If I could only have ONE CAMERA

[independent]

Sigma FP is the successor in spirit to the Canon 5d III with ML. For one, the Cinema DNG files are unquestionably special; red raw is the only other codex that gives you such good color quality (subjectively, but I have worked with almost every camera in the past 15 years). 

But the 5d has some serious limitations, such as true full frame raw (despite the fact that I enjoy the bullshit pixel binned 5.7k anamorphic setting), and I had issues with sound recording last time I used it. There’s just some hardware limitations, period. Fun to tinker with of course, and if you’re carrying it anyway, why not use it?

Because it’s now pretty heavy and also not low profile considering the options. Such as the Sigma FP, which fixes everything pretty much. Rock solid reliability, 4k cinema dng 12-bit raw, etc. 

That being said, the FP still can’t shoot internal 4k 12-bit raw, requires rigging, lens adapters, ton of media storage, has a completely shit screen, you need to buy an expensive EVF, and without AF and stabilization you have to find solutions for those. So at that point, why bother with the hassle? 

These are all just tools, and I’d say 5d iii and sigma FP would be suitable for art private projects or short films. I don’t think they’re even good for travel. IPhone 15 pro far more functional. It would have to be in very controlled situations, for any budget.

But as the production gets bigger, the cost to rent or buy between these cameras and that for a more pro camera is really not that significant, which is why nobody uses them.

Don’t waste your time and money, in other words. Buy the newest smartphones for private use. Rent the right cameras for work.

 

 

[IronFilm]

On 5/23/2024 at 11:38 PM, eatstoomuchjam said:

Who is making CCD in the still world nowadays? 

I've been toying a little with buying another camera, a CCD one for the hell of it and the unique look. 

Seems like the Nikon D200 was the best ever CCD DSLR? And it's almost being given away at how low the prices are now. 

Either that or go nuts for "the best" with the Pentax 645D's massive medium format digital sensor that uses CCD, but that's still well over $1K secondhand

  

On 5/23/2024 at 11:38 PM, eatstoomuchjam said:

The main thing to differentiate a pro DP from an amateur, IMO, is knowing how to light.  Choice of cameras like the Alexa tends to be due to a feature set designed for a large crew, reliability, and having the most flexible image to hand off to professional colorists who also spend 80%+ of their time working on footage from the Alexa.  This is one of the reasons that a lot of stuff was still being shot on 2.8k Alexa when RED had 4, 5, 6, and 8k sensors available in their cameras. 

Good point. A camera can come out that's 10% better than an ALEXA but if there is even a one day learning curve for the editor and grader to get up to speed with handling this new footage, then it's not a good deal for them to go with. 

[IronFilm]

 

On 5/24/2024 at 4:36 AM, KnightsFan said:

People use iphones and super 8 film cameras and get their work in festivals. Doesn't mean I'd recommend those as general purpose cameras either. And I'm also not saying that anyone using ML should switch anything up. I've personally not found the image to be particularly better than any modern cameras, and the on-set workflow in particular is pretty bad on sets with any size crew (the original post about ML was comparing it to Alexa's on professional shoots). Now certainly back in 2015, ML was amazing. At that time, I shot a bit with early BM cameras like the OG pocket, the 2.5k and later the Ursa 4k. And I was on shoots with Red Ones and Epics. So ML was truly an outlier as a large sensor, affordable camera with quality recording.

Yeah in the context of what else existed back then, then Magic Lantern was amazing. Especially for the cost (if you couldn't afford a RED Epic). 

But in 2024???  You need to either be insane, or doing it purely for the fun of the process, or have zero clue whatsoever about the bigger picture needs. 

As we're spoiled with so many choices today that could be a better fit for your project. 

  

On 5/25/2024 at 8:01 AM, mercer said:

He's been on Noam Kroll's podcast as well and he mentioned an ingenious thing he does when he slates a shot. He basically claps and then instead of calling it Take One, take two, etc... he uses the file name on his zoom recorder in place of scene/take name/numbers... if that makes sense 

Yikes!!! He badly needs to upgrade from a Zoom H Series to a Zoom F8n.

  

On 5/27/2024 at 6:14 PM, QuickHitRecord said:

I may have spoken too soon. I went back to play around with the image and it turns out that the noise is easily dealt with in MLV App. I think the 5Diii creates a more characterful and interesting image than the C70 (and maybe even the Scarlet-X). Even if the image was exactly the same, it's smaller than a cinema camera, comfortable in the hand, weather-sealed, shoots full frame 14bit raw video, won't overheat, won't attract as much attention, and can be easily replaced at a low cost if necessary. What other camera has those characteristics? The only thing it doesn't do is shoot 4K with full real-time preview. So maybe it still represents a pretty unique value proposition 12 years on!

