martinmcgreal

Cheers! Another question - I'm hooking it up to SmallHD 501, however once I do, the A7S screen turns off, and on the 501 I get a squeezed/smaller viewing screen, as apposed to the image filling the full 1920x1080p .. How do I firstly, have both screens visible, and secondly, have the viewing signal fill the fill 1920x1080p on the 501?

Hi guys, I’ll keep this short and sweet. Shooting a run and gun type piece on a A7Sii tomorrow - far from familiar with the camera, so I have a few quick fire questions .. What’s the native ISO, or recommended ISO for this given shoot; I’ll be inside a school, moving through the corridors from room to room, as such, experiencing different lighting scenarios - though nothing blown out, as the majority of the rooms will be either dimly lit, or the blinds will be closed. What’s recommended, SLog2, or SLog3? Any recommended SLog to Rec709 LUT’s I can feed into my SmallHD501? Can I hook up my Anker Pro 2nd Gen external battery to the A7Sii via the same cables I use for my pocket cam, or is a special adaptor required? (I assume the latter) Cheers, M

I did say subconsciously .. It's not something they'd distinguish consciously until it was suddenly changed - i.e The Hobbit, which even laymen flagged up immediately. Yes, this was more down to the drastic shift in frame rate, but it stills ties into the whole concept of motion, and viewers noticing the motion feeling different to what their subconsciously accustomed too within cinema. I feel the importance of motion candence only ever comes to the forefront once you shoot with a system that delivers it cinematically. If you never shoot with such systems, you'll likely never miss it, as it can be subtle to the everyday eye, but once you do, and you jump back to a system that delivers more 'video-like' motion, you then realise the importance of it, in delivering images that feel truly cinematic. It can become a petty debate though, so I'll leave it there.

It's a valid point, but as I've re-iterated throughout the thread, I'm looking for a cinema camera, and more on the high-end, which rules out both the GH4/GH5, given neither system is built specifically for cinema. If I wasn't so picky about motion candence, such systems would come under consideration, but the fact I am so picky about it, limits me to a handful of cameras in this price-range, if that. It's frustrating - I wish I could look past it, but I've shot with so many CMOS cameras down the years that it's just become too big of a spec to continually skip on. I really would argue it's the key characteristic that defines the 'cinematic' universe viewers are so accustomed too, all be it a subconscious characteristic to everyone but filmmakers of course. Lighting, locations, production design, actors, writing etc. all vary from film to film, to different degrees of quality, but rarely ever does motion vary - it's the most common characteristic that remains the same in cinema, and as such, is the one we associate most within the cinematic universe/images - just most don't realise so.

Hate to bump this thread this again, but - couple of questions .. Is there any free resources online where I can download uncompressed footage from both RED systems (ideally the One/Scarlet MX), and also the D16? Besides shooting with the systems, this is probably the second best route for conclusive judgement. I've tried the Bolex website but the download links keep re-directing me to an ad page .. As for RED, I assume there's a ton on reduser, but I've yet to search that deeply - will do in the coming weeks .. Just asking here in the meantime .. Second question - does the D16 shoot 4:3? I can't see it anywhere on the spec sheets, but a quick google search directs me to a thread on this forum discussing 4:3 on the D16, so I'm curious? I assume it doesn't .. It's so difficult finding any anamorphic footage with the D16 too .. There's bits and pieces on Youtube/Vimeo but nothing more serious than quick unconsidered tests that look relatively poor due to user error.

Following another viewing session of footage from both the D16 and Scarlet X this past week or so, I'm now definitely leaning more towards the latter. I've actually not been overly impressed with what I've seen from the Scarlet X, or more so for a system in such a price-range, though this probably hasn't been helped by mistaking it for Scarlet W footage at first, which is in another league entirely. It's difficult not to fall in love with the D16 image, the more footage you view, and the longer you ponder on it. That CCD sensor .. Yes, it's not 4K, and yes, it's not a low-light camera either, but a fair argument can be made with the latter that such an inconvenience forces you into more considerate lighting, which can only benefit you down the road. It's also worth noting how easy the transition from the pocket camera to a D16 MTF will be, kit wise. Can you record ProRes externally via an Atomos Ninja with the D16? I'm by no means set on a decision, and won't be until purchase time, which is a fair few months away yet, but it's interesting just how far I've swayed from my original image appetite, which I guess speaks volumes for the D16.

In my part of the world, the Mini 4.6K isn't available at any rental houses (as far as I can see), which I find interesting, considering how big the media industry is in the North of England now. I can only speak for commercials, since that's the area I work in, but it's as if it's not even made any sort of noise amongst professional's this side of town. Of course, Arri/RED systems will always be favoured for the bigger budget stuff, but even the more smaller stuff we (the production company I work for) shoot, FS7's w/ A7Sii as C cam's is usually the port of call, with Blackmagic's higher end systems never really entering the equation for consideration. Of course, every job demands different systems, and it's never always a case of 'well x camera is better than y camera, so let's use that', but it's interesting that for a camera (the 4.6K) which can produce such stunning results, it's yet to come under serious consideration by the rental houses this side of the country. Not suggesting anything with regards to the quality of the Mini 4.6K btw, with this statement, just merely stating an interesting fact, that if anything, frustrates me. I'm assuming the rental houses reasons aren't related to the quality of the camera, and instead, something else, perhaps logistically/financial, or just the fact the system is still relatively new, and their waiting for it's reputation to build?

and, if I haven't said it enough already - motion candence, motion candence, motion candence .. Just because systems appear superior on paper to say the F35 in usability, size, resolution, codecs, dynamic range etc., it doesn't mean for one second it's a superior system. Ultimate judgement should always rest with the image, in which case the F35 wins hands down. This isn't to say I'll be purchasing the F35 however; simply too pricey, and too large.

Does the Bolex come with either PL/MTF mounts, or? Would be ideal if I could continue using my pocket's speedbooster and sigma glass ..

If the F35 was doing the rounds in this price-range, this thread wouldn't exist.

I actually haven't, come to think of it. I can't say I've ever heard nor seen evidence to suggest RAW influences motion candence, as such, I've never drawn comparisons myself. The D16 is definitely creeping into my final considerations, alongside the MX and Scarlet. Of course, the RED's are far more versatile systems, which should be my main consideration when spending such money, but it's hard to ignore the image the D16 delivers; it has that magical filmic feel to it that nothing else in this price-range can quite deliver so organically. I still prefer the clean, smooth, digital look, but the D16 is making me fall for the 'film' look again.

Thanks for the kind words! LUT's are great, if you treat them as just a small part of the grading process, and not expect drag and drop results, which most do. Of course, it helps massively if you're shooting with an external monitor that can import 3D LUT's, so you can then finesse your look all the way from principal photography to post - a process I myself followed for the stills on the previous page. I appreciate such monitors are viewed as both a luxury, and incredibly expensive, but I can't emphasise enough just how useful they become, even more so on cameras like the pocket which don't shoot Rec709, since the 'video' mode is still relatively dull/flat. You're always fighting a limited battle on set lighting/exposing/white-balancing to a LOG image, hence why I'd always encourage people - especially for narrative work - to purchase an external monitor with importable LUT's.

I did both roles for that particular piece, but I'm a dp mainly. It was all shot in ProResHQ. It's daylight robbery how cheap the camera retails for, given it's superior to systems five or six times the price. I'd always encourage even amateur shooters to make the pocket camera their first ever camera purchase. Yes, shooting/grading LOG images can be tricky/daunting at first, but you'd rather learn the hard way early on, than later. The menu system is perhaps the easiest/cleanest interface I've ever seen too, compared to say an A7S. I agree, and this exactly why it's perhaps worth me waiting even longer, to pull together the funds for say a Scarlet. I could make a purchase as early as next month, for a system that may last me a year or two, but for the sake of waiting an extra few months, I could purchase a system that would last me the best part of five years. It's a no brainer, when written like that.

