newfoundmass

I don't see them switching to a subscription model. I imagine they'll continue to offer the software for free, with a "full version" available for $300. I think they're much more interested in attracting more people into their ecosystem than anything, especially if it encourages people to buy their cameras and hardware.

I can legally buy them from anyone selling them, whether it's off eBay or a dude off the street. As long as they're not stolen, it's legal. You might be expecting too much out of America, a country where private sales of guns is pretty much completely unregulated. There aren't a lot of jobs in the United States that require licensing. Most would be in the medical field. I mean shit, we elected a president that's a complete racist moron. The bar is pretty low in general here, in both good and bad ways, when it comes to job qualifications.

Yes, I pay taxes. You don't need a license in the United States to sell video production services (or shoes, for that matter!) I've never even heard of such a thing! What country do you live in?! ?

It's not that we're surprised 8K is coming, it's that Sony has not yet released a mirrorless camera that can do 4K60p, so the idea that the A7Siii will jump straight up to 8K doesn't make much sense. They'd need a massive technological breakthrough to achieve that in a tiny body. Who knows though? Maybe with a 1 minute recording limit?! ?

I think you're overestimating how many people are taking work away from you after buying a $500 kit. People that are good at their craft and keep clients happy will always have work. We all have financial obligations and desires, some larger than others. I live cheaply. I own a small home (paid off in large part thanks to my supposed "amateur" video work), I own somewhere in the neighborhood of $20,000 worth of video equipment, all paid off thanks to my "amateur" video work, and I've found a way to live comfortably on $25,000 to $30,000 a year. I've done all that by the age of 34. If someone comes to me and says they can only afford $500 for a gig that others would charge three times for, and I can fit it in to my schedule, I have no hesitation taking it. Some wish to frame that as undercutting "real professionals" whereas I look at it as paying my phone, electric, internet, and grocery bills for the month with one gig. Besides, those type of clients weren't going to pay those "real professionals" what they would ask for anyway.

Fivver is a good place, and also looking for local actors is an option. Many of them can do voice over work. If you're lucky you'll also maybe find a friend that's capable of competently doing it, as I have a few friends, both male and female, that have good voices and are adequate for the job.

It IS a mentality, because of what definition one chooses to use when using the word. Merriam-Webster: participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs Google: a person competent or skilled in a particular activity. Using your strict definition tons of people that are professionals, from bands/musicians, to actors, to athletes, etc. wouldn't be considered "professional." It's silly.

This is such a weird mentality. The quality of work should always be what's most important. If those that have hired me and been pleased with the results consider my work to be "professional" then that's really all that matters.

I think location is a huge factor that's overlooked. There's a lot more work, presumably for more money, in New York or Los Angeles, than there is here in Vermont. There aren't a ton of high paying gigs in the immediate area. Does that mean I'm not a professional, even though I have nearly 20 years of production experience, have produced countless live sporting broadcasts all over the country, etc? Most of my work over the last 20 years has been diy punk rock and independent professional wrestling. These, by nature, are low budget forms of entertainment. It's not a matter of being cheap as much as there is literally very little money to pay people. If I charge someone $500 to shoot and edit their pro wrestling event I can guarantee you that I'll produce a better finished project than someone that will charge 3x as much and has no experience shooting or producing pro wrestling. Just as those who've spent years shooting skateboard videos, some probably for free, will produce a better finished project than someone that charges $2000. It's why I scoff at the idea that quality is related to expense. Does that make us amateurs, even if we're capable of producing high quality work for smaller budgets?

This is a very narrow way to look at things. Price does not equal quality. Never has, never will. What truly differentiates amateurs from professionals? The ability to make a living or the quality of work?

I live in Vermont, so there are not a lot of freelancers or really much of a local filmmaker scene. And really, I've always looked at things compared to my friends and what they make, as opposed to others in my field. If I can make $30k a year, after taxes, working when I want to, instead of working 40+ hours a week at a job I hate, I'm fine taking a gig for $500. I've made more doing that than I did when I'd ask for what I feel like I'm worth. I just took a gig editing a kids basketball game. Two camera angles, it's about an hour. The Dad just wanted something "professional" for his kids best game of the season. I charged $100 for what will amount to 2 1/2 hours of work, tops. I'd get scolded or bashed for charging so little by some folks, but that's almost 2 weeks worth of groceries for me for a couple hours of time. I guess it just boils down to perspective. I just feel fortunate to be able pick and choose.

