mercer

Every time I think I may be done with the Sigma FP, and think I need AF and IBIS, I mess around with some old footage... Shot with the 50mm f/1.4 Super-Multi-Coated Takumar

Don't forget to edit your reply on how many cameras you need. Out of curiosity, because I haven't been following this camera too much, what are people using it for? Do you shoot and sell stock footage?

I've watched most of it. Will finish it later today. After your holiday film you shared with us a few years ago, I think you know how much I enjoy your work. And this one doesn't disappoint. I must admit, I don't watch a lot of documentaries and what I enjoyed about this is it felt like a TV show instead of a "documentary" but we could probably spend a few pages discussing what a documentary is and I'd be proven wrong every time. I really enjoyed the look and would love a breakdown of which camera was used where? Everything blended seamlessly, so great job with the color work. Which leads me to say that the piece looks really professional. I never noticed any lack of DR or wondered why you didn't use an Alexa or an Amira. I just read in your reply that most of the people shots were done with the e-m10? That's amazing. They look great! What picture profile did you use and how did you approach the final color look? As far as the story and where it can go as a whole? I'd say your approach was really good and your main character is such an interesting guy. The women were all great as well. I was inspired by their excitement and it was great to see how comfortable they were around the camera. Did you use a speedbooster with that 50mm? Either way... 75mm FOV or 100mm, I suppose it helped to keep the camera a little further away. I could argue that you could have been even further. There's obviously a personal disconnect with birding... cameras and binoculars give the viewer a distanced bird's eye view... so to speak... and I noticed that in some of your shots, which I really liked. Personally, I would take a look at all the footage and edit it into 10 minute pieces and put it on YouTube. I'd imagine there's a huge birding community that would totally dig this material as a web series and you'd probably get thousands upon thousands of views. Add some BTS footage on the equipment you used, and you can lure in the DIY filmmakers as well to hit two niche YouTube markets. Anyway, thanks for sharing and I'd love to hear any more details about the cameras, lenses, settings, color and post work. I'm looking for a fun camera I can go handheld with and just shoot stuff. I think you've mastered that on such a high level it should be shown to film students about what can be done if you don't have an Alexa, or even an FX6 or a Canon C series camera!

If you wait a month or two, the S5 will probably be on sale new at B&H for $999. It's hit that price a few times in the past 6 months.

Exactly. I've even thought about getting another GH6 just to have that. Although it's not exactly what I'm looking for at least I know there are plenty of Look LUTs floating around for it. Another reason I'm interested in the Z6iii is for raw options or Flat Profile. But I go back and forth. Sometimes I'm tired of messing with log, other times I just want to mess around with it. I guess it's a luxury of being a hobbyist. If I got paid for any of this, I would find the path of least resistance.

It is a very cool option to have, but I think I want to be more basic about it. I kinda miss the days when you just used a picture profile in camera and kept it simple. With log footage, you can sit at the computer and try a ton of different LUTs or grade a ton of different ways. For me, by having that option in camera may give me more options but I want less. But it is something to think about that I didn't consider. Thanks.

I have seen this and even the set up I have with the SmallRig sled is pretty small. Sadly, it's not the only reason I'm getting bored with it. My amateur eyes, thinks the R7's IQ is damn near almost as good, when you add a touch of Midtone Detail in Resolve, as the FP and it's a lot more fun to shoot with. I believe Sigma is doing something internally with noise reduction in the FP raw files that's smoothing everything over. Weirdly, I feel like the internal 8bit 4K, or your suggested 10bit 4K, actually may look a little better... for what I'm looking for.

Is the S5 waterproof? With all you guys talking it up so much, now I want one.

Since this is essentially product photography, I'd say that the camera doesn't matter as much as your lighting. If you want full frame, probably any full frame camera that shoots video made in the past 10-15 years would do. Then again, on the opposite end of the spectrum, a camcorder will give you the unlimited run times you may need as well. I understand your point about media and that would be a major concern for me as well. The SD cards needed for high quality 4K are expensive so I would pick a camera that uses CF, CF Express or an SSD, although I personally loathe SSDs attached to a camera but for your use, it makes sense. So that narrows your options down a bit. From Canon, any of the 5D series cameras from the Mark II on would work. I'd imaging the Nikon D series full frame cameras would also be fine. The D750 shoots nice video. But you did mention 4K so that will complicate things a bit. Someone mentioned a GH5s, and if you did choose to go with a crop sensor camera, I'd look at the GH6. Professional codecs, CF Express or SSD recording, etc... But I'd also look into timelapse photography because you may be able to get a bigger bang for your buck? To add, not all of my suggestions will give you the 4K you originally stated you wanted, but based on the example you provided, I don't think you need it. Anyway, good luck. And thanks for the post. It's interesting to see what other people are creating!

Crazy thing is that your friends' co-workers probably think he is a snob shooting with his fancy DSLR while they're shooting with their iPhones. I actually have a friend that shot a feature film on a t3i that got distribution and was released in Wal-Marts.

Don't get me wrong, I agree wholeheartedly. I love cameras and want to try them all. But I am fairly poor, so I need to only have what I need. So, for me, as a hobbyist, wannabe, narrative filmmaker, I can only justify so much. That said... I have been itching to try something new. Have been thinking about looking at cameras and their picture profiles like different film stocks as opposed to shooting Log and creating a look in post. I suppose the smartest path would be Fuji for that endeavor.

I was thinking about buying a C100 Mark II to mess around with. Was using one of Canon's 1" 4K camcorders recently... the XA15 I think... and it was amazing. Hadn't had so much fun shooting since I first bought my 5D3 and the Canon 24-70mm f/4 L I used to own. I'd imagine a C100 is right up there.

To me, that's an eye opener right there.

As a hobbyist, it becomes a bit tougher to justify multiple cameras compared to someone who is making money with their tools. So the "proper" answer should be 1 camera. But as an enthusiast, that isn't always possible. I've tried to only have cameras that offer different features... AF, IBIS, etc... I also don't use cameras as hybrids. I have cameras I use for video... 5D3 ML Raw, the Sigma FP and R7 I have on loan from a friend and then I shoot stills on an old Pentax DSLR (K10D) and a few old film SLRs.

Sorry my reply was to this comment by @newfoundmass "I know so few people shooting video on Canon these days, and those that do are mostly in corporate work. I'm actually surprised that many films used Canon cameras." I assumed the people he knows didn't make Sundance accepted documentary films, and work on events.

Anecdotal evidence only, but at the trade shows I've worked, the majority of cameras I've seen are Canon cinema cameras. The C100 is still used a ton. Followed by Canon mirrorless and then Sony cameras.m and that's pretty much it. I did see an Ursa once but that was for a specialty attraction where attendees could stand in front of the camera and do some kinda green screen thing. Most of these lists are really only showing what people were using 1-3 years ago and isn't indicative of any current trends. I remember the list a couple years ago had a film that was shot on a 7D. That said, if I was going to shoot docs professionally, I'm sure it would come down to using either a C70/C80 or a Sony FX6. I've been thinking about my next camera purchase, and it was originally going to be between Canon and Sony but after some thought, I think it's going to either be Canon or Nikon. I must admit that the Red acquisition and Nikon's current line up of cameras... specifically the Z6iii... has gotten me more interested in Nikon.

I agree about the FP's size. It's the biggest complaint I have with the camera. To get the best codec, you're doubling the size of the camera. I know rigging up cameras can be fun and some people have made a career of it on YT, but the biggest appeal for the FP was its small form factor plus raw video. Without a dedicated color workflow, and the ability to keep it small, it's now just a 4K raw camera that isn't any smaller than the R5 (as you said) but without the AF and IBIS. Ive gotten some nice footage from the FP, but its hardly worth the hassle. All that said... it's still a pretty cool little camera. Am thinking about trying one of their native lenses with it before I give up and sell it.

