mercer

@BTM_Pix no problem, thanks for looking. How about the Zeiss ZF 50mm 1.4 or 85mm 1.4... or any ZF variant... the 25mm? I hear they’re all fairly matched. I’d love that Sigma 30mm if I still had an aps-c sensor but unfortunately all FF for me... for now. Lol. However, I read a review that Sigma Art lenses were no match for micro contrast compared to the Zeiss... however again... I am also kinda interested in the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 art, so the 35mm could be my one good prime to go along with it. You don’t have that Zoom do you? Or heard anything about it?

Yeah this site does some weird stuff to contrast too. Thanks for your help! Any chance you have any of the Zeiss ZF lenses... the 35mm f/2 Distagon is supposed to have amazing micro contrast and I’m looking to shoot more B&W in the coming months so that lens is on the top of my list... I can probably go handheld with it too if I don’t drink too much coffee or smoke too many cigarettes that day... so maybe not handheld...

Yeah, wow, that is a night and day difference on the skin tones. And they didn’t look bad to begin with. It would be great if they could make one for the GH5.

@BTM_Pix bear with me because I am looking at this on my phone right now but the Sigma 35 and the Fuji 35 look like the clear winners here but the 18-35 is holding its own considering it is wide open... But when you consider the prices... the 7artisans wide open is a steal and definitely worth consideration. Thanks. Btw, which Fuji do you have? I’m considering picking up the X-H1 because of the IBIS and it seems the 35mm 1.4 is one of the lenses that works the best with it?

Wow, Fuji is stepping up. Damn. I must admit the X-H1 is on my short list for my next camera but now... hmm... too bad it doesn’t have IBIS. REALLY?! Man, I actually really liked the E-M5ii and have almost bought a second one about 3 or 4 times over the past year... hopefully the Mark III will be worth the wait.

But secretly you love the shit out of the camera and so do your clients probably. What’s the multiplier?

That’s true, I’m just grumpy today and need a nap. Plus there aren’t too many positive Canon posts around here and me being a Canon shooter... they’re nice to see once in a while.

Derr... that’s the point. This happens way too often on this site. People ask opinion between A and B camera and somebody goes off on some G option. Yeah, typing too quick.

Oh yeah... and he said he wants a Canon and never mentioned the a7iii.

Adapting lenses sucks on mirrorless cameras. Canon lenses aren’t that small and then you add another two inches to their length and they don’t work nearly as well as on a Canon body plus then you need an electronic adapter which adds more money. Doesn’t make sense. But another two reasons why he would choose the C100 over an a7iii is the 30 min recording limit... for the performances and weddings he shoots, that may be one of the most important features. And then the inevitable overheating with the Sony... even at 30 minutes, the a7iii would probably start melting.

For one... he wants to stay with Canon... so why even bring up the a7iii? Two and three... built in NDs and XLRs. Four... Canon color. Five, six, seven, etc... he wants to stay with Canon. @webrunner5 Not to mention, two weeks ago you were seriously thinking about buying a C100 Mark I...

$2000 for a cinema camera that has XLR, cLog, DPAF, internal NDs, with a really clean 1080p image downscaled in camera from 4K... that cost $6000 new only a few years ago... yeah that’s dirt cheap.

Well, the OP also already said that he is pulling triple duty as director, DP and operator... so anybody who has ever done anything similar would know that one less thing to worry about is useful. So I would say AF is important in this scenario. I never used Sony PDAF but I know Canon DPAF has been described as having a Hollywood focus puller following you on set... to me that sounds pretty damn useful if you’re also worried about lighting, camera movement, composition, actor’s performances. Hell, the time saved marking the floor is worth its weight in gold in that scenario. The good thing about AF is you don’t have to use it, but if you don’t have it, you can never use it. With that being said, AF doesn’t automatically beat codec and codec doesn’t beat AF. Now if he/she were to come back and post that he is making a feature film to try and get distributed, then codec would probably win. If he is working on some short films for festivals but mostly for the web, AF may be more important. Personally, if I were him/her, I’d go with the GH5. Since he/she has shot with the DVX200, possibly in vLogL, the GH5 may be a logical transition. It will give a good beefy, 10bit codec for grading and it will offer some AF that could be used for tracking shots. It’s not perfect AF but in a pinch it can help with difficult shots where movement, composition and performance are also critical. The IBIS is another plus.

Are the Sigma Art primes a lot sharper than their zooms? I know traditionally primes are sharper but everyone raves about how sharp the 18-35mm is, so I wasn’t sure. It is pretty sharp though. I was watching a video on YouTube with the 18-35mm on the 80D and it really made the 80D pop.

Oh yeah, I’ve never used them so I forgot they existed. Good idea.

Those shots are so hard to expose. So you have no choice but to let the sky blow out. Pro DPs would light those trees, but I know I don’t have those kind of resources. In Resolve, in the Raw Tab, there is a Highlight protection thing you click on and it really helps to retain some information in any blown out areas. With my 5D3 raw files, I love Resolve for basic color correction and to transcode to ProRes 444. I then bring it into FCPX for edit and color grading... I know I should grade in Resolve but I just can’t wrap my head around nodes and don’t feel like learning it.

