mercer

I don't know... I think all of these YouTube personalities are full of shit, on some level. And that's fine. It's a niche market in and of itself and if they have found a way to feed their families, then it's no worse than many other professions. As long as you know where they're coming from, then I don't care one way or the other. They all follow trends amongst themselves, chasing each other's angles. The new angle seems to be... why YouTube content creating is soul draining and why I am getting out. A month or two ago, one of my favorite YT shillebrities posted a video with that topic and then he broke in the middle for a word from his sponsor... HAHAHAHA!!!!

He's been on Noam Kroll's podcast as well and he mentioned an ingenious thing he does when he slates a shot. He basically claps and then instead of calling it Take One, take two, etc... he uses the file name on his zoom recorder in place of scene/take name/numbers... if that makes sense

Or this model was selling better than the Pyxis but they want to push that camera as their next gen of cameras. Either way it's a good deal and equivalent to the famous OG BMPCC fire sale of 2014.

The filmmaker that made the WW2 5Diii/ML Raw video. Yeah Pete Ohs is pretty interesting actually. His past 3 or 4 films he has made on his own after getting a "real" budget to make a movie and hating the process, so he took his 5D3, casted some actors and wrote a very loose script that they wrote/rewrote each morning before filming. He makes a movie a year. I believe he edits on a livestream and people watch and may make suggestions... or he did with Jethica.

Just reread my last post and realized I meant to write that you guys can be discussing 16K and I'll still be praising... anyway you get my point. Also in my haste, @BTM_Pix I forgot to mention that one thing I noticed from that video which really helped was his use of old Hollywood close ups with a glowing blurry background. I think it helped to add to the feel of the piece. And with that, I think the feature film he was working on is almost completed. However I assume he shot it on the Komodo because I think that's his camera of choice now.

Wish I had more money. Emmanuel, this looks fantastic, and I just mentioned it in another thread so I thought I'd come here and state the same thing... As much as I like the image from these BM cameras... and this is just gorgeous... I am starting to notice when I look around at the low to no budget film community that everyone is using a BM camera now and everything looks the same. It seems the influencers on YT have developed a canned cinematic look, that although looks nice, it's also rather boring looking in some ways... or I guess the better way to say it is that it looks too similar to everything else. But... I really must say that it looks fantastic and if I had the money, I would have ordered one by now, especially at this price.

Sorry, I have been meaning to reply to this for the past few weeks but life has gotten in the way. You know, it's so easy to not even mention or think about the obvious production value he had by shooting at that event. In some ways, I even glossed over that in my praise of the video and it may add to the reason why I liked the camera in the first place. Now I'm a stubborn prick, so I cannot move on from it until I have made a proper film with it. You guys can be discussing 6K and I'll still be yammering on about the 1080p image from the 5D3 and ML Raw.

Of course, people have different use cases and I haven't been following this thread too closely, but from the title, I thought it was a desert island choice... not if the desert island had a thriving film market. That said, you aren't necessarily wrong about the 5D3, although I have found it to have close to 12 stops of usable DR when you expose for the highlights. It's actually pretty insane how much information exists in the highlights on this camera. That said, it's definitely not a camera I would recommend to someone who was working on a production for pay. I believe Pete Ohs used the camera because that's what he owns, so it was probably a pragmatic choice more than anything else, but since he has had multiple films shot on the 5D3 and ML Raw over the past few years at SXSW, Sundance, Slamdance, etc... it should be proof enough that the image is more than good enough for narrative filmmaking. I use it because I love the image and the ergonomics and haven't found a better one for what I want to capture. To change the subject slightly, I have been impressed with what these new, prosumer cams can do. Even the Sigma FP... which is more similar to the 5D3 and ML Raw than anything else... in a lot of ways... except it doesn't have the highlight retention that the Canon has. But between Blackmagic, Sony, Canon and Panasonic and even Fuji... there are so many options that it's pretty insane and the gap between them and an Alexa is narrowing. But... Someone posted in another thread a video of pretty young woman shot with the FF BM 6K camera that's currently on sale and I must say it looks gorgeous, but there really is something I am noticing.... all of these cameras look the same and it's this weird nod to YouTube "filmmakers" ... think about how weird that is... people are starting to consider what is considered cinematic by what videos on YouTube look like. I have no interest in that. I'd rather shoot a film on a camcorder in night shot mode if I'm being honest.

So... is the premise of this entire thread based on user error... fast forward one month and the OP will be a 24p true believer.

