KnightsFan

I use npf (pic on page 1) with usb power. Honestly if the battery door were more accessible I would just deal with swapping rechargeable AA's.

That's not a bad setup. I'd like to swap my setup with a plug on transmitter with 32 bit internal recording. That would be even better as a quick-swap between camera and boom pole, and provide easy battery access. So hopefully my bulky setup is temporary anyway.

I get a couple hours on the F3, max. Not enough to get through an 8-hour shoot without changing them. I mean it would be okay to use AA's exclusively, but considering the placement of the battery door, and my preference for completely solid rigging, it's sort of a pain to change them at all. I think I would be annoyed having to move things like @BTM_Pixshowed, and then tighten it back down and all (not to say it's worse, just that it's not for me). This is my setup now. The F3 and battery plate are bolted onto a bracket with a NATO clamp on the other side. For all-in-one setups, I slide it onto the camera cage. For separate audio, I also have a NATO rail on the boom pole, so we can quickly move the whole unit from camera to boom. It would be nice to shave the NPF's weight but the ease of use wins out for me at the moment.

@BTM_Pix how do you deal with the f3's short battery life? I have my f3 attached to an npf battery sled, but it's bulky. I wouldn't mind changing AA's every few hours, but the battery door isn't accessible when mounted like that.

You can. But you need to do it in linear color space for accurate results. Shoot a clip in a log format, download Da Vinci Resolve, and try it out!

2.5 MB/s is 20 Mbps

Oh yeah, please no one listen to me if you're doing event shooting. All of my experience is shooting narrative with a script, rehearsals, etc. No, I wouldn't say that. If you use a color managed workflow, you can absolutely change the white balance in post when shooting ProRes Raw or HQ--within reason. If you seriously mess up your white balance (shot at 150 Kelvin and need it to be 6500) it might not go well. But shooting 3000 and changing to 6000 usually looks fine, as mentioned in another comment. Do some tests to see whether it works for you. Note that it depends on a color managed workflow, because WB changes should be performed in linear gamma. Creative picture profiles typically don't have accurate transformations so they are less useful for changing WB in post. Common log formats typically have LUTs (or, even better, mathematical transformations) to change between gamuts and gammas. Small WB changes might look okay without being in linear space, but the larger the change, the more you'll wish it was done accurately.

First thing I'd say is, it's up to you and your own eyes to determine where your threshold is for what is acceptable. So my recommendation is always to do as many tests as you can to figure out what you personally find as a good workflow, and don't worry too much about what other people say is or is not good enough. On most controlled shoots, I set a white balance for the scene and use that throughout. When possible, I'll shoot a color chart in the same lighting for reference later. I have found that on my current camera, I get MUCH better results when I set to a specific kelvin value, rather than a white card. I've used cameras in the past that were the opposite. If you do find that you need to make adjustments in post, you will get the best results if you adjust white balance in linear gamma. The easiest way to do that is by transforming the color space using Resolve's color management. If you don't want to worry about that for now, that's okay! I always like to just try different things to see what happens, and eventually I find what I like.

I'm a software engineer for a VR company. As someone who uses VR 2-5 days a week, I have no desire to wear a headset more than I absolutely have to. I've tried a variety of models, including the Vision Pro. It's fun to experience VR the first few times, but in terms of physical comfort, sitting on a couch with a 65" screen and a subwoofer is way better than watching films on a headset, even considering the 3d factor. If you add a few people in, I would MUCH rather sit on a couch than both wear headsets and pretend we're watching the same thing. Not to diminish what you enjoy of course! We all have different preferences 🙂 However most people I talk to are roughly in my camp, especially those of us who are in VR on a regular basis. The novelty wore off. We'd rather text than talk in VR with avatars. Gaming, on the other hand, is a lot of fun. I like VR games. I like how they introduce unique motor skills (you actually have to aim your hand and hold it steady to get a headshot!). I think to get widespread VR adoption, all the big companies need to do is make a game that is properly fun and polished. The hardware is fine as is it's the content that's lacking. I haven't tried anything that truly felt blockbuster quality.

It's possible. I mean I would typically expect a full frame sensor from the same generation to have lower noise than a S35 sensor. Are you talking about base ISO? I've definitely seen tests showing the C500 2 having way better noise performance at higher ISO's than the C300 III and C70. CVP's comparison implies that the C400 has worse latitude than the C300 Mk III, which supports the idea that their DGO technology worked fairly well. I haven't tried any of these cameras so I have no firsthand information. It just sort of surprised me that they didn't keep using that feature.

Looks pretty awesome! No real complaints from me yet, based on the CVP video. Worth an $8k spend for me? Meh... not really. But it looks really solid with most of the expected basics covered, even if it doesn't have anything wildly new. The one weird thing is that they have left out a DGO sensor. Seems like a strange choice, considering how the C70 has it.

