Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: D4  (Read 10628 times)
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
D4
« on: January 06, 2012, 01:58:17 AM »
ReplyReply

My blog.. http://dslr4real.tv/index.php?option=com_zoo&task=item&item_id=96&Itemid=1

========
To me the 'DSLR' Dream has been to be able to produce a 'Stills and Motion' offer for the client while operating with the tiny footprint of the press photographer
 
From reading the Nikon D4 announcement that era appears to have arrived
 
If clients understand what this means it is a very exciting time
 
Lets recap the basic joys of a decent full frame DSLR
 
Full frame give the traditional photography perspective and DOF, a look we have seen and loved since 1930 in the images of Henri Cartier Bresson through to the hottest Agency photographers delivering news from around the world
 
Most image you see in World Press Photo have the full frame look
 
Digital cameras have moved stills photography forward in terms of low light ability and auto focus well beyond the best that film ever brought us
 
Having shot stills with the nikon D3 since it launch some three years ago I can assure that the D3 was a mind bendingly good stills camera
 
The fantastic dynamic range, creamy roll off to blown highlights and clean 1600 ISO made it a camera that worked with minimal or no lighting in almost any conditions
 
The D3 means I now have a truck of flash that is now virtually unused
 
The D3 was revolutionary to stills work
 
My only gripes with the D3 were the lack of 100ISO and a slight shortage of mega pixels - those gripes are gone with the D4 although Id still like 6 or 25 ISO
 
I have no doubts that the nikon D4 will be a superb stills camera
 
Video
The main revolution with video in the last decade is the ability for anyone to broadcast. Once upon a time the only way to broadcast was to buy a 30 second slot for $50k slot on TV
 
Shooting video was essentially a pointless activity for anyone but a tiny elite because they could not get it seen
 
Now anyone,indy filmmaker, kid, small company, large corporation can broadcast via the internet
 
Shooting video is no longer pointless
 
So we all want to shoot video - until that function was enabled on DLSR cameras shooting video was a horrible activity (in my opinion)
 
We had the choice of buying;
 
-A 2/3 BetaCam for $70K, adequate, but heavy and expensive
-A handy cam - cheap but horrid looking with a tiny chip and rubbish fixed glass
-A DOF adapter camera - a light hungry overweight technical nightmare
 
Video enabled DSLRs brought that era to an end matching a large sensor in a small package with cheap (compared to a $20k eng lens) stills glass
 
But DSLR video was an 'almost ran'
Well documented issues particularly the lack of monitor able sound caused huge issues to the video shooter using a DSLR - I see most of the other issues (Jello Moire etc) as fairly minimal in the bigger picture - the poor sound was the killer app that killed DSLR for me - driving my video acquisition towards the Sony FS100
 
Canon have crippled their fine D1x with the simple omission of a headphone jack - they thought this was clever.. it wasn't.. it ensured that they won't get my $6000 or buy any of their lenses for another $10k
 
By including a headphone jack nikon have scored a huge goal with the Nikon D4
 
So the Nikon D4 lets talk about why it could absolutely rock
One Bag
I am pretty sure that a nikon D4 kit being
D4, mic, laptop, cans, lavs,  24-70 and 80-200 and only of my rigs will fit in a hand luggage bag
The ultimate kit for the digital journalist or mobile corporate shooter
 
A client could commission a solo operator with this bag to cover the most remote news story or provide them with a top class corporate package of stills and motion
 
Not just cover the assignment but produce world class material
 
ENG shooting
To the ENG camera operator shooting for the Beeb or Sky DSLRs have always been a mild joke
-no control of sound
-no super zoom lens
Lets face it shooting actuality with fixed primes is a nightmare, changing lenses is just too slow for shooting actuality
The crop modes on the D4 give you a super zoom with no lens changes
 
Auto Focus
Focus is an issue with shooting video on any large chip
Most DSLR video footage is out of focus most of the time
Sorting focus properly has generally an extremely costly operation for serious productions, employing skilled technical crew and outrageous gadgtery
Auto focus on the Nikon D4 will bring a good level of focus to the solo operator
I am sure the D4 will be awesome on a steadicam giving a large chip look and pretty much escaping the need to radio focus
 
