4 ms·

I’ve been involved in shooting video projects professionally for over 30 years. This question about the expense of “pro” gear is getting quite fuzzy. Most of m

I’ve been involved in shooting video projects professionally for over 30 years. This question about the expense of “pro” gear is getting quite fuzzy. Most of my work has been as a contractor or freelancer and I’ve always believed in buying excellent gear. Yet I’ve never had any producer or editor ask “what did you shoot this with?”* Durability and reliability is the prime reason pro gear is preferred but for me anyway that calculation has changed in recent years. I just returned from Borneo where I was mostly using Sony RX-10 prosumer cameras. I carried 4 RX-10 bodies and never missed a shot. Everything was shot in 4K. A top end pro camera from Sony would have an edge on quality in terms of pixels and dynamic range. But not enough to spend an additional 25k. Plus with the cheaper cameras I much less hesitant to put them in harms way. When you are less concerned about destroying the camera it provides opportunities that otherwise might not be considered. I actually just hired a production team for a project I’m involved with as a producer. They are going to be using top notch Arri Alexa cameras with prime Cine lenses. This is GREAT gear! But I’ll never forget the $25 Panasonic M42 28mm lens I used on a RED camera that was fantastic. It had a bit of chromatic aberration but this was easily corrected in post. Nobody questioned the results. Our iPhone or Android cameras rival what Panavision was providing in the 80’s. * the exception is always super slow motion or incredible low light performance.

sand500 4y ago
How does the Sony A7S lineup compare with the high end gear for low light performance?
- kuschku 4y ago
  The A7SIII is a low light wonder with the dual native ISO at 12800, even compared to pro (cinema) gear, which is why the FX3 is based in the A7SIII.
- dannyw 4y ago
  Best in class. However, a7 IV has pretty good performance too (except at extreme ISOs), and is much more useful as a photography camera. A7S III is also not getting video centric firmware updates, unlike the FX3 which has same internals.
kayfox 4y ago
Can't really "fix it in post" when its live broadcast TV, which is what the linked YouTube video is talking about.
- dehrmann 4y ago
  Give AI 5 years.
- bigiain 4y ago
  Yep, “so cheap they’re practically disposable” GoPro and similar cameras have made whole new categories of video possible (seemingly mostly Redbull promos…) But there’s a huge difference between a YouTuber with 7 GoPros strapped to their car/bike/wingsuit, and the on board cameras used for real time broadcasting for F1/MotoGP/NASCAR. I’d bet there’s about three orders of magnitude more money involved in getting the cockpit shot from Lewis Hamiltons car into a live race broadcast compared to even “big budget” YouTube “fix it in post” production houses like Hoonigan.
- LiquidPolymer 4y ago
  100% correct about live broadcast. “Fix it in post” is not viable and shouldn’t be relied upon generally. My larger point was really about the distinguishing characteristics between “pro” and ”prosumer” are diminishing rapidly. When a minor correction in edit is all that stands between $50,000 in expense the incentives are easy to figure.
  - rcme 4y ago
    In the case of this video, though, there is a massive difference between pro and prosumer. The pro lens needs a massive focal length, massive aperture, and precise motor controls. There is no prosumer alternative and the lens really is worth 200K based on what it’s able to do.
- ekianjo 4y ago
  the threshold for fixing in post in real time is decreasing every year though.
- 4y ago
dannyw 4y ago
Worth noting the RX10 IV has 10bit log 4:2:2, features not found on most prosumer cameras. I imagine you also shoot under reasonable low light ‐ for high ISO shots, a 1 inch sensor doesn't capture as much light as full frame or even APS-c.
plastic3169 4y ago
This feels like disruption in the original Clayton Christensen sense. You have serious pro gear and then toy like cameras that are useful for something with vastly cheaper price. As time goes by the toy cameras start to get used more and more in professional tasks. In the end nobody can make money doing the pro gear. What is not talked about so much is that as a professional in a field disruption feels like your tools getting worse each year and your work day filling up with annoying work arounds. Overall there is progress but each step feels like a step backward in to the prosumer land.
- em-bee 4y ago
  the same thing that happened with computers
tcbyrd 4y ago
This is a great example to me why production and broadcast equipment is and may always be so different. I'd never even consider something like an RX-10 camera when what I need is 4 cameras attached to a live switcher genlocked to the same timecode. I went back and forth on this balance for years. I wanted that large sensor look and feel, with great full-frame lenses, but trying to use it live was a nightmare workflow. This was before Canon started making the C series that mixed the world of a camera with an EF mount that also had SDI I/O. I tested those, but still couldn't trust them in a live broadcast, mainly because of the lack of a parfocal lens I can focus remotely. I think with cameras like Blackmagic's Ursa and some more "prosumer" lenses that are parfocal we may be getting closer to having the best of both worlds, but I haven't researched that in a couple of years. Broadcast optimized gear is like having Kubernetes. Everything built for broadcast talks SDI/NDI so it's generally possible to operate or at least monitor the device remotely. Then you have routers and mixers designed to modify those video feeds in real-time with as little latency as possible. One of my first gigs in broadcast involved learning how to remotely white balance cameras from the control room or patch the output of one video feed from a satellite truck into a monitor on set, while also recording that same feed in a completely separate room. I've also spent time doing "documentary style" and film production and was amazed at how different everything was, and how some workflows that are super straightforward in a newsroom are basically impossible with things like GoPros and DSLR setups.
- namibj 4y ago
  Shouldn't parfocal be trivial to handle in software these days with motorized zoom and autofocus? Even without actually using an "auto"-focus behavior?
  - eternityforest 4y ago
    That always confused me a bit too. Maybe it has to do with people who still want direct physical control?
  - kuschku 4y ago
    It is possible, and that's how broadcast lenses implement it. Sony even sells a 500$ super35 lens that's parfocal (the SELP18105G which was the kit lens for the FS5). The same compensation behaviour can be done in reverse to prevent focus breathing (and yes, that 500$ lens does that, too). Sadly outside of Sony's 18-105G, 18-110G and 28-135G, most lenses for mirrorless or cinema cameras are designed to be manual and don't even attempt it.
Gordonjcp 4y ago
> Our iPhone or Android cameras rival what Panavision was providing in the 80’s. Can you imagine if Kevin Smith had a reasonably modern phone, a semidecent PC, and a copy of Resolve when he started out? Of course, that's happening, except it's not Kevin Smith, it's some other snotty kid whose name will become associated with cult cinema in a few years. They're still in their backyard making daft wee movies with their friends and sticking them on Tiktok, and one day you're going to be buying a ticket to their film. > I just returned from Borneo where I was mostly using Sony RX-10 prosumer cameras. I carried 4 RX-10 bodies and never missed a shot. Even at that there were (in the early 2000s!) real proper feature films shot on standard-def DV, including one of my favourites, 24 Hour Party People. Every time GAS starts to bite I look at my Sony DSR-PD150 and think "you know what, if it was good enough for the guy that did Open Water or Super Size Me, I ought to be able to get by with it" :-D
- khazhoux 4y ago
  > one day you're going to be buying a ticket to their film. “What are ’tickets’, Grandpa?”
  - Gordonjcp 4y ago
    It'll come back round again. My toddler runs around waving one of my old Gopro-knockoffs about shouting "CAMERA! CAMERA!", wearing it on a strap round his neck, holding it with both hands, and peering down at it like he's looking into the viewfinder of a TLR. Wonder if that's epigenetics from his grandfather, who was well into his Rolleiflexes? Anyway when he's a teenager everything will be shot in Willam-Gibson-esque neural stimulation implants by actors with Zeiss Ikon eyes shooting 30720x17280 240p, and he and his mates will be running around the woods with an old banger Arri Alexa 35 "because you just don't get the same organic quality in 32K that you do with these old 4K cameras, it's just got so much more life", same as we did with 16mm and VHS. Going to see a film on a huge screen with a hundred other folk will be just this incredible oldschool vintage thing, people dressing in authentic 20s fashions for the occasion. And everything old will be new again, just like it was last year and the year before.
- trynewideas 4y ago

