Leaderboard

I've seen the light. Old camera cult leader (or prophet) Ed David opened my eyes and my wallet. To the almighty F35. Birthday parties and cat videos as 2008 Hollywood intended! The image it makes is magical compared to my 1Dc and fs700 shooting raw to the same recorder. Highlights, motion and the colors are very organic. Balances nicely and similar in weight to the some of the Alexa models. FEATURE FILMS (Genesis and f35 are basically the same according to general web consensus) Superbad (Genesis, 2007) Next (Genesis, 2007) Planet Terror (Genesis, 2007) The Spirit (Genesis, 2008) Youth in Revolt (F35, 2009) Zombieland (Genesis, 2009) Avatar (F35, 2009) 2012 (partially Genesis, 2009) Alice in Wonderland (Genesis, 2010) Under the Hawthorn Tree (F35, 2010) Resident Evil: Afterlife (F35, 2010) Real Steel (F35, 2011) The Flowers of War (F35, 2011) Zookeeper (Genesis, 2011) Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (F35, 2011) Jumping the Broom (F35, 2011) Friends With Benefits (F35, 2011) Immortals (Genesis, 2011) The Darkest Hour (F35, 2011) Shark Night 3D (F35, 2011) Mirror Mirror (partially F35, 2012) SERIES Smallville - seasons ???, probably the last ones (Genesis) The Good Wife (F35, 2009) White Collar (F35, 2009) Modern Family - season 1 & 2 (F35, 2009 - 2010) Criminal Minds - season 4 - 6 (F35, 2009 - 2011) Sherlock - season 1 (F35, 2010) Bones - season 5 (F35, 2010) Hawaii Five-O - season 1 (F35, 2010) The Borgias - season 1 (F35, 2011) last ones (Genesis) The Good Wife (F35, 2009) White Collar (F35, 2009) Modern Family - season 1 & 2 (F35, 2009 - 2010) Criminal Minds - season 4 - 6 (F35, 2009 - 2011) Sherlock - season 1 (F35, 2010) Bones - season 5 (F35, 2010) Hawaii Five-O - season 1 (F35, 2010) The Borgias - season 1 (F35, 2011)

Hi everyone. I have uploaded a test sequence with shots from a indie feature I´m doing. We Shot a small scene with film because we wanted a really particular look for this par in the movie, more vintage, like memories from childhood. Se we shot on a SRII super 16mm Fuji Eterna 8673 stock. Then scanned on an Arri scanner. I never color graded film. So wanted to hear some opinions about. If any one have questions, please be my guest PASSWORD: fuji test Also, i wanted to share the raw clip for anyone who want to give it a try. Remember its film log. compressed in DnxHd https://mega.nz/#!hFh1hAyA!b0mxVAk1KtjL7guXYcRExBEcdTAVinaTLfMIQq5k-24

No longer will I have weird skin tones in any of my future footage. Thank you Internet. I put this to work on this thing I shot on red one mx.

There is a similar sort of tone with topics about Canon too... Some companies seem to split people down the middle. I couldn't care less about the brand, personally... I've owner or rented them all ,more or less... And all have pros and cons

I generally prefer a flat day rate for anything under 12 hours. For me, there's not a whole lot of difference between a 3 hour or 8 hour shoot, since my day is already booked and I can't take other gigs. When clients are watching the clock trying to save a few dollars, the shoots tend to get rushed, which usually means more time in the edit trying to fix problems that could have been solved on set by taking your time. With clients that really want an hourly rate, I'll charge a fee just for showing up, then bill hourly.

Hey EOSHD'ers, In case anyone's interested, I've just written an article about Stillmotion's MUSE program (which I've been a member of for a couple of months now). It contains a Q&A with Patrick Moreau, and details a lot of the misgivings I have about the program. You can read it here: http://lintelfilm.uk/blog/muse-vs-muser Would be great to hear your thoughts. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have too. BTW is anyone else here a MUSE member?

yes but he explains what you need to do to work with skintones very easily - also he's starting with pretty poorly shot footage. He helped me a lot. My grading is weird and different, but now I am going to get more serious about skintones, and also keep it weird.

