webrunner5

I would think a kid in Cairo rocking a VPN would be on Trumps Twitter site more than here LoL. satire.

Jon I know you have the XT2, I know it is a hell of a camera, and I know they have great lenses for them. I just could never afford them, or the average person can't either. If you can hell they are great, so is Leica, but each of them is not that much better for me to spend all I have money wise to justify them. I see no real gain to having them other than well, I have one. OK I have a great camera so now I am going to take great pictures. Doesn't work that way you know it and I know it. But if I could afford them well I guess I would! It is sort of like my dream to have a Arri Alexa. Hell am I going to take that much better videos with it. hmm, Dr is great, so that helps, but beyond that, which I could buy a shit pot full of lighting, or maybe learn to DO lighting better, is it going to make me a great film maker, I doubt it. It would be easier, well yes, and that is why top pros use it. Is it going to write a award winning script, take a award winning photograph, well no. But I guess if a person has a lot of confidence in the product they use it does effect your outcome to a certain extent, which is a good thing to have.

They are Not worth the money. They do nothing that any other camera can not do. The X trans sensor is silly as hell. You buy them, not me.

Now don't get me wrong about Fuji, I have drooled about Fuji MF cameras in the past, but guess what, I bought Mamiya cameras, a lot of them, I even had several Hasselblads, never a Fuji. Mamiya was Way cheaper, not as slick looking, as petite, but built tough as hell, and they never let me down. The Mamiya RB67 was in my mind the best MF camera ever built, hands down.

Yeah I have to give it to Panasonic with the GH- series, they have really pushed the body space to the max with what you need and nothing else. Their touchscreen, AF system, battery size, articulating LCD you name it has been in response to the customer, not some silly bastard that has never used a camera sitting behind a desk. I just bought a new, yes new, still in the original box Panasonic AG-AF100AP video camera. It is laid out beautifully. It has, in a few test I have done, a hell of a Cine, Film look to it for the money you can buy one that is crazy to pass up. If I can't make a decent looking video with this camera I need to give it up. Is it a Arri, well hell no LoL. but I will give Panasonic credit, they have all along, tried to help out the little guy more than any company along with BlackMagic trying also that I know of video wise.. We need to give them credit for that.

Yeah Who in the hell needs a camera with 20 knobs on top to fondle. The Nikon Df was stupid enough, the hell with this retro stuff, I want a camera that is laid out well. Not silly stuff we had 30 years ago. Digital cameras are Way more complicated than old film cameras were.

Yeah I agree Fuji is sort of drinking the Leica Koolaide as of late. They make some good stuff, but cult like stuff, well I think not to justify the price. China is going to hand their ass to them you watch. I have never had a desire to buy any of their cameras, even film days ago. Do they make good stuff , well yeah, is it that much better, well not enough to take my money that I have ever seen.

Quit posting this stuff. Now I guess we all have to go out and buy a damn BMPCC because you came up with this beautiful video! You are costing us much grief. Quit reminding me why I need my ass beat for selling mine, maybe others do also.. Oh and by the way well done. Looks like we all know what it Can look like, and you made it even better. Thank you I guess?

Yeah I don't really want to see Canon , Nikon or anyone go out of business. Competition is great for all of us, and there are real people working at them that will lose their jobs. Just listen to the people that buy your stuff that have paid thousands of dollars, not a bunch of 12 year old Japanese, giggling girls who want Pink F-ing cameras! Quit protecting your top end stuff or you WILL be making nothing, I mean nothing but Pink cameras. All 250 of them! Well I have to add this to this conversation to make it a little upbeat. Hell maybe even shot on a Canon camera. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/03/16/watch-this-amtrak-train-blast-passengers-with-a-wall-of-snow/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na&utm_term=.87ca5b6a6e6f

Yeah, I bet Philip Bloom knows every rock on that beach.

