mercer

Honestly, I'm patiently waiting to hear your thoughts on the camera before I make a decision about it. As it is now, I'm not compelled to get one, but I think you're probably familiar enough with my tastes to know if it's something I should bother saving up for, or buying when there's a decent price drop. I have to stop reading this site... I start the day completely content with what I have and now I'm thinking about what films I can shoot with a Micro or an FP... I NEED HELP!!!

Yup, that is the inherent issue with the Micro in my opinion. I've said it before, the camera is literally the size of a Rubick's Cube and any and every add on goes against the tiny nature of the camera. The Ikan VL35 is a 3.5" screen, so it isn't too big, but it's square in shape so it adds unnecessary height. The Focus and the Shinobi are 5" screens, but aren't much bigger than the Ikan because they're rectangular shaped monitors with a similar height even if they add an inch in width. Really, the perfect product doesn't exist, which would be a small add on EVF like the one made for the EOS-M. Don't you already own a Ninja2? I'm sure that would work in a pinch for a B-Cam. If you're using the Micro as a crash cam or for obtuse, Dutch angles, in tight spaces, you could always run a long HDMI from the Micro to a small monitor attached to your Ursa rig, too. I was going to ask how well the P4K matches your Ursa, but after thinking about it, the Micro still may be a better option for you... for cost and to have that similar Fairchild sensor look. Even if you're shooting 4K with the Ursa, there are a lot of examples showing how the Micro footage upresses really well with Resolve's Super Scale function. I remember John Brawley saying he used it a lot as a C-cam in The Resident TV show he used to DP. I think they used an Alexa Mini as an A-Cam with an Ursa as a B-Cam and the Micro to cover macro shots for the surgeries and anywhere that they were limited with the size of the set or the shot. His rig was really cool too. Here are a couple production stills he generously shared with us... After further consideration, I think if I get the opportunity to have another Micro, I'll build a barebones rig like his. But I am very happy with my current set up, so I'll have to find an insanely cheap Micro to even bother. @BTM_Pix made an interesting point that the FP could be considered a FF Micro with a built in monitor for a similarly small set up... probably even smaller in reality. However, I was wrong, John Brawley went on to say that he felt the P4K matches the 4.6K better than the Micro does... so maybe a P4K would be a better B-Cam option for you.

It's natively a Canon battery but they do sell sleds that you can change it to NPF batteries... which is obviously the smarter way to go... NPF Battery in the camera with one of these Powerextra batteries to the DC input on the monitor. When/if I find another Micro for a good price, I'll probably go that route with an Ikan 3.5 monitor for the compact size or an Atomos Shinobi for the features.

I don't know if c-mounts will work with that mount? Which Fujinon zoom lenses are you looking at?

This seems to the best solution for external power on these cameras. When I was slowly building my Micro rig I was so tired of the piss poor battery life and the constant changing of batteries... between the camera and the monitor, I'd have to change batteries every 20 minutes or so. I was considering the SmallHD Focus to power the monitor and camera at the same time but those Powerextra batteries would have been a better solution for a lot less money. Good to know for the future... thanks for posting it. I assume they'd also be great with a Z-Cam... power the camera and then run a USB to power the phone for monitoring.

They're worth the investment if you're going to use them and are interested in that aesthetic. Search Alexa Mini Super 16 and you can see some great samples of that old glass in action on a high end camera. And if you're patient, you can get an old Super Speed for a decent price. But if you plan on using a Sigma 18-35mm, or something similar, most of the time, the S16 glass may not be worth the money. With that being said, the Sigma 18-35mm is probably the smart move. Throw the 30mm 1.4 into the mix for your close ups or those shots when you need that extra speed but don't want to bump your ISO and you have a nice little kit for most situations. Add some BPM filters and you're all set. Instead of testing the crap out of the camera, it would be cool to go out and make a 3 minute short film with it. That's what I did with my 5D3... my mistake was that I fell in love with the footage too much and the idea expanded into a much larger project. But I learned the ins and outs of the camera in a quick minute. Whatever you end up doing or what lenses you use, I look forward to seeing what you make with it.

It's funny how different people are. Although the crop factor can be annoying, or difficult, with the Micro, the sensor size and it's relation to 16mm/S16 is what I find appealing about it. And the S16 crop mode of the P4K is the ONLY thing I find appealing about that camera... for me. Well native ProRes recording is definitely s bonus as well. As far as it being outdated... as a DP that hangs out on this forum, I understand why you would think that, but the no budget, writer/director side of you must know that 1080p 60p is all you really need. The Ursa was definitely a smart move, though. Have you had the chance to test it out yet? And if so, thoughts?

