There's a deluge of conflicting opinions about the Canon 5D Mark III. This can be baffling until you pull the string. A number of comments come from motion picture D.P.'s, who we respect a great deal, but their agenda is different from what I'd call a "Cinéma vérité" filmmaker.
What's a "Cinéma vérité" filmmaker?
Are you a Cinéma vérité filmmaker?
The definition of Cinéma vérité is (according to Wikipedia) "a style of documentary filmmaking, combining naturalistic techniques with stylized cinematic devices of editing and camerawork, staged set-ups, and the use of the camera to provoke subjects. It is also known for taking a provocative stance toward its topics."
Another definition – "A style of filmmaking characterized by realistic, typically documentary motion pictures that avoid artificiality and artistic effect and are generally made with simple equipment."
Another definition is – "a style of filmmaking that gives the impression of being unrehearsed, spontaneous, "real life" moments. It's unpolished and raw scenes give it a more "truthful" feel than a fictionalized event restaged and shot using traditional studio production methods. Usually shot on location with the lighting that exists there naturally."
The translation from the french is "cinema truth".
I would add "to see and capture scenes of what is rather than in it's lit or unlit state…for fear of losing it if you fool with it too much.
I like "unstaged" films. They have an excitement. It's the different feel you get from a Bourne identity film versus the polished, well-rehearsed James Bond films of late. Cinéma vérité has a power to it.
I am a "Cinéma vérité" filmmaker. In the world of still photography this type of work is called candid instead of being shot in a studio where everything is composed and carefully lit. I like raw, unposed truth. I love capturing it on film and always have since I saw my first