Jump to content
gustavo godinho

How to shoot a feature on Alexa without a focus puller?

Recommended Posts

Hi.

 

Are there many camera operators/dps who do their own focus without the need of a first AC as focus puller? I'm not talking about documentary stuff.

 

I'm thinking about doing it after watching this Listen Up Philip BTS doc.

 

Sean Prince Williams, the DP, is pulling focus himself. What do you guys think when we're talking about working with actors and, sure, with a language that allows some focus mistakes?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pulling focus is basically as easy or hard as you want to do it. If you want a lot of shallow DOF shots in your movie, you're going to have to make sure your getting the focus marks 100% spot on, or it'll look like crap.

 

I currently run a GH4 w/ Speedbooster which brings the FOV to basically that of Super35 film, and I always pull my own focus.

 

Pulling focus yourself will be easier if:

 

a ] You attach a large 7" HD monitor to the rig that has focus peaking.

 

b ] You have a follow focus that allows you to move to marker toward the back of the camera, so you can actually see the marks.

 

Of course, its going to be harder for you, since you have to pay attention to not only the framing and the focus peaking, but also your marks on the follow focus. Hard A/B stops are really desired here.

 

Large format films, large sensors, and/or fast lenses will make pulling your own focus harder. However, with a standard Super35 format, it shouldn't be too hard - considering you have the right tools and understanding.

Edited by Landon D. Parks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also depends on how you stage the shots. Pulling your own focus on shallow DOF is fine if there's not too much movement. So if your doing elegant Fincher style locked of shots its easier to pull focus. If the camera operating side is complicated, then its more difficult to do both.

 

If you look at multi-cam sitcom and ents TV those camera operators pull their own focus and its fine. TV studio Ped operators have to do everything and could be asked to crab the camera, while booming down, while zooing in and pulling focus. You need 3 hands to do some moves on a ped. In those situations DOF is your friend and thats why studio sitcoms/shows tend to have such deep focus, its to give the ped ops a fighting chance. 2/3inch sensors help too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just shot a feature film on a Greek island, with an Arricam LT and Zeiss T.2.1 lenses. I did the focus myself on 90% of the shots (shoulder and still shots) and it really looked perfect at the end. I shot between F.stop .2.8 and 4 all the film. I did not use monitoring, only the viewfinder. We did several rehearsals each time, because we shot 35mm that gave me the time to get friendly while framing to do the focus. I just saw a screening of the film last week, and felt that the focus looked really organic because I was framing myself the movie. I think with an alexa camera it is the same. I did not use any follow focus, only my hand on the focus ring of the lens all the time.

 

Cheers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do find that cinema-oriented lenses make focus pulling difficult. Very large focus rotation is often lauded as a good thing. It is, if you're working in the circumstances of a single-camera drama shoot. If you're working alone, it is emphatically not a good thing as you simply can't get there fast enough. This is, for instance, one of the flaws of the Zeiss 21-100mm lightweight zoom, which is probably still a great documentary lens despite the fact that the manufacturer shouts proudly about its 300 degrees of rotation. It's too much for run and gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might rack focus myself for intimate closeups on objects or actors when my eye is supposed to be the viewer and I'm deciding what they'll see. When I'm scanning the frame and rolling back and forth through it slowly. That kind of thing is hard to communicate to an A.C. cause there are no real marks. It's intuitive.

 

And for cramped quarters when you can't fit a second person and there's no wireless then yeah, you have to do it alone.

 

Much prefer a good focus puller for the basic moving from A to B stuff. Frees me up to see the lighting and frame better.

