C500: Options...Options...

[puredrifting]

I guess times change with so many choices out there now. My 1st Betacam: never touched it till I bought it and received it. 2nd Betacam: same.

Flashback: At the time though, there really weren't the alternatives we have today. Your only choice was which model Betacam could you afford? Maybe an Ikegami head versus a Sony head?

I agree with your assesment, if more of us thought like business people and bought what clients would pay us to shoot, you'd see far fewer barely used cameras in the Marketplace. Keep in mind though, there is a sizable
contingent of DVXers who rarely shoot paying projects and like buying and selling cameras. It's like they are camera hobbyists and not professional shooters and there's nothing wrong with that if they have the money,
can afford to lose the money on resale. It's a hobby. I'm amazed how many DVXers can afford to do this with cameras like Arris and REDs though, those are some expensive hobby cameras!

For those who try to make a living though, we really need to choose a tool, make enough to pay it off as quickly as possible so we can get into day rate profit with the camera. Completely different than being a camera collector.

 

[DIRECTORDEVIN]

I guess it’s certainly how you look at it. I For one own many camera including all the ones you mentioned above. But why? Because no matter how much of a storyteller I am, I’ll never be ashamed to admit that I simply love the technology, yes I am a fan boy to the death. I bought many cameras over the years that I will never ever sell and that’s because I don’t buy cameras in order to return an investment I buy cameras because I’m a filmmaker and that’s just what I love the most in the world. I come from a 35mm film background so when new technology comes out claiming they can match film etc etc I buy them because I just have to see if it’s true. I have to see if film is really dead, so I experiment and experiment until I fall asleep with the camera in my hand.

Now when I’m doing these fun exciting tests, I’m shooting (and obviously making enough money to afford all of these tools) for clients who don’t really care about what camera I employ. I mean after a while it has to be “you” that they want and not the camera, this is easy to understand because if you want the red just buy one, but you don’t want the red you want what I can do with any camera. Any client who doesn’t understand this I don’t want to work with anyway. So I agree there are people in here who do this for a hobby so they camera swap, then there are some of us who just love cameras and if they would just admit that then perhaps it would free them from the guilt of feeling like they must make a film or something.

Now the way I was able to afford all the cameras I own now was because I took a stance and said “you hire me for me you don’t know as much about what camera to shoot on then me the master filmmaker” and when you think about it that way it’s true. I made everyone I worked with understand that, and this is only for small jobs not worth a damn. I never had a major client ever request a specific camera, and saying we want it in 4k is not a camera choice. The point I’m making here is we have to grow past camera for client mentality, it’s demeaning and wrong. This is how I was able to afford all this stuff, a miracle happens when they hire you and your bank account will love you for the mentality change lol. Filmmakers obsesses over cameras because we are supposed to and never should we feel bad about that even if that’s all we ever do in this lifetime.
I’m in the middle of reading a script right now that I’m deep into the sud text of the character, the moment I’m done I’m powering up my F35 just to hear the sound of the fan.

Flashback: At the time though, there really weren't the alternatives we have today. Your only choice was which model Betacam could you afford? Maybe an Ikegami head versus a Sony head?

I agree with your assesment, if more of us thought like business people and bought what clients would pay us to shoot, you'd see far fewer barely used cameras in the Marketplace. Keep in mind though, there is a sizable
contingent of DVXers who rarely shoot paying projects and like buying and selling cameras. It's like they are camera hobbyists and not professional shooters and there's nothing wrong with that if they have the money,
can afford to lose the money on resale. It's a hobby. I'm amazed how many DVXers can afford to do this with cameras like Arris and REDs though, those are some expensive hobby cameras!

For those who try to make a living though, we really need to choose a tool, make enough to pay it off as quickly as possible so we can get into day rate profit with the camera. Completely different than being a camera collector.

 

[puredrifting]

I guess it’s certainly how you look at it. I For one own many camera including all the ones you mentioned above. But why? Because no matter how much of a storyteller I am, I’ll never be ashamed to admit that I simply love the technology, yes I am a fan boy to the death. I bought many cameras over the years that I will never ever sell and that’s because I don’t buy cameras in order to return an investment I buy cameras because I’m a filmmaker and that’s just what I love the most in the world. I come from a 35mm film background so when new technology comes out claiming they can match film etc etc I buy them because I just have to see if it’s true. I have to see if film is really dead, so I experiment and experiment until I fall asleep with the camera in my hand.

