Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Camera equipment and HD filming for newbie  (Read 19606 times)
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2214


WWW
« Reply #60 on: August 21, 2012, 02:19:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Mr. Morgan, why do you use an external monitor? The FS100 body-only pack should include a specifical loupe for the on-board monitor, isn't it? Isn't it useful?

The onboard monitor is 480px, but now has useful focus check - which makes a differece (new in firmware)

If you are operating handheld there is no comfortable hold using the 'chimney pot' due to the front heavy position

Operating from a tripod one could use the onboard monitor.

My setup on the shoulder the onboard monitor is very nice for a director to watch from behind you

The chimney pot and handle are also made of unpleasant plastic. Might sound stupid but I dont like them near me.

« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 03:04:24 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2214


WWW
« Reply #61 on: August 21, 2012, 03:34:40 PM »
ReplyReply

I dont really know how to take this thread further.

Its a bit like (and I guess you are a photographer) saying 'what camera is best'

Well maybe 10.8 for landscape, or an iphone thats with you, or a D3 for sport, or or or

One difference is videography is not easy, and the gear does not work out of the box, like a D3 and the 3 nikon flagship zooms you really are good to go on 90% of stuff.. a video camera less so.

The onboard monitor could work, or not, or maybe or sometimes.

For example interviewing Jenny Bond (at midday, outside in the sun and wind) tested me and my gear (as seen above), to or beyond, its/my limits, the same project also called for some Broll that I shot with a $500 tripod and the bare FS100 with kit lens.

You gotta get a feel for it.

To me I require from a camera..
I can see
I can hear
I can put the lens where I want, in motion or stationary
The batts dont conk out

sounds simple enough!

S





« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 03:43:34 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #62 on: August 21, 2012, 05:16:11 PM »
ReplyReply


Thanks a lot Bern,

That was what I was looking for.

Cheers.
Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #63 on: August 21, 2012, 09:15:07 PM »
ReplyReply

I just dont get how people think they a can focus 1080 resolution on a 480 device (the other EVFs), it just cant happen

I was initially concerned the resolution of the EVFs might not be being sufficient, but in practice have never had much of an issue. There's always pixel-to-pixel punch in when needed, but I rarely use it.

A similar example is RED's monitors, & EVFs. None are more than 1280 pixels wide, but designed for 4-5k cameras. On that note, Canon better stepup their C500's LCDs, as the C300's would be woefully inadequate for 4k.

One of my favorite features of an EVF is the enhanced ergonomics. In addition to a better balanced rig, the fourth contact greatly assists stabilizing handheld work.

That said, EVFs are not for everybody. We all have preferences, & in the example of RED's Bomb EVF some users reported visual issues that appeared related to their specific eyesight.

Best,
Bern

PS Starting tonight SmallHD is having 10% sale for the next two days
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 02:55:27 AM by Bern Caughey » Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1917


WWW
« Reply #64 on: August 22, 2012, 12:51:17 AM »
ReplyReply

I dont really know how to take this thread further.
.................................
One difference is videography is not easy, and the gear does not work out of the box,
.................................................
To me I require from a camera..
I can see
I can hear
I can put the lens where I want, in motion or stationary
The batts dont conk out

It all works just fine. You just need to use proper professional video kit correctly specified for the job and know how to use it.

All this current nonsense using video capable DSLRs for video work is like using an iphone for professional photography.
Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #65 on: August 22, 2012, 01:50:55 AM »
ReplyReply

You just need to use proper professional video kit correctly specified for the job and know how to use it.

For this specific project I'd stretch my budget to include at least a 2nd hand FS100. The new profiles seem to have tamed the color, & I imagine there are numerous owners upgrading to the newest take, so bargains can be had.

North Light is relatively weak, & the Sony's extended ISO could be a great asset. I don't imagine NDs will be much of a factor, & as needed screw-in would suffice.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 01:56:28 AM by Bern Caughey » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #66 on: August 22, 2012, 02:27:02 AM »
ReplyReply


All this current nonsense using video capable DSLRs for video work is like using an iphone for professional photography.

I don't really know if it's all black or all white.

I had the oportunity to talk with pro broadcast
Cameramen who are working in a prod house
Specialized in live events that outsource the tve.
They work on Thomson cams, big mediums etc...
Strangely, for their indy stuff One uses a 5d2 and
Another a gh2 not even hacked.

Recently I read a report from a big prod house
In the usa of one of the Camera operator came
With a hacked gh2 to film from a small corner
And after reviewing the footage they ordered
Several bodies to panasonic.

I must say that the more i learn in video, the
More i tend to agree with Paul. Why insisting
In using dslr and not cameras designed for video,
Included those low-end camcorders with fix zoom
That are generaly more efficient for filming.

But it seems to me that this isn't really a straight road.

At what costs are we talking about for a proper
Video camera - camcorder , and form factor, that
Will give the quality of a hacked gh2 or 5d ?
I've been trying a few affordable and the footage
Really looked like an i.phone and to have better,
You need to jump to real pro gear, and the prices
Jump drasticaly.

Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #67 on: August 22, 2012, 02:41:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Fred,

A Producer just sent me this reel from a team he's working with.

http://vimeo.com/18484574

Think what you might about the visuals, but I didn't dwell on the camera. For awhile I've pushed him to equip all camera crewmembers, especially documentary, with GH2's for additional footage.

For my work the GH2 has only been a B-Roll camera, but B-Roll is fun. And the ability to take stills in the same package, pacticularly in multiple aspect ratio, is a Killer Feature. All combined the GH2 has become my prefered walk-around camera, enhancing it's fondness, & calling to be used more widely.

Best,
Bern.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 04:15:59 AM by Bern Caughey » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2214


WWW
« Reply #68 on: August 22, 2012, 03:37:30 AM »
ReplyReply

It all works just fine. You just need to use proper professional video kit correctly specified for the job and know how to use it.

All this current nonsense using video capable DSLRs for video work is like using an iphone for professional photography.

Video cameras don't all work fine. the EX1 form-factor well known for poor performance on the shoulder

(shooting on the shoulder is done when you want the lens placed at a good eyeline)

The length and mass of 'proper' ENG cameras cause significant issues in interesting lens placement. (car mount an F900?)

The FS series dont have monitoring suitable to sustain focus with the narrow DOF often chosen.

Big ENG cameras do at least do the job they were designed to do well, they are also 10X the price of most of the cameras the oP can afford.

S



Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #69 on: August 22, 2012, 04:41:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Exactly.

An example. I had this little gf2 as
A pocket CAM. Well, the gf2 is also
Hackable. I've hacked it at 100 mbs stable.
If it doesn't give the quality of a gh2, it
Does give the output of a 5d2. Amazing
For a pocket CAM.
More importantly, tonight I'm going
To a jazz jam session, I'll mount on
This toy a cine cooke vintage and it will
Fit in the smallest bag, a compact CAM One.

And guess what, some of those
Informal takes might be used
Later on for the musician's prod
In a video clip, mixed with footage
Of expensive cams and nobody
Will complain.


Recuenco uses this all the time, mixing
Alexas with 5d2 etc...

Ps: we used the canon in fashion. No need to
Precise that the muas are using hd make-up.
We came to the conclusion that the 5d is just
About perfect, organicaly speaking, because
It lacks precision. The hacked gh2 is no fun
Because too detailed and really not good
For fashion, it chalenges too much the muas.
Instead of fashion, what we had was like
Dematologist medical footage.


A note that I think usefull to keep in mind about the term I used of "HD makeup", because there are often confusions. (as well as marketing)
Lot of shooters thing that if they hire MUAs who use hd make-up, it will be suitable for an hd output...this is far from being the case.
HD makeup is simply a technique used before (when cameras weren't hd) and wich consists in puting the emphasis on natural look.  In other words, the skin looks real skin.
Yes the make-up is micro and invisible but this isn't just about the labeled hd make-up but a technique (advanced technique) and if the MUAs aren't good, HD or not HD make-up it wouldn't work.
As for the shooters, avoid entering the make-up area with your cam while muas are using those micro powders, specially with aerograph because you'll end with micro particules everywhere on your gears.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 05:53:22 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1917


WWW
« Reply #70 on: August 23, 2012, 12:57:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Video cameras don't all work fine. the EX1 form-factor well known for poor performance on the shoulder

The length and mass of 'proper' ENG cameras cause significant issues in interesting lens placement. (car mount an F900?)

The point I was making is that proper professional video cameras work just fine and have done for decades. Things like the EX-1 are just 'serious' amateur cameras.
F900 on a car ? Same form factor as a PDW-700, and I spent Monday morning doing a car shoot with two of them mounted on an Peugeot 406 estate.

If people want to make proper commercial productions use the professional kit and staff that deliver the goods .
Logged
Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 499


« Reply #71 on: August 23, 2012, 01:51:17 AM »
ReplyReply

All this current nonsense using video capable DSLRs for video work is like using an iphone for professional photography.

VIdeo capable DSLRs have been used in countless professional productions with great results. We use them all the time, but they are used more like silent movie cameras than video cameras. For "video" work we have proper video cameras...
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #72 on: August 23, 2012, 03:46:29 AM »
ReplyReply

The point I was making is that proper professional video cameras work just fine and have done for decades. Things like the EX-1 are just 'serious' amateur cameras.
F900 on a car ? Same form factor as a PDW-700, and I spent Monday morning doing a car shoot with two of them mounted on an Peugeot 406 estate.

If people want to make proper commercial productions use the professional kit and staff that deliver the goods .

Paul, that's a fair statement, but not
Without questions I'd like you to answer
A few if you don't mind because we'd all
Benefit from your experience.

What you point is true, and at the same
Time is it doable?

You are into the elite and trained in the
British broadcast, wich is probably the
Best in the world. And you belong to a
Generation highly skilled within a stable
Corporation if I might say to use a shortcut.