 

Also sets up a dangerous precedent. I already have a hard time fighting to keep a good 1st A.C. on the crew. To suggest you don't need one for focus is really self defeating. Cause you'll end up with no camera department eventually. You'll be carrying all the gear, slating yourself and doing all the DIT work. haha. It's a slippery slope.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Phil.. doesn't matter about much else.. cine lenses have a large focus travel to aid focus pullers.. and a good idea it is too.. but doing your own.. its actually impossible to do well.. your hand cant physically do it in one go.. 300 degrees forget it.. Empirical fact of the universe .. the only one Ive found for "rolling your own" is the CN7.. which boasts a 180 degree travel.. like any ENG zoom.. not great for focus pullers.. but very good for doing your own.. even the cabrio,s .. you cant do a long throw pull without putting your wrist out of joint.. cine lens.. and pulling your own focus are pretty much contrary terms..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, pulling your own focus for the occasional handheld shot where you may just have to adjust a few inches or a foot or so during the take is fine... but cinema lenses have such a long barrel rotation (to allow better focus pulling by measurement plus make the focus pulls smoother) that it is hard to do a big rack with one twist of the wrist.

 

I'd would make more sense if shooting a format with more depth of field like Super-16 or 2/3" video, and if using lenses with shorter rotations like ENG zooms or still camera lenses, and it might make sense if a floating hit or miss shallow-focus 35mm look was part of the style, or if you are doing such an intimate shoot that you only want one or two people in the room (though with a remote focus system, a focus-puller can be farther away), but otherwise, it's better for the operator to concentrate on framing and let someone else concentrate on focusing.

 

Not to mention, it's helpful to have a camera assistant in general besides for pulling focus!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can put on a follow focus with gears that made the rotation less.. for your hand anyway.. Ive tried this on other peoples cameras.. but its something you really have to get used to.. that it becomes intuitive like your hand on the barrel.. which it never really did for me personally.. bit like using Nikon lenses on a stills camera..

 

Looks to be a s16 Aaton in the OP,s video BTS.. that would make life alot easier that s35mm lenses .. much smaller lenses too..

Edited by Robin R Probyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The follow focus I use, the JTZ, includes multiple sized gears for just this purpose --- to adjust the lens throw. Despite using Cine DS lenses, I almost always find myself using the largest gear to get a shorter throw. They just pop on and off the drive wheel on the FF.

Edited by Landon D. Parks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is that most camera packages -- unless it is an ENG camera + zoom in a carrying bag, plus some lightweight sticks -- are better-handled by at least two people, especially when unloading and setting up, not to mention loading film mags, filling out camera reports, slating, etc. The few times I was a one-man camera crew on 16mm short films, it was crazy to have to stop everything so I could go into a changing bag and load and download. Plus if there were a couple of cases, it took me a couple of trips to unload or wrap at the end of the day. The only time it was OK was on EPK jobs where I could fit a betacam and zoom into a bag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes if its the case for having a camera assistant .. for sure you want one.. I was talking just about physically doing your own focus on S35 cine lenses.. which now nearly all camera people have to do with nearly all shoots being on S35mm sized sensors.. Im doing almost excuslively corp shoots now pretty much.. which used to all be ⅔ inch ENG style camera,s.. now I would bet the farm there isn't a single corp shoot being shot with these cameras.. docs also have gone 99% this way.. but yes you never want to work as a one man crew.. its just physically lugging the gear around.. even when I was a loader .. the loading was 10% of the job at most.. the rest was lugging 150mm bowl Ronford tripods and other heavy boxes around the world.. even the spreader weighed a ton.. and helping the sound recordist with his wallet..

 

Now there is that market demand.. there are cine s35 zooms being made with 180/200 degree travel.. CN7 and the new Fujinon MK series are some.. the Cabrio,s are too long ..

Edited by Robin R Probyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me and my partner always pull focus ourselves and doing it on the small DSLR screens is challenging to say at best. What usually helps us is that I usually use a lens that has a longer throw for focusing and my partner she always uses the normal dslr lenses and pulls focus via the lens itself. I've tried to get her to use a follow focus but she says she's more responsive with the lens itself and I guess I can understand that but have never been able to do it myself. What I do is I rehearse the scenes and get used to the movement of the focus and then try to compensate. The problem si if I'm moving around, framing, trying to keep with the background and foreground, not shake the camera too much and then pull focus the result is usually not good so I try to limit the amount of things I have to keep my eye on and then recheck the shots every time I finish.
But still sometimes you just go wrong.

 

I'm hoping that now with a new monitor that has peaking it will be easier and bigger project where we can afford the right gear it will get easier.

