Page 12 of 18 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 177
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,815
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry G View Post
    While I've seen plenty of balanced footage from the FX9, you are right that there is a lot of yellow (green) coming down the pipeline from this camera. In some ways it's attractive, but to me it feels like a "look" has been applied. More baked in looking, and I've been curious if it's the camera, or the user. I personally think this camera has improved a lot from the FS7 in terms of color science, but I really haven't loved most of what I've seen from it, mostly due to that color bias. I just shot a music video with my GFX100, which has a Sony sensor in it, and the yellows are the same...in this case it was under NYC street lighting and looks really great (gritty, rich colors)...but I'm not sure I'd want it for my day job, you know.
    I’ll take the faint yellow/green cast of the new colour science over the older magenta cast any day. It’s much nicer out of the box.

    That said, it never took more than a few seconds to balance in Davinci anyway, so I don’t see it being a big deal.

    I’ve been going over and over the options in my head, and I think I’m getting closer to deciding to simply stick with my F55 over “upgrading” to the FX9 or C500ii. The FX9 simply doesn’t have the feature-set to match the F55, and although the Canon offers almost everything I want feature-wise, beyond faster boot-time, better internal NDs, and the more compact form factor - I’d still be losing 16-bit raw, global shutter, 240fps @ 2k, and the option for S35mm 4k 120fps (when paired with the R7).

    Given the comparable dynamic range between the two, it’s really hard to justify the upgrade. The only thing that keeps me hanging on for the moment is the thought of the time I’d save on-set thanks to the boot time, NDs, and faster gripping/rigging due to the lighter weight in certain circumstances.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,300
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    I’ll take the faint yellow/green cast of the new colour science over the older magenta cast any day. It’s much nicer out of the box.

    That said, it never took more than a few seconds to balance in Davinci anyway, so I don’t see it being a big deal.

    I’ve been going over and over the options in my head, and I think I’m getting closer to deciding to simply stick with my F55 over “upgrading” to the FX9 or C500ii. The FX9 simply doesn’t have the feature-set to match the F55, and although the Canon offers almost everything I want feature-wise, beyond faster boot-time, better internal NDs, and the more compact form factor - I’d still be losing 16-bit raw, global shutter, 240fps @ 2k, and the option for S35mm 4k 120fps (when paired with the R7).

    Given the comparable dynamic range between the two, it’s really hard to justify the upgrade. The only thing that keeps me hanging on for the moment is the thought of the time I’d save on-set thanks to the boot time, NDs, and faster gripping/rigging due to the lighter weight in certain circumstances.
    Why don’t you buy an Alexa mini LF?


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,815
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by rob norton View Post
    Why don’t you buy an Alexa mini LF?
    I came very close to putting down a deposit, but rental rates here have already dropped from about $2000/day to $1100/day for the MILF. That's a 1% rental rate, or 100 rental days to pay one back. Doesn't make sense to own with rental returns like that, it'd take too long to turn a profit from it.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    I came very close to putting down a deposit, but rental rates here have already dropped from about $2000/day to $1100/day for the MILF. That's a 1% rental rate, or 100 rental days to pay one back. Doesn't make sense to own with rental returns like that, it'd take too long to turn a profit from it.
    I've never quite figured out how these expensive cinema cameras are renting for so cheap in Los Angeles. I rented an Amira for $250/day last August. You can rent a Monstro for $400. In fact, as I write this, I'm looking at a listing for a fully kitted out Alexa Mini, with EVF, 4:3 & ArriRaw licenses, 6 VMount batteries, 3 256GB cards, quad charger, PL and EF mount and Wooden Camera grips & arms for $445/day. I mean, that's crazy cheap for what that system costs.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,365
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by robotfist View Post
    I've never quite figured out how these expensive cinema cameras are renting for so cheap in Los Angeles...
    Too many cameras are sitting idle and $400/day is still better than nothing. The LA market is peculiar that way. I looked up Red listings on eBay a few days ago. Lots of gear is available.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    I came very close to putting down a deposit, but rental rates here have already dropped from about $2000/day to $1100/day for the MILF. That's a 1% rental rate, or 100 rental days to pay one back. Doesn't make sense to own with rental returns like that, it'd take too long to turn a profit from it.
    Technically speaking, a 100-day is 300% ROI. 100% ROI would be the net sum to the owner over 365 days equal to the original investment


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

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,815
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DLD View Post

    Technically speaking, a 100-day is 300% ROI. 100% ROI would be the net sum to the owner over 365 days equal to the original investment
    How do you mean (I don’t quite follow)? A MILF ready to shoot package is about $112,000 AUD at the moment. At $1100/day, you’re looking at approximately 100 days just to repay the initial outlay, you wouldn’t be getting any return on investment until rental No. 101.


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Junior Member JanusCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Kyoto, Japan
    Posts
    26
    Default
    Isn’t that rate of return rather than ROI?

    100 rental days isn’t really a time period, essentially it’s a sales volume so Grug’s math checks out IMHO
    Why donít you just buy an ALEXA Mini LF?


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    6,365
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    How do you mean (I don’t quite follow)? A MILF ready to shoot package is about $112,000 AUD at the moment. At $1100/day, you’re looking at approximately 100 days just to repay the initial outlay, you wouldn’t be getting any return on investment until rental No. 101.
    Because you don't count the number of rental days but the net total financial sum coming to the original investor - be it an owner/op or a rental house - over a year of ownership. The two key elements here are the time frame and the amount of revenues vs. expenses.

    A net investment of $112,000 would need a net income of $112,000 (income tax treatment could be treated separately or as a package, depending on the local tax laws) to be 100% return on investment over one year period. It doesn't matter if you rented it for a huge sum in one day, ten days or, given the likely market value, a hundred days.

    Look at it purely as a financial transaction. You bought some stock for $112,000. Within a year it doubled to $224,000. Your profit is $112,000. That's a 100% ROI.

    https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r...investment.asp

    Quote Originally Posted by JanusCC View Post
    Isn’t that rate of return rather than ROI?
    It's the same thing.


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

  9. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DLD View Post

    It's the same thing.
    Rate and static are the same thing?

    Not.

    One is a vector. The other is not.

    It amazes me how many people can make a living at making videos but who can't understand basic things like exposure, basic math, how sensor sizes relate to each other.

    The list is a lot longer.

    There is a reason there is one person who is an engineer who designs the stuff and another person is the creative.


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,325
    Default
    DLD's link provides the right answer https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r...investment.asp :

    ROI can be used in conjunction with Rate of Return, which takes into account a project’s time frame. One may also use Net Present Value (NPV), which accounts for differences in the value of money over time, due to inflation. The application of NPV when calculating the rate of return is often called the Real Rate of Return.
    While ROI is a static / scalar value, I'm not sure that calling rate of return makes sense as a vector, which is typically an array of scalars of the same type (in 2D & 3D can indicate a direction. A unit vector (|[x,y]|, |[x,y,z]| = 1.0) with a time scalar (t) can indicate a velocity). A rate is a derivative: (x2 - x1)/(t2 - t1), dx/dt, also known as a velocity (1st derivative of position), taking the derivative of velocity we get acceleration (now we've gone nonlinear), and the derivative of acceleration is jerk, and of jerk is jounce, and it goes on- snap, crackle, and pop. Who says math/physics folks don't have creative abilities and a sense of humor lol!

    Top creatives / artists are also competent with math / science: e.g. DaVinci, Michelangelo, aka Renaissance people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ssance_figures

    Instead of calling out people with gaps in knowledge, wouldn't it be better to provide correct information to help them (and all readers) learn?


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

Page 12 of 18 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 ... 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
  •