Best super 35mm camera?

[redimp]

51 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Get an Atomos Samurai Blade like I did (or get a BMD VA), you can find it secondhand for just $300ish. Or buy new for $500

Do they both record 444?

[IronFilm]

4 minutes ago, redimp said:

Do they both record 444?

Nah, but I think that arguably the difference between the two is not that great.  
Especially if you want to save on the data storage and the extra cost for a recorder. 

Heck, with my BMPCC I almost never recorder raw, and ProRes444 doesn't even exist as an option, so ProResHQ is my usual choice (or even ProResLT! :-P If it is just to be uploaded immediately to my vlog).

So in a way, I'm approaching my BMPCC and F3 in the same way here. 

[redimp]

Just now, IronFilm said:

Nah, but I think that arguably the difference between the two is not that great.  
Especially if you want to save on the data storage and the extra cost for a recorder. 

Heck, with my BMPCC I almost never recorder raw, and ProRes444 doesn't even exist as an option, so ProResHQ is my usual choice (or even ProResLT! :-P If it is just to be uploaded immediately to my vlog).

So in a way, I'm approaching my BMPCC and F3 in the same way here. 

I'm a bit confused here. So you need a cam with 444 option activated to record 60p, but you don't actually record 444 footage?

[IronFilm]

51 minutes ago, redimp said:

I'm a bit confused here. So you need a cam with 444 option activated to record 60p, but you don't actually record 444 footage?

You don't have to record 444 if you don't want/need to. 
But you can if you wish!

[mercer]

Well, now that you have added 4K to your list and $4500 cap, then it seems an Ursa 4.6 or FS5 may be the way to go. But you will need a little more accessories for the Ursa.

What are you shooting with now?

And what are you planning to shoot with the cinema camera?

[IronFilm]

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

Well, now that you have added 4K to your list and $4500 cap, then it seems an Ursa 4.6 or FS5 may be the way to go. But you will need a little more accessories for the Ursa.

Yeah, whatever is your budget for a camera body, go ahead and double it immediately, then double it again!

Once you add in accessories + lenses + lights + audio + tripod + etc.... it is very easy to blow waaaaaay past that!

[mercer]

1 minute ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah, whatever is your budget for a camera body, go ahead and double it immediately, then double it again!

Once you add in accessories + lenses + lights + audio + tripod + etc.... it is very easy to blow waaaaaay past that!

Ain’t that the truth. I am in no place to tell someone how to spend their money, god knows I’ve spent a small fortune of my own but as a hobbyist that is also interested in the conveniences of cinema cameras, I cannot rightly say that I could ever justify a $4500 price tag just to have 4K, when the majority of viewers will never see the benefits. In my opinion, if Arri hasn’t felt the need to release a 4K camera, then I don’t see why anybody on here really NEEDS one. 

So with that being said I feel the OP should get whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants, but I would still suggest either an F3, a C100ii or C300 or I guess an LS300 or FS5 if he really wants a 4K camera. And if he wants one on the cheap then get an LS300 but he should be fully aware of the build quality before just hitting buy it now.

[redimp]

Answering your questions – I don't own a camera anymore, sold the bmmcc a week ago along with lots of s16 lenses. Have also shot with 5d and A7s.

My goal is to get ready to a music video project we plan to shoot this fall hopefully. I make music myself and want to be able to shoot videos/stories to release along with it. I have also written a couple of scripts that I never managed to shoot because my old gear never was able to provide the aesthetics I desired – starting with extremely deep DOF and ending with a limited FOV due to the lens I used.

Currently I own an Iscorama-36 (anamorphic block) and a set of Lomo cine glass (35, 50 and 75). That's why I'm looking to get a super35 cam in PL mount – to get that shallow DOF and cinematic image aesthetics. I also own some contax glass, so in those terms I guess I'm covered. Now I just want the body that will allow me to use this glass and be comfortable to work with for my DP and myself, and reduce the technical limitations a bit, so I can get the images I want to easier.

Not sure if it makes any sense at all, but that was my logic all the way. I also expect that if I invest this much into a camera it will encourage me more to use it. My bmmcc was sitting on the shelf for the last year. Anything I wanted to use it for seemed to be a waste of effort, since I knew that images won't be as good as I want them to be.

Now coming back to your suggestions – ursa seems to have a really nice image, that doesn't look like video, more like film. I am scared of all the problems with FPN that bmmcc had as well, but almost any footage I've seen out of it looks very pleasing. But everybody very aggressively recommends to get the Pro version, because of the NDs and other ergonomic benefits, cheaper recording media, etc. Also people recommend to get it new from the official reseller, since any ebay unit can turn out to be a failure with bad XLRs, FPN, magenta corners or dead pixels, and it's possible that one will have to return the camera for exchange. I am located in Ukraine, and new pro body here is $6300, non-pro version is $5300. Add V-mount plate and tripod plate, batteries and media and you can easily go over 7 grand.

4k is definitely not an absolute must, but I'm a spoiled brat with the 5k retina in front of my eyes at least 10 hours/day. Sharp HD is fine by me, considering I will have to de-squeeze footage to 2.66 ratio, I can upscale HD to 3k horizontal. In fact I really like how sharp HD is on the BMPC 4k. If it had a better dynamic range and no noise issues it would be a perfect cam for me.

 

[Dogtown]

2 hours ago, redimp said:

I must say, those videos from the list got me a bit confused. Some footage looks extremely good, like this one https://vimeo.com/231103934

Some other footage looks pretty bad, like this one https://vimeo.com/82889552 

Not sure if it has something to do with 444 upgrade, or using internal vs external recording. Can anyone clarify? I mean, the first clip looks very good to my eye, amazing lowlight and SHARP. The second reminds me of a bad 90s camcorder with noise reduction and sharpening going on there.

 

I believe the problem you are having viewing these Vimeo files on your 5K display is that they are original 720p and 1080p video files, your 5K display is upscaling these and and giving you a poor representation of what was captured, it is doing a two to one upscale for your 5K screen, if you can watch these Vimeo videos that are 720p and 1080p with a one to one pixel instead of upscaling to a two to one you will have a much better looking image. Don’t blow these up to full screen on your 5K monitor these 720p and 1080p will look crap when viewing like that, keep them as close to one to one pixels for the 720p and 1080p footage, it will be a smaller screen on your monitor but it will be a better representation of what the video really looks like.

 

Broatch

[TheRenaissanceMan]

The F3 will only transfer 1080/60 4:2:2 from a single SDI port if you have the 4:4:4 upgrade, because that upgrade also allows the SDI A port to work at 3G instead of 1.5G. The 60p will still be 4:2:2.

I use my $1200 F3 with a BMVA I got secondhand for $300. It didn't even require me to update my media, because I was able to use the same SD cards I had in my Blackmagic Pocket. This package gives me great 1080p 4:2:2 at 24, 30, and 60 fps. Along with the great low light performance and excellent color/DR in S-LOG, I've had absolutely nothing to complain about on an image quality level. 

I know some people who have a poor opinion of the F3, and honestly agree with their reasons. Most of them have either A) shot the F3 without LOG, or B) shot on the internal codec. Safety Not Guaranteed proved that neither is a death sentence with a professional colorist, but the camera really only takes its place as one of the best 1080p sensors when utilizing both LOG and an external recorder. The earlier comparison between the C300, Epic, and F3 demonstrates that gap in image quality quite clearly.

4K can be nice to have in certain scenarios, but I haven't worked with an editor/director yet who didn't prefer a 1080 ProRes workflow. The F3's lower pixel count also helps with rolling shutter and battery life, both of which are superior to the UM4.6K (which I've used and liked). 

The whole "I'll shoot more if I get better gear" justification is wishful thinking; trust me, I told myself that for several years where I produced very little. Get the cheapest, most modestly specced camera that does what you need and looks nice, then use it until you push up against its limitations. Then assess from there. 

[IronFilm]

6 hours ago, redimp said:

Answering your questions – I don't own a camera anymore, sold the bmmcc a week ago along with lots of s16 lenses. Have also shot with 5d and A7s.

My goal is to get ready to a music video project we plan to shoot this fall hopefully. I make music myself and want to be able to shoot videos/stories to release along with it. I have also written a couple of scripts that I never managed to shoot because my old gear never was able to provide the aesthetics I desired – starting with extremely deep DOF and ending with a limited FOV due to the lens I used.

Currently I own an Iscorama-36 (anamorphic block) and a set of Lomo cine glass (35, 50 and 75). That's why I'm looking to get a super35 cam in PL mount – to get that shallow DOF and cinematic image aesthetics. I also own some contax glass, so in those terms I guess I'm covered. Now I just want the body that will allow me to use this glass and be comfortable to work with for my DP and myself, and reduce the technical limitations a bit, so I can get the images I want to easier.

Not sure if it makes any sense at all, but that was my logic all the way. I also expect that if I invest this much into a camera it will encourage me more to use it. My bmmcc was sitting on the shelf for the last year. Anything I wanted to use it for seemed to be a waste of effort, since I knew that images won't be as good as I want them to be.

Now coming back to your suggestions – ursa seems to have a really nice image, that doesn't look like video, more like film. I am scared of all the problems with FPN that bmmcc had as well, but almost any footage I've seen out of it looks very pleasing. But everybody very aggressively recommends to get the Pro version, because of the NDs and other ergonomic benefits, cheaper recording media, etc. Also people recommend to get it new from the official reseller, since any ebay unit can turn out to be a failure with bad XLRs, FPN, magenta corners or dead pixels, and it's possible that one will have to return the camera for exchange. I am located in Ukraine, and new pro body here is $6300, non-pro version is $5300. Add V-mount plate and tripod plate, batteries and media and you can easily go over 7 grand.
 

Really sounds like the F3 is the right choice for you.

Or maybe perhaps a Sony FS700.

Or maaaaaybe if feeling really super adventurous and up for it, try to get lucky with a cheap Sony F35.

 

However, if a you never did much while owning a BMMCC then I highly doubt buying an even more expensive camera will radically change that.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

If you want a 4K cinema camera on a tiny budget, the FS700 is no slouch. When paired with an external recorder, it offers essentially the same image quality as the FS5/FS7. It's not as good an image as the F3 from a noise, DR, and color standpoint, but stands up pretty well regardless--especially with solid lighting.
 

Pass: Pharma

All shot on the FS700, and we've gotten into almost a dozen festivals now.

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, mercer said:

Ain’t that the truth. I am in no place to tell someone how to spend their money, god knows I’ve spent a small fortune of my own but as a hobbyist that is also interested in the conveniences of cinema cameras, I cannot rightly say that I could ever justify a $4500 price tag just to have 4K, when the majority of viewers will never see the benefits. In my opinion, if Arri hasn’t felt the need to release a 4K camera, then I don’t see why anybody on here really NEEDS one. 

So with that being said I feel the OP should get whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants, but I would still suggest either an F3, a C100ii or C300 or I guess an LS300 or FS5 if he really wants a 4K camera. And if he wants one on the cheap then get an LS300 but he should be fully aware of the build quality before just hitting buy it now.

I've made this point a few times now elsewhere in other threads/forums, and basically if you're not making money from your camera than you shouldn't get a 4K cinema camera. You should get yourself a 1080 cinema camera, or a 4K stills camera (or heck... even a 1080 one, no shame in shooting with a G6/D750/a7Smk1!).

 

EXCEPTION: if you're a rich hobbyist. Go ahead and buy an URSA Mini Pro! Or whatever.

As then things don't have to make any more financial sense to you than the $20K road bike you purchased but only ride down to the coffee shops once a fortnight, or the $20K set of golf clubs you haven't used for the last year. 

 

4 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

I know some people who have a poor opinion of the F3, and honestly agree with their reasons. Most of them have either A) shot the F3 without LOG, or B) shot on the internal codec. Safety Not Guaranteed proved that neither is a death sentence with a professional colorist, but the camera really only takes its place as one of the best 1080p sensors when utilizing both LOG and an external recorder. The earlier comparison between the C300, Epic, and F3 demonstrates that gap in image quality quite clearly.

Yeah, Safety Not Guaranteed being shot pre-Slog days kinda squashes many complaints about its internal quality. Sure, it is not as good as the external recordings with slog, but what really matters is the operator/lighting/director/editor/etc!

[HockeyFan12]

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah, Safety Not Guaranteed being shot pre-Slog days kinda squashes many complaints about its internal quality. Sure, it is not as good as the external recordings with slog, but what really matters is the operator/lighting/director/editor/etc!

The issue is that SLOG looks like garbage recorded internally. It's not that the internal codec is terrible (it is pretty bad) so much as it is that the internal codec isn't nearly good enough for SLOG, which all-but requires 10 bit ProRes or better. If you shoot with another picture style, I think internal recording is good enough.

I do have a serious soft spot for the C300, but that soft spot has something to do with the EF mount model having a good enough image in a tiny body. For a dSLR fan, it's what I recommend. Brilliant step by Canon into cinema from the 5D2 etc. Probably the bane of half this site because its success is why Canon ignored dSLR video after. But if you're gonna kit your camera out with an external recorder and PL glass... just get the F3. I would SO rather have an F3 than a Red MX.

[IronFilm]

2 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I do have a serious soft spot for the C300, but that soft spot has something to do with the EF mount model having a good enough image in a tiny body. For a dSLR fan, it's what I recommend. Brilliant step by Canon into cinema from the 5D2 etc. Probably the bane of half this site because its success is why Canon ignored dSLR video after. But if you're gonna kit your camera out with an external recorder and PL glass... just get the F3. 

Never been a fan of the C300 ergonomics when I shot it, in my view it is too top heavy and large to really consider it as similar to shooting with a DSLR. So you might as well go all the way and get a Sony F3!

However the C100 does squeeze into a similar enough form factor you could regard it as kinda similar feel to shooting with a DSLR, but better. 

 

2 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I would SO rather have an F3 than a Red MX.

