Looks like the bastard awful days of micro HDMI might be over? I’ve heard from a Panasonic GH5 tester that it will have *full size* HDMI! (am very happy to hear that!) One stop better as well, and IBIS too.
In other news, we can see this on top of the GH5 body at Photokina:
Very pleased to see, as I have many times suggested, that Panasonic should go with a Sony XLR-K2M audio addition instead of doing another YAGH again!
While it is exciting reading about all the new features the Panasonic GH5 will bring (such as 4K 60fps or 4K 30fps 10bit 422), it is somewhat depressing reading on other places on the internet how quick the anti-MFT trolls are out, and of course their first red herring is “but it sucks at low light”.
This low light argument reminds me of the megapixel race, sure there was big benefits from going from 2 megapixels to 5 megapixels, then to 12 megapixels, but then at around 16 megapixels to 24 megapixels range… the arguments got a lot weaker. And for 99.9% of users we don’t need 50 megapixels!
Ditto low light, not being constrained by 50 ISO film is AWESOME, then getting to 200 ISO… great! And now we can do workable 800 and 1600 and even 3200 ISO!
The Panasonic GX85 is as good in lowlight as the new Canon 5Dmk4 (but the GX85 is a fraction of the cost! & has better detail):
Let’s assume GH5 carries on and is one stop better even than that? How is that not a very workable ability to handle?
Do we NEED to have clean 100,00 ISO?? Nah, that is over the top in nearly all cases. Like having a 100 megapixel camera (for some people they’ll *need* that, but for most of us it is serious overkill and a bad compromise to purchase a 100 megapixel camera).
Plus remember there is the Metabones Speed Booster XL that gives Micro Four Thirds an extra 1.3 stop gain with the lens you’re using, nothing else has that aside from MFT. And Micro Four Thirds mount has access to a uniquely wide range of very fast lenses (I love my SLR Magic 25mm T0.95!).
I’d rather pass on the unnecessary over the top extreme high ISO capabilities and have instead the well polished and extensive range of features that the GH5 will have (just like Panasonic had each time with the GH1/GH2/GH3/GH4, relative to the other cameras of their time). So while yes I agree, better lowlight would be nice, let’s keep some perspective about this (when do you ever hear anyone complaining about lowlight from a new Canon APS-C release?!).
News got leaked accidentally by B&H that a new Zoom F4 is coming.
I thought the Zoom F8 when it was announced was a groundbreaking new recorder in what it brought to a new low price point for soundies.
Now the F4 is even cheaper (US$650 vs US$1K), and has nearly everything the F8 has! Except for most notably the lack of extra XLR inputs (8 vs 4, thus the names: F8 vs F4. The “F” = field recorder, “H” = handheld recorder such as H1/H4n/H5/H6) and the lack of an app for the F4 to mix on a tablet like you can with the F8. Oh, and in a more minor point the F4 has a monochrome screen vs the 4 color screen of the F8.
But everything else (such as pre amps, and time code) is basically exactly the same as the F8! Some things are even an improvement, such as adding camera return to the F4 that was missing from the F8, adding extra short cut keys to the top of the F4, and using XLR outputs instead of the TA3 outputs the F8 has.
Having the missing XLR inputs from the F8 is not such a big deal for many prospective F4 buyers, as 4 XLR inputs is plenty for many small/medium jobs. And when you need a bit extra, adding in two more XLR inputs for a total of 6 XLR inputs is cheap to do with the Zoom EXH-6:
The F4 is positioned quite interestingly, as it has nearly everything from the F8 (except for the extra XLR inputs and the tablet app), yet the F8 is a small enough bump up in price it will tempt a fair few people to spend a little more for those couple of extra features… however for many other people the F4 will suit them perfectly, as they won’t need more than the usual 4 (or occasional 6) XLR inputs and they won’t be using a tablet for mixing (but I would like to use a tablet for entering metadata! Hmmm…).
Andrew Jones (who was one of the testers of the F4 for Zoom) said it is almost the same size as the F8, but (strangely!) is a tiny bit heavier. I guess cutting out a few XLR inputs does not save much weight, but where does the extra weight come from? Maybe it is more robustly built?
