digitalinnovations
Well-known member
Hello all!
Given that this is a "Canon" sub-forum I realize it may be difficult to get a completely unbiased opinion but I have also been kicking around DVXUser for a long time so I know most of us can be brutally honest and most of us would "jump ship" to whatever brand/manufacturer gave us the tool(s) we wanted/needed. That said, I'm just asking for some input on which camera system to move forward with and it’s tough because we are spoiled for choices theses days.
As background, for the past few of years I have been using an Amira and Alexa Mini for my productions but the time has come for me to part ways with them. The time was right (or wrong given how things are so uncertain in the world pf production right now) and with ARRI announcing a new sensor in the somewhat near future I thought the resale value on these cameras probably isn't going to get any better...so here we are.
Obviously, I've been a bit spoiled by the ARRI sensors / color science and dynamic range - which TO ME is more important than the ”resolution wars" - I do value resolution to a certain degree for re-framing and whatnot but all of my deliverables are still 1080 so 4K is ample.
Honestly...and this may sound crazy but...I think my two top-runners are the C500 MkII (obviously) and the Ursa Mini Pro G2. I know those are far apart in terms of pricing and whatnot but here is my logic...
The UMP G2 does offer that bit of a more of that indescribable, often misused "film" kind of look out-of-the-box…I’m not sure if its color or cadence or what… I'll try to explain it like this: with the ARRI cameras, at least in my experience, it's actually difficult to make them have the stereotypical "video camera look" - which I think usually just boils down to the frame-rate, grade, composition, etc. but I hope you understand my overall point.
On the other hand, you have the C500 MkII which I think is the opposite...out-of-the-box it has that more "video camera" aesthetic and you have to work harder if that's not the look you want to achieve for a given project. Granted, I have been digging through the threads here and there have been some samples posted that are gorgeous / my cup of tea so I see the potential is there. The other thing, FOR ME, is the ability to push away from that "Canon Look", which much like the "ARRI Look", it is just ingrained in the Canon cameras.
"Well there are lot of people that pay the money specifically for that look so why would you want to get away from it?"
I'm glad you asked...simple because there are sooooo many YouTubers and DSLR shooters that produce content for $5 and a McD's coupon these days that I want to put as much space between myself and them as possible - which can be difficult when there is overlapping color science / ingrained looks there. I'm sure most of you can look at something and just know that, "well that was shot with a Canon or Sony or Fuji DSLR". And yes, I do realize that the skill, cinematography, composition, grade and all of that are ultimately what accomplish that BUT I live in an area where it seems like everyone "shoots video too" and a lot of the people / businesses / etc. don't look at production and see the shoddy camera work, clipped skies/shadows or blown-out skin-tones...they just see it's "close enough" and a lot cheaper so as much differentiation one can get the better.
The C500 MkII brings some really amazing tools and abilities to the table for me (as a OMB / one-stop-shop kind of production company) that ARRI doesn’t… The two at the top of MY list would be autofocus and low-light capabilities. ARRI makes great cameras but low-light is not their thing in my opinion. Yes, you can push/pull the ARRI footage fairly easily but that only goes so far if you’re shooting more docu-style in areas where available light isn’t that…available.
I do wish the C500 MkII had a 4K, full-frame RAW option without the crop since, as I mentioned earlier, 4K does the job just fine for my deliverables. It seems odd to buy a full-frame camera and not to record the full-frame and obviously with HFR you don’t even have the option to. Being able to utilize the full sensor at a lower resolution would really help out with data / storage because, based on what I can see, you must shoot RAW if the goal is to be in that ARRI-look realm at all.
There is also the Sony FX9 but I still own an FS7 and the feature set on the FS7, especially at the launch when I bought it, was extraordinary and still holds up to the current crop of similar cameras today but I have never enjoyed trying to massage the grade in order to get the colors where I want them. I know they are now offering the Cinetone on the FX9 (which looks pretty good) but there are probably trade-offs with the DR you get compared to shooting LOG and plus, I’m fully expecting there to be a rush of productions with the Cinetone look everywhere in the near future. Then there’s ridiculous add-on required to get RAW and then it still requires an external recorder to record that RAW signal…gotta love Sony.
So I could keep going with all the thoughts in my head from the last few days of research but have rambled enough…I would really enjoy hearing your thoughts and I’m sure some of you have been in similar predicaments when choosing your camera systems.
