kye

Nice. Almost like a street photography slideshow but where the pictures move. With the long lenses it has an intimate feel. I agree that you always have choices, and in my case I often choose other things over the film-making, and work hard to try and make sure I get the shot anyway. For me, especially with the kids, I am shooting life as it happens, and because of that I try to not get in the way of what is happening. I think it's more important for my kids to do activities than to pose so I can film them, or to have those activities interrupted so I can get a better shot etc. In this sense I'm always following along with what is happening. It happens where it happens, when it happens, and how it happens. If someone was facing the wrong way then I didn't get the shot. I don't direct people - if I ask someone to do something while also following my directions I think I'm ruining the fun for them and I don't want to do that. In terms of 'getting the shot' I have a lot of freedom in terms of what the critical shots are, but there are always critical moments that you want to make sure you capture. My kid walking across the stage, shaking hands with the teacher and getting the certificate at their graduation ceremony is a shot I can't miss. In that example I don't have control of the stage, program, or lighting, I have a limited choice in where I can sit, and the venue has control of if I'm even allowed to film at all. A recent play at the school had signs up saying that you are allowed to film your own kids but not other peoples - good luck with that when the stage has 20 kids on it running around. I can make an edit that is a sequence of nice moving photographs by just using the best shots, but story is the goal, so I have to ensure I get enough of the right moments. I started this thread because most people on this forum don't operate under the same conditions I do. I think the film above is a good example of a different conditions - people think they're in the same situation but in reality they aren't.

I read that sheet when I first ordered my XC10 and I was quite disappointed, but I then went on to read many of the other tests on much more expensive cameras, and I found that many high-end cameras didn't have a huge amount more resolution than the XC10. And then I read the a6300 test and ended up laughing out loud with its many many issues I didn't realise they've since tested the Ursa Mini and GH5s, so I've got some light reading ahead of me For those that haven't read any of these, I highly recommend doing so: https://tech.ebu.ch/camera_reports_tech3335 and for older cameras https://tech.ebu.ch/camera_reports_legacy Tests like these are a good way to cut through the internet BS and brand-loyal-myopia.

The more I see of BM, the more I like!! and considering that these days it's more and more about 'ecosystems' rather than discrete products, things like this make me more likely to invest further into the BM system with things like the BMPCC4K. I understand that their products in the past haven't been completely bug free, but the fact I'm a Resolve user (for end-to-end workflow) makes me think a BM camera would be worthwhile. I've played this game of calculating the $/Gb every time I buy a hard disk and there's normally a sweet spot in the middle of the range somewhere. Most product cycles start with a new product being marketed to early adopters who are willing to pay a premium for having the latest-and-greatest and this helps pay for the overheads of developing a product, then when they've recouped some of that and the product has some competitors they'll reduce the cost over time. Then it reaches a point where the next model up has also gotten into the low-cost-high-volume part of the product cycle and so this product can't compete, which in the case of hard drives it means that buying the smallest ones isn't economical, except when they go on run-out sale for end-of-line. In terms of buying drives for post I'd suggest that buying a larger drive might be more useful down the track - I've got many smaller drives that are now too small to bother with but add up to be reasonable storage, so if you're using them for archiving purposes then there's extra value in having your drive space spread over fewer drives. If you're buying media for recording I chose two buy two 128Gb CFast cards instead of a single 256Gb card, because if there's a card failure then I will have a spare to keep shooting on and I may lose less footage when it fails.

Wouldn't that be a great thing if they included it. Many of the web interfaces to remote control cameras are great but the latency means they're not for monitoring. If we could get a hardware link then how good would that be! And, just to aim for the moon, if the manufacturer released a set of tools for third party app developers to write their own app interfaces that would be spectacular ok, back to reality....

I was agreeing with you I don't think I would last 3 minutes!

Does the brightness required depend on the depth-of-field and focus assists? I just got back from shooting my kids football game in full Australian 31degC / 88degF sunlight and had no problems because the players were mostly 20-150m away and I was at f5.6 on a 1" sensor, so everything was in focus and all I had to do was keep framing. If I had shallow depth of field I would have been screwed, and would have needed either a very large/bright monitor or spectacularly performing focus assist features.

When I first joined the forums I thought I was a run-and-gun shooter, but I think now the term Guerrilla film-maker might be a better fit. I say this because: I shoot without official permission (and therefore can't have a setup that looks 'pro') I shoot in public where I have basically no control of what happens The subjects of my film (friends and family) tolerate my filming, but won't cooperate to the point of wearing mics or anything else like that This seems to present a different set of challenges to run-and-gun shooters who can mic up people, have control of lighting and 'set', and can have 'pro' looking cameras. Anyone else shooting in this style? (I think it's likely to either be hardcore documentary filmmakers, travel film-makers, or vloggers).

