CTRT

ahh... so you're saying I won't be able to be past a certain distance and get the subject and the background in focus, if the subject is too far from the background? I might be able to live with that, though you're right it could be pretty darn limiting!! Thanks for your help!! Thanks for all of that! Very helpful and exactly the sort of perspective I was hoping to find here!

I have read a few people saying the RX10 ii shoots higher quality/nier looking video than the GH4... I am not sure, at all, if that is true. Can you comment on that? I CERTAINLY considered that route, no doubt at all! Oh and could you please tell me exactly which lens you mean? Is that just the standard one that comes in a certain kit? And what are Supertone settings? IS that something in the camera? Sorry for my stupid. EDIT: something like this: http://www.bpm-media.de/en/Sales/ENG-Live-Production/Cameras/HDSLR-Cameras/Panasonic-DMC-GH4A::368198.html Oh and I am NOT attracted to slow mo' sorry if that came across in the things I quoted... what I am basically looking for is as sharp as I can get, with as much room to grade if need be, and at a price I can afford, as corporate video work is not my passion I will reconsider the GH4! Thanks for your comments! Thanks for this... I am so tempted to go the BMPCC route as the quality of the footage online looks amazing, but there's soooo many caveats, plus buy adaptors to get a usual lens, plus all the other stuff you'd end up buying to make it functional. It's a lot more money. Happy to know though that I could use one without having to learn how to use completely new grading tools! Thank you! Oh, when you say that your shooting scenario won't happen with the Sony, why is that? Sorry to be a dope, but... I'm a dope.

here's the explanation of the grading:

Cool video! Thanks for the explanation. As for the blackmagic it shoots files in such a way that you have to grade them completely in post - they are completely flat looking otherwise.... I'll dig up a video that explains it... basically they look pretty awful without some pretty extensive grading using LUTS, etc.

hey guys, I posted on here a while back about buying a camera on the (relatively) cheap for corporate videography. I had been using a Nikon D7200, which was a long term loan, but had to return it. You guys were SUPER helpful and suggested lots of things, including the ... you guess it... RX10 ii, which at the time hadn't been released. So I am now about to buy a camera, in the next few days, and have enough money for the RX10 ii or something similarly priced. I read Andrew's review here: http://www.eoshd.com/2015/08/sony-rx10-ii-review-final-conclusion-and-introduction-to-its-smaller-brother-rx100-iv/ but was a bit confused by a few things. He says: "However it would be a crime not to mention the 1080p capabilities of these cameras, as they are absolutely stunning in what they deliver for that. Best affordable all-rounders for 1080p I have ever used. They are like a small sensor FS7 in some ways!" and "The 1080/120p as I said in part 1 is perfect. This is the one to use for continuous recording, for very long slow-mo sequences or when you need to do a lot of slicing and dicing in the edit." and "Also I record 240fps in-camera to 50p or 60p (1080p) as slow-mo looks nice smooth, but more importantly this gives you the option to further slow the footage down by 50% to 30p or even 24p in post if you want slower. 240fps to 24p is “10x” slow-mo." and then this: "The RX10 II has a bug which I highlighted in part 1 where focus shifts slightly between High Frame Rate standby mode and capture mode. However the larger issue is really with how bad continuous AF is in movie mode and HFR (slow-mo mode). It has a mind of its own and unfortunately a rather dumb mind at that. Let’s qualify that statement… if the actor is not moving and you are shooting on a tripod then manual focus will do just fine. However for HFR at 240fps with a 2 second burst where you can’t touch the focus ring because the camera has locked up it really is continuous AF or nothing as far as I am concerned. You can focus manually in standby mode but by the time you are capturing your subject has so often moved out of focus, especially at the longer reach of the RX10 II’s lens which is so tempting to use for this. The way I am working for live subjects and not on a controlled set is to get out of movie mode entirely and use stills mode where single-shot AF is mega fast at establishing focus before hitting record. Very useful. Unfortunately this is not something Sony felt important enough to implement in movie mode or HFR mode. Here there is no super fast single shot AF, only the terrible continuous AF or manual focus which locks up during a shot. The continuous AF behaves like a drunk focus puller. Unreliable. Slow. Doesn’t do what you expect. You could have the easiest of shots, with the subject bang centre and taking up 80% of the entire frame and it will still find a way to slip away and find the background. It’s pathetic. Also whereas single shot AF takes mere miliseconds to establish focus, continuous AF in movie mode is Captain Slow around the Top Gear track… ah gradually here he comes… here he comes… round the final corner…and… over….. the………. line." Actually, if I'm honest with you, I didn't really get a lot of what he was going on about, because I don't really know much about cameras... sorry everyone... I'd like to, but I don't. Saying that I have lots of corporate clients, including two agencies, and can edit and grade well enough to keep getting jobs, so... I feel I must not suck too badly, even if the terminology is pretty over my head frequently. So the question though - at long last - is this. Is this still a good option for what I am trying to do? Will I be shooting normal video in 100fps now? Now that we have all seen it is it the best option? Or should l I be considering something else again? I Oh and as a note, I always bring lights and record audio separately. I looked at the BMPC, but the added price of a lens and a speedbooster, and having to learn a whole new grading system, seems like a step too far for what is essentially my day job... I do also make music videos though, and may get one of those eventually for that... Thanks for any help. You guys were so helpful last time; it's your own damn fault I'm back!

