>>4381471
Odd assortment of gear, you should buy things as you need them, in case you don't actually end up needing them. Make a few short films before dropping $400 on speakers for audio mixing.
>– 17 - Decent Generic Tripod - $40
If you're serious about films, a nice tripod should be a very high priority, arguably higher than a gimbal.

A Panasonic G9
A speedboster, an Helios 44

simple as

>>4381473
I appreciate the help, but do you have better recommendations for the stuff, price and quality wise?

Also, do you recommend any great budget tripods? I'm looking at this one but I don't think the panning and tilting are great on it. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1732689-REG/neewer_66600112_n284l_g0_78_7_multifunctional_aluminium.html

>>4381474
That camera is $1,300 body only. Way too expensive.

Any better image quality camera for $500 to $800, better than the image quality of the Sony ZV-E10 Mark 1?

>>4381480
Smallrig AD-01 or SIrui H15, you want a tripod meant for video, not one for stills.
Why the ZV-E10 in particular?
Do you really need 5 bargain bin lenses? Better of with 2-3 better lenses. You don't need every prime to be f1.4 either, most filming is done at f2.8 and narrower. You'd be better off with a Sigma 18-50 f2.8, which also gets you autofocus. If you go the gimbal route too, you're going to regret going manual focus.
You're overpaying for the ND filter and step up rings. You should prioritize a monitor long before you worry about a wireless video transmitter.
Why two battery banks? If you want external power just get v-mount batteries.
You should cut the audio budget by half for your level.

>>4381471
bruh g what about focus pulling and camera movement?

>>4381471
the biggest issues i see with people irl are buying too cheap of a tripod / stabilizer and spending too much money on the camera body and cheaping out on everything else. don't buy shit until you need it. beyond that you are going to have to figure it out on your own.

>>4381474
>when your 4k is too sharp and you want it to look more like 720p
the sad part is im not referring to the lens. the helios (with a normal super 35 or full frame sensor) is sharper than most digital video can be unless someone here films over 8k.

the pixel density and poor snr of micro four thirds makes any lens look as bad as the newest iphone, so you might as well rig out your phone and save a grand.

>>4381494
sneed retard

>>4381497
hey you know they make dedicated mft video cameras too if you really want phone+1 quality, no need to buy a shitty panasonic so it can break in a year when blackmagic exists for all your ILC phone video needs

>>4381498
And with EF instead of that godawful half-standardized mount where IS and WR may or may not work if you dont simp for the right brand. You were going to use real lenses anyways so at least get a four thirds sensor with the superior EF mount.

>>4381484
Will check out the tripods, appreciate it.

Manual lenses while using a stabilizer is a problem. But what if I mainly focus on and follow actors at a consistent distance? And I shoot at like f/2.8 or something while I’m following them. Plus many of my shots are going to be of still actors talking anyway.

I don’t think all five manual lenses are necessary. Maybe I can sacrifice one or two of them. But I like the low light and I like the image quality and the lenses are very cheap. I guess the only problem is the autofocus if the actors need to move and I’m using a stabilizer. Maybe in those tricky cases I can use the Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 Mark 1 kit lens which goes for about $100? The Sigma 18-50 looks okay, but $520 is way too expensive.

I chose the ZV-E10 Mark 1 because of its great image quality and price. I watched many great quality videos using it.

You're right, I think I can get a cheaper ND filter and pay less for step-up rings. A decent K&F Concept Variable ND costs about $25 and I think I can pay about $50 for all the rings.

Why should I use a monitor? I can use the wireless video transmitter to transmit the video onto phones and tablets and many other devices on set. That way I can see myself while I'm in the shot. Isn’t that enough?

Power banks are great. One 20,000 mah power bank can power the camera and the wireless video transmitter for about six hours.

I really will use the audio tools. Any recommendations for better quality audio stuff for less money?

