Check out Travel Photography - Tips and More section of our forum.
Best camera for stills and video
May 13, 2019 13:57:46 #
That's a mighty fine post for your 13,000th, a number to which I shall never aspire to reaching. Shucks, if I'd known you were gonna do all that I would've not even bothered with what I had to say. Between the two of us, this poor guy may not make it before he can get out of this thread. LOL. Lots of good advice you passed out here but let me ask you one thing - what's your procedure for keeping dust out of your GH-4 when you're outside shooting and want to change lens? Have you ever ruined a video with dust on your sensor? Now, I use swabs and make sure my sensor is clean before I start out and then when changing lens, I turn my camera off, hold the opening down so dust is discouraged from getting in, move fast, and try to be as cautious as possible but still it happens. What a disappointing experience that is especially when what you're shot is a once-in-a-lifetime event that you'll never have a chance to shoot again.
May 13, 2019 14:19:03 #
Mark - good morning!
Welcome, welcome!
As a very long time pro photographer and cinematographer (I did my first full-page ad in 1975, I believe - shot on Rollei 6x6, my very first camera), I've had the good fortune to move through the various ages of photography and cinematography. I've owned Aatons, Arris, Bolexes, Eclairs in S8 through 35mm, and most of the digital format cameras as well.
So - this is my 2/c, and just my 2/c, for what it's worth. Most people's viewpoints will differ from mine, of course. That's to be expected.
Here goes:
How much, if any, of your original film (sprockets) equipment do you have left?
While most of my gear ended up being Nikon, there was a time back in the day when I was running every brand. The top brands were always in stiff competition, then as now.
The top gear was always excellent for the end use (newspaper and magazine print work).
If you were mainly 16mm then you were, I'd say, documentary focused? Or TV commercials/music videos?
Do you know that HD (1080p and 720p), while being the main standardized broadcast medium in the US today, will be changing as more UHD (4k) pipelines come into play? And that the current international standard for digital cinema projection is around 2k flat and 3k anamorphic?
I had to change my entire lineup, as everybody else did, back in 2012 when we went from 480 to HD. And then again around 2014-5 to go to 4k. But maybe I jumped the gun, because aside from the one feature film that shot in 5k Red and actually wanted a 4k print, out of the perhaps dozen or so feature films that I've posted since that time, only 2k DCP (digital cinema packages) were actually required, ordered, and paid for. The only thing that's happened to the 4k, 5k, 6k media coming off the Reds and Arris and whatever, has been down-res'd to 2k DCP and HD release prints.
An image stabilizer is essential only in certain kinds of production, Mark. As is onboard stabilization, 4k drones, LED lighting, super- and hyperfast lenses and all the rest of it. 99.99% of that is marketing hype, same as it ever was.
The salient questions are these:
a) are you self-producing your own work? Or do you intend to hire out your skill sets and equipment as a service to other productions and producers?
b) what kind of programs would your eye and taste naturally fall into? More news/documentary/reality/run-and-gun/single operator types of programming? Or more scripted/planned/rehearsed/camera-crewed short films, commercials, or narrative feature films?
c) what's your budget? And is this a 100% deductible budget? i.e. out of your own pocket as a cost of a hobby? Or is there monetary return to be expected from perhaps higher end equipment as investment?
d) a question like a directional mic tells me that you're more going for run-and-gun type shoots and/or work, and have forgotten or not learned that, same as it ever was, if someone is going to speak on a movie you're making, it's always best to have someone, not necessary a skilled operator but certainly less of a headache later, to be operating the sound for you. That side of things has gotten cheaper, since a Zoom H4n costs maybe a hundred these days instead of the several thousand a Nagra used to cost. The mics, though, cables, headphones, slates and operators cost within 20% of what they have always cost, mainly because tens of thousands of film makers between the 70's and the 20's have realized that there's no way to effectively short-circuit that procedure and not come up with video-y, newsy, or reality-sounding dialog. (Always assuming that the films shot would be up for sale or rent, though. Otherwise whatever, shoot however you want.)
Sensor size - while most people will call the sensors the same, effectively, I'd say that for every one who says that MFT is the same as FF or MF or whatever has never seen their footage, nor will ever see their footage, projected on any screen larger than 20ft wide. Same as it ever was, a 16mm print screened on a commercial cinema screen looks different than a 35mm print.