Sensor Crop modes
Changing lenses while trying to shoot video quickly is an utter pain. Its not the lens change but fiddling with filters and follow focus alignment
The Canon 24-105 (on a full frame 5d) has basically been the only usable zoom lens with DSLRs, beyond that DSLR shooting has always required a bag of glass to create an interesting and varied sequence of images
 
The Nikon D4 shoots at different crops, a lens like a 24-70 will have a huge range of fields of view
 
I think a D4 and a 24-70 will offer enough perspectives to shoot almost anything, add a 70-200 and that crop mode and you get amazing range of image perspectives from just two lenses
 
Sound
Im sorry sound men but the main requirement of location sound is to do an interview and stop the sound clipping and avoid wind noise
Im sure the D4 will have this basic functionality
The Heart of the Image
Lets not forget what the pictures look like. This is probably a no brainer for a top level Nikon, Nikons are the kings of skin and dynamic range, what more do you need
 
All in all
I think this camera can be a game changer, the most likely thing to hold it back is the imagination of the paying client and their prejudices
 
BUT
All is not perfect. I have some concerns about the D4.
 
It appears to have Mini HDMI - the worlds worst connection interface
 
One the sound side 3.5mini jack is far from ideal too - BeachTek may come back into fashion big style or of course my Sound Devices 702 recorder - a solution like the 702 that records a master to a CF card and feeds out to the camera is probably ideal
 
Focus check while rolling - without this we could need a monitor, batteries bla bla .. unless the AF is really really good
 
Skipping or binning - taking 16mp and chopping them to 1920-1080 can be painful - I guess nikon will have the power to do this pretty well but not perfectly - expect a little moire or a softness that does not actually resolve 1080 lines
 
Nikkor 24-70 - This lens at full frame is plenty wide, at 1080 crop it will be a serious telephoto. Trouble is the copy I tried while optically mind boggling is not that nice to manually focus - which will need super precision in 1080 crop mode, but AF will probably be good on simple to analyse tele photo shots
 
Its a lump. The Nikon D3s is not the finest camera on a small handheld rig with no counterweight, Its pretty horrible on a Steadicam Merlin
 
Its expensive. Will we get all this functionality in a D800 D4000 or whatever in six months?
 
Selecting Crop Mode. I want to do this fast - but will it be buried in the menues
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2012, 03:27:46 AM »
ReplyReply

It's funny how Nikon has always been prudent and logical with megapixels. This has "just" 16 and seems a joke compared to the 20 ish of the Nex 7.

We still lack of a proper image sequence mode.

Will it have timelapse capabilities without requiring to an external gadget?

I'm not happy with the 720p for 60 fps, it reminds a lot the GH2 capabilities and it's outdated.

It's big, heavy and expensive. No raw.

About the focussing issues, wich I agree, I'm not sure the solutions are in big sensors but on the exact opposite. In fact, I think that the Nikon V1 is a good idea.
I discovered that 16mm cine lenses in C or S mount are quite efficient in order to focus in a one-man configuration. To use those lenses properly, we need small sensors.
It's usable on the GH2 because of the crop mode, but loosing wide angles.

On the GH2 you can access a crop mode setted on the upper dial, so let's say you shoot wide, turn the dial and you're on tele (without quality lost).
But cropping without downsampling has a downside: the downsampling processing helps a lot in noise control at higher isos. It means that you wouldn't use a crop mode in higher isos because it will be noticiable the difference in noise between the non-crop and the cropped.

Instead of needing bigger sensor, I'd need in fact smaller sensor as crazy as it sounds.


There are curently 2 tendecies: one is big, raw, and expensive, and the other is micro, HD and cheap, taking advantage of the electronics progress. This Nikon D falls in a no-where land IMO and I'm not sure the focussing accuracy be the grail on set (for video). It remains to be seen in real life.

It falls in a land of nowhere, excatly like the Canon, because we are reaching prices where one can almost consider a Red One. It's cheaper but the investment is already substancial. Then, strictly talking in terms of IQ, got the feeling that the NEX7 and GH2 (hacked or not) are still unbeatable in terms of price-performances.

Nikon has done a lot of video integration in its V1 models, but I find that D still very shy.