Also true lol. I'm personally fine with a large camera for what I do now. I could do with a different form factor though. But I do appreciate that lots of people like or need photo-cam style bodies, and hey if now we can have the same thing as before, but without clipped audio, I think that's pretty awesome! I'm actually pretty surprised that Blackmagic didn't do it with their new cine cam, or even the Pyxis. Maybe Canon will have 32 bit float in their June 5 cinema announcement? I'm pretty excited to see what they announce anyway.

Well yeah obviously if its terrible quality then it doesn't matter whether it's 16, 24 or 32 bit, it'll suck. Assuming the preamps are roughly in line with what you get on most prosumer equipment, and that it does some kind of dual gain merging like virtually every other prosumer 32 bit recorder, and that the module doesn't physically break when you breathe on it, then 32 bit float is a huge improvement for a huge number of people.

Awesome lens. Sigma is definitely one of my favorite companies in the camera and lens world. It's not a huge zoom range, but 28 and 50 are basically the only two primes I use regularly. 45 isn't quite 50, but if you're looking to cover a LOT of scenarios without compromising on speed or sharpness, it looks like a great choice. Too bad they couldn't put a linear focus ring on it. It's so difficult to use something like this with a wireless follow focus. Maybe they'll eventually make a cine version, like their 24-35.

That is exciting! 32 bit in camera will be huge for solo shooters.

My magic lantern work was on amazon prime. It has also been shown in local theaters, and films that I shot on magic lantern won awards both in the US and abroad. None of it was high profile or anything like that, but I think my workflow was fine. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. You can like what you like. However, I would not consider my opinion to be uninformed.

I think Gerald does a good job. There isn't enough time for someone to both test every camera, and test any one camera thoroughly. If I'm thinking about buying or renting a piece of gear, I try to see reviews from both people who use that gear a lot, and from people who have used a lot of gear. It's impossible for that to be the same person. For example, I've there are people who have never touched an expensive lens in their life heaping praise on the flood of budget cine-style lenses (Laowa, DZOFilm, Meike, SLR Magic, etc). And they might be a legit artist who makes really good videos with those lenses. However, it's not that useful for a purchasing decision for someone to say Meike lenses are good, when what I really want to know is how it compares to the competition. I've seen people say how great the optics are on the only lens they own, while taking great images of great looking scenes, but I see other tests showing all kinds of problems compared to other lenses for the price. And then, by necessity, the person who has made the comparisons between 50 lenses spent all their time comparing lenses and not making art. So it takes both kinds of people to get a complete picture of anything. I would never take art advice from Gerald, but his reviews are great for that comparison overview. As long as you keep in mind what info you can and can't get from what he says.

^ I do the same thing. We write the filename in the script notes so we know what it contains. And when I copy footage off cards, I rename all the files so that corresponding files always have the same name.

People use iphones and super 8 film cameras and get their work in festivals. Doesn't mean I'd recommend those as general purpose cameras either. And I'm also not saying that anyone using ML should switch anything up. I've personally not found the image to be particularly better than any modern cameras, and the on-set workflow in particular is pretty bad on sets with any size crew (the original post about ML was comparing it to Alexa's on professional shoots). Now certainly back in 2015, ML was amazing. At that time, I shot a bit with early BM cameras like the OG pocket, the 2.5k and later the Ursa 4k. And I was on shoots with Red Ones and Epics. So ML was truly an outlier as a large sensor, affordable camera with quality recording. Btw I've seen lots of the images you've posted using ML @mercer and I love them.

Have you used 5D3 ML? I disagree completely. I find the color to be average, the noise and particularly the chroma noise is particularly ugly, and the dynamic range is really bad. Complete opposite of the Alexa classic. The one thing it has is no compression artifacts, which at the time was unique in the consumer space with a large sensor.

I was thinking that over when I saw the S9. For me it's a toss up. I wouldn't use either one as a primary video camera, but fwiw I vastly prefer my travel/photo camera to have 10 bit compressed vs full raw, IBIS is quite useful for photography, and the rotating screen is great when you need it. On the other hand, I don't know if I could live without an EVF, and the Sigma at least has one as an accessory. And then there's the S5, which I got used at a fraction of the price of either one of them, and does basically everything I want but in a slightly larger package. It will certainly be a new sensor generation before I change anything.

Trends come and go. Vista vision film peaked and declined before digital was invented, and now as a size format it's returning. Anamorphic comes and goes and comes back. It's possible that 10 years from now we'll have another super 16 craze, and Arri will build an Alexa with a tiny sensor to fit that need.

As someone who shot exclusively on a 5D3 with magic lantern for ~1.5 years during which I was shooting every week, it is far inferior to most of today's prosumer offerings in every way, including plain image quality. If it's what you have, then yes, a 5D3 with ML produces beautiful images and it will continue to do so. However there is no situation in which I would recommend it as a purchase.

I guess my point is that, for whatever reason, these people don't consider it in need of "fixing," it's already how they like it. Maybe the real takeaway is that you and I are just old curmudgeons now lol.

It's kind of fascinating how popular bad looking videos are. Lots of people take videos on phones, add snapchat filters on their 5" screen in direct sunlight, post, and people like it.