>>4381480
I can vouch for Promaster tripods... I own one and have been hands-on with half a dozen. All are very solid and pretty cheap:

https://promaster.com/Category/5047

>>4381506
>The Sigma 18-50 looks okay, but $520 is way too expensive.
It's less expensive than your total lens kit and a much better choice, you could even get it and 1 of the cheaper primes for less $. The Sigma 18-35 f1.8 would be an even better option, but you'd need it used + adapter. The kit 16-50 is a dogshit choice.
>I chose the ZV-E10 Mark 1 because of its great image quality and price
There are better options at a similar price point, it doesn't even record 10 bit at all. The ZV-E10 is meant for handheld vlogging type videos, not be used as a cine rig.
You need a monitor to see what you're recording. They give you better framing guidelines, exposure tools, peaking, etc. You can use a monitor to see yourself in the shot too. If you get a recor
You're putting the cart way before the horse on a lot of this, makes it seem like you're more interested in picking up new gadgets than actual film-making. Have you had much film-making experience before? Picking up a wireless transmitter to cast from a ZV-E10 is a perfect example.
You can use power banks sure, but v-mount batteries are the standard for video work for a reason. Your 20,000mah would be roughly equivalent to a 95w v-mount.
No recommendation for better budget audio stuff, but I know you're overspending by at least double what you should be.

>>4381525
I'll think about those lenses.

Please name a few of those better cameras that're around the same price. Yes, the ZV-E10 records 8-bit and has a couple of other problems but you can work around them.

I think you're wrong about the monitor. I think being able to transmit the video to many devices at the same time is more useful on set. And the Hollyland app has some of those tools you mention like guides and peaking. The monitors I found are more expensive and unnecessary.

I don't think I'm over-spending with the audio tools. Maybe I can save about a $100 if I buy a better, cheaper microphone or something though. I'll use the tools to record dialog on set, re-record dialog in a quiet place if I need to, record voice overs and narrations and to mix audio. The speakers are a bit pricey but they're worth it.

>>4381492
What do you recommend?

>>4381556
>I'll think about those lenses.
Same lenses used and recommend by the video you linked in very OP.
>you can work around them.
8-bit limits grading quite a bit, it also crops 4k30, no 4k60, lots of rolling shutter, no ibis (so more cropping with digital stabilization). It's a vlog camera, not for cine. If you're doing paid work, an external recorder will also act as backup recording, or enable even better quality recording with better cameras.
I'll make another post with better camera options.
>more useful on set
How many sets have you been on where they had a wireless transmitter and no monitor? Even for a wireless transmitter, you'd want a monitor for viewing (not a tablet or phone lol). Go ask any other video forum if a monitor or wireless transmitter is a better option. If you're at the level of needing a transmitter, you absolutely should be using a monitor.
Looking back at your budget, I also see you left out all lighting. Unless you plan to rent (good idea, but you can always just rent camera gear too), lighting is as important, if not more than audio. Right now, your budget of $4k is
>32% camera, 37% audio, 31% misc accessories
I would be aiming more like
>35% camera+lens, 20% audio, 25% lighting, 20% misc accessories
On a $4k kit, I'd be aiming to keep audio below $750 max. If you want to blow $400 on speakers for mixing, go ahead, but only buy them after you've finished filming and are ready to mix.

>>4381557
Totally unnecessary expense, and wont even really work with the bargain lenses either.
Wait until you need a 2nd to pull wirelessly and can afford that setup, or just rent as needed.

What films are you going to make? I think that camera is a good choice but I would get a good AF 35mm lens (FF equiv) and a zoom for longer focal lengths, maybe some shorter zoom also. And not a variable nd but proper nd filters. Like others said, cheap video heads are crap and will give you jerky videos.

>>4381556
Buying new, I'd be considering a GH5II, R8, R10, S5, a6700, BMDPCC4k all before the ZV-E10.
Used opens you open to tons more options. At the very, very least, get the ZV-E10II if you must.

now go on and blow your money on stuff you think you need

You forgot the most important things. A book about story such as 'Story Grid' by Shawn Coyne or 'Story' by Robert McKee and lights. Those two things are absolutely necessary. I reccomend the softest lighting that adequately exposes your scene.

>>4381473
>you should buy things as you need them
Completely and utterly wrong

>>4381471
>"I want to make films"
>Shitty flick as OP
Watch more movies, learn the barely minimum of theory in terms of writing, acting and photography... and then buy your stuff.
Although congrats for checking audio with the same importance, it is as crucial.

>>4381566
>>4381576
I was avoiding zoom lenses but I might buy one if I really think I'll use it. I think I might get rid of the 17mm TTArtisan too.

I still think the ZV-E10 Mark 1 is good given the videos I've seen and its price. And I still think you can work around that stuff by using still shots and exposing properly and playing with colors on set. A lot of the cameras you suggested are about $500 more expensive. And I didn't like the image quality coming from Canon cameras, they all looked a bit dreamy. I don't know what it is.