The pocket's candence, and blackmagic cameras in general, is far better than other systems within their price-range, but still not to the degree in which it feels truly cinematic, to my eye at least - though for the price, you can't really expect this either. I was on a shoot the other week in which shot w/ 2 x Amira's and a pocket as a C cam. I actually pulled the footage into post to compare candence between the two, amongst other characteristics. The pocket holds up really, really well to the Amira, as we've come to expect, but the difference in motion was there, and noticeable. 8-bit C-log is indeed nice, but as you point out yourself, best to have 10-bit plus and be covered, for either a more intense look, or encase anything goes wrong in-camera. Your last paragraph sums up my current thoughts nicely. The plan is to spend the next few months mulling over a decision, especially with all this feedback now behind me. Sure - here's a selection of stills from the last narrative piece I shot w/ the pocket back in March, and here's my Instagram for further examples (though I don't update this as regularly as I perhaps should) https://www.instagram.com/martinmcgreal/ I could never debate that camera is more important than story, but if it wasn't important, we'd be out the job. Anyway, a debate for another day this, shall we say ..

Whilst the 35mm look isn't really my taste anymore, it's hard not to fall in love with the D16's image. It's the type of camera that your more than happy to make comprises for, in terms of say low-light and resolution, for that colour and motion. It's definitely under my consideration, that's for sure. Just a shame it's so difficult to come across in the current market (?) What's the issue with these things crashing etc. too? I've never looked deeply into the D16's flaws, but you see people flag it up every-time these are topics of discussion. Cheers. I can't access the link however until my request to join the group is accepted, and worth noting too, I don't actually have the funds to make a purchase as of now. More March/February. This is one of my options too - as in, waiting even longer to make a purchase, say until the summer, for a much pricier yet superior system. As ever though, once you've fell out of love with a camera, and have your eyes peeled on an upgrade, it's hard to wait much longer.

I have to make a compromise with one or two specs, that goes without saying when rooting in such a price-range .. I just refuse to compromise on the following; motion cadence, colour science, and decent low-light. I'd add resolution (4K), since I want to shoot 2x anamorphic w/ a 2.66 delivery, but I'll happily drop to 1.5x anamorphic if a 2K image warrants it .. I've probably not flagged up motion candence enough as an essential spec, but for me, it's exactly that. Issue here however, is it's the one spec that can squeeze an option list of say ten cameras, down to one or two at a push. I mean, how many cameras in this price-range have what you'd deem as truly cinematic motion? The MX, D16, anything else? It's why I'm struggling to warm to the F3 as an option .. It delivers in absolutely every category except motion, in my opinion .. You'll disagree, but I've spent the past couple of weeks viewing hundreds of clips from this camera, and side by side with being blown away by the image, it still has a hint of video to it's motion, which is the deal-breaker for me .. It's the kind of spec that rarely makes it into a spec priority list (even I can account for this with my opening post), however it's one you soon realise is absolutely essential. You can spend thousands of pounds on systems in this price-range, accompany it with beautiful glass, a fantastic script, cinematic lighting etc., and yet once you sat there in the edit suite watching back the rushes, your scratching your head thinking 'the image still just doesn't feel right, or truly cinematic', and you soon realise why .. It's the reason I'm passing on my pocket camera, amongst other reasons. I'm not saying cinematic images can't be produced without cinematic motion, as good lighting can achieve this alone, but at least for me, to be truly lost into the cinematic world we're so familiar with, the motion candence of a camera has to be cinematic too. If anyone would like to provide additional examples to the MX/D16 of cinematic motion in this price-range, please please do, as that might just sway me towards a conclusion on which system to opt with. I assume the higher end Blackmagic's may pop up here, given global shutter and all that ..

It's interesting you mention this .. The Mini 4K crossed my mind yesterday when I began to look at systems again based solely on specs/usability, and price too of course, and the Mini 4K just about ticks all my boxes, well, more so than anything else in this price-range, excluding perhaps the MX .. However, after viewing images out of the Mini, I quickly remembered why I was so quick to pass upon it when during my original considerations .. The image just doesn't excite me in the slightest, and it has that 'Blackmagic' look to the image that I've grown so tired of with the pocket .. It's absolutely appalling in low-light too .. I could probably just about accept my dislike for the image if the low-light was good, since image can be influenced heavily through glass anyway, but meh, the low-light .. It's certainly an interesting look, but I'm absolutely set on shooting anamorphic, which rules out ENG glass as a taking lens, for obvious reasons .. Just came across a new commercial (more so the first thirty seconds) that absolutely nails the image characteristics I'm looking to for with this next upgrade .. That soft, milky, smooth image with anamorphic characteristics https://vimeo.com/190149937 Yes, this was probably shot w/ an Alexa/RED, on some beautifully expensive glass, and lit/graded professionally - this isn't my point, I'm not talking about what makes the image cinematic .. I'm referencing the technical characteristics of the image, which render through regardless of lighting/production design (well, you know what I mean) .. What in this price-range can deliver these technical characteristics? Well, I stumbled across this a few moments after viewing that commercial https://vimeo.com/195660425 The answers obvious, if it wasn't already .. The MX can deliver this, effortlessly .. I'm just not sure that's still enough to convince me to purchase such an old/enormous piece of kit ..

The only true conclusion I've been able to make so far from this discussion is that the pocket camera really is a phenomenal piece of kit for the price. I'm searching in a market for systems five or six times the price of the pocket, yet have failed to find anything that is a substantial improvement upon it, with regards to either specs or usability. Essentially, all I want is a system with the pocket's specs, 4K, a more softer digital looking image (one could argue this can be achieved through choice of glass), and something that isn't ridiculous huge. Yet for an extra few thousands of pounds, this can't be found .. Extremely disappointing, as it is frustrating .. Do appreciate all the comments so far though - great that so many of you guys are contributing, despite the lack of progress in terms of a conclusion .. We'll get there! Regarding the 1DC - I love the image as much as I do the C100ii, but spending thousands of pounds for an image that falls apart under any substantial grading is a deal-breaker .. It hurts me to say that, since I do love the depth/colour to Canon's image, but I can't suger-coat 8-bit when there's thousands of pounds at stake .. I agree though, I have to make a compromise somewhere - I'd just father it be a spec less influential than colour bit .. What I do have on my side is time .. I'm in no rush to make a purchase, and who knows, come March/April when I do make the decision, there could be a system that ticks all my boxes, or a price-drop for a system that currently does. If the GH5 has impressive low-light, I'll probably just settle with that, and invest everything else in some beautiful glass .. What's the verdict on Panasonic's colour science?

Yeah, this discussion could continue for weeks and weeks in its current form - my next move has to be either renting these cameras and forming a decision from there, or downloading/grading some ungraded footage and having a play around. Regardless of colour, there's something about the FS5 footage that's pulling me in - it has a texture to it, or something, that feel's a tad more organic than the clean digital image you'd expect to see out of these cameras .. I mean it isn't grainy, nor noisy, but there's something there, that's pulling me in ..

Excluding Blackmagic's, the FS5 has pretty decent codec capabilities compared to it's competitors, given there's a fair few cameras in and around this price range that can only record/output 8-bit, whereas the FS5 at least has the capabilities to output 4K 10-bit, so I hardly buy the 'weak codec' as an argument for it's poor (?) color science. The C100 has weaker codecs, and yet look at the colour that can produce .. I'll keep looking into the FS5, as I've yet to see anything to suggest it's color science is poor, or in the same bracket as the A7S etc. - though then again, I've never shot/graded FS5 footage, so who am I to judge .. Anybody here shot/graded FS5 footage? The MX is the safe/fall-back option, for sure!

I work for a production company, but like most companies, we rent all our gear in, for the higher end stuff anyway, so this purchase is pretty much for personal/external work to the company - though on the smaller shoots, no doubt we'd utilise something like the FS5, if I owned one .. While I do want a system that's fairly mobile, I probably too should be make it clear this purchase isn't 'documentary/run and gun' style motivated .. It's more a purchase for narrative work, hence image quality will perhaps be the ultimate determining factor - though I do feel a system such as the MX is a little extreme, for all scenarios, excluding studio/big crew work. Back to the FS5, after a little more digging across a few forums, it seems - annoyingly - that it suffers from the same colour science issues as the A7S etc. I've yet to see this in any of the footage I've viewed, but near enough every person when commenting on comparison threads, labels the FS5 colour as one of the major con's ..

I'm definitely swaying towards it. 10-bit 4K possible on a Ninja2, or? And would it be possible to have that recording out to the Ninja, whilst having an active SDI feed to say a SmallHD 502? I currently own the 501, but I love the interface, workflow and features of the 500 series so much that I'm willing to consider the 502 for the SDI feed. Of course, alongside the external recorder and Sony LCD, this would be a 3x monitor set-up (completely overkill), but once you own one of the new SmallHD's, it's hard to ever imagine shooting without one again. I'd completely agree. Alongside size/weight, these ultimately will be the deciding specs of which I'll make a decision from. Probably worth noting too, with regards to my want for a 'softer image', that shooting 2x anamorphic will help in producing this, irrespective of the camera. And it's size/weight is too big of an issue to ignore; despite how seducing the image is, and the fact some of my favourite films have been shot on the system; though the latter reason probably shouldn't come in to play, given lighting, production design and glass, combined, play a more influential part in producing such results.

I'm really liking the look of the FS5 from both it's specs/accessibility, and of course, footage too .. No internal 4K 10-bit though .. Quite possibly a deal-breaker, given I want to stick to my SmallHD 501 as the external monitor .. How's it compare to the MX in terms of dynamic range, low-light, motion etc.?

I've spent the past few weeks doing a fair bit of digging for F3 footage, and it is an incredible camera, even more so now given with the price-drop. It's a tricky situation however, since I'm looking at this way - If I'm going to invest in a 5+ year old system, that isn't exactly small nor light, then I may aswell just opt with the MX, given it's future proof with 4K. The more F3 footage I see however, the more I remember the price, and the harder it becomes to ignore such a deal .. How much does a 'used' FS5 sell for, roughly, with the basic kit requirements, excluding glass? Yeah, sadly they haven't .. No brainer, otherwise!

Nice examples. Neither scream 'cinematic' though. The more FS700 footage I see, the more it looks like a solid documentary camera - just my two cents. It's a contender, and as you say, leans towards the image I'm after, but a move back to a 'photography' camera with a third party workflow doesn't excite me in the slightest. I have the finances to purchase a dedicated cinema camera, so .. I never said it did have bad colour. I just questioned its colour from the examples I've seen - and both the examples you've posted leave me with the same opinion. The second example especially. More convinced it's user error though .. I hear you. I said in an earlier post I appreciate this 'look' I'm after is partly influenced through choice of glass too .. I've actually rooted extensively for RED footage shot on cheaper glass, for a balanced perspective, and the perspective of what I'd find myself in, if I were to opt with one .. And yes, the results are still impressive from what I've seen, and fitting to my taste .. I hear you though - there's more finer examples of the MX around because its more often than not in the hands of a professional in a professional environment .. The example you posted is delicious. But I'd still argue it looks more like 35mm film, than soft, clean smooth digital .. Regardless, it looks beautiful - just not my cup of tea sadly .. Sure, but compromising on 10-bit colour is perhaps the hardest compromise of all .. - I apologise for the direction this thread is heading - in that I just seem to be batting away every suggestion that's thrown at me .. If it wasn't already apparent, it's more so now, that there's probably nothing in this price-range that both ticks every box in my original post, and delivers this 'image' I'm after .. Indeed, if one wants an image similar to that of the Alexa/RED, then one probably needs to shoot on such systems. The MX is the safe option, but I do worry once the honeymoon period is over, it will just sit on a shelve for months un-used due to its drawbacks. I was all set on the C100ii yesterday evening, until I suddenly remembered it doesn't output 10-bit colour - such a deal-breaker, given the image really is right on the money for what I want - i.e https://vimeo.com/121686580 It's been years since I graded 8-bit colour .. Does it really fall apart as much as I remember? If anybody could shoot me over some ungraded ProRes from the C100ii/Ninja, I'd love to have a play around, to really form a fresh opinion .. (Setting myself up for disappointment here, I sense) Cheers