Never Satisfied

[Kisaha]

+1 Axel! Obviously filmic language is far more than technical specs, absolute numbers and dogmatic apprioaches. 

Everything is a different tool, that we can choose to use, or not, for specific reasons amd that forms our language. If you choose some form of stabilization, or not, for no good reason, then something is not thoroughly though tin your projects. You choose the words when you write and speak to make meaningful statements and communicate, film is just that, and words and writings is just a tool of the myriad different ones, stabilized shots, or not, is another.

[Bioskop.Inc]

15 hours ago, BenEricson said:

The problem with the smaller cameras is they need a lot of weight added to them. The handheld look on a shoulder mounted 16mm camera just looks amazing compared to any smaller digital camera.

The Ronin look is cool but definitely played. It changes how everything looks. A rig can look just as good if not better a lot of the time, especially for doc work.

5-Axis is there for people that have a minimal setup (no rig etc...) & just need to capture something really quickly, with the minimum of fuss - and of course getting the shot without it being a jitterbug nightmare.

But as Ben said, put some weight on a camera & you can get lovely steady shots, not jitter madness - you don't have to have a big rig or anything, maybe a heavy lens. When I shoot with the BMPCC, it's normally without a Speedbooster (I do own a cheap clone & use it for really wide shots) & just some really heavy lenses on it (which can weigh between 1-2kg + whatever else I need like lens support etc...). Yes, it does move about a bit, but not the micro jitters you'll get with a really simple light camera setup, & you have to practice a lot to get used to moving with your subject, as this hides a huge amount of handheld shake & minimises that seasick feeling you can get.

But as you sad, it looks more organic/natural when done without 5-axis, but it takes a lot of practice & a lot of people simply don't have the time or energy to put the hours in. So, if it's easier & quicker to use 5-Axis, then there is nothing wrong with that - especially if you're always going to be using a small lightweight set up. Just remember that if you graduate to a bigger camera then your inability to deal with the weight will also be a nightmare & then you'll have to deal with all the issues that that brings with it.

[BenEricson]

10 hours ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

But as Ben said, put some weight on a camera & you can get lovely steady shots, not jitter madness - you don't have to have a big rig or anything, maybe a heavy lens. When I shoot with the BMPCC, it's normally without a Speedbooster (I do own a cheap clone & use it for really wide shots) & just some really heavy lenses on it (which can weigh between 1-2kg + whatever else I need like lens support etc...). Yes, it does move about a bit, but not the micro jitters you'll get with a really simple light camera setup, & you have to practice a lot to get used to moving with your subject, as this hides a huge amount of handheld shake & minimises that seasick feeling you can get.

I shot with the pocket for a while. I always thought I was steady but would need to warp stuff if shot handheld. Such a great camera though. 

If you ever get a chance, try the Sony F3. The size is huge compared to the pocket but the image is very similar oddly enough. The added weight, xlr, and nd does come in handy.