What's your favorite documentary camera package?

[Tyler Purcell]

would you at least admit that your advise to the OP regarding the f5 was not accurate .. based on my use of the camera compared to your own very limited use..?

My advice was simply a comment based on my experience. I also believe "documentary" shouldn't be limited to television. In my world when you say documentary, it's a feature film destined for theaters. So my mind set is always skewed towards that world, which is the Pro Res/Raw world.

 

Yes, I admit my experience shooting with the FS7 and F5 is very limited. As I said earlier, I dislike those cameras and will never use them again. My dislike comes from working on documentary/educational shows, some of them features. As I said before, I dislike Sony's over-all philosophy, which is to create a "feature rich" imaging system. To them the more crap you can cram into the box, the better. Just look at the A7SII, it doesn't even know what it is... still camera? Video camera? Ultra sensitive night-vision camera? High speed camera? What is this thing? You can't do all of those things without HUGE compromises. It's no different with the more professional Sony cameras as well. In order to get those features, they had to heavily compromise on the design, mostly in the imager/processing department. This creates an image that myself and many other colorists find unsatisfactory compared to the competition of similar price. Yes, I completely understand the reason why ENG people own these cameras, they do fit nicely into that world. Yet, in my eyes the compromise shouldn't be about technology, there is no excuse to have all those features and lack different recording codecs. I'd personally rather have a camera that may not fit the physical norm's, but the best codec's and better imager.

 

Think of it another way... nobody watching the finished product knows how nice your camera is to work with. All they care about is the final output. As an owner/operator, you buy the camera that fits your physical needs and maybe have a bias towards a certain style of camera as a consequence.

 

Also, I haven't seen any television ever, without MPEG noise all over it. So already it's unsatisfactory to me because we're living in 2016 and those issues should simply not exist anymore, but they're right in front of me. It's why I refuse to own a television or decoding product for TV. I can't stand the fact this is what people are consuming and nobody is complaining.

 

So I'm all for shooting with the F5 for television, go for it! Where I personally prefer saving $10k and buying an FS7 for the vast majority of people, you can argue the quality difference of the F5 is pretty noticeable. Honestly with the new Panasonic Varicam, Sony may finally have some decent competition a few years late. Panasonic has gone Pro Res all the way, but they still don't have raw capabilities internally, which is a real shame.

[Robin R Probyn]

"In my world when you say documentary, it's a feature film destined for theaters. So my mind set is always skewed towards that world, which is the Pro Res/Raw world."

 

Ive just been shooting on a doc for theatre release.. 4K .. XAVC.. what are the doc,s you have been shooting for theatrical release..

 

"In order to get those features, they had to heavily compromise on the design, mostly in the imager/processing department." can you go into a bit more detail re design and imager/processor dept..

 

"lack different recording codecs. I'd personally rather have a camera that may not fit the physical norm's, but the best codec's and better imager."

F5/55 had XDCAM 422/XAVC HD/2K/4K /SR /16 bit RAW 4K 2K.. HFR up to 180/240 with the RAW recorder and with an optional board ProRes and DN X HD .. HOW MANY CODECS DO YOU WANT ! ..

 

​I,ll leave it at that.. no point to stake you out in the sun.. but really again I have to say.. please know a bit more about what your talking about before you make these sweeping all knowing statements.. as some one new to this forum, might actually believe you and make mistakes in camera choices..

[Phil Rhodes]

 

 

HOW MANY CODECS DO YOU WANT

 

One please, then I don't have to worry about it...

[Robin R Probyn]

I only ever use 2 of these.. well SR is also good for Green screen..it was in response to the claim of Tyler,s.. .. :).. you cant make this stuff up.. got to love the inter web..

 

I quote "there is no excuse to have all those features and lack different recording codecs."

Edited April 3, 2016 by Robin R Probyn

[Tyler Purcell]

Ive just been shooting on a doc for theatre release.. 4K .. XAVC.. what are the doc,s you have been shooting for theatrical release..

Good, that makes two of us. Ohh I've been working on two features, one that's almost done shot on Blackmagic 2.5k and the other shot on C300. Both have sales agreements for theatrical. Though I don't think the one shot on the C300 will make it. :(

 

F5/55 had XDCAM 422/XAVC HD/2K/4K /SR /16 bit RAW 4K 2K.. HFR up to 180/240 with the RAW recorder and with an optional board ProRes and DN X HD .. HOW MANY CODECS DO YOU WANT ! ..

Well, I don't want MPEG on top of MPEG with a mix of MPEG. Those aren't really different codec's. Also, I don't want mult-thousand dollar upgrades that make the camera larger. Neither of those two things are acceptable in today's world. The only reason Sony doesn't do internal recording in Pro Res and RAW is because their processor is weak sauce and can't handle it. So they force you to buy boxes that contain faster processors. You could argue they're forcing people to buy the add-on's because of licensing, but that's complete bullshit. If it were licensing, they'd have no problem recording it internally without an add on box.