I think rather than dealing with a ML raw then if I wanted a hybrid camera that's weather sealed I'd go instead with a Canon 1D C or a Nikon Z8 or Panasonic S1H / GH6  or Sony FX3 / FX30 (or perhaps a7Smk3) or Fujifilm X-H2s or Canon R6 mk2 / R7 / R8 etc

Because raw is over rated, and 10bit is good enough 99% of the time. Especially if you're working in an environment where weather sealing / low visibility / run & gun / etc matters! As you likely don't have a tonne of card space with you, along with a 1st AC, and DIT on set, to handle the data offloads and to be checking the footage. 

Rather you want something simple, reliable, and fast. Which isn't what describes ML raw, but does fit the use case of the Canon 1D C / Nikon Z8 / S1H / X-H2s / GH6 / FX30 / etc 

[QuickHitRecord]

18 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Rather you want something simple, reliable, and fast. Which isn't what describes ML raw, but does fit the use case of the Canon 1D C / Nikon Z8 / S1H / X-H2s / GH6 / FX30 / etc 

To play devil's advocate (because that's what we do around here!), it's never been easier or more economical to plug a camera into a v-mount battery, which can also power a monitor. If you are using manual lenses, your shooting experience will probably not be that different regardless of the camera body that you use... so you might as well use one that captures an interesting image, right?

Also, my M2 Mac really takes the sting out of MLV app. Sure, it adds 20-30 mins of export time, but it also means that I can dial in the color balance and exposure of each shot before I even start editing.

Not saying that this is the right way to go for everyone. For me, I like the idea of a camera that has a slight IQ pitfall to take away the pressure of capturing a perfect image, and to add a little gentle pressure to tell a compelling story so that the audience doesn't study your image too much.

18 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Seems like the Nikon D200 was the best ever CCD DSLR? And it's almost being given away at how low the prices are now. 

Either that or go nuts for "the best" with the Pentax 645D's massive medium format digital sensor that uses CCD, but that's still well over $1K secondhand

This is debatable. Many people do love the D200. I haven't shot with one myself, but I've used the Olympus e500 and Sony a390. I prefer the e500, but the a390 has better and more affordable lens options. Many swear by the earlier Pentax cameras, Fujifilm's S series, or Canon's 1D classic. I think that half of the point of an old CCD DSLR in 2024 is not to spend too much.

[kye]

3 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

Not saying that this is the right way to go for everyone. For me, I like the idea of a camera that has a slight IQ pitfall to take away the pressure of capturing a perfect image, and to add a little gentle pressure to tell a compelling story so that the audience doesn't study your image too much.

What a great way of putting it.

When the image is lesser, it's like a switch flips in my head and I'm able to move on to more important aspects.  Shooting becomes so much more fun too.

[PannySVHS]

I find the p2k and m2k to give me a more satisfying image in natural light than my S1H. From what I've seen I expect the 5D3 to do the same. I cannot recall any S1H video at the moment which impressed me more than the BM HD and 2.5K cameras under natural light. Using them is a lot of fun, not despite the challenges and quirks, but to a certain degree because of them. Brighter monitor and improved battery would still make it so much better.😊

[mercer]

I didn't post my camera choice just to be forced to defend it. With that said... please tell me another camera that has 14bit full frame, uncompressed raw video for less than $1000? Please I'd love to see that camera?

As far as the Sigma FP being a better camera... I've had the 5D for about 7 years and the FP for about 1.5 and I'm sorry to tell you... the FP is not a better image... unless all you care about is getting sharpness via resolution. And this is coming from someone that truly likes the Sigma FP. I will say that I do agree that the FP is a weird successor of the 5Diii/ML Raw, in fact, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Sigma got inspiration from that camera and firmware.

As is, the similarities make the cameras a bit too redundant for me, so after a lot of testing and consideration, I am keeping the 5Diii and selling the FP. I don't really need 4K and I have access to an S5iiX if I do... weirdly I find the ProResHQ out of the S5iiX to be damn near close in quality to the FP.

[mercer]

5 hours ago, QuickHitRecord said:

To play devil's advocate (because that's what we do around here!), it's never been easier or more economical to plug a camera into a v-mount battery, which can also power a monitor. If you are using manual lenses, your shooting experience will probably not be that different regardless of the camera body that you use... so you might as well use one that captures an interesting image, right?

Also, my M2 Mac really takes the sting out of MLV app. Sure, it adds 20-30 mins of export time, but it also means that I can dial in the color balance and exposure of each shot before I even start editing.

