|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 21, 2021 9:07:05 GMT -6
My studio partner and I started shooting live performances, in studio and at small gigs. He's pretty handy with a camera and knows final cut pretty well, but he isn't too techy...while I'm a total nerd so I started doing some research. I know some of you are pretty knowledgeable when it comes to cameras, video, photography etc.
So let me ask, we need a better camera, what should I be looking at? Current camera is a Canon Ti7. Budget is $2000-$2500. Most likely buying used. We want a camera that will accept Canon lenses.
Should I concentrate on DSLR's? Cinema Cameras? Full Frame?
Currently the Canon C100 and Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera seem pretty interesting to me.
What specs are the most important, especially for low light situations?
I've been doing lots of reading but the world of cameras is new to me so I'm not sure what specs I really need to be worried about? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Dec 21, 2021 11:08:58 GMT -6
If you're filming in low light a lot, I'd look at the Sony A7sIII. It is a very nice DSLR filming camera. Small and light, you'll need an adapter for Canon glass though which might not allow you to use the very nice built in auto focus. So might not be worth it.
I'd watch a lot of footage that is made with the cameras. Noise is going to be the biggest thing if you don't plan on having a professionally lit scene. Which honestly could be argued is far more important than the camera you choose.
Native ISO will be important.
But there isn't like a "spec" for how a camera will perform in low light situations. So you'll want to read reviews and analyze footage.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 21, 2021 12:31:02 GMT -6
Panasonic Lumix GH series, hands down. the GH5S is specifically for lower light situations. You can adapt any lens to the M4/3 cameras using an adaptor. I use PL, canon and nikon primes on my GH5 when I'm not using Lumix lenses.
Low light situations typically need larger pixel sizes, which means lower pixel counts for a given sensor size.
Also, lenses matter greatly to low light. You need to get the lowest value F or T stop lenses you can afford. I prefer modern coated lenses for shows because the glare and refraction is greatly reduced from stage lights.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 21, 2021 12:48:10 GMT -6
If you're filming in low light a lot, I'd look at the Sony A7sIII. It is a very nice DSLR filming camera. Small and light, you'll need an adapter for Canon glass though which might not allow you to use the very nice built in auto focus. So might not be worth it. I'd watch a lot of footage that is made with the cameras. Noise is going to be the biggest thing if you don't plan on having a professionally lit scene. Which honestly could be argued is far more important than the camera you choose. Native ISO will be important. But there isn't like a "spec" for how a camera will perform in low light situations. So you'll want to read reviews and analyze footage. Thanks Blackdawg. We're somewhat covered when it comes to lighting, at least in the studio setting. We've been rapidly upgrading our lighting rig and its made a world of difference. That being said, we're still looking for a great low light option. I've been learning a little about native ISO. I look into that more, thanks for the suggestion. |
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 21, 2021 13:15:38 GMT -6
Panasonic Lumix GH series, hands down. the GH5S is specifically for lower light situations. You can adapt any lens to the M4/3 cameras using an adaptor. I use PL, canon and nikon primes on my GH5 when I'm not using Lumix lenses. Low light situations typically need larger pixel sizes, which means lower pixel counts for a given sensor size. Also, lenses matter greatly to low light. You need to get the lowest value F or T stop lenses you can afford. I prefer modern coated lenses for shows because the glare and refraction is greatly reduced from stage lights. Thanks, panasonic wasnt on my radar, I'll check out that camera. I was originally thinking it would be great to have a camera that also uses Canon lenses so that we can interchange lenses between the two cameras...I'm now thinking we have to be open to getting a different camera system all together to take advantage of some of the features these cameras have. |
|
|
|
Post by enlav on Dec 21, 2021 13:19:30 GMT -6
No need for me to echo Blackdawg and Svart's words. The Sony and Panasonic mirrorless options are both great. When I was more active in video production, Canon's consumer/prosumer options were always a few steps behind in features and function. That's hopefully changed since then, because the Canon look is something that some people love. Rather, I was going to ask - are you already shooting with multiple cameras? Our clients were always happier with a diverse angle/shot selection, and it certainly gives you options when a given operator is off frame or panning a bit roughly. Even on a low budget, having a wide shot, and an operator next to the stage can give you way more creative choices in post. Absolutely not talking down the Sony A7_ models and Panasonic GH5, they are both great; but I would probably bite the bullet on image quality for Sony A6500's (or whatever is current) or Panasonic G85's if it meant having multiple cameras. Of course, it depends on what is acceptable to your eyes. (I've seen so many cell phone and handy cam recordings now that my bar is pretty low!) I don't know if it's much of a concern nowadays though, but I'd also make sure whatever models you may like, you won't have to deal with overheating or recording limitations. This might be an old problem that doesn't exist anymore though.
