What's a good camera with interchangeable lenses?

M

MDMart

I've been looking around for a new camera to buy for quite a while now, and I've found some interesting candidates. However, I wanted to hear you guys' ideas for a good camera.

I'm looking for a video camera of sorts, with interchangeable lenses.
My budget is about > 2500 USD

and umm, that's about it.
Any suggestions?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
A BMPCC is a very good choice. A basic set up of camera body, loupe, and a bunch of batteries will run you $1200.
4k seems like hype to me, and unless the gh4 has something better than 8 bit 420 color, I wouldn't bother.
Best bang for the buck is a GH2 for $500.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
brunerww said:
You may want to wait until March for the Panasonic GH4.

If you want the highest resolution you can get, or you're aiming for projection or theatrical release, it is the only DCI 4096x2160 camera below $4000.

I'd get the US model with the 3.5 hour recording limit, though - EU models will have a 30 minute continuous recording limit.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry about 4k as a requirement for theatrical release. Most movies you've even seen in a theater are lucky to hit 2k.

Tonight I saw a 480p dvd on new 55" Samsung, footage was shot with a gh2. It looked excellent.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
brianluce said:
I wouldn't worry about 4k as a requirement for theatrical release. Most movies you've even seen in a theater are lucky to hit 2k.

Tonight I saw a 480p dvd on new 55" Samsung, footage was shot with a gh2. It looked excellent.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The up-scale amount to go from 1k to 2k for a digital cinema package is actually only about 7%, 1k is and will continue to be plenty of resolution for a fair amount of time. There are also a great many people who don't have HD viewing capabilities at home yet.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
It doesn't. And, comparing with the BMPCC, the gh4 also won't do raw, or even a flat gradable image in another codec (prores in the case of the black magic). GH4 shoots avchd I believe, at a not terribly stellar bitrate.
Click to expand...


It is limited to 8-bit 4:2:0 internally, but can output 200mbps 1080p 10-bit 4:2:2 via HDMI ( or 100mbps 4K 10-bit 422 via SDI with the "brick" external interface). It records to Quicktime and MP4, in addition to AVCHD.

Specs here: http://www.panasonic.com/uk/consume...pact-system-cameras-dslm/dmc-gh4eb.specs.html

I have a BMPCC, and I love ProRes "Film" LOG mode - but I've been shooting with GH2 and GH3 cameras for a couple of years, and they are pretty easy to shoot "flat" and grade. I look forward to doing the same with 10-bit 4K from the GH4.

Cheers,

Bill
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That necessitates external recording equipment.. which is certainly fine, but will raise the overall investment necessary to get that 10bit higher bitrate video stored.

Presumably, the OP does not already have all of this extra gear. Also, with a total budget of $2500, besides lenses, there are of course lighting, camera support (tripod, etc) and audio concerns to consider.

Having the most fabulous image in the world won't save you if the sound is crap. Additionally, having a camera that produces a beautiful image will not save you if you can't feed it enough light :)

But, it sounds like you may already have the necessary extras you'll need to get that higher quality footage out of the GH4, Bill.. so, I look forward to seeing the fruits of your labor with it when you upgrade :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'm not a fan of using hdmi for external recording devices. My Gh2's hdmi is very flimsy. It's a real weak link. SDI is way more robust and reliable for a external recorder. ymmv.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
It doesn't. And, comparing with the BMPCC, the gh4 also won't do raw, or even a flat gradable image in another codec (prores in the case of the black magic). GH4 shoots avchd I believe, at a not terribly stellar bitrate.
Click to expand...

The gh4 shoots qt in a "mov" container, mp4, and avchd from what I've read, and it does have an excellent bitrate.

While you may not opt to use an external recorder, it's still upgradeable to use one and record 422 10-bit color. And the footage I've seen looks like the interface is also excellent. After all, this is the 4th generation of catering to filmmakers, so they are presumably only getting better, with an emphasis on video.

It's also a fine still camera.

The previous versions had good moire, so this one will probably be decent.

It can shoot in a flat, gradeable style, I believe. But no, it doesn't shoot raw, although few video cameras do, and very few people with the capability actually use a raw workflow even when given the choice. Still, having the choice would be good, but realistically, you're more likely to get as much benefit for cheaper getting an HDMI recorder than switching to a raw workflow. I'd have to upgrade my computer and buy several more terabytes of disk space.

It seems like every time someone says "this will probably suit you" you come up with an unrealistic reason why it won't, and that confuses me. I have no problem comparing it realistically to other products, but it needs to be a real comparison, not full of conjecture.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
stef said:
It seems like every time someone says "this will probably suit you" you come up with an unrealistic reason why it won't, and that confuses me. I have no problem comparing it realistically to other products, but it needs to be a real comparison, not full of conjecture.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting take on my participation in this thread. If you go back and read earlier posts, I think I was pretty clear with my recommendation that at the budget, and for a pretty large variety of reasons, with cameras that are currently available, the best bet is a DSLR. Which one, wholly dependent on whether or not the OP already has lenses.


So, you want realistic? The GH4 isn't available yet. The OP has been "been looking around for a new camera to buy for quite a while now" so presumably is wanting to make their purchase sooner than later.. Oh, oops, there's that damned conjecture again.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If you're basing it only on what's available, sure, that's reasonable. I take the "been looking for a while" to mean he won't mind waiting one month for the gh4 to come to market, if that's what he wants.

I missed seeing what lenses he had, and will go reread. But if you'd like me to itemize your conjectures, I will, although I don't think it's necessary. I'm trying to make sure the op has a reasonable presentation of his choices, not argue with you, but I didn't think you were fair in your comments about the gh4.

Edit: to wit, I agreed completely with your post #10. You were right on target with that. I disagreed with posts #18+. I still didn't see where he said what lenses he had....
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
I feel like you're fighting over me... I love it :D

The only lense I have is a Canon 50mm lense, aaand I'm pretty sure it's the old Canon mount.

I am also not looking for RAW. It's awesome, but it's not for me, however I do like the dynamic range to be as good as possible (but raw is overkill for me, in the sense that I don't wanna have to do all that post work and upgrade my hardware and stuff).

I am usually not a fan of DSLRs due to the very/too contrasted pictures it takes, but I see that this can be changed on some of them, by setting the contrast to -5 (or however low it goes).
I'm gonna wait for the gh4 to get some hands-on reviews of it, before I make my choice, but really, dynamic range/not contrasted recordings, is more important to me than 200 mbps.


I am btw very thankful for all your comments, I didn't expect a response quite like this :D
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If you want to stick with the Canon FD mount lenses, you might be best served with a micro 4/3 camera. The Panasonic AG AF100 uses the same size sensor in an ENG shoulder mount form factor with XLR inputs and HD-SDI uncompressed out. You can find them for around $1500.00-$1800.00 on ebay.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
MDMart said:
Oh, didn't know,,, never thought about that

It's an FD then.
to be exact - Canon lens FD 50mm 1:1.4
Click to expand...

That's why we ask the questions and point these things out ;)

the lens specifically says it's aCanon lens with a 50mm focal length, FD mount, f/1.4 minimum aperture (nice fast lens, I just bought a 1.4 Sigma 30mm lens for $300). It also may even tell you the filter thread diameter there as well… it'd be a number with a "null set" sign after it (circle with a slash through it).

Perhaps it looks like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/801032544-USE/Canon_C216069201_Normal_50mm_f_1_4_FD.html
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Will Vincent said:
Resolution isn't everything. There's still no word on what the GH4's codec will be, or the bitrate, etc..

Just because a camera has a sensor big enough and allows recording to a file with the dimensions 4096x2160 doesn't magically mean it'll be awesome. There's probably reasons it'll be significantly cheaper than other options. Reasons other than just "to sell more."

And here again, would be the concern of the extra hardware, etc necessary to handle the post workflow of 4K footage, which truly is pretty unnecessary for most things, unless you're doing a bunch of CG work. Are you making the next transformers movie in your backyard? Probably not. :)
Click to expand...

Some more info on the gh4. Apparently the sensor scores pretty low on dxomark (like 2 stops lower than the gh3, and noisier). If this doesn't improve by launch, I can't recommend it for stills or video.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Lucky Hardwood said:
If you want to stick with the Canon FD mount lenses, you might be best served with a micro 4/3 camera. The Panasonic AG AF100 uses the same size sensor in an ENG shoulder mount form factor with XLR inputs and HD-SDI uncompressed out. You can find them for around $1500.00-$1800.00 on ebay.
Click to expand...

Wow, how the mighty have fallen. That's a nice camera for $1500.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top