I do believe one of the things I read was an interview with Mitch. The Varicam LT is a perfect example, I personally own one. Color and skin tones rivaling the big boys for a fraction of the cost. My employer bought some C500’s way after they were on the market (some shady business deal I’m sure) and I’ve used them on a few shoots. The skin tones out of the camera in the regular 709 profile are excellent. We shot them side by side with the C300 II and it was undeniably the better looking camera. But as we all know it never caught on and wasn’t the hit they had hoped for. After reading about the C700 I actually thought it was the replacement for the C500.
C500 MKII Leaked on Canon Rumors
- Thread starter Run&Gun
- Start date
Yeah, this is today's reality. The market has changed a lot. The mid range makes less and less sense. Especially with high end cameras such as the used Alexas and F65s going for so cheap. Cameras like the F5, Varicam LT, this new C500 are in a hot spot. To be honest, even at 10K I wouldn't buy a new Varicam LT. Because for light weight shooting something like the FS5 or even FS7 would be a better match. If I want for higher end stuff I would rather buy an used Alexa or F65 for basically the same price. You can even find used Varicam 35s for not much more than a new Varicam LT. I saw an used V35 package with recorder and EVF selling for 12K. So the mid range will eventually disappear. Just how it is today.
The other side of the argument is that you're getting a $50,000 package (camera, internal Raw, maybe the EFV) from 2017-2019 era for $20,000, which resets a lot of the price points for the independents, commercial and even the "Netflix or bust" shooters. You don't need to rent Alexa LF, Venice, F 65/55, Varicam, Helium, Monstro, etc. to get into a pretty exclusive 6K company. Add auto-focus and some EF primes and you have a rather useful device.
And if FX-9 needs an external recorder for 6K Raw, you're narrowing the price difference and adding the convenience factor on top of that.
And then you have the "Canon look", which a lot of people happen to like. "Trick Shot, Part II", here we come.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Moving forward most people aren't going to buy a camera over $5K with their own money.
The C200, EVA1, others were introduced during that 2017-ish "things are heating up" window and were still justifiable.
Moving into 2020 with crazy advancements happening every other month - and continuous decreasing prices - you'd pretty much have to be offered a handful of money (contract) to buy & use a $20K-$30K camera.
With house money, it's all good.
I want to work to save money; not pay off gear.
The C200, EVA1, others were introduced during that 2017-ish "things are heating up" window and were still justifiable.
Moving into 2020 with crazy advancements happening every other month - and continuous decreasing prices - you'd pretty much have to be offered a handful of money (contract) to buy & use a $20K-$30K camera.
With house money, it's all good.
I want to work to save money; not pay off gear.
The other side of this argument is that ARRI's rentals are $2,500-$3,500/w (not counting Alexa65, which is close to $3K/day) and Red $1,000-$1,500/w. So, if you're busy, it's 15-20 weeks of work and, considering that 6K may be a long term plateau, you may not need an upgrade for several more years.
Arash Ayrom
Cataclysmo
According to this site, the announcement is tomorrow. Supposed specs:
https://www.canonwatch.com/canon-ci...ounced-tomorrow-here-are-some-specifications/
No idea how good their track record is, but this is a pretty confident posting.
https://www.canonwatch.com/canon-ci...ounced-tomorrow-here-are-some-specifications/
No idea how good their track record is, but this is a pretty confident posting.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
I think this is a bit extreme. If you are a working cameraperson then your gear is earning you income. It's a tool like any other, and some tools work better than others for particular needs. A sub-$5K camera can be great but may not serve the functions required for certain paying work. A more expensive tool may be required, and that's not a luxury for luxury's sake. As long as it makes sense for you then it is worthwhile. Depending on your work that may be $5K, $10K or $30K. While certain strata are winnowing, others are still quite viable.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
If you were selling/representing cameras for a living you would also see the numbers that I see. You would know what is and isn't selling in the market. There's theory and there's practice.
Run&Gun
Veteran
I think that it all depends on the pool you swim in. If someone is in the kiddie pool, yeah. But the pool I swim in, almost everyone owns their own package(s) and we buy what we need to do the job right(obviously within reason depending on client/work). And I don't see $5K cameras doing what most of us need, outside of specialty shots, B/C cams(lock-offs, gimbals, etc.).
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I know plenty of Arri, Red, Varicam, and Venice owner/operators. Owning and renting out expensive cameras is typically way more profitable overall than owning and renting out cheap cameras. I personally don't know why people settle for the low end. I can understand why people start at the low end; everyone does, and I can understand why people could stay at the low end (poor market, over-saturation, lack of skill, poor marketing abilities, lack of motivation, preferring those types of shoots, etc.), but I don't understand why people don't at least try for the high end. I guess if one can make a satisfactory living at the low end and are happy with that, then good for them. Money isn't everything and low end shoots do have certain benefits such as being simpler, maintaining more control, etc.
Personally, while I do high end corporate and doc work, I'd still like to push myself into higher end commercial and narrative work. I could make more money renting out an Alexa LF with Leica Summilux lenses, Anegnuix DP lenses, and Cooke anomorphics, than the current kit I own. I know some other DPs who have higher end lenses than me, charge more than me, and make more than me. I'd rather be in their position, and it's a goal for me to push toward. Again, I don't know why anyone would want to forever work with cheap cameras as an owner/operator as it is less profitable.
Charging $750 per day as a DSLR owner/op compared to $5k per day as an Arri and Cooke owner/op; the profit difference is substantial. Yeah, you're obviously spending more on the equipment, but if you're doing it right then your end profits are still much higher with the more expensive equipment.
The cost of cameras going down would make it more difficult to profit off of the camera rentals, while other things like lens rentals and support gear would mostly remain the same. Though as I've said before, I still don't see high end cameras going down in price; the new kid on the block, the Venice, is about $70k fully licensed, and the new Alexa Mini LF is pretty close in price as well. These cameras will be the top dogs for the next few years and the releases after that I don't foresee as being significantly cheaper, as there will always be new cutting edge technology that the high end will be willing to pay a premium price for.
Personally, while I do high end corporate and doc work, I'd still like to push myself into higher end commercial and narrative work. I could make more money renting out an Alexa LF with Leica Summilux lenses, Anegnuix DP lenses, and Cooke anomorphics, than the current kit I own. I know some other DPs who have higher end lenses than me, charge more than me, and make more than me. I'd rather be in their position, and it's a goal for me to push toward. Again, I don't know why anyone would want to forever work with cheap cameras as an owner/operator as it is less profitable.
Charging $750 per day as a DSLR owner/op compared to $5k per day as an Arri and Cooke owner/op; the profit difference is substantial. Yeah, you're obviously spending more on the equipment, but if you're doing it right then your end profits are still much higher with the more expensive equipment.
The cost of cameras going down would make it more difficult to profit off of the camera rentals, while other things like lens rentals and support gear would mostly remain the same. Though as I've said before, I still don't see high end cameras going down in price; the new kid on the block, the Venice, is about $70k fully licensed, and the new Alexa Mini LF is pretty close in price as well. These cameras will be the top dogs for the next few years and the releases after that I don't foresee as being significantly cheaper, as there will always be new cutting edge technology that the high end will be willing to pay a premium price for.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
You're probably over 40 and in the 1% and not much of a content creator (you only film, but you don't film, edit, and provide A-->B).
Is any of that correct?
NorBro
Major Contributor
You are no doubt in the .01%.
Not 1%, but .01%.
I have been following your progress and your equipment for years. Obviously I don't know you personally, but I've never heard or seen or even read of anyone sharing the kind of experiences you do and/or the amount of equipment you own. (Besides maybe like 5 people on REDuser who are ASCs.)
You are very lucky to be doing what you are doing and how you are doing it (you're super talented), but trust that 99.9% of other video production freelancers do not live your life and never will.
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I've gotten Aaron Rodgers perhaps eight times before. Lately it's been a lot of John Krasinski, which I've been told around 30 times. And Jake Gyllenhaal, perhaps 10 times. Or as my one friend says, "White guy with a beard."
I need to get back to the gym to try to live up to John Krasinski's transformation.
I need to get back to the gym to try to live up to John Krasinski's transformation.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Then he ripped off his helmet and changed into clothes too!
And AR - most QBs besides maybe Cam Newton - wouldn't celebrate with props.
(lol, sorry...football is a major love of mine.)
Even as a New Yorker, I'll say Aaron Rodgers will never be Tom Brady. SB LI sealed TB as the greatest of all time.
And AR - most QBs besides maybe Cam Newton - wouldn't celebrate with props.
(lol, sorry...football is a major love of mine.)
Even as a New Yorker, I'll say Aaron Rodgers will never be Tom Brady. SB LI sealed TB as the greatest of all time.
Run&Gun
Veteran
I don't know about the "1%", but I am over 40 and I do not edit or do turn-key productions. 100% of what I shoot is handed off, "fed in", or live.
I would argue that pretty much anything we do, is "content creation", regardless of whether you have a hand in editing it or being the formal "producer" or not. And there are a lot of people who would argue against the term "content creator"(also "creating content") as it seems to "dumb-down" a lot of what is being done into just a commodity(even though a lot of it is), but it's not a good look on what is supposed to be a creative field.