Enough drama, lets play the camera and lens game again!

[jagnje]

I`ve been a member for a long time here and it used to be such an inspiring forum to visit, but lately I think it`s gone way off track.  I don`t really care much for who is buying what and why is not buying the other piece of gear. User contribution and good advice seems far more important than fighting over unreleased gear. so...

this is one of the latest videos I`ve done. Guess what it was shot with, with some of you being such gear experts it shouldn`t be a problem!   guess lighting setup as well if you`re really at it! For the trained eye and a spy one there should very little to guess

anyway, heres the video, go for it. constructive critisism is apreciated as well.

 

 

[OliKMIA]

2 hours ago, jagnje said:

I`ve been a member for a long time here and it used to be such an inspiring forum to visit, but lately I think it`s gone way off track.  I don`t really care much for who is buying what and why is not buying the other piece of gear. User contribution and good advice seems far more important than fighting over unreleased gear. so...

>>> Yes, I agree, it tends to be ridiculous. I tried to open a best video sharing thread but it seems that many users here prefer to split hairs and fight over meaningless details instead of shooting (however some users are full time pro that can't disclose their work).

this is one of the latest videos I`ve done. Guess what it was shot with, with some of you being such gear experts it shouldn`t be a problem!   guess lighting setup as well if you`re really at it! For the trained eye and a spy one there should very little to guess

>>> That being said, the "Guess what it was shot with" game is a bit futile. It could have been shot with a T3i handeld or a FS7. Anyone can produce a decent video with a T3i but you gonna have to focus manually, be careful of the moire, do a lot of denoising in post (neat video), etc.
The point about gears is to know how they can make your life easier, make you more productive, shot better and faster and more efficiently (e.g. not having to triple shoot everything because of your poor gears). All that in a small and light package that can do stills and video in one body with the best ergonomics and video assist features. People have created amazing video with an iphone but it's an hassle. I prefer to spend 5 minutes to grade nice 10 bits footage from Canon instead of spending hours to fix shitty XAVC sony footage. I might produce the same video in the end but the workload would be different.
 

anyway, heres the video, go for it. constructive critisism is apreciated as well.
>>> Not my type of music but it has its own vibe, the grading is consistent, perhaps you overdid the flares, a bit shaky for my taste (but that's a style). Overall I think you did a good job. Cheers.

 

 

[majoraxis]

I thought it looked great!  It looked like Sony colors to me so A7S?  As far the lighting, maybe some type of home improvement halogen flood light.  The camera angles,  movement and edit worked for the song.  It would have been nice to have some type of story to cut to that related to the song, but If I understood the lyrics it might not have something that I would have focused on as much..

[jagnje]

Close, but not really as far as the story goes, or lack of it, it's what the band wanted, a simple performance video.

[KnightsFan]

7 hours ago, majoraxis said:

I thought it looked great!  It looked like Sony colors to me so A7S?  As far the lighting, maybe some type of home improvement halogen flood light.

Looked Sony to me to, my guess would be A6500. Pretty impossible to tell after grade and compression though.

[jagnje]

so, does it have the "full frame" look or not?  

[webrunner5]

9 hours ago, jagnje said:

so, does it have the "full frame" look or not?  

That to me is a loaded question of how deep is your pockets on what lenses you can afford. A m4/3 camera can look FF if it has a Speedbooster and a 0.95 lenses hanging off of it compared to a FF camera with a f 4.0 lens on it. ?

[kinvermark]

I am no "gear expert", but I'll play for fun :)

1) Small camera, handheld.  Maybe GH4/5 or similar.  Manual focus?

2) Graded in either Resolve or Final Cut.

For me, it does have a full frame aesthetic, but the wide shots are very sharp (as intended?). The look and edit pacing are good.

[jagnje]

Well it just seemed funny to me, that some folks would nitpick on gear...being gearwhores, where only the expesive gear can pass. What I'm trying to say is that in this day and age most cameras will do the job, the minimal diferences between them and lenses are only a few clicks away. There is just gear that will make your job easyer and faster to do. 

 

In this particular video the gear used was a sony fs7 speedboosted, a canon 24-70 2.8, a tokina 28-70 2.8 for the flairy bits an el cheepo samyang 14mm for the widest of top shots.

I combine the tools I need to get the shot, cheap or expensive. With that in mind I'll let you guess a bit more on the lights.

[kye]

I totally understand your point and mostly agree with you......

but if you're going to give an example of why we should stop nitpicking the video features of mirrorless cameras then don't use an example from a cinema camera that has many of the features we're talking about and costs double or triple or more!!!

[jagnje]

well I can assure you that I could have just as easily shot this with a 300€ bmpcc, it was just more convenient to use the fs7. 

But it is not what I was trying to prove at all...than again I wasn`t really tying to prove anything at all I think  It just seems to me that many people here demand top quality cameras and lenses but most can`t tell one from the other.  But something as I said, I could have used just about any camera with a fast-ish lens. What nobody really comented on was lights...no it wasn`t a home depo flood ligh. Two main lights were Arri M18 HMI lights, one for key, flood and thru a frame with difusion and the other set to spot, just to cast the lengty  shadows. A set of those two costs about 20.000€ and those are the pieces of gear I could have not shot this video without. Other lights were redheads for backlights and in hall lights to give you the sense of depth, plus a very important piece of gear was the fog machine!!!

I`m still not really sure what I`m trying to really say...just focus on what you are trying to achieve and how to do it, cameras and lenses are most of the time just a piece fo the puzzle. As far as the grade and edit goes, not my work. I`m the DP/OP on most shoots, after it`s done I`m done.

[KnightsFan]

2 hours ago, jagnje said:

people here demand top quality cameras and lenses but most can`t tell one from the other

Well the first two people who did guess both got the brand correct, so there's that. If you want to prove that people can't tell the difference, next time share some high quality files, not a an 8 Mbps YouTube video.

one of my pet peeves is people pretending to see a cameras banding, compression, dynamos range, macro blocking, motion cadence (whatever that is) etc from YouTube videos

additionally, the vast majority of discussion I see about cameras are:

- ergonomic--shape of the camera (for ease of use. As you said, "more convenient")

- nds, xlrs, battery, HDMI size (again, ease of use, not much impact on final output)

- crop factor (for lens compatibility)

- bitrate and codec (moot by YouTube, the destroyer of all images)

- stills capability (not applicable)

- color science (2/3 of us recognized Sony)

- low light capability (we don't have $20k in lights available, due to budget or type of shooting)

- rolling shutter (didn't have a strong feeling either way on this video)

Anyway, great job on the music video! it's very nicely done.

[jagnje]

Well, where do most of our videos end up? you don't buy lights, you rent them. 200€ worth of rented lights ads way more production value than a 4k€ camera. 

[padam]

If you have to work with lights that are already there (like an event or a wedding) it is not necessarily that simple.

Also, it is nice to be able to achieve any look that one wants or prefers, but it may take time that is not being reflected in the amount the client is willing to pay. So in that way, a camera that has a pleasant baked-in look may matter. You also use one differently to another, and it may affect the outcome.

One needs to use it well, whatever that is, but for every video saying the gear does not matter there is another one saying that it kind of does.

Nice work anyway.

[noone]

Or when lights are NOT there.

To shoot a band live I will always take a sensor with decent high ISO over one that is less decent and that will usually mean a more recent FF camera (or my old A7s).

When the gig is packed and I can pretty much only shoot from next to the "stage" (it is often just a corner of the room), and that means a wide angle which is also easier with FF.

 

I really like that video the OP has done though.

[jagnje]

Valid points you guys made. I forgot whats it like to shoot wedings and not being able to light the scene. Heres another one...the only light modifier was a white bounce, same gear, completely diferent feel.

 

[kye]

6 hours ago, jagnje said:

Valid points you guys made. I forgot whats it like to shoot wedings and not being able to light the scene. Heres another one...the only light modifier was a white bounce, same gear, completely diferent feel.

Many people forget that other people are shooting in different conditions to them.

I shoot home and travel videos for myself, but the conditions are generally the same:

• The event comes first, photography shouldn't get in the way, camera placement is often restricted
• No re-takes, either you shoot it when it happens or you missed it
• You may have some control over lighting, you may not, but anything you do can't get in the way of the events that are happening
• There are parts in low light = high ISO performance
• There are scenes with high contrast = good DR
• There are action scenes = ok RS, and slow motion
• You have to be mobile and move very quickly = monopod / gimbal / hand-held = good IS
• etc etc etc.

I started my photography / videography journey with a <$100 Nikon point-and-shoot and every upgrade since then has been based upon the quality of the end result from me actually shooting what I shoot.  I haven't gotten a setup that I really gel with but my current setup is close, however I have shot enough to know what my style is and so I am not trying to buy equipment to hit a moving target - I know how I work, where I work, and what I am trying to achieve.

If someone has different feature desires it might be because they're shooting different films.

[BTM_Pix]

On 9/28/2018 at 2:03 PM, jagnje said:

I'm still not really sure what I`m trying to really say...

Hire lights, an editor and a colourist ?

[jagnje]

Well, I guess so do what you are best at and let others do what they're best at as well

[TheRenaissanceMan]

And that not everyone is a wedding videographer. That's the one thing about this forum sometimes: people always assume that you're either doing totally run and gun stuff with no ability to light or prep, or that you're a Hollywood production with resources for days...not realizing that there is a whole freaking world of middle ground in between where most actual work happens. 

In those cases, spending a couple hundred to rent some lights, a truck, or an owner-operator gaffer/DP (like me) makes a way, way bigger difference than two different modern mirrorless cameras. Ditto art design, hair and makeup, location scouting, support gear, etc.

Even student productions I've worked on in the Midwest can find the money to buy or rent who/what they need for a few days if they're half smart. So to act like that's only the domain of people who lounge in beanbag chairs full of hundreds with Steven Spielberg is wildly off base.

On topic: great video. M18s are so versatile, and backlighting through smoke is ALWAYS money. The music itself, not my thing, but works well with the imagery.