>>4095075hey /vid/ help me up my camera/lens game please.
I've made some projects on terrible 8bit footage and I'm pretty proud of that (Rebel t100).
I'm also slowly working on a digicam video (powershot a540) and working out ideas for a few shorts with the iPhone 14 pro.
I like shooting with these but I also want to make stuff that PRETENDS to be cinema. I'm interested in anamorphic stuff and serious grades, shooting RAW etc.
Now I can choose between a heavily discounted GH6/S1/S5. The gh6 and s1 are the same price. The S5 would save me a cool $400 or so.
When I watch "pro" GH trailers, a lot of them can't keep a consistent look from one scene to the next. Like the operator can't handle the camera or he's using very mixed lenses.
S1 videos sometimes do this but they're usually consistently good or consistently bad.
It makes it look like MFT is less forgiving than FF. Idk, right now I'm leaning towards FF since I think I can easier get away with gimmick lenses like cheapo anamorphics, vintage garbage etc.
I'm not averse to buying/renting quality stuff but will M4/3 lock me into buying very high quality glass so my image doesn't look like a smartphone?
idk /vid/ help me. why does so much GH footage look like garbage compared to S footage? I've seen the GH line do really nice stuff, but even those same directors seem to barely have a handle on it.
I think it may just be user error since the BMPCC gang is usually more consistent too.
right now I'm leaning towards FF since it doesn't require a $500 speedbooster just to make certain lenses viable.
but the GH6 internal recording is no joke. and I don't think I want to use an external recorder on EVERY project.
tl;dr: MFT vs FF, money is the same. until the lens buying comes into play. wtf do I do? I feel like either one would unlock a lot of creative options for me.
