newfoundmass

We're living in bleak times, unfortunately, where those who are meant to document and report on the powerful are being targeted in attempt to silence them. Demonizing them wasn't enough, sadly.

Thank goodness you're okay!

It's very nice to see more companies joining the L-Mount Alliance, but I really, really, REALLY like those Lumix f1/8 primes and it's hard to justify getting any others, especially with how affordable they are on the used market. Now if someone released super affordable and compact f2.5 primes I'd be all over those, no matter who made them, especially if I end up getting the S9.

If they re-released the pocket with the same sensor but with a battery that lasts at least 90 minutes I'd buy it. That was literally the only reason I stopped using it. There were times I just wanted to go out with it and film some cool stuff without having to rig it up, but it was just a pain. I loved everything else about it, even the quirks, but battery life was such a deal breaker. To this day though that image is my absolute favorite out of any camera I've ever shot with. Using that camera made me better at my craft and I miss it.

For me it's the original Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera. That camera, and all the wacky c-mount lenses I used with it, was just so much fun to use and everything I got out of it looked so much better than it should have, at least to my eyes. I FELT like an artist using it, as opposed to a videographer. That was such a special sensor, and to this day I still don't understand why every camera manufacturer hasn't switched to a menu system like it (and the other BMD cameras.)

This. Yeah, we can look back at older films and remark about how nice they look, but I can name you just as many (and, frankly, probably more) that look like absolute dog shit visually. Ironically, some of those are my favorite films! But most of them weren't made to intentionally look that way, they just did because of budget limitations. There is a lot of really bad looking films out there though. In fact I'd say most films from the film era aren't any more remarkable looking than what is filmed today digitally. There certainly are exceptions, which is why I do agree to a certain extent that it's unfortunate that most everything has moved to digital, but I can't say that every film I watch today would look substantially better if it'd been shot on film, especially lower budget ones. It's really easy to look back with rose tinted glasses and say "everything looked better back when it was shot on film." I think the bigger issue with the move to digital is how disposable images have become in general. We all shoot thousands of pictures on our phones every year but most we never look at again after taking them. In fact, most of the time we put little thought into taking them. Or at least I am guilty of that. They just sit on our phones, taking up digital space waiting for the day when maybe we remember that we documented this moment or that moment. Whereas with film, or even video tape, aside from the camera itself, you were limited by how many pictures were left on the roll, how many rolls you could afford to buy, and then the cost of developing them. You also didn't get that immediate feedback of looking at a photo you just took to see how it turned out, instead you had to wait until it was developed. I remember going to sports events as a kid with my camera and only having two rolls of film. That was roughly what, 50-60 pictures total? I had to choose carefully what pictures I took less I run out of film and miss something extraordinary. I couldn't just waste pictures! Now though I'll take 60 pictures in the span of 5 minutes with my phone! Taking photographs or moving images was a much more thoughtful experience in the film days. Today that doesn't really exist, because content is so disposable. Even if you are fortunate enough to create something that breaks through, something else rapidly comes along to take the viewers attention away. With the rise of TikTok it has gotten even worse than it was during YouTube's peak. 15 seconds and then it's on to the next thing! Still, that isn't to say it all is bad. But it's not all good either.

I very much prefer the image of the OG S5 over the S5II X, but people really make a mountain out of a molehill when it comes to the "worse" image. It's really not that bad. In the year I've had it not one client or viewer has complained about the image; in fact it has been the exact opposite! I feel like cameras have plateaued so now people over analyze and overstate every little thing. But virtually all of this stuff doesn't matter to the audience that we are creating these images for. Anyone with any discernible talent will be able to take the S1RII and create compelling images with it. That bride is going to love the pictures you take, the corporate client is going to be ecstatic with the talking head interviews you shoot, the MMA school is going to be psyched with the promotional video you film, etc. As long as it's in focus, the colors are okay, and it's framed well, these folks aren't going to really care if it's a little noisier than the R5II or if the rolling shutter is slightly worse than the A7RV. I don't know how it is where you all live, but there are literally people making money using cheap Canon Rebel DSLRs and kit lenses in my area. I see friends post their wedding pictures, their kid's senior portraits, baby pictures, and all of that stuff on Facebook all of the time. Most of the time these photographers aren't even good at what they do, put people I know still go crazy over them and post these photos they paid for proudly on social media! These photographers still get paid work, not just because they are cheap (that certainly helps!) but because the average person's standards aren't all that high. That's not to say that we should lower our standards, just that we should remember the big picture (no pun intended) and stop worrying about the small things that aren't going to matter to 99.9% of our clients/audience.