Now when I’m doing these fun exciting tests, I’m shooting (and obviously making enough money to afford all of these tools) for clients who don’t really care about what camera I employ. I mean after a while it has to be “you” that they want and not the camera, this is easy to understand because if you want the red just buy one, but you don’t want the red you want what I can do with any camera. Any client who doesn’t understand this I don’t want to work with anyway. So I agree there are people in here who do this for a hobby so they camera swap, then there are some of us who just love cameras and if they would just admit that then perhaps it would free them from the guilt of feeling like they must make a film or something.

Now the way I was able to afford all the cameras I own now was because I took a stance and said “you hire me for me you don’t know as much about what camera to shoot on then me the master filmmaker” and when you think about it that way it’s true. I made everyone I worked with understand that, and this is only for small jobs not worth a damn. I never had a major client ever request a specific camera, and saying we want it in 4k is not a camera choice. The point I’m making here is we have to grow past camera for client mentality, it’s demeaning and wrong. This is how I was able to afford all this stuff, a miracle happens when they hire you and your bank account will love you for the mentality change lol. Filmmakers obsesses over cameras because we are supposed to and never should we feel bad about that even if that’s all we ever do in this lifetime.
I’m in the middle of reading a script right now that I’m deep into the sud text of the character, the moment I’m done I’m powering up my F35 just to hear the sound of the fan.

I think we all aspire to have clients who are hiring us for our vision and many of us are lucky enough to have a few clients like that. But at least in LA, you have a website. You build SEO. You hopefully get
calls and RFPs. For those clients, they often specify "This is an FS7 job, this is a RED or an Arri job, etc." It's very simple, you have to either own and rent the camera they want or they won't hire you. A lot of
ad agencies, PR firms and larger prod cos that service the studios and streamers out here are that way. They often have footage already shot in NY or in Europe on a certain camera and you are hired to shoot Will i. AM in LA for the
same project and you have to use what they used in NYC or you don't get the job. It's not about creative vision, it's about emulating what they already shot elsewhere. Since we are in LA, where a lot of talent lives, we get a lot
of this.

It's different if they hire you to shoot spots, or a high end marketing piece. But my bread and butter is (was before Quarantine) EPK/Marketing/PR/BTS and your camera choice is often dictated to you. Having the right camera just gets
your foot in the door, then they look at your reel and either pass or hire you.

In the days of film, I was like you, I owned an Arri SR2 package, I love shooting 16mm, loved that camera and pushed to shoot 35mm with rented BL4s and 535s whenever the budgets could support it. Things were different back then, I made money with that SR2 for a decade with no
new gear investment. Same with my first two Betacams. You bought an expensive camera and it just paid the bills for a long time. With today's cameras outdated in a year or less, I just view cameras a necessary financial burden to earn money.

I made a vow to never buy another camera that costs more than $10k since the advent of the Digital Revolution and so far, I haven't. If it costs more than $10k, it's a rental item, because today's cameras are a terrible place to tie up your money.
I have definitely evolved into more of a businessman and less of an artist. I still love to shoot and light and do it well. But there a million others out there who are "artists". In the end, it's the video/digital cinema business and I want to make
money at it. Artists and starving artists are a dime a dozen, but people in this business who are artistically innovative and make money, they are who I aspire to be. Starving and being camera rich is a terrible business decision. More power to you
and others who want to own a camera collection, it's just not for me. Been there, done that, not doing that anymore.

 

[digitalinnovations]

Can someone explain what the situation is with False Color on the C500 MkII? It’s mentioned in passing on a couple of videos I’ve watched but no one has really dove into it...that I can find.

It sounds like it’s designed to measure LOG and not a 709 preview LUT...is this correct? So it’s the opposite of how ARRI’s false color works where you must have a preview LUT on for correct measurements? I just wasn’t for sure if the C500 just didn’t work on custom / imported LUTs or any LUT.

So what gives?

 

[NorBro]

In general, some hardware's exposure tools are designed to only analyze the LOG. I don't know about the C500, but it's not uncommon if so.

But of course having the luxury to set a reference (LOG, LUT 1, LUT 2, etc.) would be ideal.

 

[digitalinnovations]

Yes, I guess it is what it is but just based on comments I got the impression it was somehow “messed up” / something they were needing to fix via firmware because it was giving wrong exposure levels. I guess we’ll find out.

 

[NorBro]

If people are reading it as exposure for their LUT then it should be wrong... (again, IF that's how it works on that camera).

But if they look at the bare image (remove any preview LUT/transformation) then the exposure levels should be correct and match what they see for C-Log2 or 3.