I'm getting bored of putzing around with the FP. Great little camera, especially for what I paid for mine, but I'm tired of the SSD and although I like the internal 8bit 4K cDNG files, V90 cards are just too expensive, especially when you see what CF Express cards go for. That said, I still have my 5D3 and other than the inherent sharpness I am getting from the FP, I find the image from the 5D3 ML Raw to be more pleasant. Even though the last thing I need is a new camera, I know I need to upgrade at some point, so I'm thinking about which way to go. On one hand, I've always had the most pleasure from shooting with Canon cameras... and the best results, but Canon doesn't really offer what I want at the price point I need to be. I do enjoy my friend's R7 I've been messing around with, and find the h.265 files to be pretty good if you nail the WB and you gotta love Canon's AWB. But I really don't want to spend Canon money for their lenses. So that lead me to look at the Z6iii and I must say it looks like an amazing machine. It pretty much does everything I could need and want in a camera. Have you tested the ProRes Raw in the Z8? If so, how does it compare to NRaw? It doesn't seem to have much benefit in the file space size compared to NRaw when in Normal Quality? But as a FCPX user, ProRes Raw sounds pretty tempting. Also does the Z8 have the binned/skipped (unsure which it does) full frame, 4K raw? I saw a negligible difference even when zoomed in 200% in a YT video I watched.

FP X3? Did I miss the one and two?

Or the Sony ZV-E10ii with the PZ Kit Lens. A combo I must admit I am slightly interested in. Obviously, the Canon is for a different market and not for most people who frequent this forum. All in all, it's a solid release. Canon has been on a roll IMO. I must admit that I have been pleasantly surprised by the R7 I've been using lately. Not to mention the Canon camcorder. I know a lot of folks around here don't love Canon Log 3 but I think it's a very simple Log profile to work with. If the R6ii shot internal raw, I'd probably sell my FP and go all in on Canon. For totally different reasons, if Sony would give me an RX10ii (body/lens) with the 10bit from the E10ii, I'd be very happy. Or if Panasonic would release an FZ5000 with the internal ProRes... yes please!

You're no slouch either... I believe it was one of your older 5D Mark iii ML Raw videos that helped me choose to go with a 5D! I think it had "Wolf" in the title?

I hate those videos that try and compare a $1000 camera to an Alexa with a stupid thumbnail that suggests you'll be surprised by the results. Inevitably, you learn that the operator wasn't as good at using cameras as he was at making thumbnails, or they intentionally cripple the Alexa by shooting in ways to highlight the $1000 camera. That said, I agree that probably 9 out of 10 times, nobody will realize what camera you shot your movie with as long as the story is good and engaging, but I do think that a couple of those people may feel like something was off without knowing why. An Alexa costs 50K+ for a reason. And although I believe craft and resources lend to the final look of the film, the sensor, the Arri color science and its thick files are a piece of the puzzle. A long time ago, I got hooked on my Canon 5Diii with ML Raw because it was the first time I had shot something where I looked at it and thought... man that almost looks like a real movie. So there are some "intangibles" involved because I am not that talented, nor that skilled. I have shot with a bunch of cameras since... GH5, GH6, Sigma FP, S5iiX, Canon R7, etc... and although the FP comes close, but even its 4K raw image is no match to my trusty, old 5D3 in gross old 1080p raw.

Is that a Q7? I had one briefly for video about 10 years ago... the image wasn't horrible but it had the worst rolling shutter I have ever seen, but it was fun using old Kern 8mm lenses on it... which I still have. Now that I shoot more stills than I used to, I could see how it may be fun to throw in your jacket pocket.

Who wants to tell her that if she had just turned around and faced the setting sun, she could have continued using her iPhone? Not it.

It's good to know kids are learning that to take good photos, you need light... Science is fun. If society can figure out how history can help their social media creds, there just may be hope for the future.