Hi ​1. The 7200 was good enough, and much sharper than what the company before me was producing. Video is ending up at 1080 on YouTube and company websites. Saying that, less sharp would not be an option. 2. Unnecessary as I always rent lights and shoot in well lit spaces. But of course having more flexibility is never bad. 3. That was an issue, but I think I've learned how to avoid it and work around it in the edit... having to worry about it less would be very welcome though! 4. I prefer larger (well higher quality) files that I can work down from... I don't know if that's just me being overly cautious though and would be open to hearing about alternative approaches. 5. I don't care about size as most of the time I'm using a tripod. Saying that, It'd be great to have something SLR size (or smaller). 6. No need for in camera audio 7. I have gotten used to recording in bursts of 20 mins or less.. the sensor on the Nikon would overheat (I was told by the owner that this was the issue) and cause the camera to stop recording. So I am used to the burst method. I would be open to better options as that could occasionally be frustrating. 8. I am ok with battery swapping, but only because I'm used to it I guess... I know battery swapping can be a pain, and not all cameras have external chargers... so it's not a huge thing I guess, but being able to do it easily, or not have to do it at all would be ideal. 9. It's not critical, but for my own creative stuff it's nice to have. For the job I can live without it or if need be do it in post. Though that's a pretty huge pain. 10. I basically need to be able to get someone in focus... actually, this image is representative of 90% of the shots I use: I would often be forced to shoot that from about 1 meter. I don't know how to describe that as far as zoom is concerned. The Nikkor lens I used could do it, and sometimes I'd even zoom in a bit optically. The point is at about a meter or 1.5 meters I could get the above framing, more or less. and that's what I need. 11. I occasionally get asked for still photography, but up til now that has all ended up on FB. I would bring lights and be able to compose the shots, so... well, I don't know if that answers the question Basically, "good enough" is probably "good enough". though I might miss the 7200 is the replacement was significantly worse. 12. Generally I liked it a decent amount. I did find some of the flipping between screen and viewfinder and menus and top LCD to be annoying. The autofocus was only ok and sometimes couldn't figure out what I wanted. So most of the time it was on manual. If I didn't do the lighting right - which could happen based on the back screen, the images could be VERY noisy, but that was probably just me sucking. I am open though to trying other things and being blown away. It was random that I got it, and as such I am not wedded to it, so to speak. Hope that's all clear

​Lot's of things to ponder in this post! I really need to start embracing this tech and figuring out what it all means I guess I noticed the GH4 as well.. I need to look into that more as well... So many options! Thanks for all of this info!

​more options... ahhhhhhh.... I will check them! Thanks so much!

​I was just looking at video samples from the LX100 and am pretty amazed!! For the price it seems almost too good to be true! I was planning, if the work keeps up for another year - I get a job every month or so and they pay well enough - to upgrade properly, and I was hoping the loaner camera I had would stay in my possession that long Now that it's going away and I have to have a quick solution I am still considering that upgrade, but may have to wait say 18 months. But then if it was still going like this I could afford to drop 4-5k on a camera/lens and get something proper for the long run. So to speak. The LX100 seems pretty perfect though! Thanks so much for that suggestion!

​What is a bridge camera?? Sorry but that term is new to me! EDIT: Sorry I just googled and discovered the answer!