Crazy idea time: what next for Zoom after the Zoom F4? Is a “Zoom F2” next? The idea might sound hilarious! But being serious now, if it is bag friendly (a very small bag!!), ultra lightweight, and very cheap (perhaps US$400ish? Keeping the 50% price jump ratio from F2 to F4 to F8), then a Zoom F2 certainly would be popular!
For many jobs 2x XLR plus an extra stereo input (for up to 4x ISO tracks) would be plenty! (Plus a L & R XLR output, plus Timecode, etc… just like the F4)
Heck, for the last couple of days I’ve been doing a job with my Sound Devices 552 which only needed the one XLR for the boom to be recorded, plus one XLR output to be sent to the Sony F3 as a reference scratch track.
A “Zoom F2” would even be overkill for that! Could you pretty please make this “F2” dream come true Zoom?
Blurb and specs list from B&H (page is currently down, you need to use Google cache to view it):
Designed to provide big Hollywood sound on an affordable indie budget, Zoom F4 is a 6-input / 8-track professional field recorder featuring super-low-noise preamps and timecode with pinpoint accuracy. The unit provides recording and playback resolutions up to 24-bit/192 kHz with impressive audio specs including an extremely low noise floor (-127 dBu EIN) and high gain (up to +75 dB), with +4 dB line-level inputs. The on-board temperature-compensated crystal oscillator (TCXO) generates timecode at 0.2 ppm accuracy and supports all standard drop-frame and non-drop formats, as well as jam sync for external devices.
The advanced on-board limiters provide overload protection for all inputs and outputs, which lets you capture audio in a wide range of environments. Limiting can be applied simultaneously at full resolution with 10 dB of headroom and features controls for setting threshold, attack, and release.
The F4 offers four combo XLR-1/4″ inputs, a 1/8″ stereo input, and includes a Zoom mic-capsule input for recording six discrete tracks with an additional stereo mix, all at full 24-bit/192 kHz resolution. Additionally, inputs 5/6 can function as a camera return for audio monitoring only for confidence checks. The dual-SD card slot features simultaneous recording to both cards allowing you to make a backup or split recording with all eight tracks on one card and a stereo mix on the other.
Each of the four XLR-1/4″ inputs offers a dedicated preamp with gain control, phantom power, a six-segment LED level meter, plus a Record Ready and PFL switch. In addition to the 1/4″ headphone output with a dedicated volume control, the F4 provides two main balanced XLR outputs, as well as two sub outs on a single unbalanced 1/8″ stereo mini-jack, enabling easy connection to a camera. All timecode I/O is provided on BNC connectors and the unit includes a variable-frequency slate-tone generator to confirm levels.
An easy-to-read 1.9″ LCD display is suitable for use in all lighting environments including dark low-light sets to bright sunlight. The on-board mixer not only provides user-adjustable level, pan, and input/output delay, but also offers high-pass filtering for noise and wind reduction, phase inversion, and Mid-Side decoding. The F4 ships with a camera-mount adapter, AC power adapter, and download codes for Cubase LE and Wavelab LE.
Six-input / eight-track multitrack field recorder with integrated mixer
Six discrete inputs, including four with locking Neutrik XLR/TRS combo connectors, a stereo 3.5mm input, and Zoom mic-capsule input
Compact and lightweight metal chassis, weighing just two pounds (without batteries)
High-quality mic preamps with up to 75 dB gain, less than -127 dBu EIN, and +4 dB line inputs
Support for up to 24-bit/192 kHz recording as well as 96, 88.2, 48, and 44.1 kHz, plus 47.952 and 48.048 kHz for HD video compatibility; 16-/24-bit resolution
Accurate timecode (0.2 ppm) I/O on standard BNC connectors; dropframe/non-drop formats with Jam Sync
Two different power supply options: 8x AA batteries or external DC battery pack with 4-pin Hirose connector
Dedicated gain control knob, 6-segment LED level meter, and PFL/Solo switch for each channel
Phantom power (+48V/+24V) on every preamp
Advanced on-board limiters for input and output
High-pass filter, phase invert, and Mid-Side decoder
Input delay of up to 30ms per channel / output delay of up to 10 frames per output
Compatible with all Zoom mic capsules; optional ECM extender cable enables remote positioning
Dual XLR balanced Main Outs plus 1/8″ stereo mini-jack Sub Out
Dedicated headphone output (100mW) with front-panel volume control
1.9” white, backlit monochrome LCD
Dedicated PFL display with viewable trim settings
Dual SD/SDHC/SDXC card slots, up to 512GB each
Records in BWF-compliant WAV or MP3 file formats
Support for extensive metadata (BWF and iXML); input time, date, project, scene number, etc.