Not saying that this is the right way to go for everyone. For me, I like the idea of a camera that has a slight IQ pitfall to take away the pressure of capturing a perfect image, and to add a little gentle pressure to tell a compelling story so that the audience doesn't study your image too much.

No reason to play the Devil's Advocate, the 5Diii/ML Raw is one of the best images I have seen for the money... especially if you aren't too concerned with playing the resolution game. Is it perfect? No. Is the workflow a little tedious? Sure. But man those files!

[zlfan]

On 5/28/2024 at 6:13 PM, IronFilm said:

 

Yeah in the context of what else existed back then, then Magic Lantern was amazing. Especially for the cost (if you couldn't afford a RED Epic). 

But in 2024???  You need to either be insane, or doing it purely for the fun of the process, or have zero clue whatsoever about the bigger picture needs. 

As we're spoiled with so many choices today that could be a better fit for your project. 

  

Yikes!!! He badly needs to upgrade from a Zoom H Series to a Zoom F8n.

  

I think rather than dealing with a ML raw then if I wanted a hybrid camera that's weather sealed I'd go instead with a Canon 1D C or a Nikon Z8 or Panasonic S1H / GH6  or Sony FX3 / FX30 (or perhaps a7Smk3) or Fujifilm X-H2s or Canon R6 mk2 / R7 / R8 etc

Because raw is over rated, and 10bit is good enough 99% of the time. Especially if you're working in an environment where weather sealing / low visibility / run & gun / etc matters! As you likely don't have a tonne of card space with you, along with a 1st AC, and DIT on set, to handle the data offloads and to be checking the footage. 

Rather you want something simple, reliable, and fast. Which isn't what describes ML raw, but does fit the use case of the Canon 1D C / Nikon Z8 / S1H / X-H2s / GH6 / FX30 / etc 

5D3ML IQ is never dated, is still the best of the video cams I have, better than R1MX and Epic-X mysterium-X, only F3 may reach its level. Magic lantern cams have strong rolling shutter, so some of the moving shots have to be controlled. Also only crop mood cams have real time high resolution preview for most high res modes. 5D3ML has good preview in 1080p full frame modes, not in high res crop modes. 

[zlfan]

On 5/28/2024 at 5:51 PM, IronFilm said:

I've been toying a little with buying another camera, a CCD one for the hell of it and the unique look. 

Seems like the Nikon D200 was the best ever CCD DSLR? And it's almost being given away at how low the prices are now. 

Either that or go nuts for "the best" with the Pentax 645D's massive medium format digital sensor that uses CCD, but that's still well over $1K secondhand

  

Good point. A camera can come out that's 10% better than an ALEXA but if there is even a one day learning curve for the editor and grader to get up to speed with handling this new footage, then it's not a good deal for them to go with. 

D200 is good. Also D1X D1H. D2H D2X are good too, although not ccd, but not cmos neither. 

[zlfan]

On 5/22/2024 at 7:52 PM, KnightsFan said:

As someone who shot exclusively on a 5D3 with magic lantern for ~1.5 years during which I was shooting every week, it is far inferior to most of today's prosumer offerings in every way, including plain image quality.

If it's what you have, then yes, a 5D3 with ML produces beautiful images and it will continue to do so. However there is no situation in which I would recommend it as a purchase.

I doubt about your work flow. did you try mlv app for cc? resolve cannot give you the same color as mlv app. 

i can generate extremely good iq footage due to its color depth and full frame. i really doubt that modern prosumer cams can do it. think about it, full frame 14 bit color depth true lossless raw vs crap codecs. if you say alexa lf or 65, maybe they win. for others, i really doubt about your conclusion. i think you need to test the latest ml firmware and mlv app workflow, optimize your workflow and skills, then decide. 

[zlfan]

On 5/22/2024 at 7:59 PM, KnightsFan said:

Trends come and go. Vista vision film peaked and declined before digital was invented, and now as a size format it's returning. Anamorphic comes and goes and comes back. It's possible that 10 years from now we'll have another super 16 craze, and Arri will build an Alexa with a tiny sensor to fit that need.

some trends never go. size matters. small sensors only bring to the table with the convenience, but not ultimate iq. 

in still world, people will laugh that aps c will tread 135ff or 645mf.

[zlfan]

On 5/22/2024 at 11:12 PM, QuickHitRecord said:

I have to agree with this. 5Diii raw was revolutionary at the time but it does not stack up against modern cameras. I did a comparison about a year ago with my current cameras and it displayed so much striated and blocky magenta noise in the shadows that I can't imagine reaching for it for video ever again. I still takes wonderful photos though.

