Hey guys. I'm new to this forum and just thought I'd ask what your preference is for shooting video? For me I'm a big fan of the Canon 5D Mark III and cameras made by Blackmagic Designs. But then theres the RED cameras and it's hard to have anything that compares to it in my opinion.
-
Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.
What is your favorite film camera to use?
- Thread starter dorian2786
- Start date
I haven't worked with a Mark 3, so I cannot comment on them. 7d, 550d etc I have. They're good for what they are.
I loved working with Blackmagic cameras. During production. the in build battery was painful. Great in post production.
Red introduces it's own set of issues. The quality of the picture is nice if used right.
I loved working with Blackmagic cameras. During production. the in build battery was painful. Great in post production.
Red introduces it's own set of issues. The quality of the picture is nice if used right.
The Ikonoskop has a really nice featureset and is said to be quite a pleasure to work with, but it's slightly overpriced compared to a blackmagic.
Worth a try if you can rent one for a reasonable amount. It deserves to be in the favorites list, the image is gorgeous imo.
Edit: I should add that my experience is limited to working with the footage in post and hearing from the people on set. Not a camera operator or dp myself.
Worth a try if you can rent one for a reasonable amount. It deserves to be in the favorites list, the image is gorgeous imo.
Edit: I should add that my experience is limited to working with the footage in post and hearing from the people on set. Not a camera operator or dp myself.
Last edited:
Loved the MkIII, shoot on Sony VG10 and this is certainly comparable albeit completely different with some quirks! Biggest is the issues around shooting flat. D800 is also nice to shoot on and it is certainly comparable to a 5D.
I have come around to being a Canon fan. They are so straightforward - everything is where I want it, quality is always good and if you know what you're doing, they can be blown up to a full screen.
Not a fan of the BMCC. Inorganic picture, banding, batteries, constantly having to churn through SSD cards, weight, post production lack of speediness, can't see the screen in sunlight and did I mention those bl@@dy batteries. Not my thing.
Want to go bigger and better now so am fantasizing about a C100 with Atmos Ninja or maybe a used FS100 or AF101. Don't really have the post-processing power for RAW.
I have come around to being a Canon fan. They are so straightforward - everything is where I want it, quality is always good and if you know what you're doing, they can be blown up to a full screen.
Not a fan of the BMCC. Inorganic picture, banding, batteries, constantly having to churn through SSD cards, weight, post production lack of speediness, can't see the screen in sunlight and did I mention those bl@@dy batteries. Not my thing.
Want to go bigger and better now so am fantasizing about a C100 with Atmos Ninja or maybe a used FS100 or AF101. Don't really have the post-processing power for RAW.
Thanks for all your replies. Not sure why you are not a fan of blackmagic cameras gorilla. Not sure what you mean by inorganic picture as the videos I've seen have been amazing. I think it's certainly the best camera for film at a budget price point.
I was watching some videos today comparing Mark III video footage with the Blackmagic Cinema camera and the results are shocking. The Mark III video tests showed signs and lights washed out and illegible, moire and more. I always found that the 5D gave a student look to productions but not a professional film look capable of true dynamic range and 35mm sensor.
That's probably true if you're talking about a price to image-performance ratio, but as gorilla mentioned the low price comes with a a lot of corners cut in terms of usability. What you get when you step up to something like the C100 is a camera that feels more like it was designed with the filmmaker in mind, or at least by a company with decades of experience in producing professional cameras. That's not to say the BM cameras are bad, but just that there's a lot of little things about the way they work that just makes you wonder if the people designing them ever really do much shooting themselves. I personally really like the C100/Ninja combo - and with the new ninja blade you get a much better external monitor out of the combo than with the previous ninja.
Thank you for your reply. I also agree that Canon cameras feel like they were designed with the filmmaker in mind. Have you ever tried the Canon c300 and the c500? I've seen test footage done on the Canon c300 and it's simply amazing.
Black Magic has the black sun issue.
And post is more expensive because the huge files.
5D MkII (or any canon DSLR) has moire and aliasing. MkIII is slightly better at the cost of a softer image.
They all have rolling shutter.
I like to work with C300 or my own good old EX1R (larger DOF, more all round/ENG style):
both less rolling shutter than the above.
(Global shutters will be globally used again in a few years
)
And post is more expensive because the huge files.
5D MkII (or any canon DSLR) has moire and aliasing. MkIII is slightly better at the cost of a softer image.
They all have rolling shutter.
I like to work with C300 or my own good old EX1R (larger DOF, more all round/ENG style):
both less rolling shutter than the above.
(Global shutters will be globally used again in a few years
)A lot of interesting comparisions coming out now that the GH4 has hit the market. It's significantly better than the mkIII in terms of detail, although not quite as good (detail-wise) as the BMPC 4k. It's got a lot of functional improvements over the BM cameras though. I'm pretty much settled on picking one of those up soon and probably pairing it with the atomos ninja star for 10bit 4:2:2 prores output.
Here's GH4 vs 5DmkIII - better detail and highlight handling:
http://vimeo.com/93281608
This is GH4 vs. 5DmkIII vs BMPCC - again mkIII falls well short of the other two in detail. Pocket camera compares well, but naturally can't match the detail at 4k on the GH4:
http://vimeo.com/93500786
This is a nice mix of GH4 and BM 4k - I think they mix well and are close, although the GH4 handles blown out highlights a lot better (and of course you only get the slow-motion on the GH4). I imagine highlight handling would be significantly better on the BM if you were shooting raw, although you can't do that yet at 4k. BM4k also has the global shutter, but in this type of footage it doesn't show it's advantage that much:
http://vimeo.com/93226003
Here's GH4 vs 5DmkIII - better detail and highlight handling:
http://vimeo.com/93281608
This is GH4 vs. 5DmkIII vs BMPCC - again mkIII falls well short of the other two in detail. Pocket camera compares well, but naturally can't match the detail at 4k on the GH4:
http://vimeo.com/93500786
This is a nice mix of GH4 and BM 4k - I think they mix well and are close, although the GH4 handles blown out highlights a lot better (and of course you only get the slow-motion on the GH4). I imagine highlight handling would be significantly better on the BM if you were shooting raw, although you can't do that yet at 4k. BM4k also has the global shutter, but in this type of footage it doesn't show it's advantage that much:
http://vimeo.com/93226003
If I could choose any, I'd probably go with the Aaton Penelope. It can do 2 or 3-perf, the threading's super easy, it's silent, light, great for shoulder and studio, works like a dream and has a comprehensive menu with a bunch of features.
If you're talking digital cinema? I'd have to say Alexa.
If you're talking digital cinema on a budget, then whatever you can afford. Seriously, the camera is only one part of a much larger picture
Last edited: