APS-C vs FF: a hybrid camera for 1000-1250 EUR (used)

[Django]

9 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Tell me any camera the OP can afford to buy with a fast lens that is good at low light. And I am not talking about cheap ass MF Chinese lens.

OP already has a fast lens: Zeiss 50mm F1.4. Paired with a A7S / A7S2 it would do wonders in low light, I know, I had that exact combo. For AF lens, the Sony 50mm F1.8 would only add an extra $200.. another reason why I'd go FF Sony rather then Fuji on such a tight budget.

[webrunner5]

I will agree to that. But they are not really that great for photography. They are better than most people think, but not a first choice for it. Plus the A7s has wonky color science. A7s II better CS. I have had both. Still have the MK II.

[webrunner5]

This is a link to a person I follow because he uses the E-M1 mk III, I have a mk II. He is a crusty old turd like me. And he did this video on it and a couple Smartphones. It is surprisingly good on the smartphones. Sure, the Oly is not a low light champ but they are not crap also. Go to his Flicker page and you might be suspired.

He is seeing what I see, they have moved a lot in the last couple of years. I have a lot of cameras to compare them to.

 

 

[mkabi]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

As far as I know, 1080p Raw runs continuous on the 5D Mark III. I've gotten as much as 10 minutes.

If you need 30 minutes... buy a camcorder.

What about 3.5K Raw??? How many minutes can you record there?

Some builds have the live-view go black... so you are basically shooting blind... may be not yours as you are happy with it???

 

[mercer]

26 minutes ago, mkabi said:

What about 3.5K Raw??? How many minutes can you record there?

Some builds have the live-view go black... so you are basically shooting blind... may be not yours as you are happy with it???

 

Those build are literally listed under "Experimental Builds" I don't know if you can judge the entire Magic Lantern Raw firmware based on a build that is titled experimental.

With that said, I agree that it really isn't for everybody. If I was starting in video now, I'd buy the Panasonic X1500/X2000 camcorder and shoot 10bit 4K up to 60p in their Cine Gamma (or whatever it's called). If I wanted Raw Video (I would) I'd buy a Sigma FP. It isn't as good for stills, although a Flickr search may contradict that, but for video... there isn't much better at that price range right now...

If the OP wants IBIS, get an S5...

If he wants AF and IBIS and doesn't need 10bit, then the A7iii will be fine as well.

But... what do I know? I still shoot with a 10 year old hacked camera. I'm happy with it, but it's not for everyone. Here's what I captured with mine in my first week with it...

But as I said... what do I know? I shoot stills on film and am thinking about buying a Bolex 16mm... so I'm hardly like very many users of this forum.

[mkabi]

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

Those build are literally listed under "Experimental Builds" I don't know if you can judge the entire Magic Lantern Raw firmware based on a build that is titled experimental.

Exactly my point... I'm not trying to insult you or the community... but all the "hype" is around these experimental builds. Everyone is excited to share the positives without sharing the negatives.

All I'm doing is pointing towards the negatives.... if you can look past them, you're golden.

[mercer]

1 minute ago, mkabi said:

Exactly my point... I'm not trying to insult you or the community... but all the "hype" is around these experimental builds. Everyone is excited to share the positives without sharing the negatives.

All I'm doing is pointing towards the negatives.... if you can look past them, you're golden.

Sure if the OP is basing his purchase of a 5D on the experimental builds, then it's probably not a good idea to purchase one. There's a crop and the last I checked there isn't any real, or accurate, Live View.

With that said, Andrew has a gorgeous sample of the 3.5K mode, and I've seen dozens of samples online. Even the eos-m has some nice features and IQ if you like to tinker. But based on what he said, it doesn't sound like that's his goal here.

I was merely correcting a false narrative that ML Raw is entirely useless on the 5D3. I mean, a filmmaker recently had his 5D3 ML Raw, narrative film debut at SXSW and received write ups in all the Hollywood trade magazines. Of course, he shot it in 1080p, but if it wasn't dependable, I doubt he would shoot a feature film on it.

[TomTheDP]

Magic Lantern isn't undependable. 1080p 14 bit RAW is a staple. It's just an annoying workflow.

[mercer]

2 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

Magic Lantern isn't undependable. 1080p 14 bit RAW is a staple. It's just an annoying workflow.

Exactly, but the workflow isn't really annoying either anymore. With MLVFS, the MLV files can be brought into Resolve as if they're CDNGS... then you can color and edit them like any other files. 

[TomTheDP]

Just now, mercer said:

Exactly, but the workflow isn't really annoying either anymore. With MLVFS, the MLV files can be brought into Resolve as if they're CDNGS... then you can color and edit them like any other files. 

so no converting?

[mercer]

9 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

so no converting?

Yup it's some kind of filing system you download so then you right click your mlv folder, scroll down and choose MLVFS, assign them to a different folder and open them in Resolve. Then somehow or another it tricks Resolve into thinking they're CDNG files. 

[mercer]

I've edited straight from the CF cards. 

[kye]

13 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

so no converting?

It converts on the fly, I believe. It's a great option because it's one less step in the workflow and you don't have to have extra disk space etc. Of course you pay for the conversion when editing and rendering because the conversion is being done every time a clip is accessed, but it's a raw to raw conversion with All-i files so shouldn't be anything like editing from an IPB codec.

[mercer]

Just now, kye said:

It converts on the fly, I believe. It's a great option because it's one less step in the workflow and you don't have to have extra disk space etc. Of course you pay for the conversion when editing and rendering because the conversion is being done every time a clip is accessed, but it's a raw to raw conversion with All-i files so shouldn't be anything like editing from an IPB codec.

That may be the case, but so notice zero difference in the time it takes to render converted files vs MLVFS. There is a difference if I'm working from the cards as opposed to a drive... but I assume the card reader is the bottleneck in that scenario. 

[webrunner5]

Yeah, you just take one frame and drag it on the timeline and it brings all of them all in. Magic stuff. Resolve is crazy powerful anymore.

[kye]

41 minutes ago, mercer said:

That may be the case, but so notice zero difference in the time it takes to render converted files vs MLVFS. There is a difference if I'm working from the cards as opposed to a drive... but I assume the card reader is the bottleneck in that scenario. 

Yeah, a raw to raw conversion shouldn't take that much processing at all - almost nothing in comparison to the other processing required when editing and grading footage.

[newfoundmass]

To the OP:

Have you considered maybe the EOS R? It has a 1.7 crop in 4K but the 1080p is really good and is Full Frame. Has good AF and Canon's digital stabilization is better than the IBIS in the Sony and Fuji. Plus you can adapt EF lenses and get near native results. 

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, mercer said:

Once all of the settings are figured out, the camera literally works like any other camera, other than the ability to play back and watch your files. It was a bit scary at first to not have that option, but once you shoot with it, you just trust that you got the shot.

That's a MAJOR "gotcha". 

Not having playback. 

But then again... I did once start shooting a feature film with a Sony PMW-F5 that lacked playback!

As we'd schemed to get our hands on a Sony PM-F5 (this was years ago, when the only affordable options for 4K would've been I think the GH4 or the Production 4K camera? Or the a7Smk1 with an external recorder), but... discovered it lacked the paid 4K upgrad! wtf

Wasn't going to spend that huge chunk of change on a borrowed camera, so I did the Sony F5 4K hack for it. 

But meant we lacked playback 😕 😞 Oh well. so I connected my Atomos Samurai (which I already had and used with my Sony PMW-F3), so that I could have a way of viewing playbacks of shots! (as the F5 would automatically trigger a proxy recorder on the Samurai)

[mercer]

8 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

That's a MAJOR "gotcha". 

I suppose, but filmmakers shot feature films for years on film without any playback. It's a modern comfort. Now I'm using an old build from 2017, so it's possible they've figured that out since then. For me, the 5D3 was so very liberating because once I used the camera, I didn't look back... or forward. The image was MORE than good enough for my humble hobby. I wish I could have that epiphany with some lenses.

Neat trick for the F5... let me guess... 9 out of 10 times you got the shot?

 

[kye]

On 6/21/2022 at 8:09 PM, SandKa said:

I'd like to ask you some questions to help me choose a hybrid camera for amateur use - family and travel. After reading many reviews and opinions I'm considering two options:

1. Sony A7 III + 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS (alternative: FE 50mm f1.8) / 1250-1300 EUR (used), or

2. Fuji XT3 + 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM OIS (any OIS budget alternatives?) / 1000-1050 EUR (used).

I would also like to use my Contax Zeiss 50mm f1.4 with an adapter.

Please help me decide which one to choose, considering these factors:

• IQ in video: 4k 24fps / 1080p 120 fps (slow-mo is less important);
• stabilization in video: Sony's IBIS + lens OSS (or only IBIS with FE 50mm f/1.8) vs Fuji's OIS in the lens - mostly standing and walking slowly;
• AF in video: keeping in focus a 3-year-old kid.

Regarding photos - I shoot RAW+JPG and know that Sony is better for processing low-light RAWs but Fuji has better JPGs SOOC. 

I am considering cheaper options as well:

• Fuji XT30 or XT2, and
• Canon 5dmark II (poor DR in photos though), 6d, or mark III with ML (I know that I would have to rely on MF in video). There are also some good deals on used 5d Mark IV (850-1050 EUR). I don't know if mark IV's 4k video can compete with ML though. What's important: by choosing Canon I could cut down the cost by using the existing Canon 50mm f1.8 (if it's any good for video). Within 1000 EUR price range there is also Canon RP but the massive crop and lack of DPAF in 4k, as well as no IBIS and poor DR, make it look very bad for a modern camera. I exclude Sony 6xxx series cameras because I don't like the ergonomics and heard that they are prone to overheating.

I don't have a budget for any additional lenses or gimbal (don't know if I'd like to use one) but a cheap/used monopod could be an option for a non-IBIS camera.

Assuming you're still reading this thread, I'd suggest the following:

• Ignore all the tiny pieces of technical detail that the tech-obsessed and argument-prone contributors have shared in this thread and return to first-principles.
• First principle - get your shots in focus.  
  Nothing else matters if a shot is out of focus.  If you're shooting kids or anything else that isn't under control then either get phase-detect AF or learn to manually focus.  I shoot similar to you and manually focus - it's a skill and requires some practice but it's do-able.  Getting shots in focus with the best auto-focus cameras is also a skill that requires practice.
• Second principle - get a nice looking image - whatever that means for you.  
  The nicer the camera the more likely it will require colour grading and most people can't colour grade to save their own lives, let alone create lovely images.  Once again, this is a skill that can be developed, but making lovely videos requires (literally) a dozen or more skills so you just might not have it in you to learn to colour grade as well as edit, mix sound, master, learning NLEs, media management, etc etc.
  If you don't want to learn to colour grade then you're going to rely on the picture-profiles from the camera and that will potentially limit the dynamic range and other image attributes, sometimes quite significantly.
• Third principle - get the first two right and then buy the camera and then don't look back.  Go learn about the other dozen skills.  Highly skilled people can create feature film quality results with any of the cameras you're talking about so there's a snowflakes-chance-in-hell that the camera will be a limitation, it will be your level of skill.  
• Fourth principle - if you get to here let me say this again.  The camera doesn't matter.  The only people that will tell you otherwise are camera nerds (like here in this forum), camera manufacturers (who want your money, over and over again), and camera influencers (who want the views and royalties and commissions and manufacturer kickbacks etc).

Seriously.  Buy the camera that will get your shots in focus and then move on.