« Last Edit: January 06, 2012, 03:34:00 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2012, 03:50:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Maybe but IMO the D3 - which is my primary camera - lovely colours, works every day, no client ever complains about 11mp
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2012, 05:27:18 AM »
ReplyReply

I think that the D4 reso is more than enough. Nikon has always been very pragmatic in order to maintain high file quality and not filled sensors with too much pixels.

It will be a great photographic tool, no doubt. Probably a good motion tool as well. My point was that I'm not sure it would be a revolutionary combocam we'd all like to have. It's not there yet IMO.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7763



WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 06, 2012, 06:14:35 AM »
ReplyReply

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZZMIo7Zfys&feature=youtu.be&hd=1

Sounds pretty amazing to my video ignorant eyes but is it any good?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2012, 06:15:47 AM »
ReplyReply

@fred

Well I think you can plop it in your bag with a couple of lenses cans and a mic go off, take some nice stills, shoot some nice video, do an interview, checking the levels and wind noise,  all images with a cinematic look

You can make all of the content for a company stills and motion with one tool and minimal lights/grip

That is to me a combo cam and basically new (hacks aside)

Is it an Epic Red beater ? no

S

 
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #6 on: January 06, 2012, 06:39:29 AM »
ReplyReply

D4 footage is really good. Very pro looking files. Not as powerfull as the hacked GH2 but better in terms of DOF capabilities, DR and certainly much better in terms of stills.

This could be indeed a great 4X4 reportage camera for both still-motion. But how it differs from the Canon 1D then ? I mean, long time Nikon users will buy this camera, and long time Canon users will still buy the latest 1D. Same philosophy, similar specs etc...

I don't want to cut the buzz, I simply can't find where resides the "game changer" factor. It seems more to me in the continuity of the 1D, at the Nikon sauce.

But I see a 5D MK2 at 2000 euros...this costs almost 6. If I'm really really pragmatic, where are the 4000 I'd pay for ?
« Last Edit: January 06, 2012, 06:43:27 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #7 on: January 06, 2012, 07:00:49 AM »
ReplyReply

The $5 headphone jack is the $4k game changer

Missing from the 1Dx 'to protect their video market'

--
Not mention a bunch of other detailing

Have you used a 5dmk2 in a pressured paid environment - really its unusable, crappy monitoring (of focus) post cost inducing sound synch , black outs when you hit record, mental moire in the boss shirt, over heating bla bla bla

Go out maybe interview 10 people in a day, some of them celebs with 5minutes scheduled in and I think you will find the 5d is pretty horrid

Sitting back sweating hoping that Pluraleyes does its stuff bla bla

I can tell you as a stills guy 'stealing' the business of the videographer you do yourself no favours if the sound does not synch or whatever

Handing off footage to a third party editor who cannot understand two files per clip, and doesn't do the same workflow as you so you can't do it for them bla bla

Ive done enough paid video shoots to only use a DSLR for BRoll or fun now

Of course every one needs something different from their camera - but for me - lo budget corporate the D4 looks very very good

S
« Last Edit: January 06, 2012, 07:07:59 AM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #8 on: January 06, 2012, 08:35:31 AM »
ReplyReply

That's why I stopped to use the 5D after the GH2. Yes, the Canon has all the issues you mentionned and the Panasonic is simply a better video camera in almost every aspects except extreme isos (but a worse still one).

It's possible to monitoring the sound (helmet) with the GH2 with a special cable and control levels. I have one, it works perfectly but in the end I still use a clapperboard and record sound separatly.

I have no doubt that this Nikon will feed your requierements and will be a more solid tool than the 5D. But price is high.

I'm seeing Sony, not the Nex 7 but their latest dslrs. They have superb video capabilities and it seems that still quality is now really good (if not pushing isos) at 1/3 the cost.

There is a tough competition. This Nikon is more than probably a superb camera, as Nikon knows how to do them in their top-gear. It will deliver pro stills and pro videos for sure, and with probably less hassles than what we know with Canon. But...6000 ?


mmm...I'd wait and see a few months before putting all that money because it seems that this market is moving fast.

But that's just me.