Dammit, inserting that image killed my whole post.. Anyway, my points were: @HockeyFan12 I think we agree with each other "good enough" image quality might be a Red or even a Venice camera depending on your client and distribution medium "good enough" will vary from person to person and even job to job "focus on story" still stands - just because you've got a Venice and 19-point lighting and Hollywood actors doesn't guarantee you'll make something worth watching (Hollywood provides lots of examples of well shot stories that weren't worth shooting) And @jonpais - in terms of hand-holding a Red - look at that guys arms!!

I would imagine that some of the challenges might be able to be planned for and compensated for in advance? What aspects of using a larger rig do you think are likely to get in the way of a single operator? I'm curious if it's lenses, outboard sound, the rig, media management etc. The reason I ask is that I've normally kept my gear as simple as possible but as time goes on it threatens to get more and more complicated, so knowing what the common first issues are would aid in me understanding at what point my setup is getting too complicated.

There's a stage when it gets itchy that most people can't get past, but after that it's all fine. I used to have a goatee and every year for Movember someone would ask me about how long the itchiness goes for

IMHO it's an excellent approach. Light comes into the camera and hits the sensor. Everything that happens after that will have both technical and aesthetic impacts - depending on what you're trying to do those impacts may not align with what you are trying to accomplish. The purist philosophy is the most flexible and requires the most amount of work / skill. Maybe it's just me, but I find that mostly when computers make decisions for me (as they've been instructed to make by their designers) the decisions are not what I would have chosen.

and a longer focal length will mean less propellers in shots when flying upwind!

I agree too. Any difference between 4K and high-quality 1080 capture pales when you're watching something and the quality of the content takes over. To a certain extent IQ is one of those things that just has to be 'good enough' not to get in the way of the story. I went 4K because I was interested in pulling out still frames and printing them as pictures - treating video like a 8MP 25fps continuous burst mode if you like. If I was just shooting video I would be outputting in 1080 and wouldn't be ruling out 1080 cameras that have high quality outputs.

I agree with the OP. In terms of my own camera decisions, if there was an equivalent to the Sigma 18-35 that was on m43 it would really change my attitude to the whole m43 system. I bought a GF3 back in the day and it came with the 14mm f2.5 lens as well as the (ergonomically terrible) kit zoom, so when the GH5 came out I was very interested in the IBIS for my handheld guerrilla film-making work because I already owned one half-decent lens in the m43 system, but the lack of a killer lens and the complication of adapting the 18-35 was too off-putting for me, with the focus issues killing off the option well and truly. At the moment I'm kind of split between looking at desirable cameras and then looking for lenses that suit and also looking at desirable lenses (like the 18-35) and looking for a camera body to suit. Right now I've got the XC10 which has a good 'body' but the lens is a bit limiting, and the 18-35 which is wonderful but my 700D / ML body is a bit limiting. A killer lens option for m43 would make me reconsider that system again.

I thought that Resolve didn't understand the RAW files from ML? I've been using MLV App to debayer into CinemaDNGs, but if I can skip this step and go straight into Resolve that would be much easier. If you could clarify / confirm this then that would be really useful. IIRC you're shooting at 3.5K on the 5DIII? I'd imagine that it would upscale pretty easily - I wish I could shoot at that resolution on my 700D!!! One day maybe

Cool! I'm not sure if you've mentioned these things in another video, but I would be curious to hear more about what equipment you are using, perhaps some specifics around settings (eg, gain at various stages). The advice of doing trial runs and what issues and treatments you encountered is useful. I personally judge a Vlog by how useful / entertaining it is, and considering this is a bit more of a practical video, the more information that you can provide that people can use in their own work the better. As with all creative endeavours, actually publishing things is an achievement and definitely one I respect - keep up the good work!

Really? Apart from trying to get shallow depth-of-field (which of course a smaller sensor can't do as well) what else would you say would give it away? This is an important question because if there isn't anything then potentially every small aperture shot on every show shot on Canon could be the XC10 and you would never know. If your set is shooting on Canon, using CFast cards with C-Log, and you had an external car shot (which is going to have deep depth of field) then why would you put a C300 on there instead of a camera that is wildly cheaper? or if you're shooting in 4K on a C200 then what would you put in there that can shoot 4K? You only have to look at a series of posts like this from the Hurlblog (http://www.thehurlblog.com/cinematography-turning-your-gopro-hero-3/) to see what kind of lengths they had to go to to make a GoPro cinematic. Would it have been cheaper just to buy an XC10, ND filter, and put it in Shutter Priority mode? You can bet your ass it would have been. If you're doing anything where there is a danger of wrecking a camera then chances are the cost of the shot far exceeds the damage done to the camera, and the savings in post of not having to grade some other completely unsuitable camera would be huge. Besides, the fact they used a GoPro in a movie all the more reinforces that an XC10 would be able to be hidden amongst footage from better cameras. Unless you think that an XC10 isn't better quality footage than a GoPro? In which case, well done for reading this far, or owning a computer, or being able to ... you know.. type and stuff. And unless there's something else that a smaller sensor can't do except shallow DOF, "go and get me B-Roll of the sunset and people playing on the beach" would be a pretty reasonable gig for a camera like this. I was never making the argument that the XC10 is the best camera in the world (it's definitely not) - it was this forum that concluded that it could never be used professionally for any paid work (to paraphrase one of the posts in the original thread). I still maintain that the people on this forum got it horribly wrong the first time around, and so far you haven't provided any counter-arguments or evidence to the contrary. I definitely agree with this. I would imagine that there is also an element of 'fishing' going on, in case you accidentally patent something that ends up being useful that you can get some royalties on down the track?

