newfoundmass

It sucks, but I'll give them credit for putting the recording limits in. At least then people can know what to expect, unlike with other camera companies.

This was a confusing watch, honestly. He started out by saying viewers put too much value in the trips, yet he is clearly irked that he has been snubbed by Panasonic and not brought on them. 99% of his viewers will never be flown to an exotic location, put up in a nice hotel, and otherwise have the red carpet rolled out for them. That he tries to act like they aren't a big deal (despite his clearly being irked at being left out) shows how much of a disconnect there is between people like him and the rest of us. I don't doubt that he's being honest about Lumix BUT I've pointed out in the past on here how biased Gerald's titles are when it's a Sony camera versus when it's other brands. Examples: As a consumer I don't like it, but if I'm looking at it as the marketing person for these other camera brands and I saw how much of a shill he has become for Sony (and he can argue all he wants that he's the most critical of Sony out of every other company he reviews, it isn't true) I'd probably not bend over backwards for him either. His broader message about being disposable to these companies I agree with, but he played the game, helped create the beast, and still, to an extent, continues to be a part of the problem.

It's not a release that entices me at all but props to Panasonic for putting recording limits so people at least know how long they can record for. If you're absolutely deadset on releasing a camera that has overheating issues (ugh) the least you can do is be honest about it. Now if only other camera manufacturers did that.... I really don't know what to say about that lense, though. I guess it'll appeal to Street shooters?

B&H, Adorama & MPB have all served me well when buying used. I bought my S5iix new, but that was because it was on sale and the used price wasn't much lower. If it's only $100 or $200 cheaper then it really might be worth getting it new instead, but I generally buy cameras that are a couple years old which is where you'll find bargains. You're probably going to get the same overheating on a used camera as you will on a new one, assuming the camera you're getting has overheating issues to begin with. The same applies for most issues a camera may have. Third party warranties aren't a terrible idea. I get extended warranties if they're available for any expensive purchase I make. For me that's usually anything over $1000, though what is and isn't expensive varies per person. I film a lot of pro-wrestling, so the thought of having my brand new $2,000 camera and $1,000+ lens damaged and being SOL because I didn't spend a little more on the extended warranty gives me nightmares. Better to be safe than sorry, I say.

It's possible to get those kinds of results using a standard profile on an 8-bit camera. Picture profile settings are just part of it, though. Nailing color and exposure are important. I'm not necessarily blown away by the dynamic range personally. I think it looks good, especially considering it's shot on what is almost a 10 year old camera, but I think it really just boils down to it being a nice day out.

People keep talking about the patent, but I really don't think it is the reason behind the purchase at all. Nikon wants to get into the video/cinema market. Their recent releases are evidence of that. They have very little chance though of getting a foothold in the market on their own. Purchasing RED, even though it lags behind ARRI and probably even Sony, makes a lot more sense than creating something on their own from scratch that will likely fail. Major blockbusters and shows are filmed using RED cameras. Tons of independent films are shot on RED cameras. It has a loyal user base. Those are reasons enough for any company looking to get into the cinema/video market to purchase them instead of starting from scratch. Will it work? Who knows, but it's a better building block than what they had to work with. Better to own the company whose camera was used to film blockbusters like Guardians of the Galaxy and Aquaman than to release a cinema camera that will see minimal adoption,

A loyal customer base and a foothold in Hollywood is a pretty significant reason to purchase RED if a company is looking break into that market. With this purchase Nikon leap frogs Canon when it comes to cinema cameras. Not a lot of Hollywood blockbusters filming on Canon cinema cameras, but some of the biggest ones are filmed on RED.

If it was any other company but RED I'd be pretty disappointed to see another company getting bought up. But in this case the only thing that upsets me is that the assholes running RED are all getting PAID. Nikon has clearly been trying to get their foot in the door when it comes to video users, so buying RED makes all the sense in the world. Now it just depends on what they do with it.

There were a lot of ups and downs. I launched my own pro-wrestling company in May. It has been very successful so far. I've continued my freelance video work and it has gone well. I'm pretty content where I'm at gear wise. I'll probably upgrade my B and C cams to S5IIs but overall I'm quite happy with the L-mount and feel pretty good about its future. I was diagnosed with kidney cancer. Had my right kidney removed. No more cancer. If my scans look good in April I'll be officially considered cured. Flooding ravaged my community twice. It is still recovering. So 2023 brought some real big highs and some real low lows. If it weren't for the election I'd almost be looking forward to 2024! Happy New Year to all of you!

Aputure is great, but also look into Godox or Small Rig if you want to save a little bit of money. I have a Small Rig kit I put together that is holding up pretty well, though there are a couple things I wish they'd done to make them better, namely a little better construction and putting glass over the LED chip so I could use it outside without worrying about bugs. Still a pretty good value given I got them on sale. Adorama's Glow EZ soft boxes are also a great value and easy to set up.

I'm always confused about people complaining about the size of the S5ii. I understand preferring a smaller camera, that's one of the reasons I loved M43, but the S5iix with 24-105mm (and the S5 with that same lens) is perfectly fine and pretty well balanced.

well this took a turn. hope you're okay!

I'd still like one 🙂

The Panny 24-105 is an excellent lens and the stabilization, since it's a stabilized lens, on the S5ii is incredible with it since you get dual IS.

It might be worth waiting until you can afford the extra money? Or do you need it before then?

They'll sell more than a 100, I'm sure, but that price will scare off most folks. I'd love to have one, honestly, but not for $5600. I think I'd rather have a Digital Bolex, though.

I love my new S5IIX BUT I think, right now, it'd be the Nikon Z9 or Z8. I really, really like the images I've seen and it's excellent at photos and video.

Agreed on going the used route with MPB or one of the companies that sell used gear. Most of them will include a warranty, and some even offer extended warranties. MPB I believe includes a 6 month warranty, for example. The FX30 is about $1600 in like new condition here in the US on MPB. I would save up and just go the FX30 route.

I know over a dozen people who are news shooters and none of them use those cameras you've listed. The ones that aren't using camcorders or older ENG cameras use their phones. The local CBS affiliate uses Panasonic DVX200s, for example.

What a weird thread, honestly. There's no real argument being given for why things will go to HFR, @zlfan just keeps repeating the same thing over and over. What paradigm has shifted? There is no movement towards HFR filmmaking and previous attempts were unsuccessful. There's no demand for it, from Hollywood or viewers. You can't even really use YouTube as a reason, as most narrative (and even a lot of non-narrative work) videos on there are 24 fps. I only really see 60 fps on gaming and sports channels. Even so, history has shown that will have virtually no impact on how films are shot. I mean, you're talking about the paradigm shifting while we've got an endless number of YouTubers filming themselves in their guest bedroom "studios" in 24 fps because they think it's cinematic! It's silly! I think it's cool if your preference is HFR video, and I encourage people to create whatever they want if that's their vision, it just never will become more than a personal preference.

whoops, my bad! it's £1,899, not euros.

I just gave you a link to a S5ii with 24-105mm for under 2,000 euro. But their auto focus on their camcorders are fine/on par with the Sony camcorder you were looking at.

If a camcorder is what best fits your needs, then it doesn't really matter if the technology is outdated or not if it has a good image and gets the job done. In your price range you'll have a hard time finding a camcorder-esque camera that has a 1" sensor and can do 4K 50/60p. You'll need to compromise somewhere. Panasonic HC-X1500 might be the closest, as far as having 4K 60p and being under $2,000. It however doesn't have a 1" sensor. The Panasonic AG-DVX200 can be purchased used for under $2,000 on sites like MPB. It's basically a GH5 in a camcorder body, has 4K 60p and is a M43 sensor. The FX30 is a great deal, though depending on what you mean by run and gun the stabilization might frustrate you. Looking at a UK dealer, this seems like a really good deal: https://www.wexphotovideo.com/panasonic-lumix-s5-ii-digital-camera-with-24-105mm-lens-3128170/ That looks like it's £1,899 inc. cashback? I've never heard of TDimension but I've never bought anything without a warranty if I could help it. In fact I often do the opposite: I always try to get an extended warranty.

I'm sure in the future there will be films released in HFR as a stylized choice, but I can't see it becoming the standard. I don't think it's what the industry or the public really wants. If the way people consumed all other media had an impact on cinema it'd have switched over to 4:3 30 fps when broadcast, cable and satellite television changed the entertainment industry forever. After all, people watched more television than films and their fancy camcorders all used that aspect ratio and frame rate!

Again, the issue wasn't the displays. The 48 fps version was limited to only 450 theaters because it wasn't well received. And, again, people will differentiate cinema from the video they watch on their phones, just as people always did with 30 fps on television.