Somebody should tell Pete Ohs, who is getting his films in major film festivals and distributed, that the 5D3 with ML Raw is outdated. Obviously, anyone who has read my posts here over the past 7 years would guess that MY choice would be the 5D3/ML Raw. I have used a handful of "modern" cameras since then and none of them has held up against it. I've been using the Sigma FP for the past year, hoping it would be the upgrade I thought I needed, but it just isn't. Weirdly I find the 8bit 4K mode on the FP to be one of the more interesting features. That said, it's actually a fine camera and if I hadn't had the 5D3, I probably would be more than happy with it. As is, it's just like most other higher resolution cameras... it looks sharper and tricks your eye that the image is better because it looks sharper. If anyone is looking to buy an FP, I am looking to sell mine. Currently, I am in the possession of an S5iiX and it's fine, but it lacks the overall IQ that just drips from the 5Diii. Frankly I find the image kinda boring. But the camera itself is awesome and an absolute workhorse. I love the ProRes workflow.

🤷‍♂️ It looks great to me. I'm not looking for an image that looks exactly like reality. It's definitely desaturated, but I don't agree that it's low contrast. No offense to the photographer of that shot, but that looks like it could have been shot with any standard profile from a camcorder in auto mode. As far as... how can I judge the image... look at the skin tones... the weight of the image. It looks and feels like a real movie.

Both of those cameras are great, you should get one. What are you shooting with now?

I'm sure I posted it back then too. ML Raw is easy on the 5D3 due to dual card slots and its stability. I'm sure the FX3 and R5C could get close... minus the 14bit color... but they're $3500 cameras and I already own the 5D3.

And I'd be remiss if I didn't post this video from a British filmmaker named Paul Cook. It was the video that made me buy my 5D3 and install ML Raw on it and never look back. After 7 years, I'm still chasing what he was able to capture in an afternoon...

Agreed. I know you were never too much of a Canon guy, but I swear that the ProLost Flat settings always gave me a nice look with minimal effort in post. It wasn't until I "understood" more about color grading and LUTs did I start getting looks I didn't like. As you probably remember, I have owned a lot of cameras in my day... 4K, 1080p, 6K... but other than my 5D3 (and the FP... kinda) my two favorite cameras were my old eos-m, even with the original firmware and the Nikon D5500... it was as small as a mirrorless and the Nikon Flat profile was sooo nice to work with... all it needed was a little contrast and some selective saturation.

Good points. I guess it depends on what you're planning on shooting, or do shoot? I am only interested in narrative filmmaking, so I have a specific look I like. It's definitely a filmic look. I've always said that most cameras from 10 years ago could "essentially" and convincingly achieve a 70s film look. But the look of modern cinema isn't really close to a film look. It looks nice but it doesn't seem like they're trying to emulate that like the original Alexa attempted. Even on this forum, you'll get dozens of opinions about it. Many want the most resolution they can get. I'm still happy with the 1080p magic lantern raw from my 5D3. But I'm probably a weirdo, I'm seriously considering buying an old camcorder to get a specific "cinema" color filter that Canon had on their older models. Back in the day, Canon was known to have the "best" color. The original Panasonic mirrorless cameras also had very nice color. Sony was considered the worst. Now with the different log profiles and color space transforms, any camera can be made to look good. But if you can find a camera with a good rec709 profile, that you like, why not? Log and CSTs and LUTs are great and some will help to eek out an extra stop or two of dynamic range, but in a lot of cases, you can get by with the 8-10 stops that rec709 offers. Here's another film that I was highly impressed by shot on the OG BMPCC by a British brother team called Cosmos. What's interesting about this is that they were able to make a Hollywood looking film that was released in theaters. They also decided to shoot in ProRes LT to save storage space using only one lens for 90% of the film. It's amazing what you can accomplish if you try. It's not the tool, but the craftsman using it.

Whenever I start thinking about the beginning of the DSLR revolution or the Digital Revolution, I take my own advice and go back to look at some old videos that I love from those forgotten cameras. This first round of films, from Kendy Ty and his t2i, I have linked to countless times, years ago, but I think they could be helpful or relevant to the OP's topic... If I remember correctly, he used the t2i and the old Sigma 30mm 1.4. I believe he even created his own picture profile, in camera, for his earlier films. Like so many others, he eventually moved onto a Sony 4K camera, but many people commented they preferred the look from his trusty, old t2i. If there's a lesson here, it's simple... sometimes less is more. Sometimes the tool that gets the job done and is simple to work with, is better than wading through the minutiae of features and tech finding the best camera.

