GH1 sample footy and pricing

My point is that the film 'look' is much less dependent on pure resolution. The d90 footage, well filmed (avoiding the jello/etc.--mostly doable if you take care in shooting) looks very filmic. I have made the point before that even on crappy old VHS tapes programs originating on 35mm film look much different than programs originating on other media. The film 'look' still shines through.

It isn't all about sharpness (as has been pointed out by several others here). Clearly 24fps and the optical look of a 35mm image is very important. The d90 looks much more like 35mm than any 8mm film that I have seen. The optical characteristics of the image are the one thing that holds up no matter what the eventual viewing medium, filtration or compression. This is where the d90 still holds its own.

Others can chase every new 'fad' in still/video hybrids--but I think that it makes sense to stick to the 35mm imaging size for the best film look. (Remember that the d90 has an imager that is actually almost identical to the standard imaging area of 35mm film--the Canon is even larger). Those that compromise with smaller format imagers I predict will regret their decisions as Nikon (or Canon) introduce much improved models in the next year or so.

Or maybe some should just get out their old 8mm movie cameras, if they are really so great!
 
Robert Altman said:
Or maybe some should just get out their old 8mm movie cameras, if they are really so great!
Click to expand...
what makes you think they're not already out and have been so during the last 30 years? check out my homepage for some examples. the lisa lindal promo and the "green" nom de guerre one are super 8.

/matt
 
Honestly those 8mm films, while a great look, look like 8mm film. The well shot d90 footage IMHO looks better than that--more 16mm in quality. The 8mm grain structure is very evident, and always calls attention to itself (which is an artistic choice).
 
squig said:
like this- http://dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=166623

After seeing that I think I'm gonna shoot the film on 2 D90s.....at least until I see something better from the GH1.

Now do I get the zeiss 50mm f/1.4 or the nikkor 50mm f/1.2?
Click to expand...

Do you also plan on distributing your feature film on Vimeo?

You should take a step away from the computer until you're actually ready to shoot the feature. LOL. That way you won't stick the foot you've shot yourself in inside of your mouth anymore.

<3
 
It was a bit cheesy but I'm saving the good stuff for my script....I have to impress the kholi and mr-t gods
 
John Caballero said:
Amazing. Is like the bind leading the blind. We don't know squat about the new Canon or Panasonic offerings. We can't make desicions or judgements on neither. In the meantime we know that if you need to shoot professional stuff in the near future you can't go bellow the HVX 200, HPX 170, HMC 150 or any comparable camera at their price points. You will get nice stuff with less but it ain't professional. Neither is the D90.
Click to expand...

Car3o said:
And then someone else is replying to your post saying, If you shoot professional you can't go below RED/35mm/16mm/ or any comparable camera at their price points. You will get nice stuff with less, but it ain't professional. Neither is the Hvx200.
Click to expand...
my hat.. fav DVXuser reply ever :thumbup:
 
Lee Wilson said:
That's so weird, I have had lots of stuff broadcast on (UK BBC1/BBC2/C4) Tv shot on FX1, HV10 and HV30 ?

I will call them up tomorrow and tell them to pull it as it is not 'professional', I also have a friend who has some stuff running at the moment, she shot it on a Sony HC1, I will get in contact with her as well and give her the bad news.
Click to expand...
2nd one.. :grin:
 
mattsand said:
let john think what he wants. it's annoying and all but ultimately it's just his own problem. my dad builds houses using nothing but an axe and a drill (and occasionally a chainsaw), i'm sure many people would call that highly unprofessional too.

/matt
Click to expand...
3rd on the rocks.. caballero is a decent poster though.. me likes some of his posts at REDuser even if there he can be considered one of us though.. lol
 
my hat.. fav DVXuser reply ever
Click to expand...

The point is that common sense, if you decide to use it, tells you that there is at least a minimum level of equipment that will get you higher production value without breaking the bank. That is precisely why the HVX 200 became an instant success among the indies. The HVX 200 is so highly regarded that it can be very well integrated with Varicam footage. That alone is telling you something very positive about that camera. If people can't understand reality they might as well stay in la-la land.

You can build a house using a rock as a hammer and your karate chops to cut the wood. You don't even need an ax and a drill, or ocassionally a chainsaw.
 
Last edited:
use matt's dad's chainsaw to slice off the front of that HVX, plonk a big DSLR sensor in it and attach some nikkor glass to it and I might consider using it.

Yeah I'm blind....dvxuser is my seeing eye dog
 
"In the meantime we know that if you need to shoot professional stuff in the near future you can't go bellow the HVX 200, HPX 170, HMC 150 or any comparable camera at their price points."

I humbly disagree. You can, and many people do, shoot stuff used professionally with cameras from US$500 and up. Even further, several of the new ones may and probably do exceed the image quality of the cameras listed.

What drives the 5DM2/GH-1 and to a lesser extent the D90 hoopla is that the bar is moving again. It has been moved before. The EX1 introducing full sampling to this price class. The RED One and SK2I introducing RAW capture and wavelet compression. The HMC150 and consumer cameras introducing high performance H.264 and the Canon 5DM2 and Panasonic HPX300 increasing the quality of compression. Is it the lenses, sensor, sensor size, processing or compression? Yes. Each adds are throttles what can be done. But all have moved.

The question is always...what are you doing, who are you doing it for, and what are your time, staff, and budget constraints.
 
There are two gentlemen in this forum who I look up to and respect: Mr. Barry Green and Mr. Hunter Richards. I wonder what they shoot their own productions with, a $500.00 camera or the HVX, HPX 170, HPX 500. I wonder.
 
John Caballero said:
The point is that common sense, if you decide to use it, tells you that there is at least a minimum level of equipment that will get you higher production value without breaking the bank.
Click to expand...
agreed on this one.. not on the half-hd hvx as high production value.. mid-class production value who knows?.. no more than corporate videos into my book when even a sub-500 class cam such as the hv20 goes forward :huh:

edit
so me just wrote mid-class for sympathy :)
 
John Caballero said:
What a disservice to compare Super 8 film to the D90 video. I'll take Super 8 any day. No jaggies, image softness, bad compression, etc., etc., etc., etc.
Click to expand...

So if there is two people you respect on this thread then I am guessing you don't respect anyone else. Well you lost my respect with that last comment. I challenge you to can find one single solitary clip on Vimeo that looks better than an even average D90 clip and get someone to agree with you and I will put you on my respect list until then guess what?
 
John Caballero said:
There are two gentlemen in this forum who I look up to and respect: Mr. Barry Green and Mr. Hunter Richards. I wonder what they shoot their own productions with, a $500.00 camera or the HVX, HPX 170, HPX 500. I wonder.
Click to expand...
so if let's say anthony dod mantle was on this forum you wouldn't respect him? i mean he shot festen on a cheap mini dv consumer camcorder, one of the best films ever in my opinion. you probably don't respect me because you think i'm an asshole, but if you just look at my work you'll notice that i've shot and/or directed several successful shorts, features, commercials and music videos on everything from cell phones through consumer dvd to 35mm, and the d90. i'm not saying this is what everyone has to do, it's just my way of expression, but surely it must mean that it's viable? otherwise you really need to explain what besides your own opinion is the basis of your claims. i don't get it.

/matt
 
John Caballero said:
The point is that common sense, if you decide to use it, tells you that there is at least a minimum level of equipment that will get you higher production value without breaking the bank
Click to expand...
production value is much more than pixels and digital compression though. using a small camera can get you into locations otherwise unavailable, it can mean you get more shots per day and thus more bang for the buck, it can mean that you're able connect with the story better, it can mean you can afford a steadicam rig or jib crane for small cameras, and so on. common sense is no substitute for actually thinking things through.

/matt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top