(For instance, I don't know if the current BMPCC would have issues shooting full sets, I know predecessors would potentially.)
Edit: It wouldn't be an issue for Panasonic, just to be clear; for my personal rig, I ended up getting few Panasonic Lumix mirrorless because I knew they did fine for long shoots; just noting this concern since at the time, a lot of DSLRs, and some DSLM's would have issues with max record times or overheating issues.
Edit 2: I was in the midst of my post when you made your last one, Tbone -- about using different cameras on one shoot - I would only note that with different sensors, lenses, manufacturers, etc., you'll want to make sure you do some white/color balancing before the show; I know I just preached about image quality not being the biggest deal, but inconsistencies in image sharpness and color grading stick out to me severely. As much as poorly mixed off-camera recorded-in-post dialogue. It's not always an issue, but between some cameras (in this case, it was a lower budget project, Sony AX53's and Panasonic G...GX85's, I believe?), it felt like nothing I did in post could fix it. Short of sending it to a professional colorist buddy, I took the creative liberty of making the whole set gray scale...
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 21, 2021 13:32:14 GMT -6
No need for me to echo Blackdawg and Svart's words. The Sony and Panasonic mirrorless options are both great. When I was more active in video production, Canon's consumer/prosumer options were always a few steps behind in features and function. That's hopefully changed since then, because the Canon look is something that some people love. Rather, I was going to ask - are you already shooting with multiple cameras? Our clients were always happier with a diverse angle/shot selection, and it certainly gives you options when a given operator is off frame or panning a bit roughly. Even on a low budget, having a wide shot, and an operator next to the stage can give you way more creative choices in post. Absolutely not talking down the Sony A7_ models and Panasonic GH5, they are both great; but I would probably bite the bullet on image quality for Sony A6500's (or whatever is current) or Panasonic G85's if it meant having multiple cameras. Of course, it depends on what is acceptable to your eyes. (I've seen so many cell phone and handy cam recordings now that my bar is pretty low!) I don't know if it's much of a concern nowadays though, but I'd also make sure whatever models you may like, you won't have to deal with overheating or recording limitations. This might be an old problem that doesn't exist anymore though.
(For instance, I don't know if the current BMPCC would have issues shooting full sets, I know predecessors would potentially.)
Edit: It wouldn't be an issue for Panasonic, just to be clear; for my personal rig, I ended up getting few Panasonic Lumix mirrorless because I knew they did fine for long shoots; just noting this concern since at the time, a lot of DSLRs, and some DSLM's would have issues with max record times or overheating issues.
Thanks for the insight. We're currently shooting with just one camera, the Canon T7i. The plan would be to get a better camera and use the T7i as our second camera so we could both shoot at the same time, or stage one as a wide shot on a tripod with the other being handheld (or on a gimbal etc). Just looking at all the comparisons on youtube both the Sony A7 iii and GH5s look great. I'm wondering what the next step up from both those cameras are? |
|
|
|
Post by enlav on Dec 21, 2021 13:52:01 GMT -6
Thanks for the insight. We're currently shooting with just one camera, the Canon T7i. The plan would be to get a better camera and use the T7i as our second camera so we could both shoot at the same time, or stage one as a wide shot on a tripod with the other being handheld (or on a gimbal etc). Just looking at all the comparisons on youtube both the Sony A7 iii and GH5s look great. I'm wondering what the next step up from both those cameras are? Step ups from there... you might have newer or more expensive versions in that format, it looks like the Alpha 9 series is the latest from Sony from just a quick glance (I could be wrong, I try not to keep up to date with these things now); but I'd argue that going any higher from these models, the upgrade might be outside of the still image format and more into the professional video camera spectrum. It's not necessarily as neat as that though, as various models are designed far more for ENG/broadcast purposes, and don't necessarily work as well in creative endeavors. Excited for you though -- recording concerts and in-studio performances is really rewarding and enjoyable, and became more so as we started expanding options in post.
