ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

4 years, 6 months ago - Tony Franks

Regarding film cameras, you seem curious enough that maybe it's worth renting a Bolex and giving it a go? I shot my first film (a 6-minute short) on a Bolex borrowed from a film school and edited it myself on a Steenbeck. Film, processing, mastering cost me maybe $800 if my memory serves me right...

4 years, 5 months ago - Jonathan Ashdown

Hey there,

There is no simple answer to 'what camera should I buy' but i will say that the cameras you have mentioned are wildly different. A 35mm or 16mm film camera will prove expensive and difficult and hugely limit the types of shoot you work on as there is such a high cost associated with working on film. Most big budget productions shoot digital because it's so much simpler and cost effective.

The PMW200 and EX1 cameras on the other hand were very popular about 8 years ago, especially with shooting directors as they had a lot of auto functions, You'd see them used on a lot of entertainment TV shows and that type of production. The flip side is that they are quite limited. You'll never be able to achieve anything close to the look of cinema cameras as they have small chip sensors and fixed lenses. Essentially they are quite out dated by modern standards.

The basic principals of shooting can be learnt on any dslr, so you really need to think about what you want and need in terms of features. So much depends on your experience level, what you want to make with the camera and how much money you have to spend. If you dont have a lot to spend, sticking with the camera you have and investing in lighting, a quality tripod and good lenses may be a better option.

4 years, 5 months ago - Dave Baum

I agree with the post above, it has to be about what you personally need form a camera and of course what you can afford.

Having said that, I have used a C100mk2 quite a bit, and that could be viewed as a decent logical next step from a DSLR. A used one could be had for around £1000 I should think, they are almost 5 years old now and with the formats they shoot in (35mbps MP4 or AVCHD) what they give away in bit rates and so on they make up for in cheap media (SD cards) and long battery life. This is great for documentary shooting where maybe you don't know what to expect or how much you will be shooting. But if you are doing more controlled environment stuff, then maybe media cost and battery life are not high on the list. It doesn't do 4K, but a nice picture quality in HD; personally I think an HD only camera can teach you to consider composition more carefully because you don't have that flexibility in post to reframe. But that's mostly because I don't have 4k! I get obsessed with specs looking at new kit, and it's easy to go down the rabbit hole and forget what you can do with the kit you already have. I am at that point no, salivating over the Sony FX6 spec list. But of course investing in your skills through practise is a valuable thing to do too, whatever kit you have! Renting could be good too - I have not used it personally but Fat Llama is a site I've been told about, where people rent out their own kit to one another. Could be a way of trying some different options at a lower cost than form a hire shop.

4 years, 5 months ago - Doug Rollins

I might suggest you look at the Sony a7111. If you want to shoot 4k video or even higher frame rate for slo mo then you should definitely consider it. I used the original a 7 for years and had some remarkable results. It's 35mm full frame and is affordable. I don't know if this helps but it seems to do the job of cameras five times it's price. Rent one , as suggested by Dave, and try it.

4 years, 5 months ago - Romanne Walker

Thanks everyone for your answers so far! This has been very helpful and good for though for me. Thank you

4 years, 5 months ago - John Lubran

Two basics.

1

The cameras aesthetic qualitative performance ought meet the users ergonomic operative requirements with the caveat that if ones tastes are too extraordinary or subjectively limited to a narrow audience then it will limit outcomes.

2

The effort and investment in making a film. If one's aspiring to a wider and future audience without platform and distribution limits, there seems little purpose in using a camera that can't achieve basic broadcast standards. Whilst 1080 HD at a minimum of 50mbps is still cutting it seems almost surly to not acquire a 4K camera that meets EBU specs. They're so cheap now.

Of course if one could care less about the above conciderations and merely wants to experiment with obscure formats and film textures for entertainment and ones subjective taste in art. That's entirely another matter.