Well Canon is Canon. Probably the most Bull Headed company that makes Cameras, Lenses. They are like a Aircraft Carrier, they have deadly stuff that can kill anyone, but god help you if you need to turn the damn ship left or right! They really act like people will buy their stuff no matter how outdated it is anymore, or crippled. Well I hate to tell them they have to change or their camera business or it is done, just like Nikon on the edge of going out of business.. Even Canon's printer business is going to go away, who the hell prints anymore? They have had a serious run of good fortune in the past, but they need to wake up and not cripple the shit out of their lower end stuff, because other company's are going to hand their ass to them. They have the talent, skill to make about anything happen, but they seem to be in the slow lane on making that happen in this day and age. Pick up the Pace Canon! Oh and listen to Andrew, he has sort of following of people that sort of have a clue about Video stuff.

I don't know if this has been shown on here, I don't follow everything, well sort of. https://***URL removed***/news/1972501860/panasonic-gh5-autofocus

Well I did say "So I guess it is better than nothing, but it still is pretty useless in the long run for video." You have to figure not long ago you would have your balls cut off if you even mentioned AF and Video in the same breath. I think it is coming like it or not, and if it works damn well I would Like it!

Well the ONLY reason I would buy the GH5 is for 4k. And if I am going to shoot 4k I want it clean as hell, squeaky clean. Yeah it will look digital, but lets face it, we are in a Digital world. People that look as this stuff we shot, other than us on here, could give a rat's ass about Film look, Cine look. They want to see their eyes bleed with detail! That is why they paid big ass money for their new shiny TV! So I don't want no grain, Nada! 1600 tops for me, that is my limit LoL.

Sure it pumps, but it looks better than the GH4. It is reacting faster because it has more computing HP. It has its own focus computer. Do we really think it was going to be like DPAF? I am afraid we have to buy a Canon C100, C300 if you want to have reasonable AF. Panasonic cameras are not state of the art with contrast-detect only, probably never be. I don't have one on order and I doubt I ever will. They, Panasonic has dug their heels in on their focus Mumbo Jumbo, but to be honest Canon has everyone by the ass patents wise. So I guess it is better than nothing, but it still is pretty useless in the long run for video.

I had a VG 20 and a VG 30. Man I Loved the form factor, but they gimped the hell out of them Codec wise. You could throw one in your glove box and go. I have no clue why all these company's skimp features out of cheaper products, not that the VG series were ever cheap! OK they might take sales away from higher end models, but what the hell difference is it if they sell thousands of cheaper ones, than 100's of higher ones profit wise. It IS all about the money in the long run.

Yeah that is a big plus with the C100 is that it is using a 4k sensor that down samples to 1080, thus saving a step in post possessing. We are a Long ways from Needing 4k. I would hate to venture a guess as to how few people even have a 4k TV! For Documentary, Corporate stuff I don't know how you can beat one. Probably not the most Cinematic image out there, but they are very popular for a reason. Glad to see you got the mkII version, they made some great changes on it from the original.

Man a C500 is a ton of money to rig for what you get in this day and age. And the media, storage cost, well christ. But they do have a Look. But for 7 grand you are up with a Sony FS7, or a whole FS5 rig. Man I can't turn one of those down, I have even seen Sony F5's for that. The Canon is a dead end, the Sony's are, well...more current.

Looks pretty damn good. Nice to see. AF wise. This video on noise also shows 1600 ISO is as far as I would go. No real improvement as far as I see.

Yes you don't want to touch a DSLR rig with a 10 foot pole. C100 mkI or mkII is the way to go. Great skin tones for people pictures. Get a 18-..mm STM lens, a decent microphone, damn good tripod, not a cheap lightweight one, and you are 80% there. You need some lighting equipment, maybe a small external recorder to up the Codec a bit. They are cheap for 1080 recording. The C100 is a dream for the two things you mention. They all involve people and they Have to come out looking good, no great, and the Canon can do that. Get a C100 with the DPAF in it. People tend to weave back and forth, rock side to side when excited, so you Need AF. Make sure you don't go with too shallow of a DoF, but you do have to isolate them. Takes practice. Go for the mkII if you can swing it, DPAF is included, and the EVF and LCD are Tons better on it. Your budget is within reason using the Canon's. But you will find out there is no end to the money you sort of would like to spend LoL.

I like the flow of your edits, well done. Pretty hard to beat a C100 mkII.

