Page 27 of 34 FirstFirst ... 17232425262728293031 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 332
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,196
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Airwolf View Post
    Definitely a perplexing situation for documentary, commercial, corporate, and event filming. For narrative the consensus seems to be you have to have an Arri, Red, or Venice. Almost all of which are way out of the price range of this discussion, buying new. I don't see myself making any money in the narrative market in the foreseeable future frankly anyway. The large payouts for me come from documentary, event, and corporate work. I was set on getting the C500 II as i'm ready to move into that price point, but now I'm rethinking the whole endeavor.

    I believe the cameras that are competitive in this particular segment are as follows:

    Sony FX9, Canon C500 II, Red Dragon X, URSA Mini Pro G2

    The Red Dragon X I think is a stretch due to the price and lack of internal audio, so it's not really a solo camera unless you strap on some odd accessories. I also didn't include z-cam as they are still in their infancy and I don't trust them right now.
    I didn't put the Amira on here because it's over $30k for a new one. I can't justify $15K for a used camera, and it doesn't shoot 4K which I also can't justify going backwards in resolution for.

    A complete built out camera ready to shoot, matched with the needed accessories are as follows:

    Sony FX9: $12,500
    Canon C500 II: $19,000
    Red Dragon X: $23,000
    URSA G2: $10,000

    That includes power, 1TB of media, and basic things like a handle, monitor, evf to match them with each other.
    The only one that is at a disadvantage usage wise here is the Red Dragon, which does not have internal ND, and does not have internal audio.

    I think the URSA G2 & FX9 are the best bang for the buck. The URSA specifically shoots above 4K and produces a great image.
    I'm a Sony FS5 user currently, and I've hated almost everything about it since I got it. The color, the menus, the ergonomics, it's not fun to use. It gets the job done and that's it.
    I used to have a C100 and loved everything about it, so that's why i'm excited about the C500 II. I'm also excited about having usable auto-focus.

    The Red Dragon looks interesting, and isn't much more than the C500 II, but in order to put it into the same segment, i'd have to rig it up with all kinds of weird addons to get basic audio inputs and ND. I don't want to use a matte box, I don't want to run external audio, I just want the camera to work.

    For low light, it would have to be the C500, the others don't come close.
    For high frame rate, the Red and the URSA G2 win.
    For color, motion, and cinematic look, the Red wins, with I believe the Canon coming in second.

    Not sure what the answer really is at this point.

    Attachment 137575
    For me, the REDs of any kind are out, they function much better as a crew served camera on narrative production, commercials and music videos. Love the images, hate the ergos, their stupid skulls, etc. marketing image and in my mind, reliability is questionable.
    Last time I shot with an Epic Dragon last year, it quit working as we were prepping to shoot. Luckily RED drove us over a replacement but if I hadn't been 40 minutes from their HQ in Hollywood, it would have been a disaster.

    If I was doing more corporate/broadcast/event stuff, I would get the Sony, simply because of marketing. It's the FS7 successor and a lot of people have made a lot of money just by owning an FS7 over the past 2-3 years, if you have those kinds of clients.
    S-Cinetone is a great improvement and SOOC footage seems to look actually usable.

    I just spent a month shooting with the BMD UMP G2. It's a very nice camera. Great slow motion capability, best menus in the business, images are very nice. But the lack of waveform and weird XLR location as well as trying to sell OUR clients on shooting BMD,
    which is a name they don't know, would be a tough battle. For my own shoots, I like it. For clients, I think it would be challenging from a business proposition.

    That leaves me with the C500 MKII. I think it will be quite a winner for Canon, I wish it was a few thousand cheaper but it is what it is. IMHO and probably Chris', CRL on the C200 is so good, really gets at least in the neighborhood of the Arri look with good lighting and post.
    Thw C500 MKII is obviously a much better, more fully featured and versatile camera but as I have lamented, few of our clients would pay any more day rate for it that they will pay for our paid off C200. Which makes it a no go, for me, at least this year. If I need the write off
    next year, possibly but would it make me more money? No. So probably not, for me, with where I am, at this time. For you, I think the delineation is, how does S-Cinetone looks to you? Are you willing to keep living with Sony's notoriously bad menu navigation. Does RAW matter
    to you at all? Your clients? What lenses are you deep in, if any? For the AF to work optimally on the FX-9, from what I have been hearing, essentially you are stuck with Sony's lenses, which for me, are ho hum, not cheap. I have all Canon glass so the C500 MKII would be better
    for my for that reason but for you? I don't know.

    Really, all four cameras, in my mind, appeal to pretty radically different users, shooting different things with different client bases.

    Tough choice. Assuming you are a pro and this is your living, choose wisely. If you are a wealthy hobbyist, buy whatever you want.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,241
    Default
    New Sigma 24-70 F2.8 works well with the Sony A7 line. I know some people insinuated this wouldn't be the case with FX-9 but Phil Bloom tried Zeiss 50mm Planar during those early pressers in the UK and it worked fine also. Which means that so should Zeiss Batis, Tamron and even some Rokinon primes.

    Obviously, Canon has some third party glass too.

