mercer

Plus 4K on the D500 is cropped, so you're 35mm would be 70mm plus.

Yeah, I don't know what the hell they're doing. I am going to head out with it at the end of this week and do a bunch of tests. As I said earlier, I may sell mine, but it has more to do with the fact that it just may be too much camera for me, especially since I haven't really used it in almost two months. That's a lot of closet real estate that can go to other things. But I have been really hoping to utilize that unbelievable 4K codec for some stock footage, I just can't seem to find the time. But if I do sell it, I am going to get to the bottom of the ghosting before I do, even if it requires me sending it in to Canon for repairs, I don't need some eBay a-hole complaining to me and giving me bad feedback and possibly scratching the camera before they return it. @kidzrevil

That sucks about the XC10 because I think the work you have posted with it is without a doubt some of your best work and I've been a fan of your videos since your GH4 days.

Are you going to sell the XC10?

Because I have an aps-c and I asked the differences if I were to move up to FF.

That's for the G85, I was talking about the GX85. I have never used the G85, but there is a post about it on the forum as I think it was just released.

The GX85 has pretty good IBIS and for the price you could wait out the canon while shooting with that.

Yes, you're totally right. I didn't mean to sound rude.

Nah, just dealing with the adapter in general and extra rear lens caps lying around, one more piece of glass you have to keep clean and protect. If I want FF, I want a camera that shoots it natively. For the price of an a6300 plus lens plus speedbooster, you are almost near the price of a FF Sony... At least a used one. For the price of an a6300 or equivalent aps-c mirrorless plus speed booster you can get a D750 and be done with it. Jmo. Ymmv.

But then you have to deal with a Sony Speed Booster Ultra 0.71.

If it's possible that it's a hardware problem, then I would send it in to Canon. It seems we all got ours around the same time. So maybe they just had a bad batch. On that note, I am contemplating selling mine, not due to this issue though. But it's a thought I just had this morning so I am still wildly unsure.

On a different note, has anyone tested the MP4 option? I believe it was added in the firmware release but I haven't messed with it. Canon has that G40 camcorder that has similar properties to the XC10, minus the 4K and C-Log, etc... But it shoots in either MP4 or avchd... Just curious if the MP4 from the xc10 would be a representation of what that camcorder can do.

Right, I never thought it was some magical unicorn that made the images look like it was shot on a different medium altogether. I think there are two schools of thought with this crap... There are people like me that use terms like organic and filmic and look and there are other people that need those phrases to be quantifiable. I used the wrong word with aesthetic, when I should have just asked the pros and cons of FF. Yup, this is what I am unsure of. It helps that the D750 has a DX crop mode, so in some ways you can get double duty out of one lens, but in the end, the aps-c only camera may be enough for me. The Nikons usually go on sale a lot around the holidays so I just want to be prepared and decided, if the 750 goes on some crazy lightning sale or Black Friday sale.

But you are also never going to get the wide angle equivalence with a crop sensor that you do with a full frame, so it's more than just shallow depth of field, that is definitely part of the equation, but the separation, and FOV will not be the same.

Thanks Tim, I appreciate it.

I'm out of "Likes" for the day, so consider this reply as me liking your comment. Honestly, I used to have fun shooting video. I just got the shot the scene required and I moved on. Now I am so worried about this technical element and that technical element that every creative element I used to prioritize I am now, instead, resting on my laurels. I only recently started enjoying it again when I got my D5500. I think I went into it not expecting much and I was pleasantly surprised with what I ended up with. To address your comment though, I had the FS or FX something... It was the model under the LX5 and I loved the video out of it. The b&w footage was beautiful, that step zoom function was great and you could take it anywhere and shoot a scene or get b-roll. Does the LX7 have 24p? Would love to see that... I love old Corman movies. Is it online anywhere?