 

[Run&Gun]

Flashback: At the time though, there really weren't the alternatives we have today. Your only choice was which model Betacam could you afford? Maybe an Ikegami head versus a Sony head?

I agree with your assesment, if more of us thought like business people and bought what clients would pay us to shoot, you'd see far fewer barely used cameras in the Marketplace. Keep in mind though, there is a sizable
contingent of DVXers who rarely shoot paying projects and like buying and selling cameras. It's like they are camera hobbyists and not professional shooters and there's nothing wrong with that if they have the money,
can afford to lose the money on resale. It's a hobby. I'm amazed how many DVXers can afford to do this with cameras like Arris and REDs though, those are some expensive hobby cameras!

For those who try to make a living though, we really need to choose a tool, make enough to pay it off as quickly as possible so we can get into day rate profit with the camera. Completely different than being a camera collector.

That's where I was kind of going with that. We only had a handful of real choices for certain things back then, so it was either A, B or maybe C. You knew you were buying one of them. Now the choices are almost limitless and some people analyze everything to the N-th degree and get hung-up in the minutia and things that largely don't matter in the end.

I'm not saying I wanna go back there, but I do kind of miss the simpler "more innocent" times of Beta and the early HD days. The early HD days were easy: F900 or VariCam? And that was largely decided by your client base. The hard part was when you had to go to the bank and ask for either $50K or $100K...

 

[ahalpert]

. Keep in mind though, there is a sizable
contingent of DVXers who rarely shoot paying projects and like buying and selling cameras. It's like they are camera hobbyists and not professional shooters and there's nothing wrong with that if they have the money,
can afford to lose the money on resale. It's a hobby. I'm amazed how many DVXers can afford to do this with cameras like Arris and REDs though, those are some expensive hobby cameras!

Yeah it amazes me too and makes me feel so poor lol.

 

[ahalpert]

That's where I was kind of going with that. We only had a handful of real choices for certain things back then, so it was either A, B or maybe C. You knew you were buying one of them. Now the choices are almost limitless and some people analyze everything to the N-th degree and get hung-up in the minutia and things that largely don't matter in the end.

I'm not saying I wanna go back there, but I do kind of miss the simpler "more innocent" times of Beta and the early HD days. The early HD days were easy: F900 or VariCam? And that was largely decided by your client base. The hard part was when you had to go to the bank and ask for either $50K or $100K...

I feel like this is why people become so aggressive about their camera choice. Because we all desire clarity but there's none to be had. So, just like with your political candidate or your car, once you've settled on one, you realize why it's the best in every way and how the alternatives were absolutely rotten to the core.

I disagree about overanalysis, though. I mean, you're right that the minutia dont matter as much as the codec/framerate or, most importantly, if your clients demand or accept the particular camera.

But there are so many little details (like C300 audio controls on top) that can facilitate your shooting or trip you up. Puredrifting is right that you'll never get a handle on all of them or feel how good/bad the issues are until you shoot the camera. But you can learn an awful lot from obsessive research.

And there are long-term factors to consider. Like I'm looking at Canon vs Sony - 2 players in the mirrorless and low-to-mid-tier cinema camera space who are certain to survive and who both offer excellent AF - and it's clear that the RF mount is better designed that the E mount. Which enables better IBIS and some exotic lens designs. That advantage is baked in.

And now Canon is outspeccing Sony with 6K recording, internal RAW, and 8K recording next year. Will the recording advantage persist? Not to mention the broad preference for Canon color.

So, do I buy more sony with an eye on possibly selling and switching later on? How much money would i lose? Do i buy more canon now to invest in that direction? Or am I overthinking the whole thing.

 

[rob norton]

So, do I buy more sony with an eye on possibly selling and switching later on? How much money would i lose? Do i buy more canon now to invest in that direction? Or am I overthinking the whole thing.

dvxuser is going to be a quiet place once abe buys his next camera(s)! I don't think selling and switching matters that much as there's an implication that you're switching because you have enough work lined up (vs. the tired YT "I'm switching" videos).

Living in NYC why not rent when the brand you didn't buy is requested?

I've gone completely off the r5 and am thinking c300 iii when it makes sense in combination with the c200.

 

[ahalpert]

dvxuser is going to be a quiet place once abe buys his next camera(s)!

Lol I wouldn't count on it. Though it might be a quieter place if/when I start shooting more regularly. Or if/when we start getting more sleep with this infant.

Living in NYC why not rent when the brand you didn't buy is requested?

Yes, this is what I have done/am doing/will do. But I like to avoid it because of the extra effort and logistics, plus less money going to me. So, the goal is to figure out which camera I would be renting the most. But also which camera/system I would prefer to shoot with when the client doesn't make a specific request.

For the moment, Sony is easily the winner. I have a number of clients who like the FS7 or own one in-house and like to hire another one to shoot alongside or matching footage. The A7SII is still respected, so the A7SIII certainly will be. I don't want to go too deep into lenses and accessories, though, if I change course in the near future.

I've gone completely off the r5 and am thinking c300 iii when it makes sense in combination with the c200.

The thing is - a mirrorless camera like the R5 beautifully fills a niche. It can happily ride on my Ronin-S all day without any other support. (Not a big deal if you use a larger gimbal.) But also - the autofocus is even better than the C500mk2/C300mk3. So, it really nails a specific use case, except for the whole not working thing.

The A7SIII does pretty much the same thing but basically works.

Have you heard of the R300? Rumored to launch in September for $6300. C300mk3 sensor and DGO with 10-bit 4:2:2 internal and RF mount. Pretty compelling at that price. If the R6 worked without overheating that would be a killer value combo with the R300 and they should match more easily than any 2 Sony cameras

 

[rob norton]

Yes, this is what I have done/am doing/will do. But I like to avoid it because of the extra effort and logistics, plus less money going to me. So, the goal is to figure out which camera I would be renting the most. But also which camera/system I would prefer to shoot with when the client doesn't make a specific request.

For the moment, Sony is easily the winner. I have a number of clients who like the FS7 or own one in-house and like to hire another one to shoot alongside or matching footage. The A7SII is still respected, so the A7SIII certainly will be. I don't want to go too deep into lenses and accessories, though, if I change course in the near future.

The thing is - a mirrorless camera like the R5 beautifully fills a niche. It can happily ride on my Ronin-S all day without any other support. (Not a big deal if you use a larger gimbal.) But also - the autofocus is even better than the C500mk2/C300mk3. So, it really nails a specific use case, except for the whole not working thing.

Have you heard of the R300? Rumored to launch in September for $6300. C300mk3 sensor and DGO with 10-bit 4:2:2 internal and RF mount. Pretty compelling at that price. If the R6 worked without overheating that would be a killer value combo with the R300 and they should match more easily than any 2 Sony cameras

You need a reciprocal equipment borrowing deal with a bizarro abe who goes down the inverse path you choose.

Re r300, I haven't heard much, there are too many cameras coming out!

 

[owlbot]

Can someone explain what the situation is with False Color on the C500 MkII? It’s mentioned in passing on a couple of videos I’ve watched but no one has really dove into it...that I can find.

It sounds like it’s designed to measure LOG and not a 709 preview LUT...is this correct? So it’s the opposite of how ARRI’s false color works where you must have a preview LUT on for correct measurements? I just wasn’t for sure if the C500 just didn’t work on custom / imported LUTs or any LUT.

So what gives?

Just tested it, C500's False Color ignores your monitoring LUT.

 

[digitalinnovations]

Just tested it, C500's False Color ignores your monitoring LUT.

So regardless of what LUT you use it is still reading the underlying LOG signal? And you don’t have to toggle off the LUT in order for it to work properly?

I don’t think I hate that methodology...as long as I know that is the case and learn to adjust my way of thinking. It just seems like it would be less nuanced / detailed due to the LOG compression but again...I’m no engineer. Maybe once I can side-by-side the in-camera FC and externally running FC on my SmallHD I can see better how they differ. I just really don’t want to always have an external monitor; obviously, it’s great to have as much as possible but sometimes you just need/want to have the rig as light as possible.

It’s so weird but I never used False Color until the ARRI cams and due to my ENG background relied mostly on Waveforms (and Zebras to a lesser extent)but now I’ve grown so accustom to flicking on FC for quick checks...but I can always go back to just using Waveforms.

 

[DIRECTORDEVIN]

I feel like fase color is really something special. The fact it shows every single
Value without you having to go to school to learn where things are on the waveform lol is a blessing.

“Ahhh I think that’s her face”

Goodbye waveform lol

 

[digitalinnovations]

I feel like fase color is really something special. The fact it shows every single
Value without you having to go to school to learn where things are on the waveform lol is a blessing.

“Ahhh I think that’s her face”

Goodbye waveform lol

I never really used or had a grasp on Histograms so I know what you’re saying...BUT...I guess I’m from the “old school” and I still prefer Waveform to be certain I’m not clipping top or bottom. Where I love False Color is for those “in between” areas - especially exposing faces.

There are a lot of great exposure tools available and everybody has there own “recipe”.