    As to UMP, that's just it's perceived in the industry.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Pascal_Parvex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Wohlen AG, Switzerland
    Posts
    539
    Default
    To be honest, I don't get the Arri guys. Arri cameras have like half the resolution per inch as their competitiors, and they go "Arri has the best dynamic range!" I mean: "You don't say!?!".


    1 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Retrospective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    358
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Airwolf View Post
    Definitely a perplexing situation for documentary, commercial, corporate, and event filming. For narrative the consensus seems to be you have to have an Arri, Red, or Venice. Almost all of which are way out of the price range of this discussion, buying new. I don't see myself making any money in the narrative market in the foreseeable future frankly anyway. The large payouts for me come from documentary, event, and corporate work. I was set on getting the C500 II as i'm ready to move into that price point, but now I'm rethinking the whole endeavor.

    I believe the cameras that are competitive in this particular segment are as follows:

    Sony FX9, Canon C500 II, Red Dragon X, URSA Mini Pro G2

    The Red Dragon X I think is a stretch due to the price and lack of internal audio, so it's not really a solo camera unless you strap on some odd accessories. I also didn't include z-cam as they are still in their infancy and I don't trust them right now.
    I didn't put the Amira on here because it's over $30k for a new one. I can't justify $15K for a used camera, and it doesn't shoot 4K which I also can't justify going backwards in resolution for.

    A complete built out camera ready to shoot, matched with the needed accessories are as follows:

    Sony FX9: $12,500
    Canon C500 II: $19,000
    Red Dragon X: $23,000
    URSA G2: $10,000

    That includes power, 1TB of media, and basic things like a handle, monitor, evf to match them with each other.
    The only one that is at a disadvantage usage wise here is the Red Dragon, which does not have internal ND, and does not have internal audio.

    I think the URSA G2 & FX9 are the best bang for the buck. The URSA specifically shoots above 4K and produces a great image.
    I'm a Sony FS5 user currently, and I've hated almost everything about it since I got it. The color, the menus, the ergonomics, it's not fun to use. It gets the job done and that's it.
    I used to have a C100 and loved everything about it, so that's why i'm excited about the C500 II. I'm also excited about having usable auto-focus.

    The Red Dragon looks interesting, and isn't much more than the C500 II, but in order to put it into the same segment, i'd have to rig it up with all kinds of weird addons to get basic audio inputs and ND. I don't want to use a matte box, I don't want to run external audio, I just want the camera to work.

    For low light, it would have to be the C500, the others don't come close.
    For high frame rate, the Red and the URSA G2 win.
    For color, motion, and cinematic look, the Red wins, with I believe the Canon coming in second.

    Not sure what the answer really is at this point.

    Attachment 137575
    You forgot Varicam LT which retails about $10K with the current promotion.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Senior Member chris f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,281
    Default
    Some interesting tidbits from Canon in this C500MKII presentation they did recently:



    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,196
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by chris f View Post
    Some interesting tidbits from Canon in this C500MKII presentation they did recently:

    You going to spring for one Chris? Sounds like you are leaning that way. The recent CVP video (I think it was CVP but it might have Pro AV, one of the UK retailers), to me, the AF system on the FX-9 behaved better than the C500 MKII, which is really impressive. AF is huge for me, I use it on about 70% of our shoots.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member chris f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,281
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting
    You going to spring for one Chris? Sounds like you are leaning that way. The recent CVP video (I think it was CVP but it might have Pro AV, one of the UK retailers), to me, the AF system on the FX-9 behaved better than the C500 MKII, which is really impressive. AF is huge for me, I use it on about 70% of our shoots.
    Leaning that way, but could also see myself taking a hard left turn out of the Canon ecosystem entirely. I'm planning on using downtime over the holidays to really look at where my business is at, where I want to go, and then deciding what gear decisions would best support that choice. For where my business is currently at, staying within Canon and adding the C500MKII as my workhorse for the next 2-5yrs seems like a no-brainer, but I'll admit I'm starting to get bored with the idea of doing more of the same.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,238
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by chris f View Post
    Leaning that way, but could also see myself taking a hard left turn out of the Canon ecosystem entirely. I'm planning on using downtime over the holidays to really look at where my business is at, where I want to go, and then deciding what gear decisions would best support that choice. For where my business is currently at, staying within Canon and adding the C500MKII as my workhorse for the next 2-5yrs seems like a no-brainer, but I'll admit I'm starting to get bored with the idea of doing more of the same.
    Alexa mini LF?


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    Senior Member chris f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    1,281
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by rob norton View Post
    Alexa mini LF?
    Highly unlikely. Too rich for my blood as I'm not in the commercial world. Alexa Classic would probably the way I'd go if I were to wade into the Arri ecosystem, but that would have to be a very well thought out, intentional decision for sure.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,238
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by chris f View Post
    Highly unlikely. Too rich for my blood as I'm not in the commercial world. Alexa Classic would probably the way I'd go if I were to wade into the Arri ecosystem, but that would have to be a very well thought out, intentional decision for sure.
    Hah yes same here, although you never know. Are you trying to get into the commercial world?

    I think an older alexa would be great for pure narrative projects but it's a pretty tough sell vs. the small footprint of the c-series cameras, along with stills lenses and smaller support.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 27 of 34 FirstFirst ... 17232425262728293031 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •