Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
We are slaves of the brands?
  • Manu4VendettaManu4Vendetta

    I anticipate that my English is bad.

    When the episode of 'Dr House' was shot with a Canon 5D that was an event, not stop mentioning it on the internet. Then there have been more movies and short films using DSLR's Canon in whole or in any scene and usually tends to be highlighted, such as the case of 'The Avengers'.

    Across the street I see is different, 'Musgo' was shot with a GH2, for some the first film made with a GH2 and was a success but not of such magnitude as 'Dr House', was following more in underground forums. (I want to clarify that 'Musgo' is not the first film shot with a GH2, another movie so spanish which was also before shot with a GH2 entitled 'Diamond Flash' in 2011, but the time difference is small, only few months, but it was released in 2011, 'Musgo' was released in 2013). Following the main idea 'Upstream Color' was filmed with GH2 and this fact was not so great repercussion. So too are some movies and a lot of short films made with a GH2 without much discussion.

    Something similar happens in the case of films and shorts which uses Nikon, for example, few know that in the series 'Dexter' was used the Nikon D800, while 'Dr House' Canon case was known even people who dont know of cinema or photography, but I'm sure if it was with a Canon the news was a great event.

    I see the camera as a means or a tool, really the important in a film is to have a good script -is preferable to have a good script and not a good camera with a bad script-, there are excellent movies that have a great script and the cinematography is austere and even loose, but the spectator is left with the memory of a good story. Sure, good cinematography helps a lot, the ideal is to have a balanced, although a great director can rescue a loose script or story ordinary. I see how many in the industry -mostly low budget- so focused in Canon cameras and I think that marketing has eaten the brain of many people, is obvious that if you feel comfortable with a particular camera is great to use it, but be more open and know isnt a mark problem, this causes ridiculous arguments from experts Canonboy that the GH2 has a video look (videoish). I'm sure if many of them see 'Upstream color' without know that camera was shot ​​will comment; 'very good cinematography, great look', and it was made with a high budget camera, but if you tell thar was made with a GH2 will be conditioned in advance.

    In my case I bought a GH2 after many inquiries on the internet, in my country everybody told me what buy Canon, the 550D was the only one that was close to my budget, but its video quality not convicting them and another cameras as the 5D is away much of my pocket and in a forum someone told me about the GH2 and as I have open mind I saw something that I liked and made inquiries understanding for that price I get quality near to cameras of high budget. I dont want to talk from me, just put my example, only what dont understand how some people are so focused on a brand, as if the mark were doing you a favor by using or as if you were paying you.

  • 7 Replies sorted by
  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    That's not really about brands, it's about marketing. Canon and the show's DP got the word out and it spread which wasn't too difficult to do since this was for one of the most popular shows on television.

    Magazines and blogs hit by hundreds of thousands or millions (not the little guys with an audience in the hundreds or thousands) aren't going to run any kind of feature article on a no-name filmmaker using any brand of camera. Besides just the basics of the story you had the DP discussing in detail how it was used. I'm sure Canon helped that along. Primetime Emmy show + DP + Corporate backing of the story equals big audience penetration. It's all about will this article be read, meaning will all those eyes see the ads also on the page.

    The filmmakers themselves are purposely tight lipped about the GH2 usage on Upstream Color. Panasonic can't really go and scream it from the heavens if the filmmakers themselves aren't going to cooperate with the publicity. Not that Panasonic necessarily would. Like Sony, they have higher end cameras they try to sell for doing those sorts of things. I don't think Panasonic is quite as worried about cannibalization as Sony is, however. They do consciously attempt to protect their high-end product from their low-end product.

    Oh, also, that episode of House is far more significant than the 5D being used on the Avengers because on House it was the primary camera for that episode. On the Avengers it was used to get an acceptably good image for a second or two in a complex stunt situation, if it wasn't destroyed. On big Hollywood pictures they're the GoPro for stunt rigging.

  • JBV_CINEJBV_CINE

    The only brands i have any loyalty towards are lens manufactures and formally fuji for their 400t film stock, everything else is really just a box with a sensor or a filmgate but the lenses are the first port of call for light so in my eyes the most important and where the money should be spent weather its rental or bought.

    I think Canon just got lucky an afterthought on the 5d mark2 happened to be really great for independents and students who all put down hard earned cash and even though they have barley upgraded the technology that cash that people have put down and the images they can create does create a brand loyalty i used to be pretty loyal to cannon till all the down points made me frustrated and then i saw the GH images and was blown away and now Black Magic are doing the same.

  • majoraxismajoraxis

    I struggled with the same decision with Canon 5D MK II vs the GH1 back in the day. It came down to what system (body, lenses, and accessories) I could afford, which happened to be c-mount lenses and a GH1. If the total system costs would have been similar, I would have picked the 5d MKII at the time (because I was influenced by the power of the brand and I would have liked to have better low light performance). Oddly enough, if I would have went with the MK II, I would now own the lenses and accessories compatible with the cheapest, full frame RAW sensor camera available - the 5D MK III.

    Anyways, now I will go the BMPCC, because I have already invested in the lenses that will work with it... and I can buy 3 for the price one MKIII... nice to have the option of doing a multi-camera shoot in the future, as nicely demonstrated in Picture Day (in your post above), which I believe used 2 camera for many scenes.

  • jleojleo

    The GH1 was described in one review as " a delicate flower". No way Shane Hurlbut and the Elite Team would deploy troops with it ! :) Yet, the GH2 was used in Anchorman 2 starring Will Ferrel, so Hollywood is using it!

  • Manu4VendettaManu4Vendetta

    @jasonp:

    1- Obviously I meant to 'Upstream color, for some reason I'm wrong' to write, when 'Primer' did not exist then the GH's or DSLR with great video capacity.

    2- You have a bad reading comprehension level, because I'm not fanboy, besides the GH2 I have a NEX-5N and the time of the film cameras at university I had Canon, Olympus and Nikon. I have referred to a real situation.

  • Manu4VendettaManu4Vendetta

    @jasonp, sorry. My intention is not to offend. I apologize if I offended you.

    But your comment seems out of focus because I havent problem with Canon or another brand and I dont attacked Canon. I have referred as behave and think many users who see no life out of Canon and you have taken personal.

    I said the camara is only a tool, but there many who think that if not is with certain brand is impossible make a short or an audiovisual project, my idea this in my initial comment, I wilI summarize as people who are sheep of the marketing .

    Peace and Love.

  • johnnymossvillejohnnymossville

    Companies don't hold a gun to your head to purchase their product. Only govt can do that.

Add a Comment