 

I'm guessing that peaking should be good enough for you to focus. But as I said my experience is limited. Best of luck. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking for something else in the forums, but found this comment from Phil Rhodes in 2013:

 

"Focus pulling HD video on 2/3" video cameras is difficult.

Focus pulling on 16mm film, micro four-thirds video, or something like a Blackmagic cinema camera, is very difficult.

On 35mm, APS-C or similar sensors, it's so hard they usually employ someone whose sole job it is, and give him a lot of time and technology to get it right, and still expect to blow one take in three when it gets particularly taxing.

On full-frame DSLRs, Vistavision, 65mm, or equivalent, focus pulling is a sort of Zen meditative pursuit that's been known to drive people completely underside pumpernickel intrinsic caboose caboose rumplestiltskin."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is that most camera packages -- unless it is an ENG camera + zoom in a carrying bag, plus some lightweight sticks -- are better-handled by at least two people, especially when unloading and setting up, not to mention loading film mags, filling out camera reports, slating, etc. The few times I was a one-man camera crew on 16mm short films, it was crazy to have to stop everything so I could go into a changing bag and load and download. Plus if there were a couple of cases, it took me a couple of trips to unload or wrap at the end of the day. The only time it was OK was on EPK jobs where I could fit a betacam and zoom into a bag.

 

What I do --- I always have 2 people on camera, me included. However, I find it much easier to train someone quickly to do slate/reports/offload/grunt work than focus pulling.

 

I agree - it's difficult to setup any kind of camera system that is rigged out by yourself, even more so if you're also the DP, etc. Usually, I let the AC handle the setup while I'm lighting or directing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any comments on pulling off a FF vs pulling off the barrel and if pulling off the barrel can "torque" the camera or camera move and ruin the take?

 

I work mostly in post but am getting into shooting stuff again, mostly the type of thing with just me behind the camera or maybe one assistant. Working with Nikon MF lenses and some EF mount lenses. I got pretty good some years back pulling focus (on Angeniuex zooms with an o'Connor FF on a shoulder-mounted cinema camera, even wide open) and operating at the same time, but I've never really tried pulling off the barrel before. I'm not as good as a legit AC and can't pull focus as well for others, but have gotten pretty good at pulling my own focus. Any advice?

 

The above videos have sort of convinced me this might be possible given that I don't mind a slightly buzzed take here or there. And it would allow me to lose a massive shoulder rig and instead use a small handheld camera.

Edited by M Joel W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I shoot documentaries on film where there are NO focus aids. Digital is so easy with image peaking for focus. It's so easy to focus, I don't really know how you can muck it up.

 

I love zoom lenses where you can zoom into your subject, get focus and pull back out again. That's what most ENG guys from the past have done. Primes aren't good for doc's because you need to constantly have your subject in frame, where with primes if the subject moves around, you're stuck moving with it, even if you wanna shoot it from a distance. So it's a challenge for sure.

 

I wouldn't shoot a doc with an Alexa... but Amira for sure. I think out of the digital cinema cameras available, the Amira maybe the best because of it's ease of use. Good easy to read menu's, plenty of audio ports, good shoulder mount system and Pro Res capture so you're not dealing with the XAVC or RAW nightmare of the competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I shoot documentaries on film where there are NO focus aids. Digital is so easy with image peaking for focus. It's so easy to focus, I don't really know how you can muck it up.

 

I love zoom lenses where you can zoom into your subject, get focus and pull back out again. That's what most ENG guys from the past have done. Primes aren't good for doc's because you need to constantly have your subject in frame, where with primes if the subject moves around, you're stuck moving with it, even if you wanna shoot it from a distance. So it's a challenge for sure.

 

I wouldn't shoot a doc with an Alexa... but Amira for sure. I think out of the digital cinema cameras available, the Amira maybe the best because of it's ease of use. Good easy to read menu's, plenty of audio ports, good shoulder mount system and Pro Res capture so you're not dealing with the XAVC or RAW nightmare of the competition.

 

 

This make a lot of sense to me... I thought the Alexa Mini was so cool and preferable to the Amira until I saw one rigged up. At that point, it's more awkward ergonomically imo. So I still see the appeal of it, but for smaller crews I think the Amira is nicer. I've operated a full size Alexa once and I couldn't get a feel for it, but again, I don't operate that often. I think I would like the Amira a lot.