Built-in tripod mount; camera-mount adapter also included
Use as a 6-in/4-out USB audio interface (@ 96 kHz)
Yessssssssss! Been eagerly waiting for them to fill in the gap between 16mm and 24mm (if you are shooting S35, or 14mm to 24mm which is an even worse gap if shooting “full frame“), as that gap was just too darn big! Rather annoying not having anything between those two lenses, so I’d been saying for a long a time Samyang/Rokinon needs to bring out a 20mm prime. Now I just need to save up the US$600ish the lens will cost.
It is a little slower than the f-stop of the 24mm/35mm/50mm/85mm which are all f1.4, but that is ok as it is a 20mm lens and it is much harder to design fast wide angle lenses. Likely a 20mm f1.4 would’ve meant significant compromises with weight/size/quality/price. And the 20mm is already a little faster than the 16mm which is f2 (& much faster than the 14mm f2.8).
The 20mm f1.8 is a full frame lens which will be available (eventually) in all the usual mounts: Nikon F, Canon EF, Pentax K, Sony A, Sony E, Micro Four Thirds, & FujiFilm X. (I nearly always recommend buying these only in Nikon F mount however because they’re manual lenses, & that will give you the most flexibility in what you can use this lens on)
Here is the announcement from Samyang (same as Rokinon really):
August 8th, 2016, Seoul, Korea – The global optics brand, Samyang Optics (http://www.samyanglensglobal.com) has today introduced new manual focus lenses for full frame DSLR cameras: 20mm F1.8 photo lens and 20mm T1.9 cine lens. As known for the brand’s wide and bright lenses, Samyang 20mm series adopted bright F1.8 aperture to provide perfect wide angle for interior shots and landscapes.
Explore Your Wideness with Samyang 20mm Series
The Samyang 20mm F1.8 ED AS UMC and 20mm T1.9 ED AS UMC are wide angle manual focus lenses for DSLR cameras with full frame sensor size. It has been a year that Samyang launched the full frame DSLR camera lens and latest lens was the 135mm series.
Samyang Lenses are known for its bright apertures and so does this Samyang 20mm series. These two lenses have a bright aperture of F1.8, equivalent of T1.9 for cine lenses, to offer a best quality images under various lighting conditions. Also, the lightweight Samyang 20mm series brings the portability to increase the convenience.
Based on Samyang Optics’ exceptional optical technology, 13 glasses in 12 groups are used to create the most optimal image quality. Among 13 glasses, there are 2 aspherical lenses and 3 extra-low dispersion lenses per lens to minimize aberration and unnecessary light dispersion, delivering high resolution from centre to corners of the image.
This 20mm angle of view was designed to fulfill consumers’ requests to explore various occasions with Samyang Lens. In between ultra-wide 14mm and wide-standard 24mm, 20mm lens is a perfect fit to explore wide angles not only for shooting indoor images such as concerts and interior photos but also street snaps. The 0.2m of minimum focusing adds versatility to the lens.
Add Samyang 20mm T1.9 to Your Samyang VDSLR Kit
Specifically, the Samyang 20mm T1.9 is a cine lens optimally designed for professional follow focus system, thanks to the quiet and smooth de-clicked focus and aperture gear rings. Also, the distance scale and T numbers are marked on both sides of the lens for convenience when filming.
The best partners to explore your wideness, the Samyang 20mm series is globally available from September. The suggested retail prices are EUR 499 for 20mm F1.8 photo lens and EUR 549 for 20mm T1.9 cine lens.
For more information, please visit Samyang Optics official website (http://www.samyanglensglobal.com), Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/samyanglensglobal) and Instagram (http://www.instagram.com/samyanglensglobal).
Spotted this text from a Saramonic employee on Facebook: “It provides XLR connector and 48V phantom power, recording 24bit/48kHz wav audio files to MicroSDHC card, capacity up to 32GB” (minor tweak by myself to fix her typo)
The name of this new product is going to be “Saramonic SR-VRM1”.
