• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About richg101

  • Rank
    Filmmaker / regular forum member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Bristol. UK
  • Interests Designer, Photographer, Musician, Film Enthusiast

richg101's Activity

  1. richg101 added a post in a topic: My advice to student filmmakers   

    You can't learn creativity.  The people teaching you are normally* short of work themselves.  Why learn from someone not actually earning a living from the profession they're teaching?
    The basic technicals can be learned from the net.  The practicals can be learned from doing 2 weeks work experience carrying gear for a camera operator or dop.  
    *as a general rule
  2. richg101 added a post in a topic: You Don't Need A New Camera   

    I don;t agree.  Since most here (including myself) will very unlikely be drafted in to undertake the sole job of shooting anything of worth without shooting something of worth before hand, those obsessing about gear prior to making a single completed piece of artwork are doing so for no real purpose other than to feed the consumer within (IMO).  I imagine Bob Richardson wouldnt be where he is today if in his early days he had been on forums all day looking for the newest most high dr camera instead of doing work putting him in the eyes of people like Stone in their early years.  If it hadn;t been for his proactiveness in actually making do with what he had, Tarantino wouldn;t have drafted him in for what is the only 'real cinema' being shot in hollywood right now.  For that matter, if Tarrantino had been sat watching NAB coverage instead of writing R Dogs he probably wouldnt be where he is today.  
    Almost everyone here will need to write their own piece (and shoot it), and probably edit it, distribute it, etc and make something good before any obsessing about gear is even worth bothering with.  In the current situation it's definitely the ideas men who are king.  everyone can afford to shoot stuff that looks good.  Very few are in a position to be seen and selected to shoot a really really good piece written by someone who has the time and dedication to write stuff rather than putting imaginary equipment hurdles in their way.
  3. richg101 added a post in a topic: Cheap Full Frame camera?   

    i think i'd go for a nex /alpha aps-c camera equipped with an evf in the body and camdiox or similar focal reducer.  and a set of olympus/nikon/canon/pentax manual focus lenses.  35mm/2, 50mm/1.4 and a 85mm/2 .  the evf will make for a really enjoyable still photography shooting style with the old lenses.  the focal reducer will give a similar look to full frame.  unless going for the a7s, the video performance of the a7 and a7r are not much better than the nex5n!  
    Personally I feel it might be worth getting a a7s and be done with it.  once you have one, your need for another camera soon disappear.  Unless you have the budget to also invest in some L lenses to take adtantage of a canon dslr for stills (in respect to their af capability) looking at a canon camera for stills and video is madness when the A7s is a better camera in ALL other respects.
  4. richg101 added a post in a topic: Best youtube/vimeo export settings findings   

    give vimeo a 2.5k file (even if it's just uprez'd from a 1080p aquire, and the 720/1080 streaming from vimeo always looks better than if you simply upload a 1080p file.  this is what i have found anyway.
  5. richg101 added a post in a topic: Is the Sigma 18-35 1.8 really 1.8?   

    f stops and t stops are not the same.  the sigma may be f1.8, but probably has 3 times as many optical surfaces than the leica meaning (assuming both lenses use the same efficiency coatings) if you set the sigma to f2.8 it won;t be as bright as the leica.  dof should be the same, but there will be a difference in exposure.  It shouldnt be a full stop difference though!
  6. richg101 added a post in a topic: For Sale: Five Bell & Howell 16mm single focus projection lenses   

    ​I've considered the little sony wide angle they sell for the nex 16mm pancake.  not seen the back of it, but might have a big enough element.  the ff38 (dso) works superbly on the B+H but unfortunately this is also a weighty lump
  7. richg101 added a post in a topic: Vimeo pivots away from free video-sharing into paid content   

    if anything I think they should improve their pay per view infrastructure.  or better still add a pay for streaming system like netflix, but for indy stuff, none of this breaking bad shite.  If they allowed streaming of all of the films not on netflix, I'd pay double what I do for my plus account.  More world cinema, kubrick films (which are not on netflix).  Why is 'The Thing' (1984) not on netflix?  why is Alien not on netflix? etc.  make it a sophisticated film streaming program.  not breaking bad and the rest of the crap the masses go on about.
  8. richg101 added a post in a topic: Lenses should have megapixel ratings   

    the resolving power of a lens condensed down into a simple number is a great idea.  industrial cameras are sold in this way, why not high end lenses.  
    If a manufacturer is going to sell a camera based on its sensor resolution they should also provide lenses capable of delivering this.  Ie.  Canon will use thier 50+ mpx count of the new 5d as a selling point.  they won;t show the camera fitted with an otus or a schneider/rodenstock digitar + helical.  they'll show it with a Canon L lens, which most are incapable of delivering resolutions that actually warrant the huge file sizes and the premium price Canon will command for the high mega pixel count.  
    People use medium format backs of 80mpx for a reason - there are lenses that deliver this resolution onto 56x56mm.  there are few 135mm format lenses that will be marketed alongside the 5dmk4 (50mpx), but the canon consumer will be told their lenses designed and capable for 35mm film will still meet the demands of pixels sizes smaller than 100iso film grain.
    Everyone knows that there is more to a lens than resolution.  but if a consumer is buying a camera sold with its megapixel count used as a selling point then they should be made aware of their options.  It's like selling a Ferrari based on its ability to  go 300mph using a new type of fuel, a fuel  not yet developed.
  9. richg101 added a post in a topic: For Sale: Five Bell & Howell 16mm single focus projection lenses   

    wish your project had come to fruition Nick.  Would have been great - particularly as a single focus bmpcc anamorphic!  Make sure you keep one for yourself, if i ever get some time i might make a few replacement front cells with courser threads since i really want my own b+h to be more usable.
  10. richg101 added a post in a topic: PL mount to EOS Adapters   

    unfortunately that mount wont fit in any eos-pl adaptor.  however if the pl mount unscrews you might be able to get a machinist to put it on a lathe and remove some of the length of the pl mount.  
    it looks like the mount is about 11mm before it tapers.  you want that to be just under 7mm before the taper.
    id say that you might also have mirror problems once you get it fitting into the adaptor.  in which case you'll need to lok the mirror up before attaching the lens.  
  11. richg101 added a post in a topic: Best Camera for Low Light for 1000€   

    i'd say a pre owned bmpcc and a pre owned speed booster.  if you can find a good deal on the 0.54x bmpcc speed booster that wouod be ideal, but the 0.64x bmcc unit is almost as good in terms of speed increase.
    add to that a suitable fast 40mm or 50mm and you're good to go.  a cheap 50mm/1.4 from oly/nikkor/canon/pentax etc will be very very fast onto the pocket, and shooting 800iso (or even 1600) will provide very good low light performance.  
    otherwise, you could maybe put the money towards a fast c mount lens or voigtlander 25mm instead of going the speed booster route.  you might get some noise from the bmpcc, but once you remove 'colour noise' in raw it looks real nice IMO.
  12. richg101 added a post in a topic: PL mount to EOS Adapters   

    this is the PL mount i manufacture for the TRUMP lenses.  and it's specifically designed to work with eos-pl adaptors.  if the back of your lens looks close to this it will work.  the step is very important since the eos-pl adaptors get thinner towards the camera side.  off the top of my head I think the length of the pl mount after the ears is 7mm, then it steps to the thinner diameter.  if your lens has a bigger rear on its PL mount you might need a new remounting, or have your canon hard mounted to PL - which removes the ef mount of the camera all together

  13. richg101 added a post in a topic: PL mount to EOS Adapters   

    No Probs man.  I love you too xxx
    have a try of removing the little screw on the side of the blue ring.  this will allow you to unscrew the ring and see if the lens will seat onto the black part.  if it does, you might get away with filing down the internal ears on the blue part so they allow the lens to seat onto the black part.  as said, I think the orientation pin on the unit you have is incorrectly positioned on the mount meaning the anamorphic wont be perfectly aligned horizontally.   It would appear that they messed up the thread of the blue and black part meaning in order for the ears to bite down onto the lens mount, the pin needed to be positioned in a different place.  
    obviously, if the lens seats nice and snug onto the black part, you know the ciecio7 adaptor will work.  and if not, you'll just need to file away some of the locking ring on the ciecio7 unit assuggested for the one you have atm.
  14. richg101 added a post in a topic: Digital Bolex Mono   

    ​digital bolex plus metabones bmpcc speed booster (which has a transmission gain of 1 and 2/3rds of a stop increase. and turns the iso of the d bolex from 500 up to almost 1600.  if you can;t light a big space with your budget, shoot in a smaller one.  16mm is not a format for a big space.   the codex action cam, the onecam, and the si2k all use the same sensor as the dbolex, and none of them provide an all in one affordable package like the d bolex.  ]
    you;re preaching to the choir when trying to sell cameras with bigger sensors for low light.  what you fail to consider is that the difference of 1 stop between the bmpcc and the bolex is a drop in the ocean when you factor in how much nicer a monochrome kodak sensor will look compared to the bmpcc sensor in good light.
  15. richg101 added a post in a topic: PL mount to EOS Adapters   

    the unit you have is maybe the worst available.  However if your lens wont even seat into that adaptor it probably wont fit any eos-pl adaptor.  It doesnt look like the work of RAF.  it looks like they fashioned that pl mount by hand -it's certainly not been made on a lathe!
    the ciecio7 unit is the best value for money while being very close to true PL mounts manufactured by Arri however I'd hazard a guess that you lens wouldnt even fit a real arri camera.
    the main problem with your adaptor from jie ying is that they havent placed the orientation pin in the correct position meaning the anamorphic wont be aligned correctly from the start.  other than that, as long as the back of your lens falls within the parameters listed in this listing,
     there shouldnt be a problem - the lens should at least seat into the adaptor you have.  if the pl mount on your lens is bigger than the dims on this image, no eos-pl adaptor will work with it.

Status Feed