 

I bought myself a C200 for small shoots and noticed that it's either incredibly front-heavy if you use the EVF on a shoulder rig (requiring perhaps 12 pounds of counterweight) or you need to build it out as though it were an Alexa Mini, at which point.... I would much rather have an Alexa Mini. But the EVF is good and it cradles pretty well, just isn't as steady. I'm debating between putting together an Alexa Mini-style rig for a couple thousand dollars with an external EVF and Arri dovetail or just handholding it on a much cheaper dSLR rig without the follow focus and handlebars. These would be shoots with crews between two and ten people I'm guessing and this thread sort of inspired me to reconsider my need for new gear. But I shoot handheld a lot.

 

What's so bad about XAVC? I found the codec surprisingly thin but transcoding to ProRes was fast and the file sizes were manageable. Raw is another story.

 

I can't handhold a 135mm lens to save my life. :/ Maybe that's normal?

Edited by M Joel W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This make a lot of sense to me... I thought the Alexa Mini was so cool and preferable to the Amira until I saw one rigged up. At that point, it's more awkward ergonomically imo. So I still see the appeal of it, but for smaller crews I think the Amira is nicer. I've operated a full size Alexa once and I couldn't get a feel for it, but again, I don't operate that often. I think I would like the Amira a lot.

Plus, you need the filter wheel. You need the audio support. These are all critical ENG things that only Sony has really addressed in the "on shoulder" cameras. I can't tell you how annoying it is to constantly have a 1.2ND filter in my pocket when shooting on film to go between indoors and outdoors. With the Amira, you tap one programmable button and you get a filter and ISO change. The Sony and Canon counterparts can do the same thing, but they can be more complicated to operate.

 

I bought myself a C200 for small shoots and noticed that it's either incredibly front-heavy if you use the EVF on a shoulder rig (requiring perhaps 12 pounds of counterweight) or you need to build it out as though it were an Alexa Mini, at which point.... I would much rather have an Alexa Mini. But the EVF is good and it cradles pretty well, just isn't as steady.

C200 has a great imager and creates wonderful images. However, having shot with the C100, C300MKII and C500 on several projects, I wouldn't dream owning one for hand held work. Once built out, it's no smaller than a Red Dragon or Alexa Mini. Yes it does have audio, which the other cameras don't excel in. It does have filter's, which is another plus. But carrying around that rig all day, might as well shoot on film frankly.

 

I'm debating between putting together an Alexa Mini-style rig for a couple thousand dollars with an external EVF and Arri dovetail or just handholding it on a much cheaper dSLR rig without the follow focus and handlebars. These would be shoots with crews between two and ten people I'm guessing and this thread sort of inspired me to reconsider my need for new gear. But I shoot handheld a lot.

I shoot mostly handheld for doc work. Even with interviews, I generally run a 2nd camera that's roving hand held. There is a certain spontaneity that comes from that style of shooting which makes the image more exciting to view. I generally shoot by myself as well, to raise less suspicion on what I'm shooting. Sometimes a director or producer will tail me, but I generally like to go out and get material on my own. It's rare I have a sound guy, most of the time I'm running audio through the camera and monitoring it with my iphone headphones since they're small and don't rub on the camera body. I can see the meters below and adjust the levels very easy on the Amira or any ENG style camera. I think those things are pretty important if you don't have a big crew.

 

What's so bad about XAVC? I found the codec surprisingly thin but transcoding to ProRes was fast and the file sizes were manageable.

Interesting story. Pro Res is a multi-threaded codec. It plays back using the CPU and it's very efficient. As long as your storage can handle the bandwidth, you're good to go. XAVC is horribly inefficient. It's not multi-threaded and it has no support on GPU or even CPU hardware decoding like .h264/.h265 with some GPU's and some CPU's. So it's very slow to decode and render at full resolution compared to Pro Res or even Red Code. Heck, I have better luck decoding DPX files then XAVC. Anyway, this is just something I deal with every day and it gets annoying. Especially when you have a beast of a computer that struggles to playback such a simple codec.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, having shot with the C100, C300MKII and C500 on several projects, I wouldn't dream owning one for hand held work. Once built out, it's no smaller than a Red Dragon or Alexa Mini. Yes it does have audio, which the other cameras don't excel in. It does have filter's, which is another plus. But carrying around that rig all day, might as well shoot on film frankly.

 

 

I shoot mostly handheld for doc work. Even with interviews, I generally run a 2nd camera that's roving hand held. There is a certain spontaneity that comes from that style of shooting which makes the image more exciting to view. I generally shoot by myself as well, to raise less suspicion on what I'm shooting. Sometimes a director or producer will tail me, but I generally like to go out and get material on my own. It's rare I have a sound guy, most of the time I'm running audio through the camera and monitoring it with my iphone headphones since they're small and don't rub on the camera body. I can see the meters below and adjust the levels very easy on the Amira or any ENG style camera. I think those things are pretty important if you don't have a big crew.

 

 

Interesting story. Pro Res is a multi-threaded codec. It plays back using the CPU and it's very efficient. As long as your storage can handle the bandwidth, you're good to go. XAVC is horribly inefficient. It's not multi-threaded and it has no support on GPU or even CPU hardware decoding like .h264/.h265 with some GPU's and some CPU's. So it's very slow to decode and render at full resolution compared to Pro Res or even Red Code. Heck, I have better luck decoding DPX files then XAVC. Anyway, this is just something I deal with every day and it gets annoying. Especially when you have a beast of a computer that struggles to playback such a simple codec.

 

 

Fair enough re: XAVC. I didn't spend much time with it.

 

And thanks for the feedback on shooting the Canon form factor handheld. Everything you've written makes sense. Yeah, I can't figure out a shoulder rig that is in any way manageable for what I'm doing. So far, of everything, this approach makes the most sense to me:

 

https://www.newsshooter.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/C300-mkII-1-600x389.jpg

 

Doesn't look that steady, though. But seriously this is the best option I've found so far, just handholding the camera like a camcorder without building it out. Is there any reasonable way to make this work and add a third point of contact? I'm very seriously considering just using something like this:

 

https://www.amazon.com/CowboyStudio-Shoulder-Support-Camcorder-Camera/dp/B0036NMQ7S/ref=asc_df_B0036NMQ7S/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312111900416&hvpos=1o2&hvnetw=g&hvrand=6169804421546769952&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9001876&hvtargid=pla-594116984634&psc=1

 

I want to avoid one of those big shoulder rigs that turns this small camera into a large awkward rig, just as you mentioned is probably inevitable. There are offset shoulder mounts that put the camera in the above position (for use with the EVF), but they're extremely front-heavy. My heaviest lenses are just under 2lbs and most much lighter, so I'm hoping for some kind of compromise where I can hold the camera by its handle (and either by the focus ring or a follow focus) rather than handlebars and maybe put 5-8lbs of counterweight on the back, but it doesn't seem that promising, either. How critical is it that a shoulder rig be balanced? (I would operate without the LCD, but it's very lightweight...) I assume very.

 

Something like this but with no handlebars:

 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1357841-REG/shape_c200_of_canon_c200_offset_rig.html/?ap=y&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIuMOYwLq64AIVxAOGCh09dQb2EAYYASABEgK1d_D_BwE&lsft=BI%3A514&smp=Y

 

Still seems... not good.

 

And yeah, this is the one use case where I'm not entirely thrilled with the ergonomics.

Edited by M Joel W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a comment I,d make about the ND filters in Sony camera,s.. I would say the Amira is more complex than the Sony ..rather than the other way round .. Venice is motorized.. but the doc camera,s f5/55 Fs7 are all manual on a wheel by the EVF.. you cant get easier than that really..and quick.. there is no button function at all... the Fs7II ,has an option, a really great function.. electrical variable ND.. one level of ND has to be introduced.. doesn't matter what.. and then you can manually, with a rolling switch actually dial in the exact level you want.. or even set it to auto.. an electric current is sent through glass to achieve the ND.. this is absolutely one of the best features to be introduced in a doc camera for many years .. hate to bang the drum again .. but in my opinion ditch the C200,the worlds worst designed camera in the history of life on the planet..the C200 is very odd.. it has compressed RAW .. or 8bit only Mpeg.. making it useless for broadcast or much else.. get an fs7.. much easier to hand hold.. a ton of 3rd party accessories.. the most in the world by far..and a much better codec line up..and over all specs..