I’m guessing as it only provides one XLR connection (assuming the grammar is correct here…. that it is singular, not plural. Not always 100% accurate to make this grammar assumption about all products out of China, but it is a reasonable conclusion to leap to!), that it is going to be a very small recorder, perhaps a competitor to the Tascam DR-10X but at an even lower price point? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1086779-REG/tascam_dr_10x_dr_10cx_plug_on_micro_linear.html
As if priced low enough, it could provide a good budget alternative for those non-wireless “wireless” lav scenarios which people are using Zoom H1 recorders for (as I’ve done a few times myself at weddings, & similar scenarios): http://aspenmics.com/products/belt-clip-for-zoom-h1-handy-recorder
A few important points I’d like to see the Saramonic SR-VRM1 have:
As well as internal power (AA battery?), a way for it to be externally powered as well (even if it is as simple as a USB port to power it by. But please not mini USB! Make it be at least Micro USB sized, or even better full size USB). That way we can use it for long recording takes unattended, until the card fills up. Or can be used in your mixing bag as an small back up recording, without needing to concern ourselves about keeping batteries topped up.
Some way to pass out audio (just like the Tascam DR-10CS has, and many other recorders), ideally XLR, but even just a 3.5mm output would be ok & better than nothing.
Have both one XLR input, and one 3.5mm (a locking 3.5mm please!) input, so we’ve got that choice.
Update:
Saramonic confirmed it is coming soon with this tweet which links to my tweet of this blog post:
I’m a long way from upgrading my multiple (from six to a dozen cameras at once!) action cameras 360 Degree Virtual Reality Rig (thus I don’t need to worry about interchangeable lens options on this rig), but when I do I am thinking to go with Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera. Even though high resolution is very important for 360VR.
If you do go with 4K cameras then the Panasonic GH4 is a very popular 4K option (such as these guys using GH4 cameras for 360VR: http://shinichi-works.info/project_gh4.html). Also there is the Sony a7R mk2 / a7S mk2 options (but costs skyrocket, after all you’re not buying just one camera but many!) or Sony A6300 (which has overheating issues, an especially troubling issue if you have six of these operating all cramped up close together to each other! As then they’ll overheat even faster). Also Blackmagic Design has their Micro Studio Camera, but that requires an external 4K recorder, which introduces significant size/power/cost issues. Samsung NX1 is also very much worth a look (& NX500, but in 4K it has a harsh crop factor), but it is a dying system and ever since the NX1 hack came out the secondhand prices of the NX1 have been staying high.
Thus in the end I’d prefer the BlackMagic Micro Cinema Camera (BMMCC), because I’d prefer the dynamic range, bit depth, and color space of the BMMCC. And while the Panasonic GH4 / G7 does a max of 30p @ 4K, you are gaining resolution but giving up frame rate and I’d rather keep it at 60fps (as arguably high frame rates are nearly just as important for Virtual Reality as resolution is. Least you give the viewer motion sickness. And you can get higher resolution by using more cameras!). Presumably the GH5 will give 4K 60fps, but that will probably cost US$2K or more per camera (and you need many multiple ones of them of course for complete 360 degree coverage!), and it hasn’t even been announced yet so who knows.
Though given the likely length of time until I’ll be upgrading, we’ll surely see a Panasonic G7 sale by then which might make that option too cheap to resist vs going with BlackMagic Micro Cinema Cameras.
Anyway, I have still been putting a lot of thought & research this year into the various options for the future, and I decided I’d at last put the metaphorical pen to paper and share a few of my thoughts on this particular aspect of lens choices. We can broadly speaking split it into three groups:
a) native mount (i.e. MFT lens, or E mount lenses if a person was using A6300/A7 series instead), but then this can severely limit a person a couple of years down the track if they change bodies. It would be a lot smoother / cheaper if only the bodies need to be swapped out and not lenses as well. I’d like to have some degree of versatility with this rig.
b) full frame UWA lenses (in Nikon F mount of course, as I’ve explained in other blog posts), but not an option as you can’t then go truly wide if using them on APS-C or smaller bodies. And A7r mk2 / A7s mk2 are the only truly interesting options to consider here for use that are full frame. Maybe with the one exception of the Rokinon 14mm f2.8 lens, which does almost hit the sweet spot for price & focal length even when used on APS-C. Or the Rokinon 12mm F2.8, but then you have to deal with fisheye distortion.
c) APS-C UWA lens, this appears to hit the sweet spot of maximum versatility plus maximum FoV.