Thanks man. Yes I know exactly where you're coming from. I can't really answer your question because I still don't really know myself! There isn't any ND on MUSE - I think it's just that it's hard to see the wood for the trees so nobody knows how to sum it up. Personally I think if you're making short docs of corporate videos (as I am), then MUSE will be useful as a way of focusing all those theories of "story" onto that specific, real-world discipline. For anything else I can't imagine it telling you anything you don't already know.

Firstly, I want to commend you on a well written article/ interview. But, like most information I have read about the Muse program, I found your article to be lacking information that explains exactly what the program consists of. I assume there is some no disclosure element to the pilot program? As a writer first, and a filmmaker third... Or something, I have read almost every book about screenwriting, so I get the gist of what they're selling. The question becomes... Is the program a paint by numbers, formulaic program, or a jelly of the month club that shows real life examples as to how their process works? In the end... If you find it useful, then it is. I don't like plans or programs that promise the world at a hefty price tag when most of the information can be checked out from your local library, or on the World Wide Web. But every book I have ever read about story or screenwriting has had some little nugget that has made my writing a little better, or the process a little easier... For that alone, I have never felt I wasted a penny on a writing book.

He did a pretty bad key in the first place - look at the top of his forehead and bottom of the neck. It looks like he's wearing a v neck!

I really found this to be of great help:

I pre-ordered this camera because it ticks a lot of boxes for my type of work: Beautiful image capabilities. Global/Rolling switchable. Ergonomic body. High frame rates. ProRes + Internal raw (master those money shots!)Very cost effective. By the sounds of it, the viewfinder is meant to be a bargain. One of the best on the market for a competitively good price. However, I am concerned about these things so far: Supposed 3.4x crop on 120fps mode. Could be disappointing/annoying, but I hope not. Data could be very costly to backup in the long run. BM cameras eat memory.Weight with lens and battery. Got to look after this back. Reliability. (hopefully no weird issues like pink frames).

But the problem is that people that are happy about it will be attacked. Just like you do now to iPhone users that are happy about getting 4k. It's not like they didn't know it existed in other phones. It's just that they liked the phone they had. And now when they have 4k, they are happy about it. I just never understood this phenomenon that happens all the time with smartphones, cameras, cars, computers, you name it. People get attacked for liking their new car by people upsetting some other car already had the same features. ..... ? It's just so weird to me that you react in this way.

I don't see much hate for RED here, just people pointing the pros and cons out. C300 II weight is 1.8kg/4Llbs

Underneath the PL mount there is the Sony FZ mount. Think of it kinda like the Sony E mount, giving you the freedom to adapt ANYTHING to it!! :-D Except, think of FZ as the grownup big brother professional version of the E mount which is for consumer stills cameras instead. Personally I'm using my Nikon lenses on my F3 with a cheap F mount adapter (it doesn't feel like adapting onto an E mount camera, but like a native mount F mount camera instead. Though without electronics). But sometime in the future, I'll probably get a positive locking F mount adapter (but they're pricey) and/or PL lenses as well so I can use my PL mount as well on the F3.

an abstract point: never be afraid to say "Whats your budget?" just look em right in the eye, and say that, and smile next one who talks loses lol

Benching 300 one time is still impressive though. Max days are a thing.

This was actually all internal. Never used a shogun to be honest! Thanks for the kind words.

I really don't get why people are complaining about these lenses. This is some of the most "cinematic" footage I've seen come out of the GH4 yet. And I think it looks better (in a purely subjective sense) than the mini Hawk tests. Am I going to trade in my Iscorama for one of these? Probably not. But if I had to go on a shoot with this set, I'd be more than happy to do so.