At 5-6ft wide, the practical maximum for non-projected UHD material these days, the differences aren't as night-and-day as above 20ft, and thus debatable.
Also equipment sizes and weights and crew requirements mean that larger and more expensive productions will always, always stick with Panavision, Arri or maybe Red, Panasonic and Sony variants for maximum image quality and exposure latitude on their shoots. Because it's just not worth the bother, if Arris and Zeiss/Cooke/high end Fuji/Leica are available for rent, to take a chance on a lesser known brand.
Thing is, even though a used Alexa Classic will yield professional level results at a very reasonable price (under $10 as against a used Alexa Mini for $50k, body only), it's not just the price. As you know, using an NPR or an ACL or even something large like a CM3 or an Arri IIx series, is the limit of a field-operated single person kit (in video that used to be called ENG). Mostly even to operate the larger lenses even in 16mm requires the services of a focus-puller/AC1 and maybe even a clapper/loader. And they still do.
For me, I tend to stick with full frame sensors in stills simply because I don't have to look into the camera to see what a 24mm will cover as against, say a 135mm. Yes, I can (and do) do the math in my head but it's still intellectual and not instinctive. Same as your focal lengths in 16mm, I'd say.
And where would that make the difference? Well, in grab shots. Shots where you have to go from bag to shooting in less than, say 15 seconds. With an NPR or a C300, well-prepared, you could get that shot. With a Panavision or a Red, probably not, unless you had a crew that was also well-prepared.
Yes, the trend is to go smaller and lighter, because who can afford a focus-puller and AC2 these days?
Well, who can afford a dolly or a jib, or even an used O'Connor or Miller head these days (real fluid, not "fluid feel"). Or a tripod, come to that? And yes, the old el-cheapo Indian shoulder rig is just the same price as it ever was, 30 years ago, and sells about as much as more people discover it and how useful it is for a certain kind of shooting.
Do also consider your lab work.
Yes, there's still lab work. And color correction. And grading. And timing And yes, they're all similar, but not identical.
And yes, they're all digital, these days.
But still there, very much there. I can personally evidence this when people come to me and ask me "what's a deliverable?" when Youtube Red or Amazon or Apple or Netflix finally bite on one of their shows and the finally come around to realizing that yes, the picture and the soundtracks do still have to end up by being delivered to those companies in conformity to some kind of broadcast or quality standard. And yes, that standard is technical and no, they won't cut you a check until the film materials you have delivered (the deliverables) meet those standards, technical, legal, and artistic. All three.
That's when your lack of a sound guy will become obvious, etc..
So. I'd say look very carefully at Blackmagic as well as the obvious suspects. In particularly investigate the lab/post pipeline through their (free version available) DaVinci Resolve program. And the de-Bayering controls that aren't available on the various Apple and Adobe post products. And yes, that's the very same DaVinci CC setup that was available on the Hazeltines of yore at the labs. Just digital now.
Lenses are as they ever were. The real cinema lenses (used for 20ft plus projections in real cinemas) are head and shoulders better than the stills lenses pretending to be cinema lenses. But they cost more than ten times more than those other ones, because less than 1 in 1000 productions will actually to go a real commercial cinema run these days. Mostly they'll end up on 5-6ft wide or smaller, in most cases a lot smaller. In that case, you can see that even 16mm is fine. So MFT is fine.
Me? I have Blackmagic for cinema use and Nikons for stills. The current flavor of the month for both is not the Panasonic GH5, as mentioned elsewhere, but the Panasonic GH5s. Canon C series, Sony mirrorless, and all the others are all there in the pack, plus or minus. Yes, I've used pretty much all of them. No, there wasn't anything outside of Blackmagic that stood out/stands out FOR ME because of the post pipeline - the Blackmagic camera media just slides right into DaVinci Resolve without issues, conversions, etc.
For a tripod, and again depending on what you principally want to shoot, I'd want to go for something like the older Davis & Sandford V18 series - I have two of them and they both feel as smooth to me as my O'Connor 30D and 50D (real) fluid heads do. I came to the D&S because I found them for less than $100 each - and then I tried them out and liked them. Not as much control as the real fluid heads, but great for a situation where mostly people want me to handhold the camera rigs on top of the fluid heads anyway, to get that contemporary "hand-held" look, but without the jitter that comes with using lighter weight rigs.