APS-C lens options:
Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6, max FoV but I’d be concerned about the slow f-stop, as then you’d start to be losing one of the key gains of ditching GoPros with their poor lowlight ability.
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (or the newer Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8, but that costs more so no), this is the lens I own myself and is in my eyes the “best” UWA lens for normal filmmaking, but does that mean it is for 360VR too?? Hmm
Rokinon 10mm f/2.8, is lighter/cheaper/wider (all 3 keys points for a 360VR rig) than the Tokina but is a fixed focal length (probably not a disadvantage though at all! As you absolutely don’t want that focal length to change once you’ve set it, thus why people will tape down zoom lenses if using them on a 360VR rig). However the Rokinon 10mm f/2.8 isn’t cheaper than Tokina when you consider the older Tokina models can easily be picked up secondhand, but the Rokinon can’t be so easily found at all secondhand as it is a newer lens.
Rokinon 16mm f/2, the fastest option but by this point at 16mm it is only barely UWA at all.
Outside these options listed, I can’t think of any good UWA lenses, or am I missing something? Everything else that comes to mind seems that they’d all be a worse compromise somewhere in price/FoV/speed/etc than these four that I listed.
Keen to hear in the comments your views on my thought process and each of the options I reached at!
The screenplay for this short film was written by an Artificial Intelligence neural network bot. The results are hilarious.
Not even screenwriters will be safe from the coming robot invasion.
Also the soundtrack is meaningless, the lyrics was generated by AI (although the music composed was done by humans, next step for the AI? No reason why it couldn’t be): https://soundcloud.com/tigerandman/home-on-the-land
I’d love to shoot an AI written screenplay myself! Maybe I could feed it horror film scripts instead of Sci-Fi?
They chose Sci-Fi as obviously it is a good match for a screenplay written by an AI, but also because this was produced as an entry in the Sci-Fi London film festival for their 48-Hour Film Challenge. This is the version on the Sci-Fi London Vimeo channel:
Here is the Wikipedia article which goes into more detail about the kind of neural network they used for their AI (running on thirty two Tesla K80 graphics cards!! They cost US$5K each at launch: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8729/nvidia-launches-tesla-k80-gk210-gpu The K80 has dual GPUs, a staggering 24 gigabytes of RAM, & draws 300W of power!):
LTSM is superior to Markov Chains here as it samples a larger sequence of letters, which makes it superior for whole paragraphs rather than just a handful of words.
Amusingly the creators also made a bot to vote for themselves in the competition at a rate of 36,000 votes per hour. And blamed on the AI! Haha. There is an “interview” with the AI over on the Sci Fi London blog:
Wow, a real life Transformer? Has a chassis that can adapt to match the exact length and width of nearly every car. Is electric powered! Can be tuned to simulate the characteristics of almost any car (ride height, rigidity, damping, gear shifts, acceleration, etc). Basically The Mill’s BLACKBIRD is a blank car you can swap in for any car of your dreams.
Has 4x RED cameras mounted to film its surroundings, also a laser scanner to recreate the environment for accurate compositing (such as reflections) and for VR (you can see the HTC Vive used in the video).
Then a CG car body gets dropped over on top of it in post. Clients can even use the Blackbird Augment Reality app to see a live CG rendering of the vehicle on location.
This can be useful to car manufacturers for a number of reasons, such as if availability of the car is difficult due to production scheduling vs shoot dates, or if the car needs to be kept tightly under wraps from the motoring paparazzi. Or if numerous variants of the car advert are needed (due to changes from one year’s model to the next, or due to different versions of the car for different regions of the world).
Fantastic use of merging Virtual Reality techniques with conventional filming.
Watch the whole video here:
First time I remember coming across a tutorial of the uses of CGI cars being composited into a real life scene was years ago when I saw this HitFilmtutorial, is worth a watch if you’re curious about understanding the basics of how this works:
Is by any chance KineMount an open mount like say Micro Four Thirds is? I am guessing it is not.
There is a thread over on BMCuser about possible interchangeable mounts for BMD cameras.
http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?16668-Possible-interchangeable-mounts-for-4-6K
Got me thinking that the absolute best result would be if BMD adopted the FZ mount in future cameras. FZ mount is what is used in the Sony F3/F5/F55, which I’ve used and is an absolutely wonderful mount! You can adapt it to anything else, for instance I’ve got a rock solid Nikon F mount on my Sony PMW-F3. So it works, and FZ is an already popular mount used by many.
But Sony will never let BMD use FZ mount. Thus the very nearly almost as good option is to talk with Kinefinity and see if they’d open up KineMount for everybody to use (in many ways KineMount is like Sony FZ mount, and kinda better… as Kinefinity have a focal reducer option! Yay). As if that happened it would be tremendously good news for both companies, and a massive result to help the indy / hobbyist / low / medium budget film industry.
Be great if Kinefinity and BMD could talk together with each other to create a universal mount system which can go onto dominate the film industry in the future. As no longer would consumers have to choose between buying a Canon EF mount model or the PL version (such as happens with the C300, BMPC4K, URSA, and URSA Mini), they can have both!
It would fit very well with BMD’s corporate philosophy of have having an open system rather than a closed ecosystem you’re forced to buy into over and over again (hello RED!).
So BMD appears to support open systems (such as using SSDs or CFast cards) rather than vendor lock in (like RED does!!). And this would obviously benefit Kinefinity in increasing their awareness, thus it appears to be in everybody’s best interests to make KineMount an open mount.
KineMount already has adapters read to go, and even a focal reducer! (which doesn’t even exist at all for Sony FZ mount. Being able to gain a stop of light with the KineEnhancer, and shoot effectively with a “full frame” camera, certainly helps make KineMount even more attractive over Sony FZ mount) So Blackmagic Design wouldn’t need to make adapters if they don’t want to (plus others, such as AJA and Sony already leave making adapters up to 3rd parties to do that).
I *love* that Blackmagic Design provides lots of camera choice (BMCC is available in *three* different mounts! PL/MFT/EF), but it would be so much better if the buyer didn’t have to choose and could just do all of it with the one camera!
And it means less inventory costs for BMD and the camera stores (because they’ll only need to carry one type of each camera model, & not up to 3 versions of it!), and less design costs for BMD (probably, as doesn’t need to be done 3x over for each camera version).
Obviously to make KineMount a universal mount they’d need to drop the Kinefinity branding (otherwise other brands will find it hard to join in behind it), instead of calling it KineMount perhaps just simply call it “K mount” (although that usually refers to Pentax’s DSLR mount, so “CK Mount” maybe for “Cinema K mount”??).
If this open standard is well documented then you open the door to 3rd parties quickly making active adapters like:
EF Speedbosters
EF with built-in Vari-ND
EF with electronic Vari-ND
EF-Mount active adapters
Plus all the usual “dumb” adapters that enable using vintage photo lenses like Canon FD, Minolta SR-mount, etc…
What a dream world this would be to live in!! With so many choices and possibilities.
Hopefully if these two companies unite on a common open standard then you’d see other smaller manufacturers like Apertus & AJA follow suit with KineMount on their future cameras. And if a big player like Nikon or JVC entered the large sensor cinema market then there would be a universal mount they could consider adapting!
JVC for instance would have no other option, unless they chose EF *or* PL (or created their own sub mount from scratch!). JVC does already have the GY-LS300 with a Micro Four Thirds mount which is kinda a “universal mount”, but the JVC GY-LS300 camera is not aimed at the high end, and Micro Four Thirds with adapters is not rock solid like Sony FZ or KineMount are.
And while Nikon could use their Nikon F mount if they ever entered the cinema market, this would cripple their sales as it wouldn’t be PL for the higher end (unless they make two models like the Canon C300… again, forcing the consumer to choose between the two, rather than giving them flexibility) and at the indy / low budget level many people have unfortunately gone with Canon EF lenses instead and would feel resistance to changing mount to Nikon. But this way Nikon could offer a Nikon F mount cinema camera (with a KineMount underneath) with a PL adapter, which then additionally gives people the freedom of choice to use Canon EF lenses with a 3rd Party adapter or any other lenses their heart so desires.
Hope Kinefinity and Blackmagic Design read this and start talking together about making a joint open standard for cinema camera mounts!
Look at how quickly Canon EF mount become popular and an almost “standard” with many low / mid range cinema cameras! (such as Varicam LT / Arri Alexa Mini / BMPC4K / BMCC EF / URSA / URSA Mini / Axiom / etc ). If a rock solid sub mount for cinema usage, such as KineMount, was set up as an open standard and adopted by a few manufacturers then I think it won’t take many years at all before it gets to the common usage level.
RED Raven, Blackmagic Design URSA Mini 4.6K, and Kinefinity Terra 6K (there is also a 5K option, which gives a global shutter):
They all offer higher than 4K resolution in raw with a S35 sized sensor (although…. RED Raven barely barely squeaks in here as an option, because its max 4.5K option is only possible when shooting wide. Doing standard 16:9 and it drops down to “merely” 4K resolution, and its crop factor then ends up being closer to a Panasonic GH2 than a S35 camera! But you’re stuck with the awkward Canon EF mount with no way to speedbooster it to get a wider field of view from your lenses).
RED’s Raven and Blackmagic Design’s URSA Mini are no strangers to us if you’re followers of camera news, but Kinefinity unfortunately is unknown to many even though they’ve released many cameras over the years. And now yesterday they released the Terra 6K and Terra 5K! Here is a list of Kinefinity’s current cameras that they sell (which doesn’t include in this list their oldest models):
The Kinefinity Terra 6K has an impressive listing of specs, putting its features at near to RED Scarlet-W territory. And uses the proven Kinefinity 6K sensor which we’ve seen before with the KineMAX 6K can produce nice imagery, so hopes are high with the Terra 6K (the cheaper Terra 5K however uses a new 5K sensor which we’ve never seen anything from before).
So which of the top 3 low budget cameras with higher than 4K raw options would I likely prefer?
If you don’t factor in the price / support / brand name cred, then I’d go for a Kinefinity Terra 6K over URSA Mini 4.6K or RED Raven any day of the week.
However… in the real world those are factors to consider, thus here I go:
For brand name recognition it would rank: 1st) RED 2nd) BMD 3rd) KineFinity (“who??” Unfortunately would be a common reaction)
Customer support: 1st) RED 2nd) Blackmagic Design 3rd) Kinefinity (though the gap back to 3rd would be smaller if you’ve got a Chinese speaking partner to help smooth out the language barriers and provide a connection in China, which I do)
Price: URSA Mini 4.6K, then a Terra 6K would be roughly the same price or maybe a little more (or maybe even less, as the Terra 6K starts out more expensive but has radically cheaper media than a UM46, which would claw back the cost gap. So it depends on your personal configuration), and then finally last would be a complete RED Raven package which is about double the price of a similar UM46 kit (or even nearly 3x time the cost, once RED’s higher accessories costs are factored in). Which then simply rules out the RED Raven for me. (however, if you work in an environment where specifically RED is being requested by your clients over and over again, then swallowing the multiple times higher cost for a RED simply becomes the smart business decision to go for. Rather than buying a camera package which won’t get picked up and used)
And so I’d be left with a tight contest between UM46 or Terra 6K (cost is basically the same more or less, and arguably the support with Kinefinity isn’t “too much” worse than BMD?? Depends on your location in the world, and how much of a language barrier you’d experience personally with Chinese).
Do you go for the well known, and a bit better supported, URSA Mini? Or take a punt on the Terra 6K with its better features? (smaller size / higher frame rates / higher resolution / more mount options / focal reducer option / WiFi / radically lower power consumption / cheaper media / more input & output options / 3D sync / claimed higher dynamic range / likely better low light / etc)
I’m feeling like leaning towards the Kinefinity Terra 6K!
A video shot with the Kinefinity KineMAX 6K (same sensor as is in the new Terra 6K):
Kinefinity has put up prices now in English (so no more needing to translate Chinese, and convert RMB to NZD/USD):
http://www.kinefinity.com/shop/terra_preorder/?lang=en
Terra 6K Body is: US$5,999
Basic package is: US$6,999
Pro Pack is: US$8,999
Looking at that it would seem either the body only with the KineBACK + KineGRIP (about US$1.5K extra), or the Terra Pro Pack are the most interesting options (as I reckon a KineBACK is pretty close to essential to have as an option for professional shooting, and the KineGRIP is just so nifty to have if you want to slim down the Terra to merely DSLR size). Then kit out the rest of what is needed from your existing gear collection. If you need extra batteries they’re cheap (as the power draw of a Terra is less than half of a RED Raven or UM46, and BP-U batteries or V mount can be sourced cheaply from eBay), and media is cheap too (as you can use off the shelf SSDs if they’re fast enough, you don’t need pricey MINI-MAGs from RED or CFast cards).