EDIT: Just to correct myself, the Alpha 9 looks to have worse video performance than the Alpha 7S III. I don't know how the layperson keeps up with these names... maybe they don't. the Panasonic G85 was only $499, around 7 years ago.. and now they're $699? The same model? I don't get it... ha.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 21, 2021 13:59:45 GMT -6
No need for me to echo Blackdawg and Svart's words. The Sony and Panasonic mirrorless options are both great. When I was more active in video production, Canon's consumer/prosumer options were always a few steps behind in features and function. That's hopefully changed since then, because the Canon look is something that some people love. Rather, I was going to ask - are you already shooting with multiple cameras? Our clients were always happier with a diverse angle/shot selection, and it certainly gives you options when a given operator is off frame or panning a bit roughly. Even on a low budget, having a wide shot, and an operator next to the stage can give you way more creative choices in post. Absolutely not talking down the Sony A7_ models and Panasonic GH5, they are both great; but I would probably bite the bullet on image quality for Sony A6500's (or whatever is current) or Panasonic G85's if it meant having multiple cameras. Of course, it depends on what is acceptable to your eyes. (I've seen so many cell phone and handy cam recordings now that my bar is pretty low!) I don't know if it's much of a concern nowadays though, but I'd also make sure whatever models you may like, you won't have to deal with overheating or recording limitations. This might be an old problem that doesn't exist anymore though.
(For instance, I don't know if the current BMPCC would have issues shooting full sets, I know predecessors would potentially.)
Edit: It wouldn't be an issue for Panasonic, just to be clear; for my personal rig, I ended up getting few Panasonic Lumix mirrorless because I knew they did fine for long shoots; just noting this concern since at the time, a lot of DSLRs, and some DSLM's would have issues with max record times or overheating issues.
Thanks for the insight. We're currently shooting with just one camera, the Canon T7i. The plan would be to get a better camera and use the T7i as our second camera so we could both shoot at the same time, or stage one as a wide shot on a tripod with the other being handheld (or on a gimbal etc). Just looking at all the comparisons on youtube both the Sony A7 iii and GH5s look great. I'm wondering what the next step up from both those cameras are? Honestly the next step up from the panasonic GH5 lineup is the S1H or going wholesale into RED territory. Semi-pro cameras like this are just like audio gear where once you get into this kind of quality, it's about quality-of-life features rather than quality of picture. RED and some of the others start to become very modular but in that modularity comes higher costs. The base cameras might start at 5K but they don't come with monitors, storage, batteries, mounts, cages, grips, cables and lenses or any of the other stuff that's essentially part of the semi-pro stuff like the lumix or canikon stuff. With the budget you've mentioned, you're not getting into the "next level" of cameras IMHO. There's a big jump from the 2K$ tier to the 8K-10K entry prices for the next tier. I know a few freelance DP's around town and they have their own camera rigs and these run around the 25-30K$ mark to be essentially competitive. Both run RED cameras. |
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 21, 2021 14:13:15 GMT -6
Thanks everyone...so for filming in low light settings, are there any advantages/disadvantages when it comes to lenses for the Sony A7 III vs Panasonic GH5s? Lets assume we're ditching the canon lenses. thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by enlav on Dec 21, 2021 14:14:37 GMT -6
Honestly the next step up from the panasonic GH5 lineup is the S1H or going wholesale into RED territory. Semi-pro cameras like this are just like audio gear where once you get into this kind of quality, it's about quality-of-life features rather than quality of picture. RED and some of the others start to become very modular but in that modularity comes higher costs. The base cameras might start at 5K but they don't come with monitors, storage, batteries, mounts, cages, grips, cables and lenses or any of the other stuff that's essentially part of the semi-pro stuff like the lumix or canikon stuff. Very true.
There's also an argument to be made that it becomes more difficult to assemble and operate pro-level video equipment. Heavier, longer setup, etc... What partly made the DSLR movement so successful is that the gear itself is affordable and easier to operate.
Sure, we have extremely expensive steadicams/gimbals nowadays that make the process more difficult (with some random "vlogging" camera attached to), but when this was cutting-edge, people were shocked at how great a product you could get from basic image stabilization and a "still-image" camera.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 21, 2021 14:15:19 GMT -6
Edit 2: I was in the midst of my post when you made your last one, Tbone -- about using different cameras on one shoot - I would only note that with different sensors, lenses, manufacturers, etc., you'll want to make sure you do some white/color balancing before the show; I know I just preached about image quality not being the biggest deal, but inconsistencies in image sharpness and color grading stick out to me severely. As much as poorly mixed off-camera recorded-in-post dialogue. It's not always an issue, but between some cameras (in this case, it was a lower budget project, Sony AX53's and Panasonic G...GX85's, I believe?), it felt like nothing I did in post could fix it. Short of sending it to a professional colorist buddy, I took the creative liberty of making the whole set gray scale...
That's great point and something I'd never have considered. The plot thickens.... |
|
|
|
Post by enlav on Dec 21, 2021 14:43:56 GMT -6
Thanks everyone...so for filming in low light settings, are there any advantages/disadvantages when it comes to lenses for the Sony A7 III vs Panasonic GH5s? Lets assume we're ditching the canon lenses. thanks This is one of those times where I would note there are generally going to be a handful of videos that people will post showing direct comparisons in various situations. They can be informative, but I definitely wouldn't base my entire decision around them. I always assume there is a large potential for user error, and typically these cameras have a lot of settings that are not on by default that can improve your recordings. Should those get left unmarked or unchanged, the potential of a camera could go unseen in some video demos/shootouts.
That noted, here's one I found. Haven't listened to the specifics or details of the shootout, but the low light performance between the two was so drastic it made me think it was rigged (unintentionally or otherwise). Haha.
Without scrubbing back and checking, I'm guessing this might be kit lenses on both, which might even be better for your purchasing situation.
Edit: Last thought before I'm mentally tapped out on the topic - The A7S III is also twice the price and given another thing the reviewer said, may have worse battery life? There's certainly a lot outside of low light performance that one would need to worry about; but if people can get good results from older, more affordable, cameras, I have no doubt either would give you something usable.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 21, 2021 15:28:57 GMT -6
Thanks everyone...so for filming in low light settings, are there any advantages/disadvantages when it comes to lenses for the Sony A7 III vs Panasonic GH5s? Lets assume we're ditching the canon lenses. thanks I think it depends. Lumix high end lenses have a best case F stop of around F2.8 for the zoom lenses. I have both the 12-35mm F2.8 and the 35-100mm F2.8 and I paid 700$+ for each because of it. These have powered image stabilization built in that works in conjunction with the sensor stabilization and can produce extremely stable looking pictures from quite ham-fisted movement. Keep in mind though that the wider the lens, the less shake you can see. I have a 7mm prime non-fisheye lens that I love but it doesn't have any stabilization but I can't tell at all. I have a 135mm prime that I like but I literally can't press the shutter button manually without getting a fuzzy picture and I have to use the remote to trigger it! I don't about sony lenses. I assume they all compete and have similar setups. Anyway, even with manual primes like my Nikons, the sensor stabilization is quite good but I wouldn't do hand-held without a rig of some sort. The weight of the rigs can help soften movements naturally. Manual primes can come with very low F stop numbers. I have a 50mm F1.2 that's amazing for low light, but the DOF (depth of field) shooting wide open with 70's-80's era glass can be a bit too much to use handheld and still get focus. They are also either uncoated or have early attempts at glass coatings to reduce flares and refractions, but they don't hold a candle to modern glass, but modern glass in F1.2 would be $$$$$.. As with audio gear, you can pay literally as much as you want to pay and still find reasons to feel inferior! |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 21, 2021 15:43:37 GMT -6
Thanks everyone...so for filming in low light settings, are there any advantages/disadvantages when it comes to lenses for the Sony A7 III vs Panasonic GH5s? Lets assume we're ditching the canon lenses. thanks This is one of those times where I would note there are generally going to be a handful of videos that people will post showing direct comparisons in various situations. They can be informative, but I definitely wouldn't base my entire decision around them. I always assume there is a large potential for user error, and typically these cameras have a lot of settings that are not on by default that can improve your recordings. Should those get left unmarked or unchanged, the potential of a camera could go unseen in some video demos/shootouts.
That noted, here's one I found. Haven't listened to the specifics or details of the shootout, but the low light performance between the two was so drastic it made me think it was rigged (unintentionally or otherwise). Haha.
Without scrubbing back and checking, I'm guessing this might be kit lenses on both, which might even be better for your purchasing situation.
Edit: Last thought before I'm mentally tapped out on the topic - The A7S III is also twice the price and given another thing the reviewer said, may have worse battery life? There's certainly a lot outside of low light performance that one would need to worry about; but if people can get good results from older, more affordable, cameras, I have no doubt either would give you something usable.