Yes, I've shot many pro assignments on the GH4, GH5s, etc., both in stills and in video. But the video looks like video (i.e. the news, ENG look) and not like film.
Actually in the end I still have and sometimes use my Canon and Beaulieu S8mm, Aaton LTR16 and Russian 35mm movie film cameras, because, to my eye, and in the cinema, only film looks like film.
And, depending on the production or the client, some other folk agree with me enough to want to use that medium. With film discipline, of course.
So yes for Panasonic MFT as well, but really I'd say gear up as you mean to end up. If it's realty-doc style online and OTT, then sure, stay there. If commercials or more, try for at least a Blackmagic or used Varicam / Red Scarlet / Alexa Classic. I use my old Leica and Nikon primes because they still hold their own. But any of the more modern lenses will be sharp enough, zoom enough, etc., for your final image. Setup times, operating requirements, speeds between setups, all of that comes to play when you're shooting professionally, but not necessarily for your cuppa tea.
Since I have assignments pretty much all over the country these days, I've made it my hobby to look in all the local Craigslist ads, camera stores and some of the older pawn shops, thrift stores, etc., to see what I can find. Then I take the best of those, get them CLA'd, and test them against the sets that I own, and sell the inferior image quality samples off.
So when I say I still use a Nikkor 105/2.5 for my portraits or digital movie or 35mm movie shots, be assured that the actual lens I'm using is probably the 10-12th such exchange, so it's pretty darned sharp and clear still, even when compared to the current AF-S or whatever series lens works on auto cameras these days.
Do I have an 18-200mm lens for a doc-style catch-all? Sure do. It's saved my bacon plenty times in sports and other events. But would I use that for a commercial or a short drama? Nope, Nikon or Leica primes for those, with follow-focus etc., for sure.
Okay, done spouting now. Hopefully some of you can pick something useful out of it all. Apologies for not being able to write shorter!
Welcome, welcome!
As a very long time pro photographer and cinematographer (I did my first full-page ad in 1975, I believe - shot on Rollei 6x6, my very first camera), I've had the good fortune to move through the various ages of photography and cinematography. I've owned Aatons, Arris, Bolexes, Eclairs in S8 through 35mm, and most of the digital format cameras as well.
So - this is my 2/c, and just my 2/c, for what it's worth. Most people's viewpoints will differ from mine, of course. That's to be expected.
Here goes:
How much, if any, of your original film (sprockets) equipment do you have left?
While most of my gear ended up being Nikon, there was a time back in the day when I was running every brand. The top brands were always in stiff competition, then as now.
The top gear was always excellent for the end use (newspaper and magazine print work).
If you were mainly 16mm then you were, I'd say, documentary focused? Or TV commercials/music videos?
Do you know that HD (1080p and 720p), while being the main standardized broadcast medium in the US today, will be changing as more UHD (4k) pipelines come into play? And that the current international standard for digital cinema projection is around 2k flat and 3k anamorphic?
I had to change my entire lineup, as everybody else did, back in 2012 when we went from 480 to HD. And then again around 2014-5 to go to 4k. But maybe I jumped the gun, because aside from the one feature film that shot in 5k Red and actually wanted a 4k print, out of the perhaps dozen or so feature films that I've posted since that time, only 2k DCP (digital cinema packages) were actually required, ordered, and paid for. The only thing that's happened to the 4k, 5k, 6k media coming off the Reds and Arris and whatever, has been down-res'd to 2k DCP and HD release prints.
An image stabilizer is essential only in certain kinds of production, Mark. As is onboard stabilization, 4k drones, LED lighting, super- and hyperfast lenses and all the rest of it. 99.99% of that is marketing hype, same as it ever was.
