Any thought? 10 Cameras Compared | Canon 1DC | C100 Mk2 | EVA1 | GH6 | NX1 | BMCC 2.5k | GH4 | GH2 | GH1 | Z6

[John Matthews]

I'm interested in knowing what people's thoughts are on this camera comparison.

 

[Matt Kieley]

To me this just proves we've had access good image quality at micro budget prices for over a decade. I've come to realize this more recently, and that the only real factor in deciding to buy or keep a camera is whether or not is suits your needs and your production style. 

[John Matthews]

2 minutes ago, Matt Kieley said:

To me this just proves we've had access good image quality at micro budget prices for over a decade. I've come to realize this more recently, and that the only real factor in deciding to buy or keep a camera is whether or not is suits your needs and your production style. 

I pretty much came to the same conclusion. It would seem that one could get a $100 used GH2 and lens, a speedbooster (not necessary), inexpensive lights, a computer that can edit 1080p Prores 422 with sufficient storage, and some AI software for upresing. With some talent, an eye for good images, and a story to tell, one could get in the game for well under $1000 in gear. Distribution is already taken care of with social. Amazing times.

[Matt Kieley]

I shared this in another thread recently. I made a reel of newly-graded old hacked GH1 footage of mine from 2011-13. Graded with FilmConvert Nitrate simply using the default sRGB color since they don't have a GH1 camera pack, and exported in 4K from a 1080p timeline straight from Premiere Pro CC.

I didn't even know nearly as much about lighting then, so most of it is natural light and 100w tungsten practicals/clamp lights (with frost diffusion). 

[FHDcrew]

13 hours ago, Matt Kieley said:

I shared this in another thread recently. I made a reel of newly-graded old hacked GH1 footage of mine from 2011-13. Graded with FilmConvert Nitrate simply using the default sRGB color since they don't have a GH1 camera pack, and exported in 4K from a 1080p timeline straight from Premiere Pro CC.

I didn't even know nearly as much about lighting then, so most of it is natural light and 100w tungsten practicals/clamp lights (with frost diffusion). 

At 1:40 in your video, did you bloom the highlights in Davinci?  The highlights look clipped but not destructing. I’d like to start using Nikon Flat on my Z6 more often, as I don’t want to keep rigging out an external recorder all the time. I know highlights will inevitably clip, but my hope is even if my sky is completely blown out, I can bloom either via Davinci or using a promist filter, so it still looks attractive and not harsh. 

[Matt Kieley]

3 hours ago, FHDcrew said:

At 1:40 in your video, did you bloom the highlights in Davinci?  The highlights look clipped but not destructing. I’d like to start using Nikon Flat on my Z6 more often, as I don’t want to keep rigging out an external recorder all the time. I know highlights will inevitably clip, but my hope is even if my sky is completely blown out, I can bloom either via Davinci or using a promist filter, so it still looks attractive and not harsh. 

I didn't use resolve except to convert some old cineform AVI files to prores for editing in Premiere. The blooming is from the lens I used, I believe it was a vintage Tokina 75-150mm f3.8 with an Optivision XW 5000 Anamorphic lens. It probably wouldn't be as blown out if I actually had a bright light or at least a bounce on the subject, but it's just the natural light and nothing else.

[Matt Kieley]

3 hours ago, FHDcrew said:

At 1:40 in your video, did you bloom the highlights in Davinci?  The highlights look clipped but not destructing. I’d like to start using Nikon Flat on my Z6 more often, as I don’t want to keep rigging out an external recorder all the time. I know highlights will inevitably clip, but my hope is even if my sky is completely blown out, I can bloom either via Davinci or using a promist filter, so it still looks attractive and not harsh. 

I didn't use resolve except to convert some old cineform AVI files to prores for editing in Premiere. The blooming is from the lens I used, I believe it was a (correction) Canon FD 50mm f1.4 (the old chrome ring version) with an Optivision XW 5000 Anamorphic lens. Or maybe a Bushnell 35mm f.2.8 It probably wouldn't be as blown out if I actually had a bright light or at least a bounce on the subject, but it's just the natural light and nothing else.

[majoraxis]

I’ve owned a number of those cameras (GH 1. NX1, BMCC 2.5k). I would say that the GH5 is a great low total cost of ownership camera.

It’s 10bit with a decent bit rate for about $750 used.

Maybe that’s more than people would consider cheap, but it is hack and hassle free with a broadcast quality image.

So have we had access to great low cost icing images for a long time?  Sure, but each had it’s challenges and flaws !

 

 

 

 

 

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, majoraxis said:

I’ve owned a number of those cameras (GH 1. NX1, BMCC 2.5k). I would say that the GH5 is a great low total cost of ownership camera.

The GH5 has been an iconic camera.. very close to a GH6 too. I think the point of that video is, when exposed and edited properly, you can get great results with any of them. I've purchased some of these old cameras (usually with a lens); then I sell the lens and get the camera for VERY cheap if not FREE or even make money in some cases. I like the challenge of doing great things with low-end gear rather than getting the most expensive gear with the expectation of fantastic results. That's just me, and I don't shoot professionally; so, there's that too.