sand500 4y ago

How does the Sony A7S lineup compare with the high end gear for low light performance?

kuschku 4y ago
The A7SIII is a low light wonder with the dual native ISO at 12800, even compared to pro (cinema) gear, which is why the FX3 is based in the A7SIII.
dannyw 4y ago
Best in class. However, a7 IV has pretty good performance too (except at extreme ISOs), and is much more useful as a photography camera. A7S III is also not getting video centric firmware updates, unlike the FX3 which has same internals.

kayfox 4y ago

Can't really "fix it in post" when its live broadcast TV, which is what the linked YouTube video is talking about.

dehrmann 4y ago
Give AI 5 years.
bigiain 4y ago
Yep, “so cheap they’re practically disposable” GoPro and similar cameras have made whole new categories of video possible (seemingly mostly Redbull promos…) But there’s a huge difference between a YouTuber with 7 GoPros strapped to their car/bike/wingsuit, and the on board cameras used for real time broadcasting for F1/MotoGP/NASCAR. I’d bet there’s about three orders of magnitude more money involved in getting the cockpit shot from Lewis Hamiltons car into a live race broadcast compared to even “big budget” YouTube “fix it in post” production houses like Hoonigan.
LiquidPolymer 4y ago
100% correct about live broadcast. “Fix it in post” is not viable and shouldn’t be relied upon generally. My larger point was really about the distinguishing characteristics between “pro” and ”prosumer” are diminishing rapidly. When a minor correction in edit is all that stands between $50,000 in expense the incentives are easy to figure.
- rcme 4y ago
  In the case of this video, though, there is a massive difference between pro and prosumer. The pro lens needs a massive focal length, massive aperture, and precise motor controls. There is no prosumer alternative and the lens really is worth 200K based on what it’s able to do.
ekianjo 4y ago
the threshold for fixing in post in real time is decreasing every year though.
4y ago

dannyw 4y ago

Worth noting the RX10 IV has 10bit log 4:2:2, features not found on most prosumer cameras. I imagine you also shoot under reasonable low light ‐ for high ISO shots, a 1 inch sensor doesn't capture as much light as full frame or even APS-c.

plastic3169 4y ago

This feels like disruption in the original Clayton Christensen sense. You have serious pro gear and then toy like cameras that are useful for something with vastly cheaper price. As time goes by the toy cameras start to get used more and more in professional tasks. In the end nobody can make money doing the pro gear. What is not talked about so much is that as a professional in a field disruption feels like your tools getting worse each year and your work day filling up with annoying work arounds. Overall there is progress but each step feels like a step backward in to the prosumer land.

em-bee 4y ago
the same thing that happened with computers

tcbyrd 4y ago

This is a great example to me why production and broadcast equipment is and may always be so different. I'd never even consider something like an RX-10 camera when what I need is 4 cameras attached to a live switcher genlocked to the same timecode. I went back and forth on this balance for years. I wanted that large sensor look and feel, with great full-frame lenses, but trying to use it live was a nightmare workflow. This was before Canon started making the C series that mixed the world of a camera with an EF mount that also had SDI I/O. I tested those, but still couldn't trust them in a live broadcast, mainly because of the lack of a parfocal lens I can focus remotely. I think with cameras like Blackmagic's Ursa and some more "prosumer" lenses that are parfocal we may be getting closer to having the best of both worlds, but I haven't researched that in a couple of years. Broadcast optimized gear is like having Kubernetes. Everything built for broadcast talks SDI/NDI so it's generally possible to operate or at least monitor the device remotely. Then you have routers and mixers designed to modify those video feeds in real-time with as little latency as possible. One of my first gigs in broadcast involved learning how to remotely white balance cameras from the control room or patch the output of one video feed from a satellite truck into a monitor on set, while also recording that same feed in a completely separate room. I've also spent time doing "documentary style" and film production and was amazed at how different everything was, and how some workflows that are super straightforward in a newsroom are basically impossible with things like GoPros and DSLR setups.

namibj 4y ago
Shouldn't parfocal be trivial to handle in software these days with motorized zoom and autofocus? Even without actually using an "auto"-focus behavior?
- eternityforest 4y ago
  That always confused me a bit too. Maybe it has to do with people who still want direct physical control?
- kuschku 4y ago
  It is possible, and that's how broadcast lenses implement it. Sony even sells a 500$ super35 lens that's parfocal (the SELP18105G which was the kit lens for the FS5). The same compensation behaviour can be done in reverse to prevent focus breathing (and yes, that 500$ lens does that, too). Sadly outside of Sony's 18-105G, 18-110G and 28-135G, most lenses for mirrorless or cinema cameras are designed to be manual and don't even attempt it.

Gordonjcp 4y ago

> Our iPhone or Android cameras rival what Panavision was providing in the 80’s. Can you imagine if Kevin Smith had a reasonably modern phone, a semidecent PC, and a copy of Resolve when he started out? Of course, that's happening, except it's not Kevin Smith, it's some other snotty kid whose name will become associated with cult cinema in a few years. They're still in their backyard making daft wee movies with their friends and sticking them on Tiktok, and one day you're going to be buying a ticket to their film. > I just returned from Borneo where I was mostly using Sony RX-10 prosumer cameras. I carried 4 RX-10 bodies and never missed a shot. Even at that there were (in the early 2000s!) real proper feature films shot on standard-def DV, including one of my favourites, 24 Hour Party People. Every time GAS starts to bite I look at my Sony DSR-PD150 and think "you know what, if it was good enough for the guy that did Open Water or Super Size Me, I ought to be able to get by with it" :-D

khazhoux 4y ago
> one day you're going to be buying a ticket to their film. “What are ’tickets’, Grandpa?”
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  It'll come back round again. My toddler runs around waving one of my old Gopro-knockoffs about shouting "CAMERA! CAMERA!", wearing it on a strap round his neck, holding it with both hands, and peering down at it like he's looking into the viewfinder of a TLR. Wonder if that's epigenetics from his grandfather, who was well into his Rolleiflexes? Anyway when he's a teenager everything will be shot in Willam-Gibson-esque neural stimulation implants by actors with Zeiss Ikon eyes shooting 30720x17280 240p, and he and his mates will be running around the woods with an old banger Arri Alexa 35 "because you just don't get the same organic quality in 32K that you do with these old 4K cameras, it's just got so much more life", same as we did with 16mm and VHS. Going to see a film on a huge screen with a hundred other folk will be just this incredible oldschool vintage thing, people dressing in authentic 20s fashions for the occasion. And everything old will be new again, just like it was last year and the year before.
trynewideas 4y ago