Leaderboard

Wow. Thanks for those kind words. I’m the director/writer/VFX-supervisor & a member of Crazy Pictures which means that I’m kind of involvd in most things regarding this project. We worked qite hard to achive a high production value with the small budget we had, so it feel GREAT to hear that you enjoyed the result. (extra fun to hear about your girlfriends reaction!) If there’s anything you wonder about the production, the process or some technical details, feel free to ask.

http://www.koreanfilm.or.kr/eng/news/kofic_news.jsp?mode=VIEW&seq=1763&blbdComCd=601007 "50% lower" is a broad statement, 50% lower than who exactly? If it is 50% lower than the current cheapest anamorphic lenses then this is exciting, but if it is 50% off $50K well maybe not so much.....

I always carry a zoom like the 24-105 or 24-70. Travel is different for everyone, but I do extended trips to multiple destinations so my kit needs to be versatile. I've been to 55 countries in the last couple of years, lots of incredibly dusty environments in Africa, SE Asia, India, South America and Central America, I rarely changed lenses in the field. But a single FL is pretty limiting, even with something like a a7r3 or a crop body as a backup. I carry 2 bodies, 2 primes and 3 zooms -- I decide what I'm going to need before I leave my room for the day and outfit each body accordingly. Even in those situations I occasionally changed lenses, but I was smart about it - turn the camera off, body facing down and so on. I also carry a blower and sensor cleaning supplies because even if you're not changing lenses sometimes crud still gets through - especially if you're shooting native Sony lenses since they don't put any weather sealing gaskets on the rear of their lenses. Chris

Choose the brightest and the most beloved/precious prime lens you have from 21 to 35mm FF equivalent. Why? Because it will be your best and intimate creative friend during the trip... and friend in the most intimate and contemplative hours could be just one... There is some magical-personal feeling to be alone with one prime wandering during day and night, that doesn't provide zoom's working easiness and convenience. You may and will miss some shots, but you'll put more of your soul in them... and that is the most important: not to hunt for shots, but to look for your deepest expression.

Here's the review: The shot at 6:57 of him in slow-mo with the light of a single match is just incredible!! Footage reminds me of the Canon 5DIII ML RAW 14 bit from @kidzrevil in places. Just lovely. Are people anticipating the Pocket 2 to have IQ like the T4K? and to all the people who think you don't need good IQ for home videos - see the lovely shot at 8:12

@IronFilm I figured heck 30 day return policy thats MUCH more reliable than an eBay rando-seller. Couple things: I've received my dumb adapter and I have to say it looks fairly quality for being $17. Going to be trying a 28mm on it first. I also purchased Caleb Pike's at DSLR VIDEO SHOOTER's a6500 guide and it has given me a much better run-down on how the camera works. I figure it's like having a video version of the manual. Has me pumped for its Tuesday arrival! Finally, I won the Sony 35mm 1.8 OSS prime on eBay. (Wasn't much of a hassle). I've been pouring through recommended color profiles/settings and will likely be purchasing Pro Color 3.0 / Pro LOG Bundle as well! Can't wait to open up new filmmaking possibilities that just weren't possible with the Nikon D5300. Just wanted to say thanks everyone for the advice in leading up to this purchase. Hopefully after playing with my setup for a bit I'll have some footage to share in the coming weeks.

I just went to THE VOID in downtown Disney in California two days ago and MAN IT WAS LIFE CHANGING!! The VR + interactive nature of it was truly magical. I cant believe it. Cant recommend it enough to anyone who has an opportunity to go https://www.thevoid.com/dimensions/starwars/secretsoftheempire/

As Old as I am with the water I would have probably thought I Peed myself. Pass.

Some of the shots taken with telephoto end (100-200mm) seems pretty impressive It could be F4/F4.5 with ISO 3200/6400, quite usable? wish it doesn't overheat after 5 mins though

I have nothing to do with this film other than i think it's amazing! They've been, like they always are, very open with everything through out the whole process. Including gear which is why i thought it would fit here on EOSHD. Premiered on Swedish cinemas four days ago. Total budget: $2M, shot on FS7 and vintage Russian lenses. More info below. Director Victor Danell on Facebook: "Last year I directed my first feature. Me and the DP wanted a lifeful and ”not so perfect” look to keep the story grounded, so we decided to shoot on vintage lenses. I relubed and added a oval iris on every lens my self. Shot on a Sony FS7 This is the complete set of lenses we used. A total price of less then $800. 20mm - Mir 20a 28mm - Mir 10a 30mm - Meyer-Optik Görlitz Lyidth 37mm - Mir 1a 38mm - Helios 44-2 + DSO wide angle adapter 50mm - Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 58mm - Helios 44-2 85mm - Jupiter 9 135mm - Tair 11a THE UNTHINKABLE / DEN BLOMSTERTID NU KOMMER http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5227746/?ref_=nv_sr_1"

If you were doing a roadtrip somewhere with a Sony A7III planning to shoot of video of nature, people ... only one lens with you for a light kit, what would it be? For me: 28mm F2 because: - Zoom lens do not work. One would say a 24-70, but a f2.8 would be too heavy and a F4 not good for low light and DoF - 35mm is not wide enough for nature stuff and gimbal use - 24mm is too wide for people/portrait - The iPhone has a 28mm lens. When you think about it, you cover everything with it from landscapes to portraits. - On the Sony, you can use crop mode and transform it into a 45mm, very convenient - For the jokers on some forums that say the 28mm is not sharp versus the Batis 25mm or other lenses, check a portrait a took with it wide open and tell me about sharpness: https://500px.com/photo/135582633/no-country-for-old-men-by-loup-fsr?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=860266 What about you?

Should we start a petition for Canon to make a consumer Medium-Format video-centric ILC? Some would argue that if we're going to dream then we should dream BIG!

28/2 Both on my nikon D810 and now A7Riii I have a 28/1.8 as my main lens which I rarely remove. My eyes now see in 28 which makes me be ahead of the image.

The flip side of that though is that the people who do get it and don't want the traditional one will be prepared to pay for that style and you won't constantly be in a pricing war with other producers who make those traditional ones. Go your own way, make your own market and own it. You won't get every job but you'll get the jobs where people want what you are creating more than they want the lower price you are charging.

Can't believe how much money those chancers must be making conning film makers for these festivals. So, I'm off to buy a projector, some garden chairs and a domain name and I'll be soon inviting entries for the Society of Cinematic Arts and Media Festival

ProRes is designed to be very light on CPU & does a great job at the expense of larger files sizes but that first system is a 2006 Mac Pro 1,1 & will not be up to the task of 4K video even with a graphics card upgrade. The second system is a 2010/2012 Mac Pro 5,1 (or a 2009 4,1 that has had the firmware upgraded) & the hex core W3680 3.33GHz CPU is still a decent performer as CPU performance hasn't improved all that much over the last 10 years. That should handle 4K ProRes fine with an upgraded video card. However you need to look at the price carefully. It does draw a lot of power but is beautifully made & will chug through the work without missing a beat. If you are not committed to Mac then a similarly specified HP Z400 Windows workstation with a hex core W3680 3.33GHz CPU can be bought for a lot less than half the price of a Mac Pro 5,1.

Budget + look. We could afford more expensive lenses, but the look of the Russians were exactly what we wanted for this project. Together with the oval iris we added to all of the lenses they looked like vintage lenses, but without the cost, weight and headache that comes with real anamorphics. I think my favorite lens was the Helios 44-2 together with Richard Gale's wide angle adapter. The character is out of the world!

This is probably a bit low brow on populist for most of you but anyway.... So I went to see Jurassic World in 4DX the other night. Not a great film but definitely a great experience. I don't really know what I was expecting, maybe just a bit of motion rumbling in the seat and a few gimmicks of the odd tiny blast of air and a bit of water but it was way beyond that. Of course, its not going to work with every film type but with something like Jurassic World you've already left any pretence of high brow at the door anyway so if you're going to go for it then you might as well really go for it. The range of movement in the chair was way beyond what I was expecting both in distance and velocity which made every crash or shock point really shake you but I was also surprised at the subtlety that really put you inside the aerial shots and also when the camera was tilting up to reveal something. The air jets coming from the front were obviously good for weather stuff but the ones in the head rest were very effective for bullet fly bys but the big surprise where the ones behind your calfs which they used to simulate little creatures running around your ankles. And honestly, the rain effects with the water spray were fantastic ! As an old cynic, I shouldn't really be getting excited by this stuff but I had an absolute whale of a time as did everyone else in there. Its a long time since I've left the cinema and people have seemed as euphoric as that. And that is with what is a decidedly iffy film as well. Also, as I've said before on here, we really all did give up on 3D too soon. I would love for Spielberg to do a version of Saving Private Ryan for 4DX as it would lend itself very well to the inclusive immersion aspects. Flame away

This video is kicking up a fuss over in the REDuser forum that he isn't shooting the rest of Avatar movies on a RED!

1. Thank you! I really appreciate this. We don't really think so mush about this, we just do films the way we like to watch films ourself. (and we don't watch a lot of Beck) 2. It wasn't that hard. I attach some BTS stills of the camera 3. Of course! Easter eggs from most of my favorite films can be spotted in the movie. I'll send you a dammsugare if you can spot homages to The lord of the rings, Jurassic Park, Lost and Home Alone. I think this is the numbers you are looking for: 120 shooting days 79 hours of raw material 420 vfx shots 19 crashed cars Over 1000 extras 360 000 liter rain 3 broken bones 82 locations 3000 liter coffee 7 liter fake blood

For what its worth XAVC-I on FS7 is a pretty fat 10-bit/422 intra codec with bitrates up to 600Mbps...

Nice. Your talking a camera in the A6500 that you can make pretty darn good footage with. Not a lot it can't do. Well Whip pans are probably out with one. But most people don't even know what Rolling Shutter even is or care. So don't let that slow you down. If you do 1080p, 4k down sampled is your best best. It is pretty good that way compared to 1080p OOC. Simple to do also if you haven't before. https://dslrvideoshooter.com/how-and-why-you-should-downscale-4k-to-1080/

No, Samyang, Rokinon and Bower are all the same

It's Samyang/Rokinon... so realistically something along the lines of: https://atlaslensco.com but at 50% off (~$4k). In which case I'd be looking forward to jonpais' footage! ? Possibly under the 'XEEN' moniker, of which their current lenses are also cheaper than say Tokina's stills version adapted cine lenses. Hopefully they come with C-AF compatibility for some of the people around here.

I tend to follow USA pricing more closely, and we've already seen the F8 go on sale for cheaper than the F4 launch price!! Never used an Edirol/Roland (but looked at them a lot, the double stacked design of their knobs looks like a nice design touch), probably if I'd started out in this just a couple or so few more years earlier then I very likely would have (in hindsight, I wonder if I should have got a Roland instead of the Tascam DR680mk1? I do remember investigating Roland a lot with their options, perhaps I went with the DR680mk1 because it was cheaper. Also I already had had a lot of positive experiences with the Tascam brand, as I'd started with a DR60Dmk1 and used a DR70D on a feature). Say something like the Roland R4 Pro would have been very nice back then! (In a number of ways the R4 Pro is still even more advanced than the F8n, such as viewing waveforms and having AES) Pity we haven't seen anything recently from Edirol/Roland as they were the leaders of their time in the low/mid range market. Kinda like Zoom is doing now?

Typically, for me, it's confusing when people assume impressive IQ requires being shot on RAW or some other "fat" codec. Great images come from production design, set design, cinematography, and lighting...even storytelling context. The thing is, you can easily capture that with 8-bit. RAW allows more latitude in grading, but if the material is captured right to begin with, you're good. I have stuff I shot in 2010 on thin 8-bit that looks considerably better than some stuff I shot last month on ProRes. Heck, I have HDV that is more impressive. Depends on what and how you're shooting. I wonder if EOS member Danell would agree or disagree to that? I'm reminded of some indy doc that came out a year or so ago, and it was lauded as a neat achievement because the whole thing was shot and captured with hacked RAW -- and that's saying something when it comes to doc filming. And it was cool that a small crew could do that...but then when you actually saw what they shot and how they colored it, one couldn't help but scratch their head and think, "well, why did you go through all that trouble then?" It looked terribly average. Bad lighting and odd grading. A better shooter and colorist, even if they only had 8-bit to work with, could be wildly more accomplished than what those guys did. FWIW, I just shot with the FS7. I liked it enough, but I wasn't doing anything demanding of it. For the task I put it to, it didn't look much better or worse than my GH5. And, actually, in it's standard color profile I thought the highlight roll off of the FS7 actually looked rather unimpressive.

I've wanted to go see something in 4DX twice lately. SOLO and Jurassic World. First time my friends found it too expensive for something that seems a bit gimmicky (here it's like almost double the price of a regular 3D showing). Second time I had work on the showing date (4DX in Original Version (OV) only gets shown like once and I can't watch movies dubbed in German, I tried, but I just can't stand it). As a youngster I was in Disneyland Paris and they had 'Honey, I Shrunk The Audience' in their Kodak Theatre (I vividly remember Cyndi Lauper's 'True Colors' playing whilst waiting in line). You know how 3D is always advertised as if it comes out of the screen and you can touch it?! Well, back then it really felt like that was the case! You'd duck if something came flying at ya. (Nowadays it feels more like looking through a window. Sure everything outside of a window is 3D, but it's like distanced and layered depth, you don't really feel immersed in that world at all. But I'm sure not much has changed to make it less effective, it probably just had been hella impressive to a lil' kid never having experienced anything of the kind (well, some stereoscopic anaglyph stuff perhaps). Or maybe they had actually shot it with a 'safety margin', displaying a crop of the footage allowing for action to be projected outside of the perceived dimensions of the frame making it really 'pop' from the background.) Of course there were mice that escaped and you felt something tickle your legs. A dog would sneeze in yo face! It was quite the experience. I've kinda been scared to try 4DX. I'm afraid it in fact IS gimmicky and would be super disappointing. Possibly because I've been on like supposed 4D rides where they basically just show you a YT video (examples below) whilst being seated on a secured bench that tilts, rolls and vibrates; where the motion seems to have been added randomly (feels hugely out of place) and it really feels super gimmicky and adds nothing. or something like: But... I guess it depends. That was very crappy integration. Seems you can do a lot with 4DX: But they really need to have the implementation make sense. You kinda almost have to make the movie with the mindset you will be showing it in 4DX, rather than it being an afterthought. Then I believe it might be an experience like it was to me like 20 years ago. Do think Jurassic World is one of the movies this would be perfect for. Definitely will give 4DX a shot after having read you had quite the time yourself... I just have to hope I don't have to work and can find a couple of friends to join in (I'll lure them with 'free' popcorn perhaps) next time they've got something OV showing. I do love an experience out of a movie, so I'm not one to 'wait for it to be on Netflix' (I may or may not however download certain things I expect to be too crappy to go watch in cinemas). Went to London especially to see The Hobbit at the ODEON BFI IMAX (yeah, I did hate the HFR making stuff look so fake). We saw Star Wars: The Force Awakens locally at UCI Kino's iSens cinema for having the biggest screen in the country, 23.1 Dolby Atmos 3D surround sound by IMM Sound and all seats being VIP comfort level. Though I'm not sure much can top The Hateful Eight that came to town as the special Panavision Super 70 Roadshow. Guess modern trickery can't win from good ol' film... but if you manage expections, you'll probably find a way to enjoy yourself nontheless.

I understand that you are forming your style, I am sure you are going to earn a lot of money from weddings! I may be too oldschool, but I needed a few times of "pause", some time to breath in your edit, just my humble opinion of course. I noticed that you used a couple of prime lenses, again that is your style and I respect it greatly, but personally, I find a good zoom lens liberating for such jobs - that can be more stressful and demanding, later on in your career. Keep up the good work, and I am waiting eagerly your next project. Next level? Heineken!

Douchers.

You must be fun at parties!

Take a look, Tito is the man. I think you can remove all the 3 screw/tabs that limit infinity and close focus points.

Ive mostly travelled with a 35mm equivalent lens for the last few years. But for the last week while I've been in Hong Kong I've been using a 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 and loving it. The combo is a lot bigger but it's not actually been all that bad, even in such an intensely dense city as Hong Kong. In fact I've been considering buying a 24-70mm f2.8 whilst I'm here

@tupp very interesting videos, thanks for sharing! If it were simply possible to swap out the UHS-I SD card interface inside the EOS M for a UHS-II one, that would make higher resolution recording feasible. But I imagine the amount of coding required to make it work might make it very difficult. In any case I doubt you'd be able to sell and make any money from a hardware hack like this - unless you get permission from Canon! I spoke to a Canon rep at the media production show in London recently where they were showing off their cinema EOS cameras, and he was aware of the EOS M 2.5k hack and seemed totally positive about it even saying he'd like to try it himself. I showed him the hack in operation. He also said he hoped that magic lantern would be available for the M50 one day!

It is not just that a dumb adapter gives you more focal length options, but also it is important to always have back ups for when something fails, and this is a very cheap way to keep your ass covered. (it doesn't even have to be an outright failure that might encourage you not to use the focal reducer, maybe the glass in it is creating flaring you don't want) Same here, I like buying secondhand stuff from Adorama / B&H as they have a generous rating system I can trust.

No because I would likely use it with vintage glass

I don't know whether they have designed them to do this but here is how I use the mounting clamps they provide with Amaran M9s as a bridge to connect my two together. Being able to break them down into singles (two of them will just about fit in the carrying pouch for one) and then use them individually or combine them to make something bigger makes them even more useful. You could definitely extend this out to connect four if needed.

Just want to comment on the 2.3 GH5 fw - preliminary experience. AF-C is waaay better for faces now. For interview / locked on, set AF-C to face detect, AF Speed -4/-5 (slow), AF sensitivity -3 (max locked on). This reduces pulsing considerably and the face detect is ok. Should be useable for vlogs and casual use, need more testing before using it professionally but it could work. I tried at 24p and it wasn't bad! When it was left at default 0/0 there was pulsing and basically unusable professionally, but set to slow and locked on it was much better. Tested by filming myself in a static interview position, I sometimes moved back and forth like a real interview. Focus racking isn't the smoothest, might not be acceptable if you want silky smooth transitions, but most people probably won't care. I tried this with both the Panasonic 12-35mm and the Sigma 18-35mm with Metabones SB mark IV @ "F1.2". Face tracking is hilarious though, nowhere near Sony. If you tilt your face (still looking at camera, just your head over 30degrees) the box disappears. From the YT videos it's clear that different settings get your drastically different results, so take note. The second thing I want to use it for is B-roll. I tried single area AF-C, set to 0/0 and it works decently in 60P. Most B-roll I just use 60P and not 24p. If left on -5/-3 it's not responsive enough for tracking objects and will easily lose focus if you are changing focus distance. Very positive on it so far, especially for interview use and shallow DOF. I'm not super confident in the AF-C for B-roll but time will tell.

Yes, that's correct: you dont know. Crisp +7 actually softens your image, it's like using the "Masking" slider in lightroom while you use the sharpening tool. Set it to 0 for maximum sharpness. Fullframe or crop, it does not matter.

Thank you for looking it up! Please do this next time before commenting! In this case the poor sharpness is not caused by the crop/fullframe mode oversampling difference. In fact you can barely see the difference in perceptible resolution between the FF and crop mode with the A7r3. Crisp +7 almost totally elliminate the +7 sharpening effect, it's like shooting with -7 detail with 0 crispening. But the end results may have less noise, this is the point of the crispening.