Something I've been pondering lately is usability. I just wrapped a fast-paced short film shoot at a local bar using two C70s and a set of Sirui Jupiter anamorphics. I chose those cameras despite owning two older Reds. The C70s are not cameras that have much appeal to the cinema purist side of me, but I'm glad that I did choose them because I don't think we would have made it through our shot list if I'd been using a camera that was even slightly slower. I still think that my ancient R1MX produces an image that just puts me in a light trance and pulls me into the film more than any other digital camera that I know of. But it's hard to imagine a film that would be the right fit for that camera, so I think that it's days with me may be numbered.

So, yeah, unless I was working with larger crews and bigger budgets, I guess my answer to the original question would be the Canon C70. It may be the Honda Civic of cinema cameras, but it will get you where you need to go, without adding additional stress.

i seriously doubt that c70 has a better iq than 5d3ml. i think c70 is not as filmic as r1mx or epic-x mysterium-x. yet those two reds cannot compare to 5d3ml. 

[zlfan]

On 5/23/2024 at 4:38 AM, eatstoomuchjam said:

Keep in mind that in 2009 (when the 7d was released), the number of consumer lenses designed for APS-C was even less than now - and there weren't a ton of people adapting vintage Cooke lenses to the 7d.  Plus, 15 years ago, sensor technology was not what it is now.  

 

Personally, I don't care a lot for Sigma lenses.  Every time I put one on my camera, I feel like I'm putting on something designed by a robot - all technical perfection, no soul.  But yes, the 18-35 is quite popular.  The EF-S 17-55/2.8 is one of the standout lenses for Canon APS-C, but it's one of only a small number.  Fast primes?  Not many.  I HAVE considered picking up the 18-135 USM for a walkaround lens for C70 + Komodo-X since it's decent enough quality and a big zoom range, but while I'd use that for personal stuff, I'd be really unlikely to take it out of the bag when on set.

 

Who is making CCD in the still world nowadays?  The sensor options in the still world are about the same as in the video world at this point.  Still world has Foveon, but video world has the 17:9 sensors included in many cinema cameras - and most mirrorless cameras (excepting GR1 and Hasselblad medium format) support a video mode which effectively means that most modern still camera sensors are also video sensors...  but most dedicated cinema cameras don't feature a still photo mode.

The main thing to differentiate a pro DP from an amateur, IMO, is knowing how to light.  Choice of cameras like the Alexa tends to be due to a feature set designed for a large crew, reliability, and having the most flexible image to hand off to professional colorists who also spend 80%+ of their time working on footage from the Alexa.  This is one of the reasons that a lot of stuff was still being shot on 2.8k Alexa when RED had 4, 5, 6, and 8k sensors available in their cameras. 

As people here have repeatedly pointed out, a lot of the best DP's aren't making choices for the sharpest possible image - if you want the image to look a little soft, using a Speed Panchro on a 2.8k sensor to upsize to 4k is going to get you there.  Will any Internet camera/lens reviewer give a glowing review to that combo?  Doubtful.  Will an audience watching the film walk out talking about how beautiful the film was?  Yup.

As a perfect example, I just watched Dune 2 last night since it's finally free on Max.  Lots of people have been talking about how beautiful it was.  As I watched, some of the scenes were really pretty sharp-looking and they were the ones that seemed mostly CG.  When humans were on screen, I repeatedly noticed how unsharp the images were.  Googled a bit and found this bit from the DP

> "Texturizing the image was the name of the game. The larger ALEXA sensors are so extraordinary that I felt we needed to dirty the image up a bit."

Shot on large format sensors, but too much perfection/sharpness felt soulless.

Also:

> We had a 57 mm LOOK lens with Petzval glass where you can dial in your effect with a third lens ring

Dude shot parts of Dune 2 with a $400 Lomography lens.

https://shop.lomography.com/us/new-petzval-55-f-1-7-mkii-art-lens

 

And:

> Ultimately Fraser and his team decided to use spherical optics and he worked with a diverse range from ARRI Rental including re-housed 1980s Moviecams and re-housed Soviet-era glass provided by IronGlass, along with some lenses from his collection.

Dude shot parts of Dune 2 with Helios 44-2 and Jupiter-9 and lenses like that.  Can't afford the IronGlass rehoused versions?  Go buy 'em for like $200-300 on ebay.