The salient questions are these:
a) are you self-producing your own work? Or do you intend to hire out your skill sets and equipment as a service to other productions and producers?
b) what kind of programs would your eye and taste naturally fall into? More news/documentary/reality/run-and-gun/single operator types of programming? Or more scripted/planned/rehearsed/camera-crewed short films, commercials, or narrative feature films?
c) what's your budget? And is this a 100% deductible budget? i.e. out of your own pocket as a cost of a hobby? Or is there monetary return to be expected from perhaps higher end equipment as investment?
d) a question like a directional mic tells me that you're more going for run-and-gun type shoots and/or work, and have forgotten or not learned that, same as it ever was, if someone is going to speak on a movie you're making, it's always best to have someone, not necessary a skilled operator but certainly less of a headache later, to be operating the sound for you. That side of things has gotten cheaper, since a Zoom H4n costs maybe a hundred these days instead of the several thousand a Nagra used to cost. The mics, though, cables, headphones, slates and operators cost within 20% of what they have always cost, mainly because tens of thousands of film makers between the 70's and the 20's have realized that there's no way to effectively short-circuit that procedure and not come up with video-y, newsy, or reality-sounding dialog. (Always assuming that the films shot would be up for sale or rent, though. Otherwise whatever, shoot however you want.)
Sensor size - while most people will call the sensors the same, effectively, I'd say that for every one who says that MFT is the same as FF or MF or whatever has never seen their footage, nor will ever see their footage, projected on any screen larger than 20ft wide. Same as it ever was, a 16mm print screened on a commercial cinema screen looks different than a 35mm print.
At 5-6ft wide, the practical maximum for non-projected UHD material these days, the differences aren't as night-and-day as above 20ft, and thus debatable.
Also equipment sizes and weights and crew requirements mean that larger and more expensive productions will always, always stick with Panavision, Arri or maybe Red, Panasonic and Sony variants for maximum image quality and exposure latitude on their shoots. Because it's just not worth the bother, if Arris and Zeiss/Cooke/high end Fuji/Leica are available for rent, to take a chance on a lesser known brand.
Thing is, even though a used Alexa Classic will yield professional level results at a very reasonable price (under $10 as against a used Alexa Mini for $50k, body only), it's not just the price. As you know, using an NPR or an ACL or even something large like a CM3 or an Arri IIx series, is the limit of a field-operated single person kit (in video that used to be called ENG). Mostly even to operate the larger lenses even in 16mm requires the services of a focus-puller/AC1 and maybe even a clapper/loader. And they still do.
For me, I tend to stick with full frame sensors in stills simply because I don't have to look into the camera to see what a 24mm will cover as against, say a 135mm. Yes, I can (and do) do the math in my head but it's still intellectual and not instinctive. Same as your focal lengths in 16mm, I'd say.
And where would that make the difference? Well, in grab shots. Shots where you have to go from bag to shooting in less than, say 15 seconds. With an NPR or a C300, well-prepared, you could get that shot. With a Panavision or a Red, probably not, unless you had a crew that was also well-prepared.
Yes, the trend is to go smaller and lighter, because who can afford a focus-puller and AC2 these days?
Well, who can afford a dolly or a jib, or even an used O'Connor or Miller head these days (real fluid, not "fluid feel"). Or a tripod, come to that? And yes, the old el-cheapo Indian shoulder rig is just the same price as it ever was, 30 years ago, and sells about as much as more people discover it and how useful it is for a certain kind of shooting.
Do also consider your lab work.
Yes, there's still lab work. And color correction. And grading. And timing And yes, they're all similar, but not identical.
And yes, they're all digital, these days.
But still there, very much there. I can personally evidence this when people come to me and ask me "what's a deliverable?" when Youtube Red or Amazon or Apple or Netflix finally bite on one of their shows and the finally come around to realizing that yes, the picture and the soundtracks do still have to end up by being delivered to those companies in conformity to some kind of broadcast or quality standard. And yes, that standard is technical and no, they won't cut you a check until the film materials you have delivered (the deliverables) meet those standards, technical, legal, and artistic. All three.
That's when your lack of a sound guy will become obvious, etc..
So. I'd say look very carefully at Blackmagic as well as the obvious suspects. In particularly investigate the lab/post pipeline through their (free version available) DaVinci Resolve program. And the de-Bayering controls that aren't available on the various Apple and Adobe post products. And yes, that's the very same DaVinci CC setup that was available on the Hazeltines of yore at the labs. Just digital now.
Lenses are as they ever were. The real cinema lenses (used for 20ft plus projections in real cinemas) are head and shoulders better than the stills lenses pretending to be cinema lenses. But they cost more than ten times more than those other ones, because less than 1 in 1000 productions will actually to go a real commercial cinema run these days. Mostly they'll end up on 5-6ft wide or smaller, in most cases a lot smaller. In that case, you can see that even 16mm is fine. So MFT is fine.
Me? I have Blackmagic for cinema use and Nikons for stills. The current flavor of the month for both is not the Panasonic GH5, as mentioned elsewhere, but the Panasonic GH5s. Canon C series, Sony mirrorless, and all the others are all there in the pack, plus or minus. Yes, I've used pretty much all of them. No, there wasn't anything outside of Blackmagic that stood out/stands out FOR ME because of the post pipeline - the Blackmagic camera media just slides right into DaVinci Resolve without issues, conversions, etc.
For a tripod, and again depending on what you principally want to shoot, I'd want to go for something like the older Davis & Sandford V18 series - I have two of them and they both feel as smooth to me as my O'Connor 30D and 50D (real) fluid heads do. I came to the D&S because I found them for less than $100 each - and then I tried them out and liked them. Not as much control as the real fluid heads, but great for a situation where mostly people want me to handhold the camera rigs on top of the fluid heads anyway, to get that contemporary "hand-held" look, but without the jitter that comes with using lighter weight rigs.
Yes, I've shot many pro assignments on the GH4, GH5s, etc., both in stills and in video. But the video looks like video (i.e. the news, ENG look) and not like film.
Actually in the end I still have and sometimes use my Canon and Beaulieu S8mm, Aaton LTR16 and Russian 35mm movie film cameras, because, to my eye, and in the cinema, only film looks like film.
And, depending on the production or the client, some other folk agree with me enough to want to use that medium. With film discipline, of course.
So yes for Panasonic MFT as well, but really I'd say gear up as you mean to end up. If it's realty-doc style online and OTT, then sure, stay there. If commercials or more, try for at least a Blackmagic or used Varicam / Red Scarlet / Alexa Classic. I use my old Leica and Nikon primes because they still hold their own. But any of the more modern lenses will be sharp enough, zoom enough, etc., for your final image. Setup times, operating requirements, speeds between setups, all of that comes to play when you're shooting professionally, but not necessarily for your cuppa tea.
Since I have assignments pretty much all over the country these days, I've made it my hobby to look in all the local Craigslist ads, camera stores and some of the older pawn shops, thrift stores, etc., to see what I can find. Then I take the best of those, get them CLA'd, and test them against the sets that I own, and sell the inferior image quality samples off.
So when I say I still use a Nikkor 105/2.5 for my portraits or digital movie or 35mm movie shots, be assured that the actual lens I'm using is probably the 10-12th such exchange, so it's pretty darned sharp and clear still, even when compared to the current AF-S or whatever series lens works on auto cameras these days.
Do I have an 18-200mm lens for a doc-style catch-all? Sure do. It's saved my bacon plenty times in sports and other events. But would I use that for a commercial or a short drama? Nope, Nikon or Leica primes for those, with follow-focus etc., for sure.
Okay, done spouting now. Hopefully some of you can pick something useful out of it all. Apologies for not being able to write shorter!
May 13, 2019 14:37:18 #
gessman wrote:
That's a mighty fine post for your 13,000th, a num... (show quote)
The GH4 even exposes the sensor. There’s no shutter over it! Somehow, though, I’ve never had to use more than a Giotto Rocket Blower (rubber squeeze bulb) to knock off dust.
Living in a humid climate helps. Using two zooms and a macro helps, as does holding the body lens mount down when changing lenses.
I keep caps on my lenses when they are off the camera. I clean my kit after each use, and charge batteries before each use. I leave the automatic sensor cleaner on. Where possible, I change lenses in still air. I plan my scenes and show up with the lens that I probably need already on the camera.
Another secret: I never use small apertures! Diffraction starts at f6.3 on my sensor, but I’ll work down to f/8. I carry neutral density filters to handle bright sun at 1/50 at f/4.