Given that this is a "Canon" sub-forum I realize it may be difficult to get a completely unbiased opinion but I have also been kicking around DVXUser for a long time so I know most of us can be brutally honest and most of us would "jump ship" to whatever brand/manufacturer gave us the tool(s) we wanted/needed. That said, I'm just asking for some input on which camera system to move forward with and it’s tough because we are spoiled for choices theses days.
As background, for the past few of years I have been using an Amira and Alexa Mini for my productions but the time has come for me to part ways with them. The time was right (or wrong given how things are so uncertain in the world pf production right now) and with ARRI announcing a new sensor in the somewhat near future I thought the resale value on these cameras probably isn't going to get any better...so here we are.
Obviously, I've been a bit spoiled by the ARRI sensors / color science and dynamic range - which TO ME is more important than the ”resolution wars" - I do value resolution to a certain degree for re-framing and whatnot but all of my deliverables are still 1080 so 4K is ample.
Honestly...and this may sound crazy but...I think my two top-runners are the C500 MkII (obviously) and the Ursa Mini Pro G2. I know those are far apart in terms of pricing and whatnot but here is my logic...
The UMP G2 does offer that bit of a more of that indescribable, often misused "film" kind of look out-of-the-box…I’m not sure if its color or cadence or what… I'll try to explain it like this: with the ARRI cameras, at least in my experience, it's actually difficult to make them have the stereotypical "video camera look" - which I think usually just boils down to the frame-rate, grade, composition, etc. but I hope you understand my overall point.
On the other hand, you have the C500 MkII which I think is the opposite...out-of-the-box it has that more "video camera" aesthetic and you have to work harder if that's not the look you want to achieve for a given project. Granted, I have been digging through the threads here and there have been some samples posted that are gorgeous / my cup of tea so I see the potential is there. The other thing, FOR ME, is the ability to push away from that "Canon Look", which much like the "ARRI Look", it is just ingrained in the Canon cameras.
"Well there are lot of people that pay the money specifically for that look so why would you want to get away from it?"
I'm glad you asked...simple because there are sooooo many YouTubers and DSLR shooters that produce content for $5 and a McD's coupon these days that I want to put as much space between myself and them as possible - which can be difficult when there is overlapping color science / ingrained looks there. I'm sure most of you can look at something and just know that, "well that was shot with a Canon or Sony or Fuji DSLR". And yes, I do realize that the skill, cinematography, composition, grade and all of that are ultimately what accomplish that BUT I live in an area where it seems like everyone "shoots video too" and a lot of the people / businesses / etc. don't look at production and see the shoddy camera work, clipped skies/shadows or blown-out skin-tones...they just see it's "close enough" and a lot cheaper so as much differentiation one can get the better.
The C500 MkII brings some really amazing tools and abilities to the table for me (as a OMB / one-stop-shop kind of production company) that ARRI doesn’t… The two at the top of MY list would be autofocus and low-light capabilities. ARRI makes great cameras but low-light is not their thing in my opinion. Yes, you can push/pull the ARRI footage fairly easily but that only goes so far if you’re shooting more docu-style in areas where available light isn’t that…available.
I do wish the C500 MkII had a 4K, full-frame RAW option without the crop since, as I mentioned earlier, 4K does the job just fine for my deliverables. It seems odd to buy a full-frame camera and not to record the full-frame and obviously with HFR you don’t even have the option to. Being able to utilize the full sensor at a lower resolution would really help out with data / storage because, based on what I can see, you must shoot RAW if the goal is to be in that ARRI-look realm at all.
There is also the Sony FX9 but I still own an FS7 and the feature set on the FS7, especially at the launch when I bought it, was extraordinary and still holds up to the current crop of similar cameras today but I have never enjoyed trying to massage the grade in order to get the colors where I want them. I know they are now offering the Cinetone on the FX9 (which looks pretty good) but there are probably trade-offs with the DR you get compared to shooting LOG and plus, I’m fully expecting there to be a rush of productions with the Cinetone look everywhere in the near future. Then there’s ridiculous add-on required to get RAW and then it still requires an external recorder to record that RAW signal…gotta love Sony.
So I could keep going with all the thoughts in my head from the last few days of research but have rambled enough…I would really enjoy hearing your thoughts and I’m sure some of you have been in similar predicaments when choosing your camera systems.