 

I want ALL the pro res codec's, CINEMA DNG (tiff), DNxHD and a flavor of raw jpeg2000, even if it's proprietary with a plugin for DaVinci.

 

"In order to get those features, they had to heavily compromise on the design, mostly in the imager/processing department." can you go into a bit more detail re design and imager/processor dept..

If you create a hyper sensitive imager, it's incapable of doing anything else but being hyper sensitive. When you ask it to run lower ISO's in order to shoot outdoors for instance, the imager simply can't take that much light and you loose dynamic range/color accuracy. So the operator must run the camera at higher ISO's with lots of filtration. When you stack ND's like that, you are substantially changing the look of the image.

 

In terms of the processor, the F5's processor is MUCH better then the FS7 (16 bit vs 10 bit). That's why the F5 looks better in arguably most situations. This processor limitation situation is rot throughout Sony's consumer and prosumer camera line. It's no different then Canon and Nikon, both who run lower-end processors in their DSLR's, most likely due to heat dissipation vs size since DLSR's have so many moving components. Sony doesn't have an excuse with their prosumer cameras and lower-end commercial cameras. The cost to run a better processor is minimal and there is PLENTY of space in the FS7 for one. It's an annoyance that just doesn't need to exist. The iPhone in your pocket probably has a faster processor then MOST Sony cameras. Heck even GoPro have been using the immensely powerful A9 chip in their new cameras. Not saying the A9 is better then what Sony spec's, just saying if you think that way about camera building, you'd be able to do a lot more internally without the need for extra add-on bits.

 

Again, I'm not really complaining about the F5 as much as I'm griping about owning a product from a manufacturer that purposely limits their cameras.

 

​I,ll leave it at that.. no point to stake you out in the sun.. but really again I have to say.. please know a bit more about what your talking about before you make these sweeping all knowing statements.. as some one new to this forum, might actually believe you and make mistakes in camera choices..

I hope someone does listen because you haven't given any evidence to the contrary. Have you tested RED, Alexa, Sony, Blackmagic cameras back to back on the same shoot? I have, in fact on many occasions. Have you then taken the camera files and manipulated them in post production so you can tell the differences between the cameras? I have, in fact I use to demo this poop at NAB for years. I remember a Sony rep coming over and dropping off NEW footage for me to use in our demo because he was embarrassed with the stuff we shot. It didn't matter, I turned it black and white and showed people the rings (halo) around bright objects in frame thanks to the 8 bit process or the A7S. Heck why do you think I keep commenting about highlight clipping and the Sony cameras? Dude, the demo we used at NAB I shot outside at night, the cars that reflected light or headlights from those vehicles would leave streaks of pure white on the image. The point was to show how good the camera performed at night and how much manipulation could be done. But you can't manipulate anything that's already clipped!

 

So sure, you're a great cinematographer working in a controlled environment, who cares what you shoot with. I'm glad the F5 works for you as it does for so many people. As I've said many times, it's a good looking camera, no doubt about it.

[Robin R Probyn]

I was referring only that the F5 can be used for run and gun.. thats all.. you claimed it cant be .. I showed it can.. codec,s processors etc besides the point.. that was my only argument with you sir.. or that you should use it.. only that it is a run and gun camera f you want it to be.. so advising quite categorically it cant .. was not good,or well researched advise..

 

But I do wonder why you have such problems with some of the most widely used codec,s in the world.. so many other people are getting excellent results..

 

Lets agree to disagree again :) . happy shooting sir

Edited April 4, 2016 by Robin R Probyn

[Tyler Purcell]

But I do wonder why you have such problems with some of the most widely used codec,s in the world.. so many other people are getting excellent results..

The Toyota Camry and Honda Civic are the most popular cars ever made, doesn't make them any good.

 

If you buy a Toyota Camry, you'd probably have a very satisfactory result. But if you also buy a BMW M3, you'd have a reference to compare the Camry to.

 

The problem with MPEG is that it's an almost free codec, licensing is pennies compared to the alternatives. So like the Camry analogy, people buy into it not knowing what they're missing. Since Sony designs the cameras around shooting with an MPEG format, how do you know what quality you're loosing if your camera doesn't do anything else?

 

Most things are great if you have no reference to compare them to.

[Robin R Probyn]

Here we go again.. I dont have shares in Sony.. or even any great allegiance .. if the C300 wasn't the worst ever ergonomics of any camera ever made.. I would have bought 3 of them.. and probably be able to retire by now :)

 

"Since Sony designs the cameras around shooting with an MPEG format, how do you know what quality you're loosing if your camera doesn't do anything else?"

 

 

 

10 bit XAVC is a very good codec and so is SR 422 444.. same as HDCAM SR tapes ,visually lossless compression, the was the gold standard for a long time..and 16 bit RAW.. these are high end codec,s available in the F5/55.. feature films have been shot with these codec,s.,high end TV drama..Doc,s etc...by thousands of people.. but for you somehow they are totally crap.. sorry but logic can only point to user error on your side..this is not a Camry to a BMW.. its a Porsche to a Ferrari ..

 

What programs are you shooting or editing that are of such a level that those codec,s cant deal with it.. esp SR 444...

[Patrick Cooper]

My vote's for the Bolex H16. Wind and grind!

[Adrian Sierkowski]

I think at the end of the day; the best camera for a Doc happens to be the camera you have with you when something documentary worthy comes along. I also think this has to be looked at a lot more pragmatically than most would. I wouldn't want to bring, say, a A7S stills camera out into the middle of the desert and try to make it work at night noon. However, if you're shooting something on say, crossing the boarder in the middle of the night with a bunch illegal immigrants it might be well worth considering.

 

Or, a Red Weapon might be PERFECT for a documentary about modern life-- whatever that means-- with a slick picture style and the like-- but I wouldn't want to try to do a show with it where I have to roll for an hour + straight in the middle of Namibia in direct sunlight with no shade.

I think, however, all around, you're looking at Sonys. For me, they are all built in such a way that they can be usable in almost any situation because they give you versatility (and to a certain extent intercutability which is as important on a bigger doc where you may be mixing cameras in order to suite the situation-- e.g. F5 and FS7, or FS7 and A7s) to take them almost anywhere and render good looking images in a way which is familiar to those working in post without massive DIT problems in the field.

 

Now this isn't to say a C series Canon or something from Panasonic wouldn't work as well-- but I would say personally they aren't as well suited to be worked with all day and many of them require a lot more kitting up than you'd need on a similarly spec'd and priced Sony.

 

Also if you are going to spend a LONG time on a camera package, at the end of the day, you should play with a bunch of them and see which one best suits YOU and how you're used to working. I can pick up a Sony and a C series canon or a Panasonic and make it work, but as I've spent more time with Sonys (and owned a few) I am much more familiar with them out of the box (and with their menus) than I am with other companies. Sometimes, honestly, those minutes you spend going -- damn--- where's that setting!-- really do make a difference.

 

Also, for doc, RnG, on the whole, yes you want built in NDs-- generally. And I always worry about power consumption and recording time. Nothing is worse then that feeling as you're watching % tick away knowing in this moment if you cut; you'll loose something phenomenal (while it was narrative in my case-- there was a moment with a perfect full moon about to set, huge, behind a found location and no matter how fast i tried to go i couldn't get talent onto marks fast enough to catch a spectacular shot-- then the camera battery died).

[Brian Drysdale]

It really depends on the type of documentary you're shooting. There is a wide range of cameras suitable for shooting broadcast HD docs. from 1/3" up to Super 35.

[Robin R Probyn]

It really depends on the type of documentary you're shooting. There is a wide range of cameras suitable for shooting broadcast HD docs. from 1/3" up to Super 35.

 

 

Totally agree.. my posts have just only been to rebut the statement made that the F5 can not be used for R&G.. (hate that term)..and later as it was dragged in ..the codec,s it provides.It can,it is.. and I based it on my 2years experience of the camera.. rather than a few interviews.. and one particluary nice looking,program that is the epitamy of R&G.. but Tyler is a hard dog to get off the porch .. :)

Edited April 4, 2016 by Robin R Probyn

[Phil Rhodes]

To be honest the suitability of a camera for running around ENG-style is much more to do with the way it's accessorised than the camera itself, unless it's a dedicated ENG machine. An F5 with a decent shoulder pad, top handle and of course That Lens is perfectly suitable (though I doubt it's the lightest package around).

 

P

[Robin R Probyn]

Its not ! .. but thats the trade off.. one big expensive zoom.. on all day..never miss a shot..work quickly.. T2.8..parfocal.. blah blah.. or lens changes.. carrying other lenses around .. sometimes VF info.. sometimes not.. change the lens interface.. into the menu..change Mattbox donut..where is it.. in the car.. entrusting loose lenses to the director.. NO !... general stress and frustration..

 

Get alot of work.. very quick.. nice images.. dir loves you..make money.. buy outrageously expensive easy rig.. or borrow sound recordists wallet as counter weight.. move to North London or Surry and buy a Volvo estate..

 

Yes 2/3 ENG camera way easier./better... but those days are gone.. its all s35 now.. very few freelance jobbing cameramen haven't made that jump by now..

Edited April 4, 2016 by Robin R Probyn