@sam PM sent to take this topic offline. In future it would be better if someone has a problem with something I've said to reply to that thing, instead of just rolling it all up into negative remarks about me personally. Thanks.

I've noticed that the speaker on my iPhone can be muted almost completely if you can get a complete seal over the speaker, so maybe. If it has separated speakers then maybe try a few layers of gaffer tape and see if it's enough. As you say, it may not be!

At over 1500 posts I'd be hoping they'd have covered a lot of ground... but ouch!! I swear.. ML would be a great candidate for someone studying PR to get lots of real-world experience. And help a huge number of people at the same time!!

I assume you're referencing "90a58a5 lossless: experimental resolution overriding that should cover all DIGIC 5 models (to be tested)" ? I am yet to add modules manually, so that's another learning curve I'm yet to ascend. Considering that the crop_rec_4k is called "bleeding edge", and then we're talking about adding modules, and especially modules that say "to be tested" in the description... I feel like we've run out of words for how many disclaimers should be applied!!

I think mine won't let me select above the ~1700 pixel wide, even in crop mode. I'm using the "magiclantern-crop_rec_4k.2018Mar10.700D115.zip" - is this the right version to get the extra resolution? TBH the different builds and lack of documentation is really confusing.. I've been watching the SD controller hack thread as people get good results and occasionally someone kills a card and waiting for it to be stable enough to start using. I'm not sure how long it will be until it gets added to the crop_rec branch? I mentioned the 80D as I noticed that Alex (who I believe is developing the 700D crop_rec port) appears to have paused posting in the 700D thread but is active in the 80D thread. I did also note that they're not even up to the point of ML loading, but the thread certainly indicates that people are looking at it. Considering it's got DPAF, is reasonably priced, and (if the comment in the thread is correct) it has 80MB/s write speeds, it would be a great camera body to have ML on. I realise that the A7III can't do RAW (which isn't that important to me - I'm happy with either RAW 1080 or high-bitrate 4K) and that it's expensive - especially with the Sony lenses!, but I'd still look at it as it gives a huge low light performance boost from both my XC10 and the 700D. In a way it should also "just work" which I get the impression that ML is still a fair way away from.

One thing that you might watch out for is the resolution if you're planning on switching in and out of crop mode. With my 700D I found it has different resolutions available in crop mode vs normal mode, and when I set the resolution in one mode it was within the writing speed of my card, but then when I swapped crop modes it was over what I could write continuously. It seems to be that you can "choose" a resolution that's greater than what the camera can do and ML then uses the closest possible mode, which I found was different in crop vs non-crop modes. If you're taking lots of time between shots or if you're not maxing out your cards write speed then you're fine, although I'm not sure what people do when they can't shoot in the resolution they're outputting in. With the 700D I'm shooting in something like ~1700 pixels wide and outputting in 1920 wide so perhaps slight changes in resolution don't matter as much because I'll be scaling up anyway, but your situation might be different. Downscaling is probably fine too. In terms of crop mode being a Killer Feature it might sway me into buying a 5DIII in order to have it. My camera options are currently: The first option is the XC10 which I already own, which has high bitrate 4K video, a long zoom, great ergonomics and battery life, good image stabilisation, but doesn't do shallow depth of field. The second option is the 700D with Sigma 18-35 f1.8 that I also already own, which has RAW in ~1700 pixels wide (possibly more with the SD controller hack), with crop mode it is reasonably long zoom range, does shallow depth of field spectacularly well, but doesn't have as good ergonomics and has no image stabilisation. My alternatives to the above are that I could sell them and get a BMPCC 4K, 5DIII or 80D with ML, A7III, or whatever else has been released by the end of the year. I'm in Italy for a month later in the year and was planning on taking the XC10 and 700D so will be able to put them both through their guerrilla film-making paces and really get to know them both. I've shot a few trips with the XC10 (maybe 20 days filming total) and it feels familiar and comfortable in the hand, but haven't used the 700D / ML in the wild yet. Considering that I'd basically have to sell everything and start again with a new camera & lens system for most of the above it's not a decision I'll be making quickly or without proper testing and evaluation.

Camera shake is a lot more noticeable for sure. I don't know of any other issues with it but I haven't used it much yet so YMMV. I doubt it's relevant to most people, but be aware that changing the resolution also changes the crop factor, but this is true in either crop or normal mode.

Lol, well said. We all experience life from our own perspectives. I think Total Recall was an interesting exploration of the idea of having a holiday from yourself