First I have to say that it was such a pleasure to shoot with these lenses compared to shooting with other vintage anamorphics. No hassle, no aligning, no triple checking focus. Other lenses can give great results. Kowa, Bolex Möller, Sankor, Iscorama and other anamorphics all have their special character, beauty, disadvantages and solutions to be able to shoot in a proper way. But being able to shoot without lens clamps, rings, front lenses and other stuff feels so good. It’s just choosing the right focal distance, attach it and shoot. Is it perfect? No. But I have to compliment SLR Magic because they are at least putting energy into anamorphic solutions and now even into native anamorphics. When shooting wide open, which I tend to do and have done for this short film, some chromatic aberration can be visible, it disappears when stopping down. The 35mm mm has clearly some visible circular distortion in the edges. I tiny bit too much to my personal taste but i know many anamorphic lovers love the distortion. I am enthusiastic about the sharpness, the overall look and user friendly usability. These are the first ‘lower range’ anamorphics I would dare to take with me on a commercial job. Color correction was done in Adobe Lightroom, not the most easiest and common way common way to color correct video but I love some tools that are available in Lightroom. I exported and color corrected every single frame as a tiff.

This is the question that we are all asking, but if the Pocket cam is anything to go by, then the Micro will look stunning! Think they are spending a lot of time on the URSA mini, so its the usual BM waiting game...

If you can't see the way the lenses render the defocus then you're blind. Even with the rather deep field at the wider end, it's plain to see that the lenses are defocusing with the 2x anamorphic distortion as well as adding the classical anamorphic aesthetic. And seeing as you are being so harsh and demanding of the lenses and of Hugo's test, as well as quite pompous, please direct us to some work of yours which illustrates your experience with anamorphic lenses in general, as well as the work you'd produce if SLR Magic had infact made lenses that matched Panavision c's or Vantage 74's.

My comments were not directed to the demo... They were directed towards the lens. From what I can see, there are better, and cheaper ways to get an anamorphic look.

How sweet and funny to read all these comments. Yes indeed I created a very poor lens test. I should have shot a testcard and do a rack focus. Would have been so much easier as well.

Great work put into it and all, but as far as a demo of these anamorphic lenses go it may as well have been shot spherical and cropped top and bottom! Would have been pretty convincing compared to this, which is really not what you want when you spend all the extra time and $$$ shooting with anamorphics.

They need to have another phone like panasonic CM1 but with much better BSI 1" sensor, F1.4 retractable pancake zoom lens with IS, built in ND filter, newer processor like the snapdragon 820 or much faster one, 4K 60 fps, 128 GB storage and expandable with Micro SD U3! and manual controls. Also price $650 or lower!

Ignorance + video capable cameras --> Fstoppers reports.

1. Blegh. Apple people. 4K on smartphones are a thing for a while now. 'But wooohhh, it's Apple doing it now, look at this, it's amazeballs'. I mean... really? 2. Can't agree with the topic title. It's still a tiny sensor... it's still a very deep depth of field, it's still oversharpened... I thought that was a thing we're trying to avoid by shooting with cameras like the D750, to be more filmlike. The iPhone's footage is way too screamy and harsh for my taste. It lacks nuance. Besides. DYNAMIC RANGE. Man. 3. Of course 4K -> 1080p is going to look sharper/crisper than regular 1080p from a Canon/Nikon fullframe DSLR. To me though, the amount of detail in a deep depth of field shot makes things flat, I need some layering

Thanks Hugo, appreciate the time and the energy you took. I agree with Rich, some comments were pretty harsh. Don't see why sharing is rewarded with flak; it only serves to push people away and thins the community. As to the footage (well shot and yes, controlled but fits the style of the piece). Would like to see some rapid focus pulling on the lenses (as well as speed shifts in the edit). I own their Anamorphot and the nature of that beast is that it needs a tape measure involved to hit the marks. Thanks again

That was a pretty poor test. Not much opportunity to see bokeh, flaring or rack focusing. The barrel distortion on that 35mm is pretty bad. I've seen 25mm anamorphics with straighter geometry. Oh well. What do you expect for a $3000 anamorphic prime lens? These ain't no Hawks.

Mind you, the pocket was/is a great little camera. I still feel the footage looks great. I just hated working with it... And if you hate working with something... well... you probably won't.

I definitely see the magic in the top that actress is wearing. Yowza!

For the first time I now have usable AF with Canon EF lenses on the Panasonic GH4 and other Micro Four Thirds cameras. I've been trying out the new Speed Booster Ultra, which as well as the AF improvement offers new and improved optics. Read the full article