With a 2x crop factor, depth of field is deepened by about two stops, compared with full frame, when using the shorter lenses with the same field of view.
Wide apertures minimize the appearance of sensor dust, as well.
I had many dust issues with dSLRs. It’s counterintuitive, but I’ve had fewer dust issues with m4/3.
Check out Digital Artistry section of our forum.
May 13, 2019 14:44:27 #
As another poster here said, what kind of video and stills do you want to shoot. Your question is akin to asking what's the best tool? Or what's the best guitar? Or what's the best car? Without knowing what kind of stills and video you plan to take, people can only tell you what choices they have made. Cameras and lenses are tools. You want the best tools for the job. No one tool can be best at everything. First task is deciding what the job or jobs will be.
bowmark1 wrote:
Hello all - I am a photographer from the 35mm and ... (show quote)
May 13, 2019 14:46:09 #
May 13, 2019 15:20:47 #
burkphoto wrote:
The GH4 even exposes the sensor. There’s no shutte... (show quote)
Thanks! I don't seem to be having the same experience with my Sony cameras and dust as I did with the Canon 5d2 which gets very little use after that video experience I told about above - stills only anymore. I haven't seen or heard of anyone having the kind of nightmare experience i had so maybe it's just me or perhaps more to do with the atmosphere here in Colorado than many other places.
May 13, 2019 16:05:03 #
I got another GH4 (used, from KEH) last week, so my son and I can use two in June when we do the 48 Hour Film Project again. We’ll put a 12-35mm f/2.8 on one, and a 35-100mm f/2.8 on the other. We’ll color match them ahead of time... and use Manual White Balance.
May 13, 2019 16:30:50 #
I bought a second 4K bridge camera for pretty much the same reason. I set one for mid angle shots and one for closeups. I will mount both on a single tripod with a bar and two multi angle heads.
burkphoto wrote:
I got another GH4 (used, from KEH) last week, so my son and I can use two in June when we do the 48 Hour Film Project again. We’ll put a 12-35mm f/2.8 on one, and a 35-100mm f/2.8 on the other. We’ll color match them ahead of time... and use Manual White Balance.
May 13, 2019 17:27:07 #
Thank you all! I am utterly overwhelmed by the volume of experience and expertise evident in these thoughtful and comprehensive replies to my query. It will take me some time to process and research the information you have generously shared. What a different world the digital age has wrought!
May 13, 2019 20:33:14 #
bowmark1 wrote:
Hello all - I am a photographer from the 35mm and ... (show quote)
The first question you'll need to answer is what are you planning to spend. You can get a cinema zoom lens like the Angenieux 24 - 290mm Optimo Ultra 12x zoom, for $112,000, or the
Zeiss Supreme Prime - 9 Lens bundle for $175,000 then pick a camera that makes this glass look good - It's not hard to spend $400,000 by the time you're done. Oh, and you will most definitely need a fluid head, and external stabilization, external Rode (or equal) mic, Nagra recorder, follow focus setup (autofocus is too noisy), etc etc etc. A Nikon D850 would be quite a nice DSLR for video and stills, btw.
https://photographylife.com/how-to-use-a-dslr-to-shoot-videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Qe2tzVf85k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG35xD0tDCo
Or did you have something else less costly in mind?
May 13, 2019 23:34:23 #
Before buying try a rental. The Fuji X system might be a fit. The film simulations may remind you of your "film" shooting days.
Sentinel4
Sentinel4
Check out AI Artistry and Creation section of our forum.
May 14, 2019 09:18:04 #
Sentinel4 wrote:
Before buying try a rental. The Fuji X system might be a fit. The film simulations may remind you of your "film" shooting days.
Sentinel4
Sentinel4
As long as the rental is not going to cut in to the money you have to make your purchase, rental is fine. But if that is the case, then money is no object, so just buy one of each.
May 14, 2019 11:31:08 #
bowmark1 wrote:
Hello all - I am a photographer from the 35mm and ... (show quote)
Mark, one more thing... For information on audio recording for film/video production, watch Curtis Judd's YouTube channel. He reviews audio gear, and he has a variety of training courses. As a working pro, he really knows the gamut of gear from low end to high end, AND how to use it.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Printers and Color Printing Forum section of our forum.