Giray Izcan

Tyler, oh ok didn't read the manual.. but I would still take it over any s8 camera viewfinder out there. I'm sure you would need a hoodman for the lcd while using it outdoors.

The rotatable lcd screen is definitely nice to be able to shoot from different angles. I don't care much for looking through s8 cameras' viewfinders anyhow.

Crystal sync at 24 and 16x9 gate, which is larger than traditional s8 gate sound nice but I wish it had a 200ft magazine to have a full load for dialogue scenes...

I mean sure it would be nice to have a 1000 ASA - not to mention, film would be more competitive with digital in terms of low light capabilities -but there is not enough productions shooting on it to justify the expense involved with R&D etc.

They couldn't justify the expense of making a new line of film due to lack of enough film originated productions. Sure there is a resurgence with film use but it is still peanuts compared to pre-digital days when everything was shot on film except for some TV and low budget mini dv productions. I think we are lucky to have the V3 to be honest.

Introducing or re-introducing some film stocks with characteristics, and as an alternative to v3, at a lower price point would be more useful and make film capture more accessible to lower budget productions. This way people can shoot on 35 instead of having to resort to s16 due to economics. There are excellent cameras out there already that we don't need a new camera - especially a new 65mm camera that no earthly being can afford shooting ?

It is not at all for a museum piece... you could get a functioning SR or even an Aaton for that price.

Will do, Tyler. I look forward to it myself.

Nice. I was just going off of what some others have been saying along with some other reviews. I haven't seen it myself. I will see it for myself.

I wish Nolan cared more about the content rather than the format and style. It comes off as very self indulgent.. I wish he wasn't so obsessed with his no cgi stance, i mean remember Dunkirk beach scenes with 100 soldiers standing around on the beach?... I haven't seen the movie yet but, in consensus, from most reviews, apparently the explosion segment did not look like atom bomb explosion but just a gas explosion. Imagine how much more powerful it could be if he enhanced the practical effects with some cgi. I will be the judge myself after seeing it for myself but I don't have high hopes unfortunately.

I think you would be much happier with 7213 - 200t - stock as opposed to 7219. '19 on s16, for the most part, looks soft and grainy that should be reserved for night ext or for situations beyond your control. Good luck and have a safe shoot.

Of course... it had a great cinematography, but I did not care much for the film itself.

It doesn't have to be linear but a story would be nice.

His recent movies feel like their only concern is to create a world and visuals without a plot or a story. Moonrise Kingdom and the Grand Budapest Hotel were the last great ones - in my opinion of course.

2 perf is so much better than s16 in every aspect ratio... I don't even think the two are even close to each other in terms of sharpness and clarity.

I would say an SR 3 over an XTR in terms of parts being available - otherwise, I prefer Aatons in s16 over SRs. Even SR 3s are problematic with parts. This os of course from what I've heard and read and not through a personal experience as I am not looking to source parts for either cameras.

As nice as Aatons are, in terms of a long term investment, I would be weary as apparently finding spare parts is becoming more and more difficult - even SRs.

Good work Tyler.. it looks great. Congratulations.

As much as I love Wes Anderson and his style, I think, at this point, he could branch out to different styles as each of his movies started to look and feel the same...

Jon, from my experience, nobody really cares whether you have film experience or not. People care about how the end result looks in terms of cinematography and not the format.

Hey that's exciting Tyler, congratulations and good luck with your projects. As for an Alexa LF or 35 purchase, that's assuming one has that kind of money laying around that they must spend on a camera purchase, then I would get those cameras over a 416. If anything, you are still increasing your chances of booking a job or even a rental opportunity. In my opinion, high end cameras should be reserved for rental for the projects that make sense financially. No serious project will hire a dp with their own Alexa package... instead they will want the comfort and advantages of going through a proper rental house with technical support and spare bodies in case of camera failures etc.. Also, as a side note, personal opinion of course, 7219 should be reserved for night ext or situations where you must use high speed stock. 7213 is the way to go for controlled environments. And if you can't afford that extra needed lights, you should be realistic about your budgetary limitations and shoot digital because you can't afford shooting on film. Then again, I usually choose to shoot on s16 because I can't afford to shoot on 35; therefore, I would like to get the cleanest and the sharpest image possible to get as close as I can to 35. S16 is nicely soft and organic as it is that one doesn't need to further accentuate that by shooting on high speed stocks..

I mean the higher profile jobs on s16 is a lot rarer in comparison to the old days that I highly doubt you'd be making the camera investment back - considering the prices hiked up to the 2000s camera prices with almost no real jobs to back it up. I don't know if it makes any sense to invest 20-30k for an SR3 or worse 60k plus for a 416 camera package to shoot some vanity projects. If anything, investing in something like an Alexa LF or an Alexa 35 would make sense for a working DP - definitely a lot better than a 416. I mean I would love to own a 416, sure, as I love the camera but in terms of the ROI, it wouldn't make any sense at all. Every time I hear or read stuff like my 16mm short film etc, I just pretty much know the film won't be any good. I can pretty much expect to see something shot on film with no production value and crap locations as the majority of the "budget" goes to film related expenses. I would much rather shoot at great locations and have proper crew and rentals than to try to feed the camera. If you can do all those things and afford shooting on film, then yea sure, I am all for film.

You can't compare the 2000s and now though. What's the s16 market nowadays? Artsy music videos that are mostly vanity projects or projects that shoot on x amount of film or low budget stuff whereas, back in the 90s and the 2000s, real projects with real budgets like the OC etc were shot on s16. You could actually go get real jobs with your s16 as opposed to shooting someone's vanity project that concern themselves with the format it is shot on solely than anything else.

Noone will put up with blimps though... at that point you are slaving yoursepf to the format. Shooting on a format takes a precedence over the film itself..

Luckily, film is holding steady amd I'm grateful for that bit I agree with Aapo. Many projects sacrifice a lot to be able to shoot on film which is a disservice to the film in my opinion. It only makes sense to shoot on film, if you know you can afford to shoot every angle/size you may need without sacrificing from locations etc.