Sorry I posted the wrong link in my last reply. It's still a good article about TWD... and apparently I was wrong, they shoot TWD on 16mm, not S16. This is the article about FTWD... https://www.panavision.com/mcdonough-brings-anamorphic-look-fear-walking-dead

Same. I've been considering the Sigma FP, since it was announced, but having a separate SSD on the camera isn't appealing to me at all at this level. I'm still intrigued by the camera but at this point, I'd only use the internal recording options ... 8bit 4K raw for B&W delivery or the 12bit 1080p @ 60p for slow motion. For now, I'm content with what I have, though and see no reason to make any changes this year. I will say, if you need more power, that battery option is pretty cool. I wish I found out about that when I had the Micro.

Haha, I feel the exact opposite. I don't think there's a strong enough, or charismatic enough, actor or character that can deliver lines like... "Coral!" and sell it. And then they lost the other female character that could have done it. Also, I know they loosely follow the graphic novel but I think they are missing out on some really interesting storylines in doing so. When they introduced the Whisperers, their initial theory about "Walker evolution" was a much cooler angle than a bunch of weirdos wearing skin masks heralded by an annoying character that can't even sell her own ruthlessness. Haha... IMO. Well, it seems from this article... https://library.creativecow.net/article.php?author_folder=kaufman_debra&article_folder=Behind-the-Lens-David-Boyd&page=1 The first, 6 episode season, was shot on an Alexa with Panavision anamorphics, by one DP. The second season they brought the Alexa Mini into the mix and added two more DPs to handle the workload. I imagine that after awhile, between different directors and DPs, it's easy for the original concept and visual vision to get watered down. On a similar side note... I've been watching The Outsider, which is great by the way, and I noticed a distinct difference, for the worse, in the show when Jason Bateman stopped directing the episodes. But I digress, although the Alexa footage is good in the first few seasons, I'm still unsure if it's as good as the S16 from TWD. And where they took the Alexa footage with the stylized grades in the later seasons, it almost looks like it could have been shot on a DVX100 and isn't even remotely comparable to the S16 film from the original show.

FTWD was always shot on an Alexa. However, I agree about the difference of the first few seasons. In fact, in the first episode of Season 1, they filmed in the abandoned church, with the blown out stained glass windows and it is some of my favorite photography of both shows. It's funny you mentioned Z-Nation because I said the same thing last season to my GF. I still watch the show and although it isn't as good as TWD, TWD isn't that great anymore either.

Yes, Fear the Walking Dead definitely has a more stylistic look. In fact, in Season 2 (or maybe 3) they had a beautiful B&W color grade for some scenes/episodes. But the color grading adds to FTWD's budget and it doesn't lessen it. Although I am sure a good colorist can do wonders with a filmic grade, I think a side by side would be quite telling... Tarantino, Spielberg and others still shoot film for a reason. Listen, I know there is this new thought that digital is better than film and I suppose I am the dinosaur here, but in the end, it's all subjective. Besides, I love the look of the Alexa and I would choose to shoot a 2K Alexa ProRes movie over shooting film any and every day. But I still believe film has a superior IQ to digital. IMO.

By looks worse, I mean the image from the S16 film looks better with dynamic range, color tonality, texture, highlight and shadow detail, etc... Since the majority of both shows are exterior daylight scenes, I don't think the budget necessarily would effect the IQ as much as you're suggesting. I doubt they're skimping on reflectors or fill light on Fear the Walking Dead.

If you can afford it, I recommend getting the Mark III for full 1080p, the ability to keep the firmware constantly on an SD card while you record on CF cards, the OLPF Filter, etc...

Here's the trailer to Cosmos in case anyone is interested.

After seeing the trailer for that movie Cosmos and reading that it was shot on the original Pocket in ProResLT, I was very interested to shoot ProRes on the Micro. I bought another one (second one I had) but it truly broke my heart to rig that tiny camera up. So I ended up selling it to a member of this forum. However, I love the image from the original Ursa Micro 4K and when it gets below $1200, I may give it a go to shoot some ProRes. For me, it would be for a project mostly on sticks, with static shots, pans and dolly/slider moves.... so very controlled. At 12 stops of DR, it's plenty for a controlled set up.

I'm sure it's great for that weighted, handheld look that is popular now, but I was referring to the lightweight, handheld stability of IBIS. On a side note... what are your plans for all of these cameras? Originally, I thought you were more of a director that shoots your own films. But it seems you're more interested in cinematography now. So, with your cameras, how do you foresee these tools being used? I assume the Fuji will be your wedding camera and the Ursa and the F3 will be for docs, music videos and narratives? I've been watching some videos from the original Ursa Mini and although it has a stop less DR than the 4.6K... there is something very organic and beautiful about the 4K... and the price isn't too bad either.

Are we though? There's a reason why the majority of Hollywood cinematographers still choose the 2K image from the Alexa over 4K, 6K or even 8K from a Red. With the Mini LF's release, the rise in FF and anamorphic lenses, more DPs are shooting at higher resolutions, but for now, and the foreseeable future, 2K is the resolution choice for delivery and distribution. Since the beginning of digital acquisition, the goal was to create an image comparable to film. To this day, the Alexa is the only camera that comes even remotely close. And even that is a stretch. You can look to The Walking Dead as proof. The original show has always been shot on S16 film. The spinoff, Fear the Walking Dead, is shot on an Alexa. And although I love the look, the original S16 is a better image. Unfortunately, there is this YouTube craze where content creators claim that the image from this or that camera is as good as an Alexa. There are coloring tutorials and color space transforms to try and mimic the Alexa. And people can get it close, but it's never the same. As far as ergonomics go, I agree with you... I prefer using a DSLR/DSLM to a rigged out camera, but I assume the eventual goal of most filmmakers is to shoot at a professional level with professional equipment and unfortunately these consumer cameras won't ever be at the level of proper cinema cameras... in terms of features or image quality. The good news is that story is still king, so if you prefer the handheld dexterity of a smaller camera, or Brothers3 prefers the cinema construction and features of a cinema camera, the stories you produce will have a much larger impact than the cameras they were filmed on... If that's not the spirit of this site, I don't know what is?

They're sensor specific but you can probably get by without one. If it's anything like the Micro/Pocket, moiré is a lot better in ProRes. If you're going to get one, though, look into the RawLite brand. I believe it has an IR Cut Filter built in, so that alone is worth the extra cost. They'll pop up on eBay once in a while.

I was referring to your comment about an a7s with Venice color. I actually kinda like the grungy, funky colors of the a7s... it reminds me of an older indie film look.

When you pull that much gain with such high ISOs, it's bound to affect the color fidelity a bit.

Nah... I'm pretty sure I invented it. 🤪 Haha... movies are not meant to be made by a one man crew. Lol. Thankfully, it's given me a lot of time to rework the script as needed. I've been watching a bunch of Amira videos on Vimeo and they look amazing!!! If I could own any camera, I'm pretty sure I'd pick an Amira.

I've read that article before and if you like flares, I know why you posted it. He has some beautiful examples. In his article, he seems to be using the EF version of the 50mm 1.2 L. I have the FD version. I haven't tested it for flares, but now I'm gonna. The filter thread on the FD 50mm 1.2 L is 52mm. I think the EF version might be 72mm, but that's just a guess from memory. Helios 58mm f/2 is kinda the King of Flares, so that may be another good lens for you.

Thanks, after 3 years shooting with just the 5D3 and ML Raw, I'm still as enamored with it as I was the first day and haven't really scratched the surface of what the image is capable of. Once I removed the need for 4K out of my brain, and accepted 1080p raw as a superior image to consumer level 4K, I stopped chasing rainbows. If you don't fall madly in love with the LF, then there's probably something wrong with you. Lol. My ultimate dream is to sell my film and make enough money to rent an Amira or Alexa Mini for an upcoming film. Leica Rs are beautiful lenses. They're a little out of my price range so I've never used one. I'd love to try the 50mm f/2 summicron or ultimately the 35mm f/2 one day. There are so many vintage lenses that add a little extra to an image, IMO. For instance, Pentax Takumar lenses, from the 60s, still impress the hell out of me. Nikkors lenses are great choices, though because there are plenty of options in their line up for every budget... as long as you don't mind the focus direction. The 35mm 1.4 was considered one of their "professional" lenses marketed to photojournalists and street photographers. It even has 9 aperture blades as opposed to the traditional 7 blades that most of their lenses have. But the 35mm f/2 can be had for less than half the price and is a great lens as well. My first ML Raw test was shot with the 35mm f/2 and that lens led me to the 1.4.

I have a Benro monopod already and they sell some inexpensive heads... nothing more to it really. As far as complex moves... maybe I overstated with the word complex... just basic crane movements. It's just I came up with the monopod/tape measure pouch idea out of need to have a quick, easy and cheap handheld-like solution. I never intended to do anything more than stay steady while being as mobile as possible. But with these belts, a monopod, and a tripod head, basic jib arm movements seem easily possible. No need to start another thread, I don't care if things go off topic. Conversations evolve naturally.