I'm sure he'll argue "that was almost two years ago!"

But cameras are funner and this is a camera forum 😉

I've never bought anything from lensrentals, though I've rented from them! I found they kept their gear well maintained, but obviously when buying something from a rental house you're buying something that was heavily used and there's always a risk to that. Do you know if they have any warranty? The good thing about the other places is they give you a warranty, which is always nice.

Right? Haha.

Still about $1500!

I get it, but you can get fine audio from almost any mic, as long as it's close enough to the source. Add some tweaking in post if needed and 99% of those watching aren't gonna notice the difference between a $100 mic and $500+ mic. As long as it's not peaking, there's no hum or other noise, it will be sufficient for YouTube. I mean, heck, going back to my buddy that uses a cheap Movo wireless mic going into a T3i that has terrible audio preamps! That gets used on the local nightly news on the NBC affiliate! I quite like Lumix colors, and the natural profile on the S5 is what I usually go with when I don't need to do heavy grading. As long as your white balance and exposure is set correctly you'll get very good results, and 8-bit is good enough to do some tweaks as long as you don't try to push the colors too much. Markus is great in that he thinks of some creative ideas, especially outside the box ones. I quite like his video/photo content, though when I read up more about him I cringed quite a bit when it comes to his health/motivational speaking stuff. Aside from disagreeing with most of it, he is accused of hiring people to attend tapings so that it looks like he's giving these motivational speeches in front of large crowds that uses for promotional videos when they are just paid actors. So I just stick to the video/photo channel, haha! I've never had an issue with using manual focus on the Lumix S5, and I usually use the screen instead of the EVF (I know, I know!) You can also buy a cheap 5 or 7 inch monitor if you have trouble nailing focus, but I've never had that problem personally. Also auto focus really isn't that bad on the S5, especially if you are there to monitor it. I definitely understand why people who are used to PDAF complain, but I've used it for year and really don't have a ton of complaints about the auto focus, especially once you get used to its quirks. I know @MrSMW, who also used the S5 a lot, has similar views. Having PDAF on my S5II X is nice, but I still use AF on my two S5 bodies and it's "fine." It's weather and dust proof! Haha! I am not trying to be a shill, but it really does blow my mind that this camera is so readily available for under $1000 on the used market. I just don't think you can beat it when it comes to video features, especially when it comes to full frame. It is very easy to overlook the EVF and auto focus when you take into consideration how powerful it is in every other way. And it's a camera that will still stand up 5 years from now, in terms of image quality and usability. I've had it for a couple years now and I still haven't used all the features, like anamorphic and external RAW. So it's literally a camera that technically I could still grow into using if I decided I wanted to use those features down the road. The only thing that I would warn about those is they can overheat when filming for long times and the X-T3 has recording limits in all modes, from what I remember. I really looked hard at Fuji a few years back; if not for the bad IBIS and the recording limits/overheating it was the system that I honestly thought would have been the perfect, as I really like Fuji colors. It's still over $1,000 here in the States. I've been keeping my eye on the used prices because I increasingly want one haha!

I wish more companies would do stuff like this. I'm looking at you, Panasonic.

You can film 4K on cheap v30 cards. You can get a 256gb SD card for under $40 and a 512gb SD card for under $60. I use them on my S5 and S5II X.