Leaderboard

Z-Cam: "We have produced the most mundane and uninspiring footage that any company could ever possibly publish for promoting their cinema camera" Cinemartin: "Hold my beer....."

Here is, I just uploaded! I was just playing with the lens, it soft but i love the character. I'm thinking in using it on some music videos, maybe some narrative film. The film-noir suits very nice with it. I shot everything in the 4:3 anamorphic mode so i can frame correctly, then cropped in post. Maybe i will post a 4:3 version. Film grain is real super 16 that I shot my self.

Part of the reason newer Digital cameras look so Clinical is what Kidzrevil said. All the new cameras have lots of corrections going on so you don't see any distortions for crap any more. You could have Never used lenses as wide as we have now. They were Fisheye lens if they were that wide back in the day. I just yesterday was showing my son those 4 lenses I bought from a Thrift Store for 16 Dollars. There were two 28mm f2.8's in the bunch. A 55mm f2.8, also Pentax M42.. Both 28mm, one a Canon FD,, one a Pentax M42. They are day and night different from each other color wise. The Canon has way more punchy colors than the Pentax on my A7s.. The 135mm Pentax M42 is super sharp but sort of sterile. We put on my Sony FE 16-35mm Zeiss and it was even sharper than both 28's but a lot more sterile looking than the other three mentioned. It was better in a clinical sense. More Modern for sure. So long story short old lenses do look more Classic, mellow whoever you want to name them. Of the 5 lenses we did test shots of all of them looked different, in a good or bad way depending on your mood or need.

Do you use the CineD conversion before the ACES input lut? I've played around with the idea of making a camera, and going full Jim Jannard XD

A pretty strong comeback to the i9gate issue...

This is one of the few videos shot on a7 III that made me somehow believe in its video capabilities. This one is also appealing to me, though shot on a7R III.

Wow, this is probably the best looking GH5 footage that I have seen and yes this is definitely better than the original... and that looked great as well. You’re obviously a very talented and skilled operator and colorist but even with my limited talent and skill, this makes me think that maybe I discounted the GH5 too soon.

and here is a complete work (some art event deep inside russian territory):

It was a sunny day, thus i've used "RGB boost" preset in order to keep Dynamic Range acceptable..

There is all kinds of company's that build Industrial cameras for monitoring, surveillance. That doesn't mean they will ever be worth a crap for consumer video. There are all kinds of websites where you can buy sensors all day. It doesn't mean that it can't turn into a Red camera thing, but to keep waiting for some Holly Grail 8K camera that we hope is Only going to cost 800 Dollars, well good luck with that panning out. This Z Cam 2 thing gets weirder every day let alone this thing. I think this new PK4 has thrown a Monkey Wrench into all of these startups thinking they are the next Arri. Hell just buy some camera that is proven and get on with it. A old Red Mysterium X would be better than some of these goofball things. What can one of these cameras have over this new PK4 that any normal person needs, or could even afford the media, computing power? Who even owns lenses that can resolve 8K? Who Pixar Studios, Disney Studios? It sure ain't that Nifty 50 Canon lens for 199 bucks.

Thanks Sage, i really appreciate the feedback! I used the normal 4:3; the one which is h264, 10 color for 25fps and 8 bit for 50fps. I suppose the codec is the same. I didnt used the 6k 4:3 because i needed the Ex tele converter in camera to frame the shot, also I know the 6k 4:3 uses h265 codec. Still a 4:3 pre will be awesome! that 2.2 soft looks nice!

Been getting good results with Angelbird. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1380442-REG JB

I may just go ahead and pull the trigger. Just picked up Andrew's Pro Color and I liked "Totolo-Vision" on the a7sII, a profile shootout is in order. I'm camped out in Arizona right now, daily highs are touching 110f where I am, not exactly 'get out and shoot' weather. Cheers Chris

If you compare the 2018 to previous gen MBP in some heavy rendering task you will see what everyone means by i9 being limited. The performance gain will be very small ~10-15% and in some extreme cases it can be worse as well. That is far from the ~50% performance gain that you would expect theoretically from using 2 extra cores. On the other hand, if you use a program that occasionally uses all of the cores at max for few seconds then you will see that performance boost. This is what the Geekbench measures and with which you can get ~50% better performance gain. As has been shown here, the problem is with the inability of the cooling system to get the CPU under 100C, once the wattage is >60W. Once you restrict the wattage to some level that the cooling system can handle, you can actually get a boost in performance. For example I did the cinebench test in which you can see turboboost for the first few seconds and then the throttling with some oscillations of the frequency: I then restricted the wattage to 45W: I also did the test where I allowed the wattage to go high for the first few seconds and then restricted it to 45W: That is ~35% better than the older generation MBP and ~12% better than the stock settings. Keep in mind that the boost in performance with the i9 when compared to i7 comes only when the CPU can use more than 45W. The Geekbench score for the i9 with the fixed 45W is ~20700 for the multicore similar to the base i7. So while restricting the wattage can be helpful in CPU heavy tasks such as scientific computations/video rendering/etc for the average usage when all of the cores are used for less than few seconds the current settings work fine. You can also see that with the 45W limit, the temperatures didn't reach 100C so in theory an even higher limit ~55W would work even better and which can get the performance gains close to the theoretical 50%. In short, the current macs do not perform as good as expected. I am confident that apple can at least provide some remedy with a combination of wattage limitation after few seconds + some tighter coupling of fan speed and the temperatures.

This one: ???

@Wild Ranger That looks great! Very vintage. I should mention, in the interest of fidelity, that the 4:3 mode uses a different codec with a bit different color science. For EC, I recommend All-I 2K or 4K, for the organic fluidity of motion, smooth gradients, and edit-ability. I hope to get around to a 4:3 Pre In any case, your work is always very good! *Edit: Here's a frame shot with All-I 2K in ETC mode, with the new 2.2 Soft (which will be great as a filmic base):

USB and SDI are so totally basically like almost like the same ya know!

Hey, finally done with the trailer to our debut feature film at 55Media shot almost entirely on the Panasonic GH5 (some shots on the GoPro6 and P4P) in just 12 days. Our best work yet. Movie is still going through post-production. Production company: 55Media Director/Writer: Uche Aguh Director of Photography: Dennis Schmitz (me) Assistant Director: Ukairo U. Ukairo. Starring: Jarius Drew Sowells, Kayode Akinyemi, Vincent Ramirez, Thiree Pinnock, Julian Horton, Obum Nwankwo and J Shawn Durham as 'Daddy G' Editing done in Premiere. Colorgrading done in Davinci Resolve. Dealing with the usual quirks of this camera, but results are still great. More information: www.imdb.com/title/tt7928156 www.55media.net

We might replace it as well or at least add some additions to it (C200 RAW and Pocket 4K). Lenses used were the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 (indeed), 50-100 F1.8 and Tokina 14-20 F2.0

They are seductive once you've used them so they are a dangerous game financially to get involved in. The lens equivalent of this

It certainly seems a popular product with youtube vloggers.....

Mostly I see Fuji on set. Some Sony and some Olympus (EM1 Mk2) Olympus can do 60FPS RAW in silent and have ProCap, basically a stills buffer if you’re trying to get an action event. (Capture frames BEFORE you hit the shutter release) Sony is better in low light and for resolution (post crops). Olympus is better for native lens reach, better IBIS (lower shutter speeds in low light), smaller, cheaper, lighter weight and better weatherproofing. I think also better rolling shutter because the sensor is smaller (faster integration time) jb

If you shoot with Sony theres a program called Sony Catalst Browse and that program IIRC shows me my focal length and whole bunch of other useful info like the picture profile that was used, color space, bit depth, ISO and more. Not sure if it works with Panasonic or Canon.

Just got the new MoonDog Labs Anamorphic adapter for the iPhone X. Looks good so far. I’ll be playing with it over the weekend.

I have a very early preorder on the Pocket 4k but what I still like about the FS700 w/ odyssey is the internal ND's, two proper XLR inputs, a great quality monitor, S35mm sensor, 4k 50p and even 4K 100p in burst (I'm in a PAL country). Yes, its a bigger/more cumbersome rig than the pocket4k, but then sometimes that's a benefit. I also shoot a fair bit on Red and that's no less cumbersome than the FS700 w/odyssey. I'm not going to pretend the FS700 is ergonomic but it depends what your use to I suppose. Also, I can't really see myself using the Pocket 4k in its basic form all that often anyway. I would need another monitor mounted to it as the non tilting built in one is unusable when using a cinesaddle or any position you can't see the screen straight on. I would also probably want a mattebox for ND's (not a fan of VariNds). Battery life May also be an issue on longer shoots and then I'd brobably want some sort of small cage with top handle for handling. Are these issues for everyone? Of course not, but for my use, the FS700 may still be the better camera of the two but I'll evaluate that when I have the Pocket 4k in hand. Some of the work I do uses the Sony F5 and f55 as an A Cam so the FS700 cuts in perfectly with them. While the c300 does shoot lovely images, it's frame rate limitations made it a non starter for the work I do. Please don't get on here making it sound like I'm bashing on any particular camera, I'm just outlining why one camera may be better for certain people. For me, the FS700 is still a perfectly great camera today just as the FS7, f5 and f55 are. The FS700 w/odyssey punches far far above its weight and judging it on its age or current second hand price is just wrong. I'm seeing FS700's w/ Odyssey's including 5+ batteries, 4x512GB CD SSD's, full cage etc going for $3500 AUD. I can't see the Pocket4k being any cheaper once I add a second monitor, batteries, the equivalent 4x500GB Cfast cards, ND's etc...but right now I can't be bothered doing the math. What I am looking forward to with the Pocket4k is the colour science and the compressed RAW options.

Redid the whole colorgrading process in ACES after some tests. Way cleaner than any LUT based workflow in REC709 colorspace I used before! This is how the movie will look like:

Hi everyone! I'm just passing by to show this... It's a Som Berthiot Pan-Cinor 17-85 f2. Old C-mount lens from super 16. In a couple of hours I'm uploading a video test I show with this one, using Alexa color and some Super 16 film textures that had shot my self a couple of years ago. ...

Yes. And the problem is broader than that, just in general people just don't give any time into sound post or bother finding or respecting the skills needed to it Too many directors/producers just leave it up to their visual editor to do it, just doing a tweak here or there to the levels if that. Or nearly just as bad, they *do* attempt to take sound post "seriously" and find someone different dedicated just to the task of sound post. But many producers/directors seem to think just because someone is an expert musician / DJ / music producer / whatever, then they'd be good at sound post! Nope, they're radically different fields. On a proper budgeted film they might have a team of just sound dialogue editors and assistants as part of the wider sound post team. (just look at the credits for the size of the sound post teams, often bigger than for the visual edit!! If you exclude CGI etc. Just out of my own curiosity I thought I'd go double check my gut feeling on this by looking at half a dozen of the most recent on IMDB's top 100. And yup, in every case the post sound department is a little bit larger than the editorial department! Of course I'm not counting VFX people here, which is a HUGE number on modern films!! But then again I'm not counting the music department either, which can be a length credit list for some films) It is like thinking a photographer would be a good cinematographer! lol. Or visa versa. Yes, they have some overlap with their skills, but in the end they're each their own deeply specialized fields and are totally different to each other overall. And you're just taking a pot luck random shot at luck as to if one will be competent at the other (and you're extremely unlikely either will be great at the other's job, but until they get some experience under their belt first). Unfortunately I've lately been hit over and over again with experiencing crap craptastic sound post, quite demoralizing when I put all this work into crafting the most golden possible sound files I can under the conditions of the shoot. But of course at wrap I then must hand them over, and it is out of my control. Only to much later on see and hear the final product, which leaves me wondering wtf happened??

After the first minute I didn't pay attention to the quality and really started to enjoy the video. That was good. there were some limitations but really shows that we shouldn't be stopped by the technical stuff and that content is king.

Thanks for all the love so far. Really appreciate it. And sorry for the late replies. Pre-Production took a few weeks. Uche Aguh wrote it basically while casting and searching for locations to shoot and adjusting the script to it at the same time! I worked on a shotlist, schedule and lighting/equipment. Production took place nearby Atlanta in a small town called Palmetto. A very eary place tbh. We shot over a time-frame of 11 days. We had a crew of 6 people. Right now we are working on post-production. Some bts pictures can be found here: http://55media.net/portfolio/the-house-invictus/ pushed it up to 6400 in some situations. I already added some grain. Sadly the internal NR on the GH5 is very strong and smudges lots of low contrast detail and YouTube does the rest... (Waiting for the Pocket 4K) Here is a link to a higher quality version on vimeo:

Love to hear more about the production and pre production side of this, & what was the size of the crew you used? Any BTS? And your distribution plans?

You may find the greatest DoP in the world Roger Deakins won't agree with you. Those who are against the "clinical look" tend to look for excuse of not able to light their scenes properly and pick a soft or vintage lens to diffuse the image. Some people are fooled by the look of some LUTs into believing that the image is too clinical when paired with a sharp problem free lens when the problem is the LUT itself. A good sharp clean lens is as good as it get in what is being captured through the glass. How it looks after it is saved in your memory card and loaded onto your computer are interpreted by design.