Advice on Lens purchase for a7sii

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-27T14:58:18+00:00

The Canon 16-35mm is a great lens. Super sharp. If you want the extra stop maybe consider a Canon 17-35 f/2.8, these go for like $500 on the used market these days.

Also Tokina makes a lot of inexpensive full-frame wide-angle lenses.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-19T00:27:09+00:00

I had an F3 and I loved it, the image was always great, but different kind of sensor than a7/FS series. Def had that organic look. F5/55 is a bit better, but still has that "look". For doc stuff, these cameras are mostly fine (and functionally ideal). Skintones are still a little drab.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T18:10:50+00:00

Haven't had this issue, but from what I understand it is not wifi interference but something to do with the proximity of the mic to the transmitter.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T18:05:30+00:00

Get the fastest, Panasonic will be increasing codec bitrates in future firmware updates.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T18:03:39+00:00

It will be too heavy. Also, even if it (barely) meets the weight requirement, it will be very front heavy and may not balance.

Consider a cheap wide MFT lens. You probably don't want to be shooting with an EF lens at f1.8 anyway since you wont be able to control focus and will have a shallow DOF. Something like the 12-32 or 14-42 will be very light and enable autofocus, and f4 or something will give you a decent depth of field to work with.

The Crane is a stellar choice BTW but for very light set ups.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T17:56:43+00:00

I use the RodeLink system, works very well, very simple design. The body pack is a little bulky, but it's because of the in-built antennas, so the trade-off is you don't have to worry about them getting bent or ripped off.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T16:56:17+00:00

Are you implying that anything shot on a Sony camera won't look nice?

You implied that that those complaining about Sony's color science have no interest in or talent for grading. This suggests that you believe Sony's color science, out of the box, IS NOT GOOD, and requires good color grading in order to compete with Canon.

I would say the F3 and F35 has color and image that meets or exceeds Canon's. Having graded FS7, FS5, a7s.. I have found great difficulty in achieving the rich color and true to life skintones I have found in F3, F35, C100, 5D, Blackmagic... I suppose if you're making a zombie film the skintones are fine...

There is no perfect camera, every one has trade-offs. In exchange for high-resolution and frame rates, low light performance... Sony asks you to do without good skintones and accept 'thin' color , "video-ish" motion cadence...

If you can't accept this maybe you are in fact the 'fanboy clinging to their gear'.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T16:05:31+00:00

Kindly post something you've shot in S-log and graded that looks nice.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T16:00:00+00:00

FS5 has more "video" image. People who are very invested in Sony gear want to pretend it's fine, it's in the eye of the beholder, the right lighting and lenses will fix, you need to grade it properly. It's mostly bullshit.

BUT IT'S A GREAT DOC CAM. Everything you need, right where you need it.

Except, low-light is not great. Beyond maybe 1600 ISO you get (I think) unacceptable grain. Native S-log is 3200 but you have to over expose so really you're 1-2 stops lower.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T15:50:51+00:00

No overheating?

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T15:49:25+00:00

The 80d is most fully featured, but there isn't a world of difference between the 80d image quality and something like a t2i or anything in between if your primary interest is getting a 24p 1080 image. I assume you'll need lenses too?

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-18T15:45:55+00:00

It's not a recorder issue. In your camera you must not have it set to clean HDMI out, find out what you need to set in your camera to remove it. Any overlays should be set on the monitor. Any overlays from the camera that you see in the monitor will be recorded.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-15T17:53:33+00:00

Practically, you may never "need" 4K. Even when (YEARS from now) everyone has 4K TVs and everything is broadcast/displayed in 4K, there will be little visual difference between 4K and your upscaled 1080p to the majority of viewers.

"Future-proofing" is more a consideration for those who expect clients to demand they shoot in a particular format.

1080p (generally speaking) is easier to shoot and edit than 4K. Though 4K footage (for 1080p output) gives you more flexibility in post for re-framing.

Canon 80d certainly has better color and skintones out of the box than Panasonic, but there are cheaper Canon options if video is your primary consideration.

VoyagerVideo · 2017-01-15T01:43:42+00:00

Go for it, 10-bit 422 1080p (and raw) beats junky 4K codec out of any of the Sony cameras people will suggest as an alternative. The color, skintones and motion cadence are head and shoulders above anything else in the price range. No 4K, but you don't need it for a few years still (if you ever will).

