Mark Kenfield

Interesting. I can't say that method makes an awful lot of sense to me. I've always understood and expressed ratios in stops. So at a 2:1 ratio, the key would be 1 stop higher than the fill. At 4:1 it would be 3 stops higher etc. etc.

It depends entirely on the nature of the shoot. For sitcoms (like Seinfeld) that were recorded on-stage, in front of studio audiences, on multiple cameras. There was really no way to have any units on the floor. So an overhead grid was essential.

How much accessory gack do you expect to be adding to the camera? (wireless video, sync box etc.) The Amira is probably the simplest and easiest to work with overall, with 2, 4 and 7 stop internal NDs. The FS7 MkII is very light and very capable. But you really want to add a proper EVF to it, and (like with the Arri Mini) most of the rigs people put onto it, end up making the whole thing WAY heavier than it needs to be. It's also got the general Sony complexity of menus and ergonomics, that slow you down a bit when you need to change settings on the run. I haven't had a chance to bring one out on a shoot yet, but I think the Sony Venice (if you kept it in it's most stripped down form - with XAVC internal recording) might actually be one of the most appealing docu options at the moment. With the Venice, the weight is on par with the Amira (3.9kg for the body), you get a 5-second boot time (a big deal when you're running around) 1-8 stops of internal ND (so no need to fuss around with external NDs), you can very quickly adjust your ISO, WB, framerate and shutter angle, and it's got possibly the nicest EVF on the market. Also, because it has an E-mount (as well as PL), you have the option of opting for the featherweight Fuji MK zooms (18-55mm and 50-135mm T/2.9. Which would keep the overall weight down to a really nice level. If it'd fit within the show's budget, I reckon it's worth a serious look.

I don’t know. Ultimately, it’s a job title, not an honourific. You don’t need a degree to earn the title, you don’t have to pass any exams. So if you’re doing the job, even if it’s just with a small crew, on a small production - you’re fulfilling that role, and should be credited as such. I don’t really see that there’s much of an argument that can be levelled against that. Now, obviously if you’re one-man-banding it, or not working within the structure of a crew (in a conventional sense), then it’s really stretching the title too far. In which case “cinematographer”, “camera operator”, “cameraman/camerawoman”, “videographer” or whatever else, is going to be more important. But ultimately, I think the elitism that some people attach to the title of DoP, is really just fuelled by ego moreso than any actual justifiable reason. If you’re doing the job, you’re doing the job.

Fiddle with your shutter angle, and if there's anyway to force the LED curtain to stay at maximum brightness, do that (it's often any kind of dimming that causes flicker issues with consumer LEDs, but at full output, it sometimes goes away).

Your follow focus is 15mm LWS or 15mm studio?

Proaim is awful. The quality of their machining is terrible. Avoid anything they make at all costs.

Looks really interesting. I'm sick to death of all these bloody comic book movies, but this one looks like it could be an interesting take.

Would have been weird as hell!

You're planning to use a variable ND?

Yep, has the 30 minute limit (though I gather they're planning to remove that via firmware once some new tax classification laws get adjusted in the near future). If I had to record a single take for that long (for a sitdown interview etc.), I'd be recording externally though. I wouldn't trust the heat-dissipating capabilities of any of these small mirrorless cameras to handle such long continuous runtimes. Their video capabilities are really getting up there. But they're still stills cameras at heart, and they're not designed to handle heat like a video camera can.

I've just moved my stills cameras over to a pair a Fuji X-T3s (from APS-C and Full-frame Nikons + APS-C Sony), and my main reason for ending up with the Fuji's was their motion picture capabilities (which are basically the best out there at the moment) I figured the vast bulk of my work is motion stuff, so if I'm going to spend the money, it might as well be in something that can cross over and act as a usable b-cam when needed. The X-T3 fits that bill nicely. I've used it on several video shoots so far, and I like what it produces. Rolling shutter is actually acceptable (are rare thing with mirrorless cameras), and having 10-bit internal and external, and 4k up to 60p basically matches most options out there (in the entry level arena). The biggest point it has going for it, is ergonomics. The manual dials, and quick-menu layout mean you can adjust settings very quickly and easily, and it isn't much worse than using something like the FS7 out in the field. Obviously you still have all the compromises of a mirrorless camera over a dedicated video camera. But (in my opinion at least) with it's 10-bit recording, it's the first truly viable large-sensor 'hybrid' camera that's been made. Definitely worth a looksee. I also really like that when I plug it (and all my other crap) into a v-mount battery, I get 8hrs of continuous runtime! 🙂

I absolutely agree that Gold Mount is superior. And it absolutely doesn't matter much because V-mount has so dominantly become the standard. It irks me, but that just seems to be the way of things.

Its 10-bit max. You need the F35 on the latest firmware to get 12-bit output.

Yep, F35 sensor in a single-piece body with the SR tape deck built-in. To use it in 2019 youd want to make sure it has the 3G-SDI and 4:4:4 upgrade boards. Theyll allow you to get all of the goodness out of the sensor and on to an external recorder.