That guy states that the GH5s tops out and the sony goes to "64,000..", etc.. Which means that he isn't using the GH5s ISO above 51,000, which is the stock limit. For the GH5S, you have to manually turn on the "extended ISO" to enable up to 204,800. Clearly he didn't do that. I HATE when reviewers are so unknowledgeable about what they're doing and can't be bothered to read the manuals and end up giving false impressions by bumbling through things. |
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Dec 21, 2021 15:55:03 GMT -6
Yeah hate bad reviewers. i like this guy, he is very throuogh and diligent. Here is an A7sIII review: and A7IV And GH5 and A7III test from him: To get above these cameras you're looking a 2-8x the budget all around. So I'm guessing you'll want to stay in the area for now. The GH5 and Sony are really good. The new Canon R5/R6 is also nice but expensive as well. Plus uses different Canon glass then what you use. The Sony glass is great. Nothing wrong with it at all. I think Canon L glass is better than the normal Sony glass. Zeiss glass is really nice though but cost more than L glass. Even the EOS Canon 50mm F1.8 is great really, but 50 can be too tight for some things too depending on how much room you have to work with. The 40mm canon is nice too for the price. For me with video work it goes: 1. Lighting 2. Lens 3. Operator/framing/use 4. Camera Either way, both the GH5 or Sony stuff is a great way to go. The a6500 would also be good IMO or 6300 even and you could get multiple additional ones too. Edit: Also for low light, this film was shot entirely on an A7sII, so its older body. And NO lighting other than what you see. So flash light and whatever was on in the scene. (Also i mixed the music  ) |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,083 
|
Post by ericn on Dec 21, 2021 19:59:07 GMT -6
I would probably just grab a Blackmagic Mini Cine camera and a nice lens or a Cannon DSLR. Sony and Panasonic are nice, but in both cases they have habits of trashing the entire line and starting over simply because they don’t get the sales volume they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Dec 21, 2021 22:58:27 GMT -6
I would probably just grab a Blackmagic Mini Cine camera and a nice lens or a Cannon DSLR. Sony and Panasonic are nice, but in both cases they have habits of trashing the entire line and starting over simply because they don’t get the sales volume they want. I know for the sony that is not a problem now. They have ruled the DSLR video world IMO for a while now. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 22, 2021 7:16:06 GMT -6
I would probably just grab a Blackmagic Mini Cine camera and a nice lens or a Cannon DSLR. Sony and Panasonic are nice, but in both cases they have habits of trashing the entire line and starting over simply because they don’t get the sales volume they want. I know for the sony that is not a problem now. They have ruled the DSLR video world IMO for a while now. Panasonic > sony |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 22, 2021 7:19:06 GMT -6
I would probably just grab a Blackmagic Mini Cine camera and a nice lens or a Cannon DSLR. Sony and Panasonic are nice, but in both cases they have habits of trashing the entire line and starting over simply because they don’t get the sales volume they want. Simply untrue. I've had the panasonic GH1, Gh2, G6 and GH5 cameras over the last 12 years or so. They release a new camera in each of their price/performance brackets every year or so just like everyone else and the lineage is unbroken. |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Dec 22, 2021 12:53:09 GMT -6
Tbone81 , my wife and I are both Canon shooters professionally, and I highly recommend their mirrorless line. Having said that, there's absolutely nothing wrong with any of the options mentioned above: both Sony and Panasonic make really compelling cameras. If you're going to have a multicam setup, though, I would recommend keeping them the same brand for color consistency. Can you match color between brands? Of course you can, but I've found it much faster when the cameras use the same color science. I regularly shoot with a Canon EOS-R and an EOS-RP, while my wife shoots with an R5 - all on one shoot. Each camera renders color a little differently, but they're in the same family, if that makes sense. Whenever I have to incorporate footage from another camera brand (usually Sony or Panasonic, actually), it's a bit of a headache. I'm sure if I primarily shot with one of those, it would be the Canon footage causing me problems. I do personally prefer Canon colors above all others, but if I weren't shooting Canon, Sony would absolutely be my next choice. The autofocus capabilities on Canon and Sony are currently unmatched, IMO, and for someone just starting out, having the camera do the focusing part (even in low light) is a godsend. Blackmagic cameras are very compelling for very particular reasons, but no autofocus. Panasonic probably stuffs the most features into their cameras for the money, including some helpful metering that Canon and Sony don't give you until you upgrade to their prospective cinema camera lines. (Which I'm doing over the next two weeks.) In summary, any modern camera is capable of giving you fantastic results. It's about finding the system that works best for you and helps you get great results quickly. I cannot emphasize the word "quickly" enough. Video provides one with many, many opportunities to get bogged down and not finish a project. Anything that helps you get good results quickly is worth its weight in gold.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Dec 22, 2021 15:46:27 GMT -6
