David Peterson

Is already shipping WHOA! A 100% mark up?? Ballsy! They'll probably come down a little if no other appealing and popular S16 camera comes out. However the BMPCC already pushed prices of S16 lenses so high, that even after coming down a little, they'll still be much higher than they used to be. And S16 lenses on a BMPCC4K still would be covering much more than 2K, so they'll still have a lot of appeal on the new camera too.

I hope there is a URSA Micro Pro! Even if they just use exactly the same sensor. Imagine how good the BMPCC4K would be with built in NDs, SDI outputs, genlock, etc

If you like the Sony VENICE and already shooting with it, then go for that! Otherwise the Panasonic Varicam S35 or Varicam LT. RED Gemini is another if you're a RED fanboy. For a C cam / Crash Cam / ultra low budget: then the Panasonic GH5S (not GH5, the newer GH5S!), Kinfinity Terra 4K, or the Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K (again, not the original one, but the newer one) are all epic ones for low light.

I agree with your comments. In fact I'd go further than that, and say based on Vyachesla Melkov's post in this thread that even a URSA Mini or Raven would be a bad idea for him! Rather simply a Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K would already be a camera which is plenty over kill for him. Edit: heh, I just read this was posted in 2015. Ah well never mind... sometimes this board has too little traffic!

Damn. that is beautiful! Is the kind of stuff which tempts you to buy a BMPC4K

Over five years later.... hopefully the OP has found his answer already!

Just because a person does freelance work with a CCD camera doesn't mean it is a good recommendation for that camera. You said you're doing " sports, weddings, music videos, and real estate tours", well there are people still doing those with old Canon 5D mk2 or even Canon Rebel cameras!! Does that mean either is a good idea to recommend anybody else buy? Nope! Could you have got just as much work with a Sony PMW-F3 or Canon C100? (both which seem to go for around the same price as a F900?) Probably. Or what about even if you'd got say 2x Panasonic G85/G7 cameras for some IBIS and multi camera shooting? Could you have done just as well? Probably. In fact not only would I say "probably", but for most people they'd even go further in their freelance career if they'd gone with one of these other options instead of a 2/3" CCD camera.

Doubt the base is 125, it likely is a stop or two higher, then they dial it back for 125

Did you mean the Canon 50D? (got one myself) And don't you own any other digital cameras than those?!

Found this beautiful footage shot with a Panasonic GH5S and Fujinon MK lenses: Some of those little stills cameras can do great!

ARRI is by no means whatsoever the only company to try and create a "film like look" in their cameras. So does basically everyone else! And you must remember the D21/D20 was their earliest of early prototypes at making a digital camera, we've come a looooooooong way since then! It isn't at all in the slightly to expect even mid/low priced cameras from smaller brands to now in 2018 to outperform the D21. In fact I'd say the best digital is now clearly ahead of film, we've gone "better than film". btw, have a watch of this as a team of film students did a shoot out of D21 vs S16 film vs 5Dmk2 vs GH2: http://sofatube.cias.rit.edu/videos/show/2671 A few points: D21 fell short of S16 film. The 5Dmk2 is ooooooollllllllllllllllllldddddddddddddd!!! Digital in even stills cameras has come a long long long long way since then. Just because you turn the camera on and point it at something, that doesn't make it look "filmic". None of those images looked at all filmic to me, not even the actual film shots! Like I said before, it is not so much the camera which makes the film look "filmic" but also everything else together! Especially the lighting and grading, and just the general cinematography skills. Which back in the old D21 days those production teams with the D21 had lots of that, unlike the average someone grabbing a BMPCC today. I bet a BMPCC in the hands of a olden D21 production crew, swapping the D21 straight out for the BMPCC, then the BMPCC would look just as nice! Can also be insightful to look up more recent D21 work, as they'd be also be with more modest resources than back then when D21 was in its prime. For instance this video from a couple of years ago: And just came out this year: Nothing there strikes me as anything which couldn't have been done with many other modern cameras. Or this, meh, you could just rough up some Blackmagic Micro Cinema footage and get the same results (I just see too many problems in this short film honestly, could have been better if shot with a BMPCC etc):