Making a film is one of the hardest things I've ever attempted... especially in a DIY, low/no budget space... but it's also one of the most exhilarating experiences I've ever had... even if ai haven't been successful with finishing the film... Yet.

Didn't know that was in B&W. Thanks for the heads up. I adore B&W, so much so that I've been testing my FP in 4K 8bit mode for the sole purpose of having a smaller set up for a B&W film.

To be fair, I vaguely remember the OP stating at some point that he/she likes to have discussions about gear. And let's be honest, this forum is primarily a gear forum. Perhaps the OP should mention that this discussion isn't necessarily about a decision he's currently planning on making and instead it's about learning and gathering information. With that said, @kye has a fair point. These cameras are only tools for creative endeavors. These cameras will not make the film or color grade your film or make your film good. At the end of the day, story is king. I would suggest to the OP that they take some time and go back and look what people were creating when the DSLR revolution began. Look at t2i and GH2 videos to see what was possible with limited resolution, DR and resources.

I want one!

I agree the lawsuit and the patent for Redcode was probably the driving force, but they didn't spend hundreds of millions of dollars to buy Red solely for the patent. They could have licensed it for 2 decades and developed their own cine line of cameras and lenses for less than that. Other than the RedCode patent... what other tech does Red have? They have an established brand in the high end cinema space and a lower tiered customer base that will pay top dollar to be a part of that brand. Don't get me wrong, I love photographic history and I am a huge fan of Nikon. I own a small set of ai-s lenses and a small set of scalloped ringed non-ai lenses with the "C" coating. They're obviously one of the greatest photographic companies in history with an amazing lineage... in the photographic world. Until very recently, their video capabilities were lacking. It will take a while for them to gel with a lot of cinematographers... they'll just use Arri cameras instead. Then again... I reserve the right to be completely wrong.

Doubtful. Antiquated cultural practices aside, Nikon didn't need Red to create a lower tiered cinema camera. They bought a patent and a brand. A brand with a VERY loyal following in the lower tier and a loyal user base in the higher tier, Hollywood, cinematography world. If they aren't, at all, interested in the brand, then they spent hundred of millions of dollars for a patent. Red doesn't make lower tiered cameras, but they can help each other. If Nikon eventually dismantles the Red brand, it won't be in 2 years. Maybe in a decade after they gain the trust and reputation with the Red loyal user base and the Hollywood cinematography community. I do think the Komodo could bridge the gap between Red and Nikon, though... with the OG Komodo being more Nikon with a new composite, user friendly design and the Komodo X staying truer to the Red brand. But I think Nikon will use a "powered by Red" moniker, or something like that, in their higher tiered MILCs.

It would be utterly ridiculous for Nikon to absorb or abolish the Red brand, especially since they aren't natural competitors. They purchased Red for the Redcode patent so they didn't have to license compressed raw from Red or ticoRaw. It's really that simple. If they use the Red branding in any future Nikon release, who knows. If they decide to venture into the low tier cinema camera market, it will involve the Komodo and they won't change the name of it other than add Nikon to it somewhere. Maybe... Nikon CineRed Komodo. They won't take the Red name away, they'll just add Nikon.

I believe it only offers a S35 crop. Due to the compression methods from the 6K sensor, some say that the S35 crop is superior... but I didn't buy a FF camera to shoot in S35. And the difference is probably minimal and I don't care about minimal. But as usual, I'm probably the weirdo here, because I still prefer good 1080p over run of the mill 4K. For instance, I mentioned earlier that I think some lenses shine with certain cameras. After thorough testing, most lenses look pretty good in 4K. By that I mean, most vintage lenses have a certain level of sharpness that is good enough due to the 4K. In fact, I think vintage lenses help to tame the sharpness... resolution of 4K. Now with my 5D3/ML Raw, some of those same lenses just don't work. But with a more modern lens, the image looks really good, in my opinion better than the FP. Here's a shot from the 5D3 with the older non-Art Sigma 50mm 1.4... And here are a couple shots of the Takumar on the 5D3... Obviously, they're different shots so in some ways they're incomparable... And here's a B&W shot with the Tak on the 5D3 that's a lot more interesting... So what's my point... I have way more options than I need and B&W makes everything look cooler. That is all.