Is basically exactly a year since I wrote my newbie guide to filmmaking gear based around the GH2, so now is a timely time to write a short update?
It is a tribute to the GH2 and Panasonic’s range of cameras as a whole, that they still line up as a very competitive choice even today in early 2016!
Lots more interesting cameras have since come along, such as Sony A6300/RX10mk2, Nikon D5500/D500, & Panasonic G7. But if you want to keep costs down and the max bang for buck then my guide from a year ago still holds relevant the bonus that a year later you can find these secondhand even cheaper than before!
Here is a post I wrote in response to a request about gear for Highschool for their young filmmaking students. Naturally with a limited school budget, and the need to buy multiple gear kits for several student groups to be able to use at once (and not to mention the risk of youth breaking gear!), costs need to be kept under tight control, so my GH2 gear guide still holds very relevant:
A few secondhand Panasonic GH2 is my vote. Dirt dirt cheap, and you get top notch quality from it! Waaaaay better than any Canon APS-C DSLR (heck, people rated a hacked GH2 above a 5Dmk3 even!).
Another thought is several GH1 bodies (nearly as good as GH2, but lacks live HDMI), plus one or two GH2 bodies for when they want to use it with an external monitor (Aputure FineHD VS-2, a quality 1920×1080 screen for dirt cheap!! 😮 Amazing), plus one G6 (or even G7, which some people even prefer over a Gh4! It is better than a GH4 at low light) for when they want 60fps FHD slow motion on a production (or 4K).
Get a few RJ Lens Turbos, and Nikon F mount lenses.
Nikon D5200 is also a solid choice! I own one myself (plus lots of Micro Four Thirds cameras). Again, maybe if you go with Nikon instead consider a mix with several D5200 plus one D5300 for when you want 60fps FHD slow motion on a project.
For audio I’d avoid a Zoom H4n like the plague. (Ditto Canon for a camera body) An H4n or a Canon both “kinda” (but not really) made sense in the very very early days of the HDSLR Revolution (years ago), when there were very few other options. But it makes no sense to buy either today at all.
I’d go instead with a Tascam DR-60D mk2, paired with a cheap Xiaomi USB battery bank (Xiaomi is like the Apple of China!) which I Velcro to the back plus a camera strap around the handles of the Tascam. No need then for a mixing bag! And you’ll be able to run for a looooong time with that set up! (vs the internal AA batteries which get eaten up if you run only on them, but with a USB battery pack you never need to worry about that)
That there is my set up before I upgraded to a Sound Devices 552 (waaaaaaaaay more expensive! But worth it, for me as a semi pro soundie). A Tascam DR-60D mk1 is also worth getting if you find a very cheap deal on it, but improvements in the DR-60D mk2 I feel is worth it. (Tascam DR-70D is also worth a look, but for your school needs is not really worth it the extra XLR inputs)
For microphone, get perhaps one Sennheiser MKE 600? (I have a NTG2 at the moment, which is a solid microphone and I got a good deal on it! But I might suggest going with a MKE600 or perhaps a NTG3 instead) And the rest be HTDZ HT-81 microphones (which is what I started out with years ago, recording into a Zoom H1). Again following my suggestion of having the bulk of the gear being cheap while still decent (HTDZ HT-81) but get one or two nicer pieces (which are still frugal) for use on more important projects which deserve it (or/and for when they’re under closer supervision by you, so they’ll be looking after the equipment). This means they’ll also learn to appreciate the quality difference which can be output from lower end equipment vs better equipment (and also how it can *not* matter… how a HTDZ HT-81 in skilled hands will sound better than somebody clueless on a project using a MKE600).
So that is for outdoor recordings, for indoor you’ll want something else (due to reflective surfaces which will bounce the sound back, not ideal for using a shotgun in). I’m using a Takstar CM-60 at the moment, until I can afford an Oktava MK012. So I suggest you get a few CM-60 for indoor audio dialogue.
But I mainly got this because of the FREE SHIPPING, as I live in the middle of nowhere in a small island nation called New Zealand. Sometimes shipping of big bulky items from the USA can be painfully expensive! But if you’re in the USA then there are well priced boom poles with free shipping for you to choose from at B&H / Adorama or Amazon.com
