Darren Levine

This is kind of going in circles... None of these cameras produces a poor image, but all of them are an investment. if purchasing is really the way you want to go, rent a red for your next project, an alexa for the following project, an f55 for the next, and a c500 for the next. yes you'll need to invest more time in learning each camera, but in that process you'll find which you prefer the most. im constantly thrilled by the image i get out of the c100, the flexibility that the canon's remarkably clean high isos along with the sheer friendliness of the design/function is what settled me on that camera, but only after giving a feel for the others in that price bracket. Now that they're more 4k recorders on the market, the c500's lack of internal recording options is less of a issue/consideration

Indeed, a good AC keeps an eye out for his/her camera op and relieves them when possible. You know what would be interesting? a stand with a hook that's about 7 feet high that you can hook the camera to right from your shoulder for instant relief/readiness. tell me someone's rigged that, surely im not the first to think of such a 'inanimate AC'

Also realize, that almost all of the suggestions here will work great, if you shoot properly. If i were you, the question i would ask is: what camera will work as smoothly as possible in my workflow. If you're going to be very small crew, run and gun, all over the place, in and out, then i would no question about it pick a canon C100/300/500. They are absurdly intuitive and just make life easier on a shoot with the way they are layed out, add to that the ability to use very clean higher iso if you find yourself in a tricky lighting situation, makes for one of the most 'helpful' camera lines to date. If the budget is tight, a C100 with a ninja-2 recorder gets you prores 8bit 4:2:2, and it is damn pretty despite the 8bit. and it's the exact same sensor as the c300/500 Also keep in mind that between now and when you plan on shooting in the fall, at least 1 more option will come onto the market. such as the bmc 4k. it's still up in the air about its abilities, but as with any new camera, it's worth a look. If anything, i'd be happy to accompany you to any of the NYC rental houses to look over the options and throw some ideas around.

HA, nice jab! I assume you're talking the 48fps, which i have yet to even try to look at. LOTR is certainly a good sample, since you've got the same team, same design, same lots of things, just different camera/acquisition. While im really not a fan of the direction they took the hobbit in, i did like the dragon design/execution quite a lot.

prime example: near the end of LOTR return of the king, the big crane in of the people bowing to the hobbits. the keying on that shot looks terrible to me. Though of course it could have had to do with plenty of things other than the camera, ya know, the other important things that get overlooked when camera talk takes over ;)

You couldn't have picked a worse example, the majority of the star wars prequels were shot on the f900

presumably because Reuel prefers shooting anamorphic. Though the higher DR part i don't see reason for. 14 stops is on par with film

Agreed, these film vs digital threads have thankfully become more scarce, but still somewhat irritating to see them go through the same circle of reasoning. Though sometimes some interesting non-image specific aspects get covered, like the size/weight differences. Digital cameras can get smaller and smaller, but film mags have to pretty much stay the same. Though advances in support equipment help to equalize the balance, an easyrig would help tremendously with handholding a large camera. just be sure to exercise that lower back! But to beat the horse skeleton with my own stick... film has a great look, projects with the appropriate resources have the choice to use it or not, digital has for years been chasing that film look, and while it can certainly be argued that it's still 'missing something' or otherwise isn't identical to film, it's still in my opinion at least reached the 80/20 mark, and thus can and has been used by productions of all levels to produce images that 99% of audience members are dazzled by. a few years back i went to see "crank 2", not really because i cared about the story, i was more curious about the image, since i read that they used i believe the XA-A1 and a bunch of HV20 cameras to shoot the whole thing. and i wanted to see the end result. Now, i'm obviously more sensitive to edits and images than the average audience member(as are we all who shoot and/or edit) but still, despite me picking out some pretty bad looking shots, in some ways they added to the grit of the story and ya know what? not one person stood up in the theater and shouted: "this movie looks like it was shot on my cell phone!" and walked out. The point of course being, story trumps camera, every time. handycam brilliance trumps imax guttertrash. And thats the kicker, crank 2 was absolutely hilarious, i didn't expect to like it, but i and my colleagues enjoyed it probably more than we should have.

It's right on the specs page, lists the available resolutions as 4k, 1080. no mention of a center crop on one hand, windowing is somewhat common and perhaps now an expectation from new cameras on the other hand, this is only bm's third camera, and looks like they're keeping it quite close to the original bmc, so i'd say it's a tossup if they put in a windowed option

hey if you want it to have a nice sounds, go for marbles :)

do you live near a beach? or a playground?

I was just having this conversation with some associates of mine, and we all agreed that in comedy, sometimes these moments just happen and if you didn't have glass on them during that moment, it's gone, unrepeatable. having two cameras can ensure you get the gold, no matter who its coming from

ha, i can see that turning into a series

i can offer some technical tutorials... and such... https://vimeo.com/channels/indiejunkie/page:1

youre missing the most important piece of info... what is the max load capacity of the heli? i've worked with remote heli pilots and less weight is much preferred. i don't know if there is a nailed down formula, but i'd venture a guess that putting 1/2 or less of the max load into the heli is a good weigh to be at. though since you're label is RC Helicopter i'm sure you already have a handle on that ;) im eyeing the pmw200 to replace my ex1, but not sure if its significant enough of an upgrade. you might want to look into the black magic cinema camera. has a form factor that i think will really fit helicams nicely. wider lenses are a bit rarer for it, but the tokina 11-16 or the sigma 8-16 should get you as wide as your heart desires. and it can record uncompressed at 2.5K or prores, or dnxhd, all onboard, no external recorder, for $3000. should be shipping this month, but rumors are large backorders