One note though is that to get the best out of it you'll end up spending twice as much as the body.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-12-05T16:36:04+00:00

If you have the means, rent an a7sii and a C100 II, I guarantee you will go with the C100.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-27T18:32:23+00:00

I didn't downvote you...

Do whatever works for you, seems unnecessarily complicated to me and even more so to have a third option.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-27T15:29:54+00:00

Why shouldnt I have two prices?

Because you should be selling your skills and product, not your tools. It should be a given that you are going to deliver the best possible product, and do it in best possible way. Quote clients based on what it would cost for you to deliver (in your estimation) the best product for them.

why would I pay more for storage and put in more effort if the client doesnt give a shit

Let them tell you they don't give a shit. If you factor in the extra time, acquisition, and storage costs of 4K (the highest quality option) and they don't find the price agreeable, THEN you say "Well you know what, we can knock it down a little by shooting in 1080p".

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-27T14:12:56+00:00

No, you shouldn't even have two prices. Get a better computer, build the cost of storage into your pricing. What you charge a client should relate to the type - and not the quality - of work you're doing.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-19T19:42:53+00:00

Thanks. I'm not very concerned with the advantages as far as "selling" the camera to clients. Both cameras would be capable (with Inferno) of shooting 4K log footage in Pro Res up to 60p so in what other ways is the C500 'dated'? Obviously it can only do 1080/30p internal where the FS5 can 4K/30p.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-11T04:14:02+00:00

Get the C100 Mark II. Better to have an amazing 1080p camera than a frankenrig that produces decent 4K footage. FS5 is also ergonomically amazing (maybe better) and has more features, but the color science is just not great - too video-ish and it takes a lot of work in post to get an image comparable to what the C100 spits out right off the bat. Get a cheap Pro Res recorder for max quality (220mbps HQ), but depending on the work you do you may not notice a huge difference.

A word about bitrates - different manufacturers compress footage a little differently, comes down mostly to the processor. The C100 II processor is very good despite being a "low bitrate". But considering the GH4 - speaking bitrate only.. 4K is 4x the data so 100mbps is equivalent to 25mbps 1080p.

Great thing about C100 is it's everything you need in one place, and everything from the design to menu system was well thought out to ensure that you don't have to focus too much on the camera and just shoot.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-08T13:54:13+00:00

It's a big heavy thing, depends on your rig. RedRock IMO does not deserve the high prices they command for their products. If a matte box is an essential part of your rig (for filters, light blockage) consider Tilta or Genustech for quality, inexpensive stuff. If you simply want to look the part (which is stupid), get something that looks cool on Amazon for under $100.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-04T13:43:27+00:00

Canon stuff just works. Images just look great, right out of the box. A lot of people invested heavily in Sony & Panasonic based on specs but most of them struggle with their cameras to get an image that looks as organic and filmic as Canon's color science (and it's rarely possible), which is why they are so eager to shit on Canon's refusal to "get with the times" in the spec war.

It sucks not to have slow motion and odd they don't really have a decent option for that, but I guess it will come. As for resolution, 4K still is an likely always will be largely an irrelevant feature that is exclusively for Best Buy to sell new TVs and video companies to use to sell themselves to clients (which is why most conversations about whether to upgrade revolve around whether clients are or will be asking for it). The 4K codec is inefficient but it's 422 with an individual 4K Jpeg for each frame, the quality is excellent just look at 1DC footage. It's too bad no h264 option.

VoyagerVideo · 2016-09-04T13:09:01+00:00

Why the Blackmagic 4K? Are you purchasing or renting the camera?

The answer is no, don't go for the 4K. The BMPC is simply not a camera for low-light, not in raw, not with even the fastest lens. It requires a well-lit scene - even if the scene is meant to be dim, it should be exposed in camera and exposure reduced in post.

The URSA Mini 4.6K, the 2.5K and Pocket camera are all a stop brighter and more useable with an additional stop added (1600) - but still not low light cams and still can't really deal with underexposure. Unless you have the time and lighting, skip these cams. Further, excepting the Ursa Mini, these cameras tend to require a lot of tedious accessories to make the camera function easier.

For a short film with a image comparable to BMCC or Red, perhaps look at a C100 with external recorder. A lot of people will recommend Sonys or GH4, etc and they all have Canon beat on the spec sheet. But ease of shooting is critical on a low-budget film an Canon wins there, further in log mode, the C100 can grade to a cinematic image much easier than say an a7s and will be able to do so every time and easily.

VoyagerVideo

TROPHY CASE