[FHDcrew]

2 hours ago, John Matthews said:

I like the challenge of doing great things with low-end gear rather than getting the most expensive gear

Agreed, it is an easy indication of talent. 

[EduPortas]

Nikon Z6 looks very good. Considerably better than the other cameras. And it's FF, as a bonus.

Also, it has competente AF for video. Not Canon or Sony level, but certainly good.

[FHDcrew]

23 minutes ago, EduPortas said:

Nikon Z6 looks very good. Considerably better than the other cameras. And it's FF, as a bonus.

Also, it has competente AF for video. Not Canon or Sony level, but certainly good.

I can agree; I use one on a daily basis.  NLOG grades very easily using a Resolve color-managed workflow.  Dynamic range is solid, nice highlight rolloff and you can overexpose the image to make things clean.  I've been playing with the flat profile and it isn't too bad; definately worse than NLOG, but in Resolve I can do a CST to Arri Log C and then back to Rec709, to make the image behave more like LOG.  And I can then raise the exposure while it applies a highlight rolloff, which in turn allows me to dig deeper into the shadows and fully utilize the Nikon FLAT dynamic range.

 

Also with a cheap Ninja Star and the right HDMI settings, you get that 10 bit NLOG image in oversampled 1080p, full-frame with usuable AF.

[EduPortas]

3 hours ago, FHDcrew said:

I can agree; I use one on a daily basis. 

That's great, man. At the price used Z6s are going right now it's impossible not to consider it for serious work.

What's your opinion of the AF in video? Can it hold it's own in talking-head scenarios?

(I've only used my Z50 for this purpose and it was good  in AF-F mode with the kit lens. It has no eye-detect AF, though, just face AF)

[FHDcrew]

8 hours ago, EduPortas said:

That's great, man. At the price used Z6s are going right now it's impossible not to consider it for serious work.

What's your opinion of the AF in video? Can it hold it's own in talking-head scenarios?

(I've only used my Z50 for this purpose and it was good  in AF-F mode with the kit lens. It has no eye-detect AF, though, just face AF)

It definately can.  FYI I currently only have 1 lens, a Tamron SP 45mm 1.8, being used through the FTZ adapter.  AF works well enough for talking-head purposes, but it can hut a tad bit at times, and the lens will occasionally lock up, warranting a restart of the camera.  I believe it is specific to this lens however; I was able to try some native Nikon F-mount glass through the FTZ; autofocus felt snappy and confident without hunting issues.  Even with the Tamron I trust it for simple talking head footage.

[FHDcrew]

To be truthful I’ve been a bit surprised at the latitude and dynamic range Nikon FLAT offers. Maybe not as much as NLOG, but there is definitely info in the shadows if you dig deep enough. It handles highlights terribly, so it’s best not to overexpose. And the shadows still do have limits, if I have to dig too deep then I hit a threshold where yes there is detail, but it’s undersaturated and some color-noise/mud is introduced. That being said so far I’m impressed with how much I can pull back from the shadows without destroying the image. Then again, lighting conditions were nice on my most recent shoot. I’ll have to do some mid-day stress tests and comparisons, and I’ll let you know what I find. I may start a new thread where I compare NLOG to Nikon Flat. 

[Framed_By_Dan]

1DC was immediately noticeable when doing the singular comparison, it looks so organic and much less digital compared to the rest.

[EduPortas]

11 hours ago, FHDcrew said:

To be truthful I’ve been a bit surprised at the latitude and dynamic range Nikon FLAT offers. Maybe not as much as NLOG, but there is definitely info in the shadows if you dig deep enough. It handles highlights terribly, so it’s best not to overexpose. And the shadows still do have limits, if I have to dig too deep then I hit a threshold where yes there is detail, but it’s undersaturated and some color-noise/mud is introduced. That being said so far I’m impressed with how much I can pull back from the shadows without destroying the image. Then again, lighting conditions were nice on my most recent shoot. I’ll have to do some mid-day stress tests and comparisons, and I’ll let you know what I find. I may start a new thread where I compare NLOG to Nikon Flat. 

Thanks man, much appreciated.

With the prices of newer cameras, it's always good to have more options that are not insanely expensive, especially if the actually AF correctly like you said (I only use Nikon Z lenses for fan boyish reasons, though).

[FHDcrew]

9 minutes ago, EduPortas said:

Thanks man, much appreciated.

With the prices of newer cameras, it's always good to have more options that are not insanely expensive, especially if the actually AF correctly like you said (I only use Nikon Z lenses for fan boyish reasons, though).

Native Z lenses give the absolute best AF performance so you should be set. 

[John Matthews]

For me, I was amazed by the performance of the AI upscaling. It makes me think about something Rodney Charters said a long while back. Is it still relevant today?

 

[deezid]

12 hours ago, Framed_By_Dan said:

1DC was immediately noticeable when doing the singular comparison, it looks so organic and much less digital compared to the rest.

Lack of sharpening gave it a really smooth image and color science was pretty good.
But the codec is something I never want to deal with in my live again. 😭