DPR doesn't seem to think much of autofocus in video mode on the A6500, and hardly any other place I looked worked well other than eye focus, not something you do that often with Video. But to be fair no camera is super dupper great in AF mode all the time. The Panasonic GH5 is not looking too bad either on AF in video mode, and their touchscrenn is second to none. "Video AF DPR The extensive frame coverage of the phase-detect pixels, combined with a touchscreen should make for a formidable video camera, especially if you desire or require autofocus. Tapping on your subject in a Flexible Spot area mode leads to quick and decisive focus, and you can adjust the speed of the rack in 3 increments: Fast, Normal, Slow. Fast tends to overshoot and is best avoided, but Normal and Slow lead to very smooth refocusing. In completely auto (Wide) area mode, the camera does a decent job retaining focus on faces, or other subjects near to the camera and center of the frame (oddly, it didn't perform as well in complete auto mode as the RX100 V, which was generally less jumpy). However, in if you set [Movie] AF Tracking Sensitivity to 'Responsive', it can get distracted, momentarily shooting off to the background or a foreground element. This behavior continues even in the camera's 'tap-to-track' mode, possibly due to the subject tracking algorithm momentarily losing the subject. View a demo reel of the camera's video AF capabilities from 1:18 onward in our video below: Our biggest complaints around video AF are around usability. Many of the focus modes you'll use in stills shooting are unavailable, and you'll have to do some work before you can simply 'tap-to-track' as you can in stills mode. The camera's default behavior when you tap the screen while in 'Wide' (auto) area mode is immensely confusing: you get a flashing 'spot focus' message on screen with no indication of where you've just placed your AF point. What is spot focus? It's essentially a Flexible Spot override with the manual focus ring engaged, similar to the way tapping the screen in Wide mode in stills momentarily switches you to Flexible Spot mode if you had 'DMF' mode active. The idea is presumably that you can tap to refocus during video recording and manually fine-tune the focus, but it's not clear to us why there's no AF point indication and why it can't just be more like stills shooting. Furthermore, it's remarkably difficult to simply engage tap-to-track, a well-desired feature you'd think would be as straightforward and simple as most competitor brands have made it. On the a6500, you'll have to first enable the 'Center Lock-on AF' function in a menu, since the easier to use and more reliable 'Lock-on AF' area modes are unavailable in video. And when you return to stills shooting, you'll have to remember to disengage 'Center Lock-on AF', as it takes over the touchscreen, meaning you lose the ability to tap to specify an AF point in any Flexible Spot mode. That also means that to get back to 'spot focus' mode in video, you'll also have to disengage 'Center Lock-on AF'. Much like in its stills mode, the video AF modes really need a complete rethink. However, when you get it to do what you want it to do, performance can be impressive. Tags: review, shooting-experience, sony" So yes, the Canon DPAF is the best out there as of now. But I am sure in certain circumstances they both have a advantage. Still like the DPAF though better. This review is good also for the A6500. Dan knows his stuff. http://www.newsshooter.com/2016/12/01/sony-a6500-touch-autofocus-reviewed-it-does-a-better-job-of-focusing-than-i-can-but-thankfully-it-isnt-infallible/ Well unless they improved the 80D lately the older 70D was a better video camera focus wise and dependability wise also. Less DR on the 70D though.

Yeah I have seen the 4k ones going for 2500 bucks, maybe a bit less. Other than the BM Usra Mini, really the only 4k options in town in that price range. The FS700 has slo mo out the butt and low light ability to boot. It is a awkward turd to use, but for tripod work that is not a big deal. That is where the BM Ursa Mini would be a lot better for run n gun stuff. It is pretty amazing how few 4k pro type cameras there are to pick from used under 5k. And that is way out of most peoples range on here. Canon C500, Sony FS5 is 5k price wise but damn, that is big money unless you are making big money with it. I guess there is the JVC LS300 camera, seems not too bad, but not pro built that is for sure. But they are 2600 bucks new now on B&H. That is getting pretty cheap.

Well you know what IS good about it, is that I did not pay any attention to what kind of camera you are using! And that is what you want to convey, it looked Filmic. You did great on that part. So what ever you are doing camera wise, tweak it a little and I think it will be golden to the audience that views it.

Well I do like the dark mood of it, but to me a little too much grain and a little too much dialog with out a scene change. Ergo, it sort of got boring ,and I really stopped paying attention to what they were saying in the end. Sorry , that is what I see.