I don't understand why I need a monitor. I just want to see myself and a phone or tablet has a big enough screen.

I'll post my pending lighting list.

What would $750 worth of audio even look like?

>>4381493
>>4381511
I'll spend more on a tripod but the DJI RS 3 Mini seems like a pretty good stabilizer.

>>4381724
I wouldn't get rid of an UWA, that's something hard to replicate in post.
A zoom IMO is more of a run n' gun thing, it is cool to have one if you want kung fu zoom ins or outs but it's mostly not to change shit on the go.

>>4381729
It's the autofocus that might have me buying one of those lenses. It would be extremely rare for me to use the zoom in the middle of the shot.

I don't think I'd use an ultra wide angle lens like 17mm much, especially since I can't do that much with sets and locations. Maybe the 25mm really is enough.

I'm not sure if this thread is only about the camera itself, but depending on what you're filming, you should also look into some lighting.
There's a reason they say "Lights, camera, action" in that order.

>>4381755
>especially since I can't do that much with sets and locations
You really need a UWA for car interiors or tight spaces like bathrooms. Happened to me.

>>4381757
>in that order.
You can't film anything without the camera first, home boy. Also OP did state he would post that lighting list too.
Camera is king btw.

>>4381768
They go hand in hand. You obviously can't film anything without a camera Captain Obvious, but lighting is the most important component you need to film anything. You can have the most insane camera rig, but shitty lighting will ruin everything you shoot. Bad lighting is like a car without wheels and no gas.
Relying solely on natural lighting can be a mistake. It's all about the context of the project you're shooting. But you absolutely have to invest in proper lighting equipment if you're even 1% serious about shooting videos.

>>4381724
>avoiding zoom lenses
Why though? The video you yourself linked uses those same ones. Those are widely used for a reason.
>ZV-E10 1
It's not good for anything beyond handheld vlogging, what it is literally designed for. Even the II is a big step up. Some cameras are more expensive, yes, but you get a lot more, and can save in other areas as a result. You were spending too little on your camera setup given your budget anyways, and again, lots of better options for cheap if you go used.
If you're fine using a lower quality camera and having to work around, you should apply the same logic to your audio and would be able to keep that under $500. I have no issue if someone wants to drop money on audio, audio is important, you just are prioritizing it over the camera setup far too much.
>I don't know what it is.
You can find good and bad examples from any camera. I listed cameras with objectively better video recording capabilities.
>I don't understand why I need a monitor.
You don't understand because you lack experience. I have been trying to offer advice, from my own experience, but about to give up. A monitor should be one of the highest priority accessories. Look at any small film-maker, they all use monitors. Not all use wireless transmitters, and you know what those transmitters go into? Other monitors, not tablets.
>$750 worth of audio even look like?
From your initial list, I would only get the Zoom H4. The mic is actually good for the $, but possibly overkill. I would be getting cheaper headphones, and cheaper boom. You don't need $400 speakers or a $150 midi controller at this level at all.
>>4381727
Do you want to use a gimbal for gimbal shots or just stabilization? Again, if you went with a better camera, you may not even need a gimbal at all.
>>4381755
You don't need to ever zoom while shooting for it to be worth it. Consider down the road when shooting on rails and matte boxes, you have to reset each time you want to change focal length.

>>4381781
>Captain Obvious
It's not obvious because people sometimes spend more on location than a good camera, and to begin with OP doesn't have anything ATM.
>lighting is the most important component you need to film anything
No, the camera is. Stop sidetracking.
>Bad lighting is like a car without wheels and no gas.
No, bad lighting is like a shitty road, the car is the camera, you cannot drive without one.
>But you absolutely have to invest in proper lighting equipment if you're even 1% serious about shooting videos.
No, you have to invest in proper camera equipment if you're even 1% serious about shooting videos because that's how you are going to shoot.

>>4381785
What are you going to film if there's no lighting? You literally can't you dweeb. It's not sidetracking. It goes hand in hand with the camera.
Like I said, it's like a car without wheels or a guitar without strings.
I'm not saying you shouldn't buy a camera. It's like you're arguing over absolutely nothing just for the sake of it. I don't even know why I bother replying to shit like this.

>>4381757
True. A well lit scene taken on a bad camera, will look much better than a poorly lit scene take on a good camera. Cameras are only as good as what they're recording, and that starts with lighting.

>you need a camera first to record duh
Is smooth brain pedantry safe to ignore

>>4381471
Here's a recent budget ZV-E10 rig, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6QoCV8HXlA
>NPF batteries instead of v-mount, also a better choice than battery banks
>adds matte box, top handle, uses phone for monitor
He also says though,
>if you are going to upgrade any piece of this kit, just get yourself a monitor

I was looking at rig video cameras and manual lenses when I started, but I've made so much more acting myself with autofocus and not having to set up as much. Too much stuff to man means more people to interact and setup, and less likely to start shooting. Minimal setup with maximum quality lighting is your best bet. This is optimal first flow unless you have at least TWO friends that will CONSISTENTLY show up.

Vid camera mirrorless
Autofocus and manual lens later
In camera audio with mic port
Hour setting up lights
Hours studying story
Hours writing story

>>4381814
>You literally can't you dweeb
The Sun, or turn the lights on you dumbass
How are you going to film if you have no camera? you literally can't you poorfag
>It goes hand in hand with the camera.
It doesn't, you first get the camera and then you plan.
>it's like a car without wheels or a guitar without strings.
It isn't, it's like a road and the camera is the car, learn to read
>just for the sake of it
I understand what you are saying but you are retarded, camera is top priority in a small production. You can circumvent paid actors with civilians, friends or crazy volunteers. You can play around natural lighting, as hard as it is to make it look pretty, you can use old hardware to grade, you can use the bare minimum in rented lighting and you can even dub the audio later if you have the patience, you can't skip the camera you stupid fucking idiot

>>4381815
>Is smooth brain pedantry safe to ignore
It isn't you mental nigger, it isn't the same to record on 720p 8-bit than 1080p 10-bit 422
Good video on decent lighting beats excellent lighting recorded on a toaster, considering audio the same on both.
>Cameras are only as good as what they're recording
Cameras are only as good as the sensor mandates. And that starts with what they can record.
Camera is king, it comes first and in a small production you plan around its limitations.

>>4381785
>t. imagelet
Lighting IS what the camera captures you huge retard. Even shitty cameras can ged moody shots and takes because of the right lighting.

>>4381830
>Camera is king
nah, money is king, you need money first to buy/rent camera and start production

see how silly that level of reductionism is?

>>4381834
>see how silly that level of reductionism is?
It isn't because you are right, we don't even know how much money OP has
Hence the quote that making movies is easy, just expensive.

>>4381831
>Lighting IS what the camera captures you huge retard.
We don't live in penumbra unless you want to record at EXT-NIGHT all the time, pal
>Even shitty cameras can ged moody shots and takes because of the right lighting.
Yeah sure but OP wants filmmaking not IG shorts, camera is much more important and less expensive to rent on the week.
Have you ever filmed something or are you just a scrub weddingfag?

>>4381841
>less expensive to rent on the week.
I meant lighting is less expensive on the week
pls respond

>>4381606
/thread

if you really know your direction then you can hire a DOP, sound guy, actors and rent all of this shit in the same budget. none of this gear faggotory matters if you're not a DOP or want to be a DOP.

File: Getting Into Cinematography.png (3.22 MB, 720x5855)

3.22 MB PNG

pic related

>>4381768
Okay, noted.

>>4381784
Well I appreciate your help and I'll note all the changes. I agree with you on some things.

>>4381828
>>4381845
>>4381606
>>4381575
You guys are right about story and direction being as important. I am learning about tools and buying affordable stuff while working on my second short film. I storyboard and write and edit and do a lot of the audio work myself. Story Grid seems like a good channel, I watched a video of theirs about how to write something great and it was a really nice video.

>>4381846
Much appreciated. God bless you.

>>4381819
It's not bad. But I disagree on the v-mount battery and handle. The battery blocking the screen is a deal breaker for me. Would rather attach a 20,000 mAh power bank to the top, even if it's a little heavy. Lasts over 10 hours and I'll turn the camera off when I'm not using it.

Meant to quote >>4381584 for this reply >>4381856

>>4381856
>Story Grid seems like a good channel, I watched a video of theirs about how to write something great and it was a really nice video.
You're an asshole. You're not going to learn anything by watch videos from random YouTube retards. I can bet you your script sucks balls. Why do you prefer them over reading books or watching films and analyzing? You don't learn from guides you learn from actually watching films and reading books and then applying your observations. Here you must do:

>pick 5 authors you love and then experiment, combine, emulate prose until you develop your own style
>disregard writing/direction rules and critics, and women most of all (not just in writing)

If you want to read books on film theory then checkout >>>/vid/ pastebin.