​I don't ever use the AF for videos... I was really just curious I actually didn't even know the Nikon had all the auto options until after my first shoot!! Whoops! I did find the auto stuff useful for quick shots for fun at gigs or on the street... but that's not paying work... yet...? Thank you for the info! I appreciate the info and advice!

​oh! I didn't know such things existed... so even if I got the Sony or Panasonic I could still consider the lens recommended for the Nikon..? And do the adaptors allow things like AF, etc. etc., etc.?

​ooh! That's very interesting! Saying that I might be lost without a viewfinder... at least with the nikon I found it very hard to judge focus quickly outdoors on the back screen.. then again that's not something I do very often, and wasn't for work, but for fun... then again, you never know I suppose.. Either way I'll google it! Thanks!

Actually, are my lens options greatly limited by choosing Panasonic or Sony? Looking online it's hard to figure out exactly what the story is... hard for me Thanks again guys!

​Thanks I will... in the meantime I just checked the Sony A6000 and now I feel like I am back to having no clue... ha. So I think I must limit my options: Another Nikon D7x00 €1000-1200 Nikon D5300 €750 Sony A6000 €600 Panasonic GX7 €650 Hmmmm..... Of course I can always look second hand, etc.

​Thanks! I really appreciate that... I am dutifully noting all of this and checking reviews, making a budget, etc. Have you used the Panasonic GX7? Kinda fascinated now, especially at the price...

​Thanks! I literally was handed a camera bag with a few lenses and a camera and somehow managed to get these corporate video shoots.. ha. I had shot music videos with video cameras in the past, but never a DSLR. So I guess I'm coming at this from a weird angle. Saying that, once I figured out what the Nikon was capable of, and as long as I rent lights, the video I've made has been pretty sharp! And the ease of use is amazing IMO. The Panasonic is a very attractive LOOKING camera btw. I just had a look. But I need to try and find a way to compare the video quality to the D5300, etc. Thanks again!

I just checked and the lens I got used to was a Nikkor 18-70.

​Ah I see! At that price it def sounds like something to have as an option! I basically record sound with a separate recorder and lapel mics (I never have a sound guy available to me) and use a tripod as much as possible, as it make things so much easier when editing.

​Thanks! I appreciate this input... I will check out the Panasonic and Sony cameras... I don't know anything about Panasonic cameras at all... I really need to learn more about the gear...

​This is extremely helpful!! Thanks yet again!

Wow! I gotta say that the video looks more than good enough for what I need! Much appreciated... Just had a look at lens though... dear god they're expensive! Ah well, I guess you gotta spend money, etc.

Thanks so much! Trying to get my head around al of this and it's a lot to take on board, as all I really want to do is shoot some video.

​First, thanks for replying... I figured there was half a chance that my stupid vague question would go unanswered... Second, I don't own any lenses; the loaner had two, one of which was wide angled, and was the only one I ever use for video. I'd have to buy a lens as well. Third, you mention the D5500, etc., but I literally have no idea how these compare to the 7200 - quality wise... I've seen comparisons online, but they compare a lot of - to me - arcane bits and bobs, or things like WIFI that are useless to me. Fourth, it's almost all professionally/well lit corporate stuff - interviews and cutaways to people wandering around in hotels and conference rooms. Tripod 80% of the time. Found the Nikon to not be great for video without one tbh. Finally a budget.. top end would be €15-1600... saying that if I was a few hundred euros off something a lot better I could maybe source the extra cash. But it wold just depend on how much better for how much cash etc. Oh, I don't need 4K, but solid 1080 is absolutely necessary. This all ends up online, and I can upgrade in a year or so if the work keeps coming. Thanks again! Oh and sorry, I had considered the lower number Nikons like a 5300, and Canon EOS 70D. I'd also been looking at a D7000 used, but then I started seeing all these other things like Blackmagic, etc., and got totally overwhelmed.

Hi everyone, Thanks for having me I have a quick question, bearing in mind I'm basically an idiot. I have had a long term loan of a Nikon D7200. In that time I've gotten work, which is great. Some of that work is video work. I now have to return that now and need to buy a replacement, but am not sure if my best bet is simply getting a direct replacement. I am not afraid of buying second hand, but really need something that shoots video (well lit subject matter) as well as the Nikon. Any advice will be hugely appreciated... I have been pouring over reviews for a few days and have basically lost the ability to reach any conclusions