Ah interesting, so 5K Euro is your total budget? When they say "all necessary components", what exactly do they mean? For instance how many batteries and which batteries? It is very easy to see another grand plus to blow by in a blink of an eye. Oh, and also the fact it comes with an Atomos Blade should be a matter of concern you should investigate? Because WHICH Blade recorder is it? If the Ninja Blade, well that is useless to you. Assuming it is the Samurai Blade (which I own two of!), you need to ask your ask yourself if: a) it works? (as I think people back in the day did mainly dual link SDI from the D21? Which the Samurai Blade can't do. But perhaps single SDI still can give you a full 10bit 422 at least, I am guessing this. But it is something I'd 110% want to double check before buying one) B) is this a compromise you're ok making? Personally I was fine with choosing a Samurai Blade to record from my PMW-F3 and miss out on 444, as I felt ProRes HQ would still give me 99% of what I want. However a person who has their heart set on a D21 sounds like someone who obsesses over these 1% differences and wouldn't be willing to settle for such a "major" compromise in its color output? Have you looked at prices of quality tripods? You'll be in for a shock. Remember you'll need at least a 100mm bowl for the head in my opinion (although the usual set up with a D21 back in the day would have used an even bigger sized tripod head! And yeah sure, there are some beefy 75mm ones you could get away with) But with only a tripod, your shocks could come off as static and boring. The other support gear for movement goes up a lot in price too! As for lenses, yes I know about those. The Helios/Jupiter/etc are rather limited and have their own certain look which you might not always desire. Not been a fan of XEENs. And the CP.2? Yeah, the CP.2 is one of the most popular low budget PL lenses there are, but even a small lens set would massively blow your budget! Even a very very small three lens kit of say 20mm + 40mm + 80mm I'd say is just too small! But on an ultra low budget you could get away with in a pinch if forced to. But I'd say a five plus lens kit of primes is a better target to aim for as a minimum. Nothing non-plastic about BM! It depends a lot on the user. There are many beautiful pieces shot with BMD cameras, have a browse through these for instance: https://vimeo.com/search/sort:popularity?q=blackmagic&staffpicked=1 https://vimeo.com/channels/bmcinemaworld/videos/sort:likes/format:detail https://vimeo.com/channels/blackmagicpocket/videos/sort:likes/format:detail https://vimeo.com/groups/blackmagic/sort:likes/format:detail https://vimeo.com/groups/188659/sort:likes/format:detail https://vimeo.com/groups/blackmagicpocketcinema/sort:likes/format:detail https://vimeo.com/groups/bmcam/sort:likes/format:detail https://vimeo.com/groups/pocketcamera/sort:likes/format:detail And if I wasn't going with a Blackmagic, or a GH5S/Z6/X-T3/etc, then I'd very likely go with a Sony PMW-F3 (of course, I own one now!) or there is footage I've seen which makes me feel the Sony FS700 4K raw has a lot of potential too for its very low price. (US$1.5K for its body, then another $1K ish or so for a recorder) https://vimeo.com/search/sort:popularity?q=fs700&staffpicked=1 Check out the footage this guy has shot with a FS700 paired with an Odysessy for its 4K raw (well, or ProRes HQ, which he does mostly it seems): https://vimeo.com/paulbates/videos/sort:date/format:thumbnail That it is non-logical, that I will not argue against!! :-o Have you considered the Digital Bolex D16 or the AJA CION?? I'm not a fan of either of these cameras myself, as I feel like there exist better options. But for you... I suspect you'll find them worth at least investigating? As they're both niche and very unique camera with their own look that some people are a fan of, definitely living outside the mainstream!

Tyler nailed and expanded on points I only touched on before. Specifically just the share amount of extra costs you can run yourself into. (even with small mirrorless cameras, the camera body is but a small cost portion of your total well rounded camera kit. But it gets much much worse as you get bigger in body size!) I own still a Sony PMW-F3 myself, and I got that after having only owned smaller mirrorless cameras. And yeah, the extra costs on top for everything else was significant and I went down a bit of a rabbit hole at times in trying to figure out how to equip/build out the PMW-F3, the camera itself was but the start! And the Sony PMW-F3 body is very lightweight/small/easy to use compared to a D21! If I could go back in time, would I still do it all over again and get myself a Sony F3? For sure! But I do wish I knew then what I know now, I'd have done a few things differently. I'd even still recommend the Sony PMW-F3 to people today (because it makes a very nice image, and while it is "big" it is still very small for what it does and is much more user friendly than many other cameras of its era such as the RED ONE), doubly especially so because their prices have fallen through the floor! (it is a very underappreciated camera) You can buy the F3 body for sub $1K And the external recorders (which used to be very expensive! Heck, just the RGB 444 S-log upgrade key was initially thousands and thousands of dollars!!) can be purchased new for sub $500! Sony itself marketed the F3 as "a mini F35", and others favorably rated the F3 back then as even "a mini ALEXA". If I'm just shooting in HD (and not 4K) then the F3 might still be my favorite choice of camera to shoot with from Sony.

The objection to rolling shutter seems to be a common theme I only ever ever see on forums. If this truly was a valid universal objection (rather than being a very niche case) then we'd see the Sony F55 (or the original BMPC4K / UM4K or the AJA CION) being used 100,000 time more often! But we don't. It is far far more important to thinking about to what degree does it have a rolling shutter? A really slow one like on the old Canon 5D mk2? Well yes, I agree, that could be objectionable! Or does it have a very fast rolling shutter like the Samsung NX1 has in 1080? Those are two very different extremes, from cameras which both are "rolling shutter". Another common problem is thinking they're judging just the camera itself from a film piece, when in reality they're actually judging much much more than that! (the lighting team, the set designer, the color grader, the MUA, and more) The leads to possible errors in judgement when looking at footage from low end cheap cameras (like the BMPCC) which has a tonne of clueless no budget amateurs pumping out bad looking footage vs looking at high end expensive cameras (like the D21) which of course usually only has a team polished professionals using it. So in the end, are you really fairly comparing apples vs apples? btw, those two examples you shared, the first one I felt suffered from its limited DR (not greatly, but you could tell), the second "low light" example I bet had a tonne of lighting involved! Have you shot with a RED ONE M? (or even any other large large camera like the ARRI ALEXA Classic or Sony F65 or etc) People might say "oh the size doesn't bother me", but they've only shot with a small mirrorless/DSLR, then actually using a big camera with its extra weight, extra support gear, extra powering needs, and extra COSTS!! (all these costs much more than the extra surrounding needs of a mirrorless camera) all ends up coming as a big shock to them. You'd go further putting that €5K budget (btw... we never clarified, was that only for the camera itself? Or is your total budget for all your gear? As if the latter, then you'll find your budget falling very very very far short!!!) purely into lighting, camera accessories (in the broadest sense, it is a money blackhole!), and audio and sticking with your a6300 for now to make the absolute most with it rather than getting a D21. Or if you must must change cameras (fair enough! I'd be tempted to do so too. I never thought the a6300 was a particularly good camera release by Sony) then as well as the BMPCC4K there are a tonne of other exciting new stills cameras released which are pushing high the limits of their capabilities. Like the Panasonic GH5S (like the older GH5, but even better!) or the new Nikon Z6 (not much footage out of it yet, but I expect it could be even better than the Nikon Z7. Plus cheaper!) or the Fujifilm X-T3: https://www.fdtimes.com/2018/09/06/fujifilm-x-t3/ https://www.eoshd.com/2018/09/fuji-x-t3-may-feature-samsung-sensor-as-south-korean-giant-gears-up-to-supply-full-frame-sensors-to-the-japanese/ https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/09/06/fujifilm-x-t3-announced-4k60-10-bit-output/

It would be a good combo, a moderately so so camera but paired with epic glass! (you'll have something to go wider than 25mm though?)

You say "artistic reasons", but unless you're going to hang it on a wall then it must be serving some purpose? I'm guessing here, low budget short films. If so then I reckon you'll get a much more "film like image" if you shot with even an original BMPCC (can be picked up for only a few hundred bucks on eBay) and put the rest of your time, efforts, and money into lighting the scenes and color grading. Remember that BMD with the BMPCC was also aiming to emulate a film/ARRI look as well, while the D21 was merely a later stage beta prototype in the earliest of earliest days of digital filmmaking for ARRI as they were fumbling around to try and figure things out before they finally produced the classic ARRI ALEXA. And I'm not at all trying to personally criticize you, I've never done that, rather I'm trying to walk you through all the pros and cons.

Luke is my favorite gaffering YT channel! Totally if I wasn't doing sound then I'd be in the lighting department instead.

What are you getting it for? As on commercial/paid work it makes no sense at all. And for low low budget shoots it makes not much sense either, as you'll lack the crew and budget for the proper support it needs on set. Shooting at 200 ASA is a big downside. Doesn't record sound internally. Dynamic range is worse (which is kinda one of the main big appeals of buying an Arri Alexa Classic in the first place! So what is the point again of the D21??). There is no internal media whatsoever, what modern day recorder can you use? Odyssey I bet is your best choice, however don't expect to record D21's particular flavor of arriraw with it (although I could be wrong), but the Odyssey can do 444 HD instead. The D21 was never that popular, it sold for only what, a year or two until the Alexa came out? The D21 was more like a beta camera for Arri on the path to making the Alexa. Personally I'd rather get a secondhand URSA Mini 4.6K and a BMPCC4K , you could probably pick up both together for a similar price as one D21! Have you ever shot with a RED ONE M? (not MX... the M! ha) If that felt like a breeze to shoot with, easy peasy, then well I suppose if you saw a dirt cheap D21 for perhaps US$2K or some such ridiculous price then you might want to give it a try?

Seeing as you seem to be extremely new to this, do also remember that as your shutter speed increases you're going to need a *LOT* more light! Especially that old MX sensor which is very light hungry (double check it isn't the RED ONE M, which is even worse!).

The BMD Micro does an even better job! Being smaller, and has 60fps slomo (popular with drone shots), and it has a remote control port too which is very handy

Crazy how this month marks a whole year since VENICE was announced! Guess it took a while for the camera to be developed, rolled out , and to gain growing acceptance.

I would have got a Panasonic G80 with its kit 12-60mm lens, that is weather resistant and super affordable, yet still give a very nice image for its price.

The DJI P4P is a big leap forward as the first Phantom with a 1" sensor. But if you're shooting a multi million dollar movie then there is plenty of budget spare to shoot with something better! However for a sub $1mil movie? Go for it, use a P4P! Especially if it is only a very small number of shots. Yet still, see if you can source an Inspire owner if you can instead at a good rate.

I'm surprised they didn't do what Aapo suggested!

I suspect once you consider the entire budget, there is not much difference at all between a D21 and a F35, the F35 might even come in overall cheaper. And what are you getting it for? If it is any kind whatsoever of paid work, then the extra grand or so for an Arri Alexa Classic is so teeny small that it is nothing at all and should be a no brainer to buy instead. And if it is just for personal use? I think you're doing serious serious serious overkill here! And a BMPCC4K would be an awesome choice instead.