When you started and learned, there wasn't
Those little cheap boxes capable to deliver
Unthinkable quality just a few years ago, in
Wich we can even mount the best cine lenses.

Also, rule game has changed in the business and
To date it's the wild west.

Teevees are firing people, the younguest generations
Because it costs less. Low-end campaigns are done
Now with pirats with their dslr and graded with magic
Bullet looks 200 bucks app. People like you are generaly
Working in high-end com, cine, 3d. But the next generation
Are dslr users, after effects experts, and plug-ins addicts.
And currently are creating looks the ad agencies are
Talking seriously. You know that internet advert will beat
Other mediums. It's the mobile phone era.

And, for the first time, the new generation will have
To live with less than their parents.

When you say to use proper video cams, the budget
Question araises. If you had 20 now, what would you
Use?
Or said differently, could you recommend a proper video camera
That is affordable for the people who are making their
Steps in motion and want to grow, that would meet the
Requierements you think it should?

If you can give a few gear models, I shut my mouth and
Will listen to you. But if your statement is based on
Unrealistic budgets for Most of us, then it's no surprise
We are using af100 and gh2

The thing is that to become good, we have to produce,
Film, edit over and over again. Then if growing, the equipment
Do so. To reach the elite we have to work a lot of low-end
Assignements, in wich dslrs are difficult to beat.
Again, this is not a critism, you know i have great respect
For you, but I think that you are writing from  your
Position. Now, I'd be very happy if you could go deaper
In your statement about dslrs and give an alternative,
Thinking if you were currently learning in the time we are in
And with the vast offer of systems available.
 
« Last Edit: August 23, 2012, 04:02:41 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Petrus
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 499


« Reply #73 on: August 23, 2012, 04:54:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Canon XF-305 is the first sub-10k$ video camera which is officially approved by BBC for TV productions. Previous "cheap" cameras with BBC stamp of approval cost $50k minimum. So some of these "prosumer" video cams are getting good enough for serious work also.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #74 on: August 23, 2012, 05:57:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks.
It's a 7500euros camera.
Specs look good, specially like the mxf.
Yeah, it looks like an hassle-free device.

The bitrate is not stellar though. The hacked gh2
Can jump to 4 x this and the canon more than double.

Of course, this isn't all about bitrate and this
Canon is undoubtly a great tool looking at all
The parameters with good usability.

However, I can mount pl lenses, cooke, anamorphic,
The zeiss line, leitz etc...

Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2214


WWW
« Reply #75 on: August 23, 2012, 02:19:28 PM »
ReplyReply

If people want to make proper commercial productions use the professional kit and staff that deliver the goods .

This is a fair point worth thinking about.

In stills world I laugh at those doing football with a 5.6 Stigma zoom, while I have my nice 400 2.8, Ive never owned any crap glass for stills or really any kit that was not top line. I started with an Fm2 and a 50 1.4, top line, and stuck with it that way

When investing in kit it is certainly worth thinking about flowing in that direction

For example I bought a Tascam sound recorder, and it said 'error' first time I pointed at someone professionally, I was so mad I bought a Sound Devices recorder the next day, now if I had just bought the Sound Devices in the first place then ...

I have Vlock batteries, decent monitors (no I didnt get the SDI connections and will regret it) Satchler sticks, nikkor glass, nice cans, nice mics, decent  cans.. all nice stuff

Im just waiting out for a decent S35 camera head, maybe the Black Magic 2 or something. And then I will have a true cinema kit close to any professional.

--

I think (and blogged http://www.dslr4real.tv/index.php?option=com_zoo&task=item&item_id=111&Itemid=1) that probably the best $$ go in either pro kit, OR really cheapo consumer stuff

Ive just got the NEX5n and its a right laugh

100 tripod will keep your camera kind of still, a 3g satchler will perform art, a 700 Frotto, is just wasting 600, because its not much better than the 100 china job

S



« Last Edit: August 23, 2012, 02:26:03 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2214


WWW
« Reply #76 on: August 23, 2012, 02:23:50 PM »
ReplyReply

But maybe im a dinosaur too.

That 400 2.8 was bloody critical with a 4mp camera only good to 400ISO

Todays Stigma kiddy has a camera he can crop to 1/4 of the image and has a load of ISO and a fuller bank account - not suprising he is so cheap.. and really not bad

S

Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
adrjork
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


« Reply #77 on: August 23, 2012, 05:49:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi guys, just a math question:
let's say that you have to shoot a wall and you want to shoot a 5m large section of that wall; you have a 24mm lens mounted on a 1.5 cropped sensor. At which minimum distance from the wall do you put your camera to take that 5mm large section? Does a formula exist?
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2214


WWW
« Reply #78 on: August 23, 2012, 06:04:32 PM »
ReplyReply

http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/calc.htm angle of view calculator

you can do the rest

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
adrjork
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


« Reply #79 on: August 23, 2012, 06:54:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Wow! Thx a lot!
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad