Francis Carver

Francis Carver

Lives in United States Mid-Atlantic, DE, United States
Joined on Nov 20, 2011


Total: 2553, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Papi61: Don't know if this will have a substantially different image quality than the regular Alexa. (I doubt it.) The price is definitely an improvement, but I'd still use a 6K Epic Dragon. When you're renting this kind of camera, the price isn't going to be dramatically different (about $600/day for a basic package: camera + couple of lenses + storage + touchscreen + rig etc.)

Right U R, Papi. Commercials are being shot with the Arris when money is no object, or else with the Canon C500 or one of the Reds when money matters some. If you want to see money being wasted by the minute and by the bucket -- kindly proceed to any shooting location when an Arri-cam or two is in play.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 17:48 UTC
In reply to:

Jozef M: How much weight? How big/small is this apparatus? Use the metric system too, please.

I grew up with Metric -- and yet I think it is totally dumb. On the other hand, Imperial measures make complete sense. (No irony intended here, either.)

Historically, the French cooked-up the Metric System only to rub-off the English in the wrong way. This -- they succeeded to do.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 17:44 UTC
In reply to:

FocusPuller: Not so sure about the drone application. At $40k with lens and at least 6 lbs this isnt going on the toys everyone is obsessed with. Big-budget films, maybe, but that would be a very small market.

I guess Arri calls full-sized helicopters operated by flesh-and-blood pilots "drones" these days? "Drone" -- yeah, that is the hot-hot-hot word of the year, isn't it now? And which sane person would not want to hang a $30,000 camera from the underbelly of a $1,000 drone?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 17:39 UTC
In reply to:

omeneo: The article has mistakes.

1) There is no "Alexa Mini 4K". There is Alexa Mini. Arri has no 4K cameras, they upscale to 4K from 2.8K and 3.2K. So the title is misleading.
2) It does not have built in lens motor. It has built in lens motor controller.
3) Arri digital camera line is not using fully modular approach, that would be Red.

Arri calls 2.5K a 3.2K. and a 3.2K an "almost 4K."I guess they are always rounding UP the numbers, don't they now? Including their cock-and-bull grabbed-out-of-thin-air prices.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 17:36 UTC
In reply to:

webrunner5: This has got to be one of the most overpriced cameras on the market. And I thought Hasselblad and their limited wood hand grip crap was stupid.

Exactamundo! I would have though that with oil prices still falling, it would be less expensive to make a plastic camera body out of like 0.1 liter of crude oil. Apparently not.

This camera, when compared to the competition, should be priced at around USD $4,200 to $6,000 maximum, and even then it should come with either (a) an LCD screen or (b) an EVF or (c) a combination of the two.

But at the past-preposterous USD $30,000 ticket rice, this off-beat thing here is a lame-duck joke that backfired already on the struggling Bavarian company.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 25, 2015 at 17:33 UTC
In reply to:

DStudio: "It also has an integrated lens motor allowing for focus, iris and zoom to all be controlled from an ARRI hand unit, wirelessly. This makes the ALEXA Mini 4K an excellent choice for use with a drone."

I find this statement dubious. Only those with very high budgets might do this. The risk of damage using a drone can be reasonably high, so you'd have to be able to afford to rent or buy a number of units and somehow get them insured.

Most independent filmmakers need not apply (at least for drone use).

Someone at Arri HQ in Munich, Bavaria must have heard the word "drone" being a buzz-word of sorts -- so, here comes the Arri Drone-Cam.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 17:01 UTC
In reply to:

agaoo: cool spec, but how much?

"Probably around $500-600 daily rental, decently-equipped."

Since this one comes with NOTHING, you'll be spending abut $1200 to $1500 a day on one that you can actually shoot some video with.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:57 UTC
In reply to:

mpgxsvcd: Wow that looks like a stunner. However, I can't help but think that a Panasonic GH4 in capable hands with the right lenses could probably come close to matching it.

$28,000 to spend on lenses goes a really long way towards making the playing field even for the GH4.

"if you have the budget to shoot with an Alexa rig and all that it entails, you won't be using a GH4 as a primary camera, nor would you be buying the gear, anyway. A rental house would supply the gear."

Exactly! This little toy is pricey as the inferno, and instead of a real 4K camera, it can only muster up around 2.5K reslution natively. Pretty old sensor inside, it came out around 5-6 years ago, actually.

So, you definitely do not want to waste your money on it by buying it. And it is probably too pricey to rent as well. So, where will that leave most folks, I wonder?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:53 UTC
In reply to:

armandino: Mmm.... $30,000 strapped on a drone...

Also -- LCD screen not included, electronic viewfinder not included, stabilizer not included, normal SSD recorder unit not included, battery not included, and so forth.

Come to think of it -- WHAT DO YOU GET for your thirty thousand buckaroos here, people? Anything?

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:47 UTC
In reply to:

MayaTlab0: Thanks for talking a bit about Arri. I think this is a brand many camera manufacturers should give a long, careful look at. Arri was late to the digital party and yet right now in many areas they are considered the reference. It isn't because of the Alexa and Co specification sheet, which has nothing particularly extraordinary, but simply because of a better overall design that actually cares about users and helping them achieve their artistic intentions.

"Thanks for talking a bit about Arri. I think this is a brand many camera manufacturers should give a long, careful look at. "

I think they have. And they decided to pass.

"no one owns a camera but rents it. so a rental-manufacturer like ARRI..."

ARRI -- a "rental manufacturer" of cameras? Phew, that almost sounds like an insult.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:43 UTC
In reply to:

jtan163: Carbon fibre body?
Hmm, well according to about 50% of the Nikon FX forum it must be an amateur model.
Pro cameras are made of magnesium alloy and wireless is just an affection for amateurs and soccer parents...
I'm just saying.

No screen of any kind, no EVF either. Now, that's a REAL PRO gear, Man!

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:39 UTC
In reply to:

Threshold Tech: "what ME might expect"? The DPReview intro to the press release may have been written by Tarzan.

Hopefully the camera will make an appearance at the ARRI 4K Seminar in Toronto in March.

MEwant 4K, not 2.5K.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:38 UTC
In reply to:

BobbySan: It always makes me laugh when Company X releases a camera and someone on here always says - "1080P we want 4K otherwise it's no good for film makers' BS!

The Arri Alexa family has made some great film/TV at 1080P
Skyfall - 1080P
Avengers Assemble - 1080P
Game of Thrones - 1080P

It's not about kit, it's about craft

HD was soooooo YESTERDAY. Quick, someone pass out some fliers about this in Munich.

Okay, so this thing can record 2.5K natively -- but TODAY, we are using UHD and 4K for native pixel resolution in digital videograpy. And not 2.5K.

2.5K -- well, it was soooooo YESTERDAY.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:37 UTC

Thirty THOUSAND dollars -- for what? For THIS little Germania nothing?

Heck, this must be the world's first "4K camera" -- that only has an approximately 2.5K native resolution sensor. And USD $30.000 is just a bit too much for a little upscaler tucked away inside this no-brainer.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 24, 2015 at 16:34 UTC as 16th comment | 1 reply
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Miki Nemeth: Very intersting conclusion. At the moment (9 Dec 2014) the RX10 is 50 EUR cheaper than the FZ1000. The RX10 in the meantime received a new firmware with XAVC-S. The built-in ND filter, the professional-grade (parfocal) zoom lens, excellent XAVC-S codec, professional weather sealed body, cheaper price today makes my decision much harder. My problem with 4K is that to exploit its (great) advantages it requires a huge amount of disk space, and more importantly an enormous amount of post processing time. Decent FullHD video footage is all I'd need. Image stabilization efficiency is another big question. Hmm.

"Are you sure about this 24mm to 37mm crop of the LX100? The end results are a 2.4x crop in 4K video mode compared to.... in stills mode it is a 2.2x crop."

Yeah, that is why it is ONLY 37mm.... and not 40 or 42mm, you see.

If you want a little processing power inside your camera, you need to move out of Panasonic and into a Samsung NX1. That one does not do any image cropping or other low-CPU capability trickery.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 24, 2015 at 15:14 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7 flips for selfies article (385 comments in total)
In reply to:

ShatteredSky: What if I want to use that tilting screen for non-selfie shots? Am I cool than? One of my gripes is that the LX100 does not come with a tilting screen ...

If you do not want to selfie, than just don't. Childishly easy ...

Please, do take ALL the "selfies" you want of yourself, see if I care.

But please.... PLUEEEEESE.... do not expect US to watch YOU in these shots to no end. :-))

Direct link | Posted on Jan 21, 2015 at 17:49 UTC
In reply to:

WetCoast: 1" sensor, please. No more 2/3", 1/1.7" or 1/2.3"... :)

No clue what the sensor inside this one is as far its size is concerned -- it is apparently a closely guarded secret. You can see 101 assorted specs on this camera here -- but the size of its sensor. Suspicious....

Direct link | Posted on Jan 16, 2015 at 19:54 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

avicenanw: Both are great bridge cameras. If you are more into photos, the RX10 is for you, and if you are more into videos, the FZ1000 is for you with its 4K video capability. I would go for the RX10 because I am more into photos. The RX10 has sturdier build with metal (magnesium) chassis (vs the plastic FZ1000) , is dust and moisture resistant, have constant f2.8 aperture across its zoom range, have built-in ND filter, and a headphone jack for monitoring sound when I occasionally go into video mode. The RX10 also have better out of camera jpegs in case you prefer not to do post processing.

@ XVOYAGERX: Since when is a cheap plastic camera body "very well built?"

Whether you like it or no, the better overall build quality, pricier cameras and made out of metal alloys, and the lower echelon, cheaper cameras and made out of plastic. Or, as you like to say it, out of "Poly Carbonite."

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 21:16 UTC
On Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Review preview (814 comments in total)
In reply to:

Birdy1970: Great cam.but not compact...

What are YOU, Weird Named One, the Mighty Inquisition?

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 21:13 UTC
On Nikon D5500 adds touchscreen and flat picture profile article (213 comments in total)

These whatyoumacallit "upper entry level" (ha-ha-ha-ha) DSLR cameras are getting mighty pricey as of late.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 6, 2015 at 05:17 UTC as 42nd comment | 1 reply
Total: 2553, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »