All Activity

Exactly. I use L mount and don’t own a single native lens. I shoot mostly cinematic video though so no need for autofocus most times. The new Kipon L mount to EF speedbooster gives you autofocus though if you need it and lets you use some of the canon pancake lenses with a slim profile. That or a small nifty 50 and you’re golden. Personally, I can’t wait to try my Konica Hexanon 40mm f/1.8 pancake on the S9, it’s tiny even with the adapter/focal reducer.

Why?

There is absolutely a difference of looks between the formats, but it doesn't mean lens equivalency is false. Lens equivalency says that "all else being equal, a 28/2.8 will look the same on FF as a 14/1.4 on MFT" but the thing is, actually making a 28mm F2.8 lens and a 14mm F1.4 lens would end up with subtle differences in how you would do that. The "look" is really a combination of the subtle differences in lens design. The MF look is probably just as much an artefact of history and would incorporate the lens design quirks of the time. A modern MF camera with optically pristine lenses wouldn't have as much of the look as an MF film camera with vintage MF glass. A FF camera with a super-fast lens that has the same design flaws as the common MF lenses would have a lot of the MF look. Lenses aren't perfect, and much of the "look" is due to the imperfections. Reducing the discussion down to FOV and DOF is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

This is original 8mm film transferred to digital nowadays in this decade: The native acquisition resolution then is not the most crucial premise with the tools we have today.

With hard work and knowledge you can, but the intrinsic characteristic look of its own is distinct indeed. The more unlimited and wider you can the more diverse you naturally go. - EAG

This North American obsession is kinda funny... WTH matters the stuff people have sitting in their homes?! They will watch it anyway, no matter the resolution you have for them. The key is your master and... product/content. Resolution is only a small portion of the equation.

I gotta chime in here and say that there most definitely is at least a large format look. You have control of both the lens and the film/sensor planes independently. You can apply any number of adjustments to the axis -- and achieve images that a tilt-shift lens + fixed sensor (ignoring IBIS as not applicable in way I am describing) cannot. And I'm sorry, but M43 cannot achieve as shallow depth of field (at comparable fov) that my 4x5 cameras can. These formats have all been developed for a reason and equating them all in this way is bogus.

I can also say that mf lenses on ff or apsc cams have different looks than ff lens on ff cams. The major disadvantage is a little bit loss of sharpness from the former one, but there are many gains. i actually like mf lenses on ff or apsc cams much better. some of my best shots were taken by a hassy 80 mm f2.8 on an apsc cam. all are manual, including the exposure. the exposure meter does not work in this configuration. yet it gives one of the best images i have ever seen.

Also, when 5d2 and 7d just came out in 2009, I spent nights and nights watching almost all of the videos on vimeo shot by these two cameras. I can tell you that they are different, even with the same crappy in stock codec. 5d2 footage just shows some magic eye-catching things there, the color, the gradation, that magic touch that 7d2 footage is lacking. 7D2 footage looks dry whereas 5d2 footage looks juicy. In other words, full frame vv look exists.

do you do development and print by yourself at home, or send to print shops? i ask this question, because improper pp may be where the mf or lf look disappears.

Interesting. You don't believe that mf or lf look exists? This is totally against my experience. I mostly shoot photos with ff and apsc/apsh and 43/m43 cams. When I use Kodak 645 pro, the look is so distinct and so much better, I am happy in heaven. I did not believe that mf or lf look exists. My user experience tells me that it exists.

No. I own more than a dozen medium format cameras and if we're counting everything described as "large format" and/or "ultra-large format," more than a dozen large format cameras too (everything from 6x17 & 4x5 on up to 8x20). I've been doing this for a long time and I have done enough side-by-side comparisons to be certain that there is no magical "medium format look" or "large format look." As far as how a great image can transport the audience to another world, that is certainly a thing, but it has nothing to do with the size of the sensor in the acquisition device. Stalker was shot on standard 35mm film, mostly with a relatively slow Cooke zoom lens, and it's far more beautiful/immersive than just about any film you'd like to name that was shot on Vista Vision or 65mm.

I'm in North America. You can go walk into a Best Buy right now and buy a 42" Full HD TV. https://www.bestbuy.com/site/searchpage.jsp?_dyncharset=UTF-8&browsedCategory=abcat0101001&id=pcat17071&iht=n&ks=960&list=y&qp=verticalresolution_facet%3DResolution~Full+HD+(1080p)&sc=Global&st=categoryid%24abcat0101001&type=page&usc=All+Categories So no, 4K hasn't fully taken over. It's also not a question of "what can you go into a store and buy right now" anyway - it's "What do people actually have sitting in their homes?" And while I have a 4K TV, many people who I know are still using Full HD sets and aren't upset about it. Abroad, that's even more the case.

thanks for the info. seems to me canon raw does not have many adjustable options? b raw in fcp may have similar issues?

I know you are but what am I? Hahaha. I should probably be offended but like me, you're just some guy on the internet. Actually... I feel kinda bad for you. Everything is so binary. You don't believe in a medium format or large format look, yet you own a MF camera. I can only assume you don't believe in movie magic or how a cinematic image can transport an audience into another world. You seem like the type that probably rooted for the government in E.T.

I have some Dvds which look fantastic on my HD TV, not too far off from Bluray, even though Blurays offer 5 times as many pixels as Dvds. 8K TVs offer the same pixel number in height / y-axis as the Gh7 in 5.7K open gate mode btw.:) Width is 1.32 of the GH7 pixel count.

Because it's not a plain subject. Trust me, this is not as simple as a bloody number. And mainstream technology means too little or people shooting in B&W would have switched to colour when that was introduced by then. It's worldwide. Geolocalization means too little if any for that. We are in 2024 now. To not respond you in a weird manner under your request : ) I think you're just missing the whole point of it why you've heard people to tell you so. Far to be a dumb idea. It's just not what your interpretation made from :- ) Of course. Once you're going after a standard, start from there ;- )

I don't know where you're located, but in North America, 4K has taken over. I don't even know if Walmart sells Full HD TVs anymore. Reminds me of the early days of digital when people said RAW and higher resolution wasn't worth it when in hindsight that just turned out to be a dumb idea. Anyways, looking at your post, it sounds like 6K videos will look good on a 8K display when viewed from a standard distance.

Uh, if 8K was available then, I'm sure they would have picked it. I'm talking now. Not sure why you're getting all weird about this subject.

Canon raw is also supported in just about every NLE. Braw is supported via plugin in Premiere and FCP. ProRes RAW is supported well in Premiere and FCP (just not Resolve). They're all practical enough, just with the annoying extra step of using an app to extract PRR to cDNG if you want to use it in Resolve.

This depends on the size of the 8k screen and how far you're sitting from it. If you're 3 meters away from a 27" screen, almost no human is going to see the difference in 4k and 8k regardless of the screen resolution. If you're 10cm from the same screen, you'll probably be able to see some difference between 6k and 8k on an 8k screen, but... it's not that important. Many cinemas are still projecting 2K on their enormous screens. Do people watching from 10+ meters away notice the difference between it and 4K? Would they even notice the difference side-by-side? Maybe. Anyway, there are declining returns in increasing display resolution - going from SD to full HD was huge. Going from HD to 4K was a lot less huge (and lots of people are still using full HD TV's all over the world). Going from 4K to 8K is going to be pretty slow due to the fairly small perceptible gains at a standard viewing distance.

Now a tip for fitting your 8K display... Buy some lower resolution camera other than 8K but with open gate and add anamorphic glass. Don't squeeze it vertically but extend your pixels, making them wider to correct the aspect ratio and... voilà, you'll be there, your device fulfils the standard ;- )

BTW part II, how will they have audiences from now on? ; ) BTW part III, yesterday, I had the possibility of a screening of footage shot in glamourous 'low' 35mm resolution from 1991 but checked on a 4K screen of nowadays... y'all learn something? : D Looked like shot on 8K but not with a flagship smartphone... LOL I know, this stuff can be a bitch, requires a lot up to arrive somewhere :- ) - EAG

prores raw is good for rcp, b raw is good for resolve. seems to me they are fighting and not mature enough. I use resolve so I don't care much if the camera has the prores raw. r3d is supported very well by all major nles. I think r3d is the way to go if you really want to shoot raw. I think red cams are very practical raw cams. for ml raw, you need a computer with many cpus to process using mlv app. resolve seems to me is not as good as mlv app to process ml raw. otherwise, resolve can use cuda, so it is faster (about 3 to 5 times faster on the same computer). other raw codecs, they are just not mature enough to be practical.

Damn it, if I had read it before I would probably have bought a 8K camera instead rather than the BMCC6K (FF) I've just received it today! LOL ; ) Why have you chosen this day to post it! LMAO : ) Sorry my friend and other folks in general but I simply couldn't resist... :- ) I just think every single filmmaker who has made the history of cinema in the last century is crying in 2024... Poor artists! hehe : P BTW writes who is now transfering 16mm, S8 and even regular 8mm film with the help of an URSA Mini Pro 12K... if this says something in order to provide a good input on your wondering! If anything else still helps, what about 'soft is sexy'?!