Is the 5D mkII still okay? (feature film)

O

octagon

New member
Ok, here's the deal. I wanna make a low budget feature film. Everything is taken place inside a house. The shooting will be about 2 weeks.
So for this reason I wanna keep it simple with as little lightning as possible. That's why I'm thinking 5DmkII.
I already own a 60D but want something better. Also been thinking about a GH2 and of course the new GH3 and even Blackmagic.
But hopefully we'll be shooting later this year so I want something I can get now and that I'll know will work.
As for now we can't be sure when GH3 or BMC will be available. I saw that Silent House and Rubber was shot on 5DmkII.
So I guess it's possible then.

So what would your recommendation be for a film that's 100% inside and two weeks shooting with a tiny budget? :)
 
Not much of the year left. If you're buying a new camera than I'd suggest going for something other than the 5DMKII. The cameras you mentioned are all very nice possibilities.
 
I understand, just a crazy idea that drives me nuts. "Is this camera that a ton of projects have been shot on including wide release feature films still OK?". Yes, it is.

At full retail a 5D2 isn't a very good deal at this stage. At $1400 or $1500 used... it's an AWESOME deal.
 
@ Gonzo,Best post I've read today, yup I would use your 60d, and then rent some good glass and buy a bunch of cheap ambient lighting for the set. But if your dead set against using your 60d, I would go with a gh2 hands down. I have such a hard time shooting with my canon now that I been using the gh2 for a year or so. It's so sharp compared.
 
Put your money into lighting and audio rather than another camera.

Poorly lit scenes and bad sounding audio are still going to be just as bad no matter which camera you use.
 
David W. Jones said:
Put your money into lighting and audio rather than another camera.

Poorly lit scenes and bad sounding audio are still going to be just as bad no matter which camera you use.
Click to expand...

I was going to say the same thing. Even putting that money into good EF lenses would make the feature look better.

What do you currently have for lighting, sound and lenses?
 
Thanks for the feedback. I got everything else I need. So this is just about the camera. I just want something small that works with low light and also in tight spaces.
Shooting a feature in two weeks I need to keep it at minimal lightning. And I'm not aiming for a beautiful shot film. Obviously :)
This is more of an experiment. I want to see how simple and lo-fi it can be but still make a film. This is also not my first feature film but my first low budget feature.
 
Yep I dont see why the 60d is much worse than the 5d, maybe better in some ways.

60+ 2 kinos = way better than 5d for the shoot you describe.

S
 
Not ideal and when possible lighting is absolutely crucial, but I have shot ridiculous low light (B Roll inside a dance club) that was "usable" (1.4 wide open and 1600 ISO). It was my only option, no budget to rent the club and fill it with extras.
 
Maybe I'm just an old guy with an antiquated way of thinking, but I would leave the experimenting to the garage and not a feature film. But again, I'm an old guy so I might not be up on the modern way of low budget feature production where you shoot a film to see how simple and lo-fi you can get, with the attitude of "I'm not aiming for a beautifully shot film".

All the Best!

Dave
 
One key phrase from the OP in his responses was "tight spaces"... in which case a 5D could be nice with the FF sensor. I'd much rather shoot with an awesome 20 2.8 prime than a Tokina zoom in most cases.

But didn't you guys know that when a camera gets upgraded to a new model, little elves invade your studio at night and reduce the bandwidth of your old camera, mess with the shutter speeds, and delete features? That's why I upgrade.
 
Are you sure it is not camera lust/validation purchase, so that you feel well about the purchase of a bigger better camera that you want. The first recommendation people have given you are the best. With the money, you can buy you a set of lighting equipment (some freshnel or kinos, or cheaper brands like coolight) and even some lens if need be. These will last you many camera generation. I don't know why people have problem with lighting, it can be so satisfying and interesting to do and experiment.

If you still need to go about purchasing a full frame camera and don't have a ton of Canon glass. Look at the Nikon D600. For a little lower than the 5d2 you are getting a much better video camera. Better resolution, lower moire/aliasing, lower jello, superb dynamic range and the capacity to grow with the camera with a cheap $ 300-$ 1000 external recorder you can have 422 high bitrate prores/dnxhd codec. Canon has forgot about the dslr crowd, what they are interested now is just the $ 7000+ camera user. For the other one it is just the low resolution mush we got since 4 years ago.
 
Danielvilliers said:
...a cheap $ 300-$ 1000 external recorder you can have 422 high bitrate prores/dnxhd codec.
Click to expand...


I find all this talk about external recorders and Nikon funny as no one actually ever uses one. They just talk about it. "We'd shoot with it if it would be feasible and it would actually work in real shooting".

Yeah, yeah.

If you're thinking about the D600, I suggest going for the 5d mark III for a bit more. Low spaces + low light + already own some lenses.
 
26925362.jpg

I'd recommend an AF100 over a 5DmII any day of the week... I don't want to hijack the thread or anything, but the camera will allow for greater control of image, less jello on action, less moire, more lens options (yes more), a more workable DoF, actual audio inputs and controls, some monitoring out options, a usable form factor, and the option for decent internal compression OR external recording... to name a few. Can also do some highspeed too.
 
Last edited:
Thanks again for all the feedback and info. I'm not a DP but a director. I've done stuff on 35mm, 16mm, Alexa, Epic, HDcam etc.
So this will be the first time with something this. But I love the idea. The punk attitude and being able to just do something without the long process it usually is. And after seeing some films the hacked GH2 has also caught my attention. I must say I do prefer that look over the Canon look. But I guess it's not as light sensitive as the 5DmkII. Any good advice on the hacked GH2 or things I should know about that?
 
For light sensitivity, 5D2 and GH2 are not really far away from each other, I'd probably call it a tie. It's on DR that I think the GH2 fails. But it's much sharper, and also aliasing/moire free, which can be very important if you're not used to working around these issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top