 

"The main thing to differentiate a pro DP from an amateur, IMO, is knowing how to light.  Choice of cameras like the Alexa tends to be due to a feature set designed for a large crew, reliability, and having the most flexible image to hand off to professional colorists who also spend 80%+ of their time working on footage from the Alexa.  This is one of the reasons that a lot of stuff was still being shot on 2.8k Alexa when RED had 4, 5, 6, and 8k sensors available in their cameras. "

 

totally agree. 

the latest cams are very sharp, with a good dr, but kind of thin. if you compare to f3, r1mx, 5d3ml, you will feel it. 

lighting is actually the key here. 

alexa ev is enough for most of the hollywood level features, not to say indie shorts. 

[zlfan]

On 5/23/2024 at 7:50 AM, KnightsFan said:

Have you used 5D3 ML? I disagree completely. I find the color to be average, the noise and particularly the chroma noise is particularly ugly, and the dynamic range is really bad. Complete opposite of the Alexa classic. The one thing it has is no compression artifacts, which at the time was unique in the consumer space with a large sensor.

there is something wrong with your workflow. color of 5d3ml is second to none. i don't have alexa ev and f35 to test by my own hands. according to what the footage i see online or in theatre, i seriously doubt that alexa ev is better than 5d3ml in terms of color. dr and rolling shutter wise, yes alexa ev is much better. f35 is ccd so it may be even better than 5d3ml in terms of color. but think about other things, f35 and alexa ev are much larger and hard to handle. also 5d3ml can go to uhd 1x1 10 bit crop mode continuous recording, aps-h size, resolution is much higher. the battery life of 5d3ml is a breeze comparing to the gold mount bricks on alexa ev and f35. i'd say it is given and taken, instead of one side win. 

 

[zlfan]

ml improves significantly during the last 10 years on 5d3. you need to have the latest ml firmware and mlv app, and learn the latest tricks to make it wonderful. it is fun to me, as i like this kind of continuous improvements, instead of begging for company controlled limited firmware updates. many times, the hardware potential is just wasted, which is to the best interests of the camera manufacturers.  

[KnightsFan]

35 minutes ago, zlfan said:

I doubt about your work flow. did you try mlv app for cc? resolve cannot give you the same color as mlv app. 

i can generate extremely good iq footage due to its color depth and full frame. i really doubt that modern prosumer cams can do it. think about it, full frame 14 bit color depth true lossless raw vs crap codecs. if you say alexa lf or 65, maybe they win. for others, i really doubt about your conclusion. i think you need to test the latest ml firmware and mlv app workflow, optimize your workflow and skills, then decide. 

My magic lantern work was on amazon prime. It has also been shown in local theaters, and films that I shot on magic lantern won awards both in the US and abroad. None of it was high profile or anything like that, but I think my workflow was fine.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. You can like what you like. However, I would not consider my opinion to be uninformed.

[zlfan]

Just now, KnightsFan said:

My magic lantern work was on amazon prime. It has also been shown in local theaters, and films that I shot on magic lantern won awards both in the US and abroad. None of it was high profile or anything like that, but I think my workflow was fine.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. You can like what you like. However, I would not consider my opinion to be uninformed.

i understand that you have made significant achievements using 5d3ml. i never doubt your professional quality. 

but ml is improving, it is amazing. i test all of my video cams by my own hands. i try to optimize each one, but 5d3ml is the best in terms of iq. as i said before, ml cams have severe rolling shutter, dr is lacking. but if you can control your shots, 5d3ml generates extremely beautiful color. some of my 5d3ml footage is no less than any hollywood level features in terms of iq. of course, my footage is just landscape, not comparable to the hollywood features' storyline, constume design, art design, etc. but iq wise, i am impressed with my 5d3ml footage more than amazon prime, netflix, or local theatre movies. i am not joking. 

[zlfan]

19 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

My magic lantern work was on amazon prime. It has also been shown in local theaters, and films that I shot on magic lantern won awards both in the US and abroad. None of it was high profile or anything like that, but I think my workflow was fine.

I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. You can like what you like. However, I would not consider my opinion to be uninformed.

I am sorry if my tone was too strong. I did not intend to offend you. 

[kye]

7 hours ago, zlfan said:

i seriously doubt that c70 has a better iq than 5d3ml. i think c70 is not as filmic as r1mx or epic-x mysterium-x. yet those two reds cannot compare to 5d3ml. 

The sticking point is that people don't want "filmic" looking images anymore.

Everyone uses and abuses the word "cinematic" and it no longer has anything to do with what is being projected in cinemas, but rather it has come to mean overly sharp images with very shallow DoF and a heavy grade in FilmConvert or Dehancer where the mood of the grade has no connection to the story of the video (if there even is a story at all).