Tbone81 , my wife and I are both Canon shooters professionally, and I highly recommend their mirrorless line. Having said that, there's absolutely nothing wrong with any of the options mentioned above: both Sony and Panasonic make really compelling cameras. If you're going to have a multicam setup, though, I would recommend keeping them the same brand for color consistency. Can you match color between brands? Of course you can, but I've found it much faster when the cameras use the same color science. I regularly shoot with a Canon EOS-R and an EOS-RP, while my wife shoots with an R5 - all on one shoot. Each camera renders color a little differently, but they're in the same family, if that makes sense. Whenever I have to incorporate footage from another camera brand (usually Sony or Panasonic, actually), it's a bit of a headache. I'm sure if I primarily shot with one of those, it would be the Canon footage causing me problems. I do personally prefer Canon colors above all others, but if I weren't shooting Canon, Sony would absolutely be my next choice. The autofocus capabilities on Canon and Sony are currently unmatched, IMO, and for someone just starting out, having the camera do the focusing part (even in low light) is a godsend. Blackmagic cameras are very compelling for very particular reasons, but no autofocus. Panasonic probably stuffs the most features into their cameras for the money, including some helpful metering that Canon and Sony don't give you until you upgrade to their prospective cinema camera lines. (Which I'm doing over the next two weeks.) In summary, any modern camera is capable of giving you fantastic results. It's about finding the system that works best for you and helps you get great results quickly. I cannot emphasize the word "quickly" enough. Video provides one with many, many opportunities to get bogged down and not finish a project. Anything that helps you get good results quickly is worth its weight in gold. Man you’re speaking my language, thanks, that’s incredibly helpful. Speed is definitely important, I want the editing process to be as streamlined as possible. If having two of the same manufacturers camera saves a step during post that’s pretty important. I might ask my studio partner if he wants to sell his canon t7i so we can buy two sonys. |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Dec 22, 2021 17:08:45 GMT -6
Man you’re speaking my language, thanks, that’s incredibly helpful. Speed is definitely important, I want the editing process to be as streamlined as possible. If having two of the same manufacturers camera saves a step during post that’s pretty important. I might ask my studio partner if he wants to sell his canon t7i so we can buy two sonys. More than happy to help!
If you do the Sony thing, you can absolutely shoot with at least one of them being an APS-C crop sensor (a used a6500, for instance) to save money where you can. That T7i has an APS-C crop sensor. The Panasonic's sensor is even smaller than that, and it definitely can get Pro results, too.
As svart mentioned, a lot of thought/money needs to go into your lens selection. You've got to think about focal length (35mm? 50mm? 24-70mm?) and aperture, mostly. The wider your aperture (wider apertures correspond to smaller f-numbers), the more light is being let in to hit your camera's sensor. I like to shoot with wide apertures whenever I can (which is the vast majority of the time for my work), because I often like a shallow depth of field, and I often have to shoot in darker-than-ideal lighting conditions. But a f/1.4 lens does you little good in a multicam shoot if the other camera has a lens that can only manage f/5.6 or something, because you'd have to light the scene for the camera with the most-limited aperture range. (Or crank the ISO on the f/5.6 lens camera, which might legitimately work if the noise isn't too bad.)
There's a lot to think about, but you can absolutely do this, man! And don't hesitate to reach out with specific questions. Everybody here is happy to help.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Dec 22, 2021 18:34:51 GMT -6
Panasonic look is the most film like of all of them. The least moire and aliasing too.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Dec 25, 2021 14:17:58 GMT -6
I'm using Sony. Amateur here, but here are a couple shoots from my studio using an a6100 and a6000. In the Psycho Killer vid, you can see one scene where the lighting was just shit and it shows. Under a deadline, blew the shot, it is what it is, but anyway, should give you the idea.
|
|
)