Agreed! I'd waaaaaaay prefer a Sony PMW-F3. And even though the F3 is cheaper, I certainly could have at a stretch got a RED ONE instead. (was even half considering an URSA Mini 4.6K, but glad I didn't get it)

Just had a friend buy this week a RED ONE MX! :-o 
(picking it up on Monday I think)

But then again, he did get a really good price for what he paid (remember, this is in NZD):

https://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=1420980765

 

[Aussie Ash]

24 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Never been a fan of the C300 ergonomics when I shot it, in my view it is too top heavy and large to really consider it as similar to shooting with a DSLR. So you might as well go all the way and get a Sony F3!

However the C100 does squeeze into a similar enough form factor you could regard it as kinda similar feel to shooting with a DSLR, but better. 

 

Agreed! I'd waaaaaaay prefer a Sony PMW-F3. And even though the F3 is cheaper, I certainly could have at a stretch got a RED ONE instead. (was even half considering an URSA Mini 4.6K, but glad I didn't get it)

Just had a friend buy this week a RED ONE MX! :-o 
(picking it up on Monday I think)

But then again, he did get a really good price for what he paid (remember, this is in NZD):

https://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=1420980765

 

That sure is a bargain !.It may suit your friend's style of work but 9 to 15 kgs fully rigged out is no small puppy.

[IronFilm]

32 minutes ago, Aussie Ash said:

That sure is a bargain !.It may suit your friend's style of work but 9 to 15 kgs fully rigged out is no small puppy.

I think he is nuts to go handheld for so long that he does (this is his second RED ONE! And we shot an entire film film together for five weeks in Australia, I was doing sound of course with my F4 etc).

He does need to take a few painkillers now and then I think. It is heavy on your back! Especially without any full time 1st AC to help you out. 

But I can't be too much of a hypocrite.... my back is still a little bit fvcked up from 5 weeks of shooting with a mixing bag being carried by me every day.

However this 2nd RED ONE is going to mainly live on a tripod, because it only has a CF slot. Thus he'll use the HDD, so it is best it stays on a tripod. 

And his 1st RED ONE (which he recently upgrade to a SSD) will be his handheld one. 

 

[Aussie Ash]

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I think he is nuts to go handheld for so long that he does (this is his second RED ONE! And we shot an entire film film together for five weeks in Australia, I was doing sound of course with my F4 etc).

He does need to take a few painkillers now and then I think. It is heavy on your back! Especially without any full time 1st AC to help you out. 

But I can't be too much of a hypocrite.... my back is still a little bit fvcked up from 5 weeks of shooting with a mixing bag being carried by me every day.

However this 2nd RED ONE is going to mainly live on a tripod, because it only has a CF slot. Thus he'll use the HDD, so it is best it stays on a tripod. 

And his 1st RED ONE (which he recently upgrade to a SSD) will be his handheld one. 

 

Your friend must be keen to have purchased a second Red one.I am in the opposite direction -try and keep the camera and lens under one kg-that way it's

easy to do shots at ground level or one metre over your head with a monopod.Also makes it easy to attend events around Sydney using public transport. 

[HockeyFan12]

10 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Never been a fan of the C300 ergonomics when I shot it, in my view it is too top heavy and large to really consider it as similar to shooting with a DSLR. So you might as well go all the way and get a Sony F3!

However the C100 does squeeze into a similar enough form factor you could regard it as kinda similar feel to shooting with a DSLR, but better. 

 

Agreed! I'd waaaaaaay prefer a Sony PMW-F3. And even though the F3 is cheaper, I certainly could have at a stretch got a RED ONE instead. (was even half considering an URSA Mini 4.6K, but glad I didn't get it)

Just had a friend buy this week a RED ONE MX! :-o 
(picking it up on Monday I think)

But then again, he did get a really good price for what he paid (remember, this is in NZD):

https://www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=1420980765

 

That is a good deal. And to be fair, the IPP2 pipeline Red introduced FINALLY looks good. They got the chroma clipping stuff right I think (assuming the magenta highlights are actually finally gone)... took them more than long enough but better late than never.

Mixed feelings on the C100. Nearly ideal ergonomics (for the dSLR crowd) but the viewfinder is awful and the lack of genlock sucks... The only deal breaker for me is that according to someone on RedUser, Canon badly crippled the image processing compared with the C300 and the image is actually much worse even before it's transcoded to AVCHD (so you can't save it with a Ninja) without as much color processing to get the famous Canon colors. The one time I shot them side-by-side I couldn't tell any difference whatsoever. That said, I have to trust the pros at RedUser over my own amateur eyes.

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

That is a good deal.

The tripod and RED 18-85mm PL lens are a couple of things that came with the R1 MX sale which really makes it a good deal!

11 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

That said, I have to trust the pros at RedUser over my own amateur eyes.

Probably right about the C300 image vs C100 image, however do remember the "pros" on reduser are also a hell of a lot of amateurs too....