Yeah, I think it’s safe to assume that this camera will not be shipping on Sept 3rd but it’s also safe to say that whenever it does ship, it will be an amazing cinema camera.

How and when did ISO 1600 become a limitation in any cinema camera? What lens did you use? With Raw, you need a fast lens for so many shots. I’ve ended up shooting mostly with one or two fast primes just in case I am shooting a high contrast scene with a lot of shadows... or shooting way into magic hour like this shot.

Well, if 4K, slow motion and price are irrelevant to you, then I have to ask, are the films you are planning for web distribution, film festivals or fun? Also you mentioned you come from a street shooter background, well what stills camera and lenses do you already own? Are you interested in color correction/grading? For filmmaking, do you prefer the camcorder/cinema camera feel, or do you want to move to a hybrid stills camera? Also you mentioned that you’re not worried about money, but I must assume there is a minimum and maximum you’d like to spend? But to answer your question, I don’t know. I chose codec and went with the 5D Mark iii and ML Raw but there are only a few people I would recommend that to. However, I am in a similar position as you since I am working on no budget films where I am pulling not just double but triple duty as the director, camera man and audio guy, so I understand the desire to make AF easier in that scenario. I also shoot guerrilla style, so I chose lenses with IS or very wide angle lenses, so I can go handheld. If handheld is important, you may want to consider a camera with IBIS. The obvious choice there is the GH5. It doesn’t have great AF, or even good, but if it’s anything like the FZ2500 I owned, the face tracking is decent. And anybody who wears a lot of hats knows... as long as you cover your angles, you can always cut away if the AF hunts. But since you shot your first film on a DVX and your second on an iPhone, and 4K isn’t important to you, I’d probably recommend a Canon for AF, it just doesn’t get better than DPAF for tracking and touch screen focus pulls. And if codec is more important to you, but slow motion isn’t, I’d go with the original Pocket cam. You can be under $1000 for either choice and trust me, even on small or no budgets, money keeps exiting your pocket.

Idk, after looking at what Sage has done for the GH5/s, I think I would go with the Panasonic route. Since you already own at least one of the three, the investment will be a lot smaller and I don’t know if you’ve seen Zak Forsman’s footage from the EVA1, but it looks great. Of the sub 10,000, my order of purchase, for me and my tastes would be: 1. C200 (obviously) internal Raw video with DPAF... yes, please may I have another. Add an SDI recorder and you can have 2K 10bit ProRes from the Raw signal while you record raw internally... but I know this camera doesn’t meet your requirements... just reiterating how much I want one. Lol. 2. EVA1 - just a beautiful output that is broadcast ready and you can shoot Raw externally (and maybe ProRes Raw?) if you have higher end projects that are worth the extra storage and post. Plus you can use Sage’s post workflow to match the GH5/s and EVA1 if necessary. Plus-Plus, your B and C cams will have 10bit and an anamorphic mode with the GH5 also having IBIS. 3. Ursa Mini Pro - P4K as a B-Cam that should (?) be able to fill in as an A-Cam on certain shoots that need a smaller footprint. As John Brawley has demonstrated, the 1080 ProRes is more than good enough for network television, so with less than demanding clients, your FCPX workflow will be butter smooth using internal codecs... no need for an external recorder there. 4. FS5 ii - I really like the output from Sony cameras... I usually buy one a year... but in this instance it seems like it’s the safe choice because you want decent AF. But other than slow motion, I don’t know if the FS5 is really best in any other category and although I’m sure slow motion is important, is it more than 50% of your work? If it is, then there’s your answer. It’s also the only option that shares a mount with your A and B cams. Plus your B cam is FF with good AF. So the safe choice could be the best choice in this instance... Hmm, tough one.

Yeah @BTM_Pix listen to Kye and don’t eff this up.

Life is like a Zoom F4...

Yeah... that is just a nice frame. Color and composition... what more does one REALLY need?

Why did he switch back to Canon? AF and the affiliate program, I’d assume.

Reading some of these comments is akin to watching the melodrama of Mexican soap operas. Of course Sony is number 1 when they have no competition in FF and just released a new camera that’s one of their best cameras to date... their next one will be even better. I’ve always liked the Sony image and I end up buying a Sony camera once a year, or so, and then I remember I’m horrible at grading sLog and I go back to Canon, Nikon or even Panasonic. But the Sony image is so detailed and crisp and modern, what’s not to love about them? Okay... their menus are annoying but it’s not like they’re impossible to figure out. Point being is that statistics like this are fun, and as a Canon shooter I like to boast that Canon is number 1 in mirrorless in Japan. But in the end, who cares? It doesn’t really matter or mean anything. Depending on the release date of the Z6, Nikon will win the fourth quarter. Next year when Casey Neistat is shooting with a FF Canon mirrorless, Canon will win. Sadly, brand ambassadors on YouTube or Instagram will sell more cameras than the tech, color science, AF capabilities, video specs, burst rates, etc inside the camera ever will. Also, if I was a stills shooter only, I’d probably own a Pentax... yuck.