Ps: I've read all the specs, there are really good indeed. It's a muscled GH2. Very inspired. It might be a better tool than I thought first more I think about it. I got your points. But this price...
« Last Edit: January 06, 2012, 08:45:43 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 06, 2012, 09:09:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Well every tool has a place and appropriateness , personally the GH2 has never come on by radar as a 'serious' stills camera

Yep sony might do a nice DSLR sometime

I won't be buying any of them for a while, Im well kitted up and can wait a year to see how the market moves

Best

S

Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
RFPhotography
Guest
« Reply #10 on: January 06, 2012, 10:09:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred, several Nikons have a built in intervalometer for timelapse.  Have had for several years.  Timelapse with Nikon is a non-issue.  This new D4, apparently, has a new 'timelapse mode' that not only takes the still images at set intervals but also puts them into video output at a desired frame rate.  Not sure how useful that will be.  Doesn't matter as long as they haven't done away with the standard intervalometer.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #11 on: January 06, 2012, 11:52:37 AM »
ReplyReply

.... Basically I want less gear that allows me to do more. Canon isn't delivering that right now or in the foreseeable future.

Nice job Nikon!

I agree.

I also like more and more this Nikon proposal.
Logged
Tim Jones
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #12 on: January 06, 2012, 01:19:18 PM »
ReplyReply

 Has anyone looked at some of the frame grabs at 1080?  They  definitely  look useable as stills full screen on my 30" cinema display.
Awesome! Jaw dropping .
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #13 on: January 06, 2012, 01:35:07 PM »
ReplyReply


I'm trying to get a deposit placed on a D4 at our local pro shop. A full switch may only cost about $2K difference to unload all my Canon and other gear to have an equal Nikon set or at least a Nikon set of lenses and accessories of what I actually use now for stills and video. I don't really enjoy buying things anymore, but I do enjoy creating mental ease through simplified approaches. That's how I view a D4. I want fewer cases of gear and lighter cases, and use my head more to get to the end result instead of stuff.

The two biggest drawbacks on all of these dslr video cameras is 1. Sound.  They need real dedicated xlr's  and the ability to sample sound as you work.

I detest the separate sound recording, slate or not, good continuity or not, it's a pain in the ass for the editor, a pain in the ass for everyone.

Secondly these smaller cameras need autofocus for some applications.  

I don't mind hiring a focus puller for heavy production, but shooting B cam of atmosphere, or action, it's just silly to keep running around trying to hold focus on someone.  Nothing is really that sharp or should I say professionally sharp, which for video is much different than stills.

Regardless, I'm all for simplification, I just haven't found it yet.

Our LED's and florescent fixtures do not replace HMI's, we bought the Sony AF100 and it doesn't get close to replacing the RED's, we've shoved tons of stuff in multiple vans (around the world) and they never are as easy or simple as a full kitted grip truck.

In fact our next purchase will be a grip truck, that's dedicated to our needs, not something that we rent, pile stuff in and then rinse and repeat.

In fact, I even have my doubts that the Scarlet we ordered will be anything more than a b cam.

As far as this New Nikon I'd have to see the footage, but the Canon I'm more interested in.   I like the fact that it shoots at high iso, I like the Canon skin tones.   We have full sets of Nikon and Canon lenses, so that doesn't weight into the thought, for me it's the color and look of the files, but that's for stills, not video.

We'll take a hard look at this Nikon, but until it's out, who knows?

IMO

BC
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #14 on: January 06, 2012, 02:46:10 PM »
ReplyReply

The two biggest drawbacks on all of these dslr video cameras is 1. Sound.  They need real dedicated xlr's  and the ability to sample sound as you work.

Correct. I've been asking and hopping for those xlr in vain.

Secondly these smaller cameras need autofocus for some applications.  

I don't mind hiring a focus puller for heavy production, but shooting B cam of atmosphere, or action, it's just silly to keep running around trying to hold focus on someone.  Nothing is really that sharp or should I say professionally sharp, which for video is much different than stills.

And that's where the main downside is IMO. We don't really have reliable AF so far for motion on those cams.
I have a big doubt this Nikon is gona change this reality, I might be wrong but that remains to be seen.


... the Canon I'm more interested in.   I like the fact that it shoots at high iso, I like the Canon skin tones.   We have full sets of Nikon and Canon lenses, so that doesn't weight into the thought, for me it's the color and look of the files, but that's for stills, not video.


I haven't seen so far a more powerfull motion tool at extremes isos than the new Canon (not the 1D, the other cine beast the C something). It's to the point that it should affect drastically the sets. Nikon has a really good experience in high-isos quality, this D4 should be indeed strong there, but until we really can get more samples, it will be "should" and "maybe". But I've never been convinced by the skintones of the Nikons, all generations. They are more difficult to obtain than with the Canon and Nikon softwares aren't really nice (so far).
The video bitrate is way below the hacked GH2. The D4 shoots at 24mb/s max, the GH2 almost 200 and absolutly stable at 100.
The Canon is already hackable to a 100ish, let's see if this Nikon is sealed or they will manage to hack it.
It looks interesting, specs are coherent. But I think we're not there yet.


I don't mind hiring a focus puller for heavy production, but shooting B cam of atmosphere, or action, it's just silly to keep running around trying to hold focus on someone.  Nothing is really that sharp or should I say professionally sharp, which for video is much different than stills.

James, I don't want to complicate the thread, but there I'm following you half the way. Because on the motion works you displayed on internet for your studio, the ones that captured me really the most, the ones where I've entered and where I would say "I'd like to hire those guys" aren't necesarly the sharpest in-focus swiss watches precision. In fact it's all about emotions and message and you know well how to do it. I'm sure most of the footage I'm refering to has been shooted with the Canon. Not that I'm thinking that the red is not a tool, it bloody is, but we shouldn't underestimate those little cameras.

How to keep things fresh with 2 tons of equipment that require a cine crew to manouver?

That's the chalenge IMO.  I've seen people moving to Red, ultra motivated, but then their footage started to freeze and getting less exciting, less risky, less dynamic or creative. The weight of the equipment itself can be a trap or a burden for many. It's like everybody gets excited by Red but I'm not sure they all have a clear understanding of what does it mean to make all the machinery work properly.
Press the Red or Alexa button and it's all the rest of the chain that has to be boosted, and that, I hear it very little.

Things get more complicated as soon as you upgrade the motion equipment, and it gets even more chalenging to keep it fresh and dynamic. That requires a team totally involved and obedient as well very skilled.
If you can do with the Red what you where-are able to do with the Canon, chapeau*. (I'm sure you are-will)

*chapeau in french means hat, and the meaning for the non french speakers is "I applaude".
« Last Edit: January 06, 2012, 03:19:58 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 06, 2012, 04:04:37 PM »
ReplyReply

The D4 has sound both at a basic level to do a simple interview direct with the cameras functionality, a simple interview is the mainstay of 90% of broadcast material

I also think it will work well in conjunction with a sound recorder - I love the recorder I have - the Sound Devices 702

With that you can pump proper audio out into the camera while creating a safe recording too on the recorders own CF card

As for AF that remains to be seen, I doubt it will be good but who knows

Incedentally the sound recorder presents an interesting modularity in that it can hop from camera to camera - i.e. it worked with my 5d, my 7d and any other camera, the sound recorder(s) attached to my sony video cameras will die with them

S





Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #16 on: January 07, 2012, 12:16:17 PM »
ReplyReply


All of this mirrors still photography.

I'm not saying a smaller camera can't produce great results, just the opposite, I think a smaller camera in stills and motion can free up the whole process.

The problem is in commerce what goes from a kewl, hand held jerky image, shot with a crew of 3 never flies when it comes to getting through the whole creative process.

I like the real world look  but usually slick, smooth, commercial, managed with some believability of reality is where the real money goes.

So whether I'm mounting a 3 lb camera on a tripod or dolly, or a 10 lb camera it makes little difference other than the 10lb camera shoots a raw file and can crop which gives more options in post.

When we want that free flowing movement, we usually bring on a stedicam operator, but even at that 90% of the imagery is shot from some kind of hard mount, moving or not.

Actually, when you view any motion advertising or entertainment you'll see nearly every technique employed. 

When we shoot we run three cameras when possible, because as you know you can never have too much footage.

But I'm not against these smaller cameras I just think at times they can make life difficult, especially in post and can be a false economy.

They have a place, I guess that's why RED made an Epic and a Scarlet.

This Nikon may be good, though they will have to up their video game to compete, even with Canon and maybe they have.     

Then again nothing is more hand held and grittier than Southland and that's shot hand (shoulder) mount on RED Ones along with dollies and every other mount, including a strong guy's arms.

http://www.tnt.tv/video/?cid=54227&oid=225389

As far as what's on our website, we haven't updated it in a year or so, we've been busy and we're in the process of changing the whole thing to reflect how we've changed our studios.

IMO

BC

Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2206


WWW
« Reply #17 on: January 07, 2012, 01:27:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Of course at the top end nothing really changes - a DLSR is a comedy crash cam, the D4 possibly a slightly better comedy crash cam

It doesn't have a mass or size advantage over Scarlet any more any way - so who cares.

You throw words like focus puller or steadicam op into the mix as if they are nothing

They are not nothing; each of these people and their toys are (I hope) at least $1000 a day

Now down at the bottom end thing do matter, things do change

A few years ago all cheap productions (think 2 person corporate crew) looked totally awful

DLSRs have radicalised how cheaper 'motion' can look and each incremental change makes it better or easier

Best

SMM







Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #18 on: January 07, 2012, 01:35:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I imagined the website wasn't updated yet to reflect your latests because the material was there before you moved to Red cameras I think.

Yes, those dslrs have issues in post and as you say, it could be a false economy in the end.
Generaly, cheaper equipment costs at first less but on the middle term in fact more. I've seen it in almost every aspect of life.
But being far from ideal, it's possible to do really good stuff with little cams.

The thing is there was a time I seriously considered moving to Red, but I realised quickly that it's not just about the camera and a bunch of lenses. All the chain is affected and numbers raise fast.
Structure is different etc...If it was just for the basic gear, I could have done the move but then I wouldn't have the budget to sustain properly the other aspects. I had to admit that I'm not in a position to work with the Red system comfortably. It's like this guy who buys a Ferrari but in the end can't change the tyres, something like that although the comparaison is maybe too simple. It was clear for me that the only way to access more solid equipment is simply to grow and generate money with the systems I can sustain today. Being really good with what I have and if that leads me to invest in heavier equipment and bigger team, it will be done naturaly from a smaller structure that works, produce good content and generate enough incomes to do so. In that context, dslrs or mirrorless cams are powerfull tools but of course not ideal.

And then, I thought: "Fred, if you start to complain about your equipment because it's not Raw, it's not ideal etc...bad thing, because (me talking to myself) then you're not on track, also you can't really access much more at the moment so it's pointless. Be happy with what you have and enjoy filming".
And that's what I did.


Commercially, I see the strong importance of the Red or Alexa systems. There are some contracts in the high-end you simply can't obtain with a dslr config. You need a serious structure and being equiped and renting is not always the best solution. It's important to own a strategical part of the equipment.

Here, it's been a wave of Red wanters, not a long time ago. I include myself into it. But the discourse was "I need Raw". Not really "can I really sustain that? or the impact with clients". It reminded me to some extend the MF dilemas. I think that the important factors to consider are if the Red or Alexas camera are a plus commercially and a plus in the workflow. The answers are quite easy, they are a plus. But not that much that it's not possible to produce top imagery-content with dslrs because there aren't really the "right" tools or too painfull.    

So I guess I'm still super enthousistic with Red but there's no rush to get there. Priority is produce good stuff with whatever. Then, the rest comes by itself.

Regards.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2012, 05:07:14 PM by fredjeang » Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #19 on: January 08, 2012, 01:25:13 AM »
ReplyReply

snip........
Yes, those dslrs have issues in post and as you say, it could be a false economy in the end.
Generaly, cheaper equipment costs at first less but on the middle term in fact more. I've seen it in almost every aspect of life.
But being far from ideal, it's possible to do really good stuff with little cams.
..........snip

Fred I agree with everthing you say and I promise you we will test the Nikon.

We are also on the list for the Canon 1dx, but as a stills camera, not necessarily for motion, though it doesn't line skip anymore which should help with moire.

I also agree with everything you say about size, weight and heavy crews.  If I only shot for myself I'd probably have two cameras and be done with it.

Actually if I shot for myself I'd probably shoot everything with my standard RED One's and never think about buying anything else.

They're proven, now finally solid and a good price, especially on the second hand market.

Anyway, we're not in disagreement other than our business models, but great creative doesn't come from a camera or a light.

But you know that as well as anyone.

IMO

BC
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad