I should have in post. Lol.

This was the OG OIS Pocket lens some people recommended due to its power zoom through LANC. I never owned the lens but I’ve seen some videos of it on a BMPCC and it seemed pretty sharp.

I couldn’t agree more. 9 out of 10 times, creativity will trump technology. And although I agree you will have more options with a newer camera, I enjoy the creatively cost effective possibilities that older cameras afford. And some of those cameras can be had for peanuts now. The 1DC and C100 are still fairly expensive but are cheap compared to their original MSRP. A GH2 can be bought for less than $200. These are serious cameras that may not hold up against the best cameras available new today (except for the 1DC... that camera is as good as the best 4K DSLR/DSLM on the market) but they are also amazing tools and anyone on a budget could make an amazing film with one. I’m just using the GH5 as an example, you can insert any camera, but for the same money you can get a near mint condition C100 Mark I with DPAF... I think if I was forced to choose... I’d take the C100. Or if I was really strapped for cash and I had to choose between a GH2 or a GX85... or something similar... I’d take the GH2 everyday of the week. So my point being... there are some great cameras on the used market that are 5 years old and there are some great films shot with those cameras... and I thought this could be a fun place to remember those cameras and draw some attention to those films.

You mention the BTS, so I assume you saw this... but for others, there are some really cool tricks in here and well worth the 20 minutes...

I’ve been wondering when Sigma would start taking video seriously. I’ve read that the Foveon sensor has some limitations in that regard but with the popularity of their lenses for video, it would seem to be a perfect fit for them. The great thing about the P2 is the price. If you’re even remotely interested in video, you just cannot beat the specs at that price, and this will reflect in the bigger manufacturers numbers. I agree Canon won’t do it, but I also never thought they’d release the C200. And even with that camera’s flaws, 4K Raw in a cinema camera with DPAF, and every other luxury a cinema camera affords is pretty amazing from Canon. Obviously, I don’t know for sure but I would imagine the Ursa’s effect on the market, could have motivated them. Now how the P2 effects the market is to be seen, but I think we will see some great video specs coming from all of the companies in the next couple of years thanks to the release of the P2... it should be some interesting times ahead.

Wow, that would have been a nice payday... albeit a 30 year old investment. Yeah, when I bought my first DSLR for video, I couldn’t afford any native lenses, so I bought vintage ones and adapters. The first few I bought were Series E lenses but the first fuller set I had were Pentax Ms, and they were awesome. But then I got bit with the lens buying bug. But you’re probably right, some K version or M lenses are probably the most cost effective way to a decent set of vintage primes. Hell even the 50mm 1.2 is considerably less than the Nikkor... which is already considerably less than a fast Zeiss. Sadly, I probably have nearly one shelf’s worth of lenses the guy has in that photo.

Native is 800... even better.

What’s the native ISO of C-Log on the original C100... 500? I remember back in my t2i days, I would rarely push the ISO past 400 anyway, so that’s doable. I work in the trade show industry and I recently saw a C100 II in the booth I was working at. I was talking with the shooter and I realized I never really saw one close up. I couldn’t believe how small it was. He didn’t have the top handle attached, and at a first, quick glance, it just looked like a DSLR. So, you shoot narratives with it? Have you had any complaints about its lack of 4K? I’ve been working on a couple short films with my 5D3 and man are they getting expensive. I’ve been selling off a bunch of old gear to fund them but I’m starting to run out of good stuff to sell... so I was thinking about doing some low key, low rent video jobs to make some extra cash. If I do that, I’ll definitely want to have DPAF to make the process as painless as possible but I’ll also want to get a camera that I can shoot some short films with too. Since I’d start off small, I may go with an 80D but if I need to, I may be able to swing a C100. Hell, I don’t even know where to start really. The only reason I started shooting video is for narratives... but like I said... it’s an expensive hobby.

Dang! A great example right there. That short film would not have had any more of an impact if it were shot on a Red. I haven’t had the chance to read anything about it, but I assume that was shot a while ago and those filmmakers have moved on to “better” cameras but for small projects, I can totally see why a simple 8bit codec is all one really needs.

@AaronChicago that was in camera codec, right? Did you ever test it with a Ninja? I’ve seen comparisons and haven’t noticed much of a difference but I assume it must help with banding. I used to mess around with a D5500 as a second cam, but the lack of focus peaking drove me and my 43 year old eyes crazy. Anyway, the Flat Profile held up to some grading and worked well but there wasn’t much latitude, so I started using tints a lot more in FCPX and they worked brilliantly with the footage. I assume with C100 footage, I could use a similar approach after correcting C-Log.

What do you use it as a B-Cam for? I mean, what’s your A-Cam?

I am... this... close... to maybe buying one. I know the Mark II is a more versatile camera... but there’s just something about the original.