Yeah, but at the time, the Brothers Duplass were using the best Mini DV they could get. And I think that's the lesson, use the best you can get, but use it to its strengths. Hell, you could probably go get a DVX100 for less than 500 bucks and shoot an awesome movie with it... You may even be revered for doing so. Look how much street cred Ed gets for doing his hipster video tests. To add, I personally wouldn't mess with mini DV tape now because it literally takes forever to ingest into the computer, but there are definitely some other options that would give a similar look, using SD cards. Just look for a cam with 3 CCDs instead of a CMOS sensor, I'm contemplating buying a point and shoot and making a short with one just to take all of the technical headaches away... I will probably call it Point & Shoot as well. Lol. But I'm serious. I may look to one of the old Panasonic P&S cameras like the LX7... That little camera made some cool ass video in the mjpeg codec.

Well I wasn't exactly comparing making a 3 minute short to an 80 minute movie. Today, the definition of feature length is pretty liberal. People are making no budget movies that come in under an hour and calling them features. They are uploading them to Amazon and are making a little money. Also, I should have said preproduction work, which is, IMO, the brunt of it with one man band, no budget, shorts and features. If you make a 10 minute short with 3-5 actors and 3-5 locations, even though there is less to film, a lot of the preproduction work would be done if you were to just make an hour feature with 3-5 actors and 3-5 locations.

On a tripod with small movements it looks okay. That is dialed down neutral profile video sooc, so it could do with a little adjusting, but I shot this before I had FCPX and before I ever thought about correction/grading. Thanks @Liam for posting this. I was just talking with my friend about shooting with old camcorders and point and shoots and small sensor cameras and how liberating it was because, even though the imagery looked good, it kinda didn't too and that was part of the charm... It became about the story and quickly getting the shots without worrying about the technical element of cinematography so much. I used to love using old Kern D-mount lenses on my Q7... Instant vintage look.

The funny thing is... That video looks really good. I've always felt some of the small sensor point and shoots have some kind of unquantifiable soul to their IQ. For your first video, you should be proud of that. I had a Q7 for a little while last year. It was my first test of using D-mount and c-mount lenses in the digital world. Unfortunately, there are some issues with Pentax video, namely rolling shutter that seems to affect the entire frame and not just vertical straight lines on trees or buildings, but the Q cameras are a bunch of fun.

Yeah, the only real world example I saw was from @Mattias Burling and even though I have never shot with a FF camera, I know it would be very difficult to replicate that photo with a smaller sensor, under the same circumstances. I've even noticed it between m4/3 and aps-c... With the lenses I own. And right now, for me... That was more relevant. But I appreciate the answers, I've learned a little bit.

Obviously when I wrote "you" I meant you in general, not you specifically... I know you're a veteran at all this. I'm a writer/director that spent the last year + trying to be an okay camera operator with the right tool. Now I just want to simplify everything and make movies. Hopefully people will like them and I get one into SXSW, but most likely I may make my money back by creative marketing through Amazon, but the lesson will be invaluable.

I think festivals are worth entering as long as your honest about your film. There's no reason to give Sundance a couple hundred bucks unless you know you have something really special... And even then you probably shouldn't. Short films are probably the smartest approach to jumpstart a career, but even shorts take a shit load of work and when done, for just a little more work and a little more money, you could have made a feature that at least has some monetary value on Amazon or through self distribution.

Place an ad in Craigslist... There are always young actors that will work for free and usually some talented ones. Post some ads at a local college or local theatre. Your local library, or a county library probably have meeting rooms you can reserve for free... Hold auditions there. In your ad make sure you include non union/no pay, offer them a free copy of the movie and clips for their reel. You will get offers from union actors telling you how great they are and you should hire them... Either ignore the offer or politely refuse their services.

Ask yourself some questions and give yourself some honest answers. 1. Do you have access to $10,000 to make a feature? 2. Can the script you wrote be made for $10,000? Because in all honesty there is absolutely no reason why 2 feature films couldn't be made for $10,000 if you accept the limitations of the budget and work within those limitations. Hell, a feature could be made for $500 if you have access to things for free.