>>4381881
I didn't say you can rely only on videos to write better, I just said I watched a video of theirs and thought it was great.

I think you should read a lot and read books that influenced hundreds of millions of people across hundreds of years, mainly classical literature and a little bit of contemporary stuff. And you should write a lot and have fun communicating through writing. And you should watch movies to see how things are put together.

My script probably has a lot of problems but I'm having fun and getting a little better. It's just a fun little short film with a few locations, nothing crazy.

>>4381575
With the short films I have so far, I guess I make light hearted/creepy/absurd stuff. People talking, weirdness, normal actions, frustration, absurdity. As technically complicated as Lynch's Eraserhead or Nolan's Following and Memento or Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs or something.

But I have an idea for a 90 minute feature that wouldn't be technically insane either... a sort of action dramedy.

And I want to make an epic visual series for a book's narration I like.

And a crude animation series.

And maybe an anti-romantic comedy that's been swimming in my head.

Your gear recommendations have been noted, much appreciated.

>>4381859
It doesn't block the screen because you should have the screen out. Go look at any camera rig.
Even then, you can also mount an NP battery on top or bottom if it's a must. A battery bank would be an objectively worse choice over V or NP.

You say you want to do film making but then avoid the gear preferences of actual film makers. No point in asking for advice if you aren't going to take it.

>>4381890
I'm sure I don't need the screen out. I will use a phone or a monitor connected through the transmitter for a better view if I need it.

Okay, I added those sorts of batteries to the list and I'll research to see if they're a better idea than the Anker 20,000 mAh power banks (last about 12 hours) or the much smaller 10,000 mAh ones (last about 6 hours).

>>4381916
Well if you don't need the screen put and will use your phone, don't know why you're complaining about it blocking the screen.

It's not just about capacity. NP and V batteries are also used for powering monitors, lighting, wireless follow focus, and other accessories. You know what those transmitters are designed to use? NP batteries.
A power bank is really only good for charging the camera.

>>4381938
I get it but it makes me too anxious to keep the screen out because I keep thinking it will break with any random hit.

No the transmitters can be charged with the power bank too through USB C. I was surprised too. The NP-F batteries can be very useful too, I agree. I think I'd mostly use NP-Fs for lighting. Even the stabilizer can be charged with a power bank and USB C connection, I think.

>>4381946
The screen is literally meant and designed to be used out. If you're so careless that having the screen out is too risky, you should not be handling a camera at all. If you're doing work, you should have insurance anyways.
I know they can, but it's not ideal, and they are literally designed for NP batteries to slot into them.
I don't know how you can look at an industry full of people using NP and V batteries, full of monitors (and infrequently transmitters) and think you know better.
At this point, not sure I can help anymore with your retardation. Get whatever shit you want and stop asking for advice, go waste your money.

>>4381952
Why are you being so aggressive over batteries and screens? Please relax. No one is trying to offend you. I'm sure you have a lot of experience and I probably could be making better decisions.

It's my first camera anyway. It'll be okay. They're just a bunch of gadgets to record and play with pictures and sounds.

And I already said I'd see if I'll use the NP-F batteries along with or instead of power banks.

But I definitely don't want the screen out. I don't need it out anyway because I'll use phones and/or monitors if I need a better view.

Your help is appreciated, but I don't agree with some things. I've literally written down most if not all the suggestions in this thread and will research accordingly while I draw some storyboards, God willing.

Very rough list. The softboxes aren't great for video, I guess. I need to do a lot more research. Any advice would be appreciated.

LIGHTING (Pending):
$1,765 TOTAL
– 1 - Nanlite FC 500B - $590
– 2 - Amaran 200X (x2) - $700
– 3 - Light Modifiers for video?
– 4 - Tube lights?
– 5 - Panel lights?
– 3 - 120cm Octabox - $85
– 4 - 35x160cm Softbox Light Modifier - $65
– 5 - 26” Lantern Softbox Light Modifier Large - $73
– 6 - Impact Turtle Base C-Stand 10.75' (×3) - $150
– 7 - Gels for Coloring the Light - $52
– 8 - Light Reflector/Diffuser/Black Surface Combo (x3) - $50
-- 9 - Fabrics?

A good thread deserves a good bump :)