I just finished my first project completely in Resolve 15 and I'm really quite happy with it. So much so that I'm done with Adobe Premiere. My biggest problem is Fusion. I can't get over the learning curve. I'm used to After Effects and Cinema 4D. Fusion makes me feel absolutely helpless trying to figure things out.

It's really cool but they're never gonna get me to buy into CC again.

The sensor is just one part. Those other companies have built technology that uses Sony sensors, and allows them to achieve things that Sony itself hasn't been able to achieve, even in their smaller sensor cameras. Panasonic released a camera that could do 4K/60p in a hybrid camera TWO YEARS AGO. Fuji came along and did the same, and they've shown they're very much taking video seriously. Even in full frame mirrorless everyone has largely caught up, or eclipsed, Sony. That's wild for a company that was so ahead of everyone, for so long. People really believe the A7Siii will shoot in 8K? ?

No, just in jobs in general.

After taxes/insurance, etc. get taken out, $500 a week is pretty standard for millennials in the US. The median household income in the US is only $56,000 or so. I have friends that make $40,000 or so a year, but I'd say that accounts for maybe half, give or take?

I love the concept and the pricing. The battery life would be my main concern with these though. 7 hours isn't terrible, but I think I'd have been OK with them adding a little extra size to try and get it closer to 12. 7 hours is cutting it close for a lot of shoots I'd use these on, whereas 12, or even 10, would guarantee that I don't have any issue. I'm using the Azden PRO-XD wireless system, which I got on sale from B&H for $149 and they've exceeded my expectations and have good battery life. Though I don't have any real complaints about them I'd probably have sold them for this if the battery life was just a smidge better.

I hate to say it but this is the direction things are moving in for "regular" clients. It's not to be unexpected, really. The key is evolving, and adapting to the way things are going and making it work for you. I'll get guff for saying it, but if someone offers me $500 for a 4 hour shoot and a 2-3 minute edit, and I'm available, I'm taking it. Why? Because I see friends, many with degrees, barely making that a week in their jobs. I don't feel it's devaluing myself, I don't personally put that much ego into my work, as much as looking at it from a business aspect and doing what needs to be done to make sure the bills are paid and I'm doing okay. And often times those gigs lead to bigger/better gigs. To me the motto I'd encourage is simple: stay humble and stay hungry. Be grateful that they see enough value in your work to have you do it instead of their nephew and his iPhone, which, if you look at a lot of small companies on YouTube, is pretty typical.

I think the delay in the A7Siii is obvious: the expectations/market has moved in a direction that outpaced Sony's tech and they're playing catch up. Last year was a huge year. Panasonic was still riding that GH5 wave for most of the year, until they announced their full frame camera. The full frame mirrorless announcements from Nikon and Canon. Nikon and Fuji made HUGE steps in their video capabilities. At the beginning of the year the A7III looked like a real impressive camera (and it still is despite its flaws) but by the end of 2018, not so much. Heck, the GH5s, and all of the new full frame mirrorless cameras even made their low light performance look less impressive: maybe not as good, but definitely in the ballpark. In a sense, they're probably not lying by saying that it's simple to add 4K/60p but to DO 4k/60p with their current mirrorless tech probably isn't so simple without overheating. The longer they wait though the bigger the expectations are going to be. It's not an enviable position to be in. At this point they're going to need to release something ground breaking because they've got a lot of companies gunning for them, and they're all very capable foes.

No one bought the A7Sii for its stills capabilities, and the same is likely to be true for the A7Siii. It's OK for web publishing, at best.

The expectations for the A7Siii are so high and very unrealistic.

V-log pre installed is very interesting. Wonder what the crop will be in 4K, if anything? If this is under $1000 it's a winner, imo. There isn't enough for me to upgrade from my G85 as a b-cam, at least not right away, but it's a great mid range camera. 4K60 would've been nice though, even if they had to limit it to 30 minutes for heating reasons (though I suspect it's limit has more to do with not wanting to hurt the GH5/GH6.) The lack of 4K60 here though does make me wonder if we'll only be getting 4k60 out of the GH6, though HFR options might add 120 similar to how it is in Full FD.

Strange how people can't just move on from Canon. You keep expecting more and more from them, they never deliver, and then you keep asking "when?!" Even if they did, in the not so distant future, provide exactly what you wanted, why reward them after all of this?

Same

What an "alliance." ?