• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

camera Advice about: Lenses vs camera?

MidnightRabbit

Business Member
indieBIZ
Hi everyone, I would like to get your advice about what’s better. To get good lenses or to get a good camera first?
I have a DSLR cam and I would like to shoot cinematic videos. ( Eg: Depth of field) I know those examples probably were shot with super fancy equipment and crew.
I would like to achieve a cinematic vibe. Any advice to get a quality video without expending a lot of money?


Some examples




 
I think he wants to make an investment in a tool that suits him. I cant make that derision because I don't know how he wants to shoot. I think for fast gimbals shots in low light the sony would be good. If he want's to have the best dynamic range the Black Magic is a good choice.
 
Blackmagic Pocket that they are discussing has 13 stops of dynamic range
Sony a7siii has 15 stops of dynamic range


Perhaps its close to 12 or 13... You can have 15 if you denoize it further. I also think that the 12 or 13 stops of the a7siii is excellent and if I could choose I would by the a7siii over the Blackmagic Pocket 4K. For me the Auto focus is important and makes it useful for tings like festival and after movies. ( I can imagine that MidnightRabbit wants to do that) One of the cool tings of the a7siii is that he can use smaller E mount lenses for that car shot he was looking for. But on the flip side.... The Pocket is almost 1000,- cheaper then the a7siii. 🤔
 

MidnightRabbit

Business Member
indieBIZ
i like my a7siii but its a couple years older now
Honestly the easiest/quickest way to be "cinematic" is just to push in with a dolly or to do a crane shot

Like for example, play creepy music, show a door, push into the door slowly for 8 seconds, you've got a cinematic horror trailer
I've seen that basic shit so many times lol, but really just slowly pushing in with a dolly is magic compared to videography.

I did this like 8 years ago but still like the opening shot, just a basic crane shot.

That's a great idea. Thanks for sharing. What are you using as a steady cam? 🙂
 

MidnightRabbit

Business Member
indieBIZ
A quick tip for low budget cinematography that can help you accomplish what Sean is talking about immediately.

You don't really need more than 1080p for youtube, so film in 4k on a tripod. Once you get into the editing deck, the image will be much larger than the 1080 frame. Shrink shots down to fit if you don't need movement. If you want to do a push, or crane move of some kind, simply set keyframes and move the entire shot inside the window at up to native resolution. Perfect stability, full resolution, flawless fluid movement. It's a zero dollar fix that works perfectly, as long as you don't mind a 1080p output. This technique was responsible for every camera move in my first released film.

It's super easy, and if you don't understand, or need help, I'm sure one of us would be glad to screen share with you for 5 minutes and walk you through it.

Great suggestion from Sean.

I went and found the trailer for that old movie that used this trick, lol, I can't believe how bad I used to be at this. Anyway, you can see the technique in practice here.

That's genius! that makes totally sense. Never thought that before. Thanks, Nate.
 

MidnightRabbit

Business Member
indieBIZ
You're talking my language - that all makes perfect sense! There's another way to use the analogy though (which can serve as a metaphor for that infamous "cinematic look") : why is a grand piano needed for this song? Is it the rich "grand piano" sound, as opposed to a stand-up honky-tonk piano, for a key phrase in the music? OK, you can sub in a virtual instrument there; job done, money saved, on to the next project.

But what if the song is about a pianist, and the music video needs to show them graduating from a honky-tonk in some two-bit town to a grand in a major concert hall? Well, now you've no choice - you need a real piano for the shot. But does your artist need to be able to play it? Not necessarily - stunt doubles regularly do the fingerwork for all kinds of instruments in movies, so your artist only needs to be able to act as if they can play.

Then again, if it's the artist who's commissioning this video, they might really need to play when they sing to get the maximum emotion out of their performance, so now you've no choice but to find a grand piano in a suitable setting and shoot your artist and the piano in real time. But hey, you can skimp on the audio at this stage, and re-record everything in the studio, because you're going to be doing this anyway, aren't you?

Unless the whole point of the video is to reproduce a "live" performance ...

There's a whole set of circumstances that have absolutely nothing to do whether or not the technology exists, but everything to do with whether or not it's needed, and that need will change with every production.

Getting back to the "cinematic" or "professional" look of any production, but especially a music video. Taking your second video as an example (MUSE) - study the intro: there are 54 separate shots in the first minute and three quarters, before he starts singing. That means setting up camera angles and lighting, as well as rigging and decorating the set, 54 times over. Sure, you can compromise on certain shots and use the same lighting when shooting from two or three different angles ... but if you want the "professional" look, then it's that investment of time and creative energy that will have the most effect, not the number of lenses you have in your kit bag.
That's Right!, a music or video production is the sum of many technical and creative aspects, knowledge, and decisions. Thanks for your insights. I will practice camera angles and lighting before shooting a video.
 

MidnightRabbit

Business Member
indieBIZ
Cinematic vibe! Not just what is on the screen technologically but to evoke a certain experience similar to a theatrical one.
Yeah exactly!!! This is kind of Off-topic, but this happened to me long ago. I watched "The Dark Knight Rises" on BlueRay, big 4k TV. I was disillusioned about how the BlueRay resolution was killing all the cinematic vibe, it looked like it was shot with an IPAD, everything was so clear that you can notice that everything was fake, part of the movie set, the costumes, and props were made of plastic and the abuse of CGI was just too much. I thought, if this is Blue-ray I'm not interested in, cause is killing all the vibe. I was not immersed in the movie, the feeling was like watching a reality show or soap opera. I don't know if I'm the only one that think like that, cause lot of my friends love that "HD cinematic look" probably because it looks more kind of realistic, like watching a movie through a window or FaceTime.
 

MidnightRabbit

Business Member
indieBIZ


Perhaps its close to 12 or 13... You can have 15 if you denoize it further. I also think that the 12 or 13 stops of the a7siii is excellent and if I could choose I would by the a7siii over the Blackmagic Pocket 4K. For me the Auto focus is important and makes it useful for tings like festival and after movies. ( I can imagine that MidnightRabbit wants to do that) One of the cool tings of the a7siii is that he can use smaller E mount lenses for that car shot he was looking for. But on the flip side.... The Pocket is almost 1000,- cheaper then the a7siii. 🤔
Thanks, man! this is super helpful, thanks for this analysis and pointed out the cool features of the A7III. and yes, that's exactly what I have in mind ... mini-docs, behind the scenes, making of ( studio/rehearsals ), festivals, etc.
 
Top