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a comment I,d make about the ND filters in Sony camera,s.. I would say the Amira is more complex than the Sony ..rather than the other way round .. Venice is motorized.. but the doc camera,s f5/55 Fs7 are all manual on a wheel by the EVF.. you cant get easier than that really..and quick.. there is no button function at all... the Fs7II ,has an option, a really great function.. electrical variable ND.. one level of ND has to be introduced.. doesn't matter what.. and then you can manually, with a rolling switch actually dial in the exact level you want.. or even set it to auto.. an electric current is sent through glass to achieve the ND.. this is absolutely one of the best features to be introduced in a doc camera for many years .. hate to bang the drum again .. but in my opinion ditch the C200,the worlds worst designed camera in the history of life on the planet..the C200 is very odd.. it has compressed RAW .. or 8bit only Mpeg.. making it useless for broadcast or much else.. get an fs7.. much easier to hand hold.. a ton of 3rd party accessories.. the most in the world by far..and a much better codec line up..and over all specs..

 

 

I mostly agree, at least about form factor and specs. And at $7000 the FS7 is a great deal. There's a lot of disappointment in the C200 and C300 Mk II's ergonomics, at least from what I can tell, and I share in it. I've only used the F3 and F5 and not the FS7, but I do remember the F5 being much more ergonomic for shoulder mounting than any of Canon's cameras.

 

But I'm actually happy with everything other than the handheld configuration (and yes, the 8 bit is not very good). I don't mind just cradling the camera for quick handheld shoots, and most of my paid work is short form or shooting vfx inserts. But it really is a bear to get working over the shoulder and that's one area I wish I could address better.

 

I think I figured out a mess of accessories (lightweight baseplate, no matte box, no handlebars, offset, 8lbs of counterweight, 5" rosette extender and other hand on a lightweight follow focus) that will serve my needs and let me shoot through the EVF, but if I shot professionally more often than I do, I would probably be looking at different cameras and certainly a different shoulder mount. It's not a good solution, but probably good enough for me.

 

And I'm still finding I pull focus a lot better off a follow focus than off the barrel. Maybe the stiff lenses are causing me to torque the camera? :/

Edited by M Joel W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basic problem.. as with the f3.. is having the EVF right at the back of the camera.. its just the worst place..this is classic engineers designing a camera with zero input from professional users.. they just followed the consumer format .. if you ever want to shoot hand held on your shoulder.. which is empirically the only comfortable way to do it .. you will need a 3rd party EVF.. Zacuto Gratical or EYE are popular ones..and quite a bit of rigging for the C300/200.. f5 is just a box and you need some sort of base/shoulder rig, usually they also have 15mm rod support etc.. but its a box thats longer than it is tall.. like ever single other professional film or video camera.. even consumer .. why Canon ever thought taller than longer was a good idea.. to say nothing of the XLR ports being at the very top .. is really sort of unbelievable .. and then to do it twice !!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ursa Mini Pro.

 

Mechanical ND filters, sensible layout, shoulder mount, proper EVF.

 

I'm just sayin'.

 

P

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ursa Mini Pro.

 

Mechanical ND filters, sensible layout, shoulder mount, proper EVF.

 

I'm just sayin'.

 

P

 

 

Yes another example fine example .. Amira.. great camera but for doc,s.. thats a no from me...weighs a ton.. not native even UHD.. and man.. power hungry .. that thing eats batteries .. you need a bag full of them..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • FJS International



    Just Cinema Gear



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Paralinx LLC



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Serious Gear



    Visual Products



    G-Force Grips



    CineLab



    Tai Audio



    Wooden Camera



    Metropolis Post



    Abel Cine



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Glidecam



    Ritter Battery


    Cinematography Books and Gear
×
×
  • Create New...