If they want a "vintage" look, that is more a function of the lens than the camera system even though you are shooting digital. If you can get your hands on some older Cooke, Schneider or Zeiss primes you will get a softer image than with a modern lens. I have a Cooke Kinetal and Zeiss Planar primes and all produce nice images. Even vintage Zeiss lenses tend towards sharp.
As Phil says, if all you are looking for is the amount of grain you have in the posted video, that can be added rather easily in post.
That video was done on 7219 with Mk II Zeiss Super Speeds. So a relatively higher-grain stock, coupled with 25 year old lenses. You might do best using older glass on that camera, maybe some Nikkor primes or Super Takumars, the latter which would yield you a warmer look you might be seeing in that music video. You might come close to the look, but the way that stock performs in bright light is quite unique - particularly in highlights. Try shooting with the wide DR settings on the C300 and then finding a good colorist who can work your grade.
Edited by Kenny N Suleimanagich, 10 July 2015 - 11:43 AM.
And also, pick your subject! The demo shot is a dark-skinned man heavily backlit against a blue sky. The image is full of contrast and colour and texture. Go in someone's magnolia-coloured apartment and shoot a a pasty white guy against a pasty wall under pasty light and it'll look feeble even if you shoot it on 65mm neg.
The blackmagic pocket camera has a similar sized frame as S16, so it's a good start. Mixing that with older bayonet mount lenses, may help a lot. You won't get the grain, but adding a film stock LUT in DaVinci, should net you a similar color pallet.
One of the things that makes that music video so powerful is the slow mo. Looks like mostly everything was over-cranked, even if just a little.
It’s a question that is asked all too often. A novel idea but why not use film? Have you worked out how much working with 16mm will cost? I believe the visual characteristics - the look and feel 16mm/Super 16 is unique to the format. They still make 16mm film, so why not use it, at least try it and explore its real workflow before dismissing it; you’ll be surprised as 16mm film is not that expensive. Cameras are ridiculously cheap, film stock can be cheap too, depending on how it’s bought, processing and scanning isn’t too much either, depending on how much film there is, in my experience the most costly part of 16mm is usually professional PL lenses, you can get deals on camera rental, film stock processing and scanning.
Have you considered the digital Bolex? I never shot on it, but form videos I've seen online it got a vey filmic 16mm look (It got a Kodak sensor, so not surprising) coupled with some vintage lenses could be a good combo. only problem is, where do you rent one?
Another very filmic 16mm style camera is the Ikonoskop A-cam, which has a beautiful and very film like image to my eyes and it is available to rent from some places.