Leaderboard

I think you're right-- after playing around a bit more, I've been able to get some really crisp footage, even at f/1.4. I guess my hands were really unsteady in that first 1.8 test! f/1.4: '> and '>

Im sure its a good lens stopped down to f5.6 ish its soft and blooms at 2.8 , its just you have paid top price for it at £250 quid, you can get the AT-X Pro version for that price on ebay http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tokina-AT-X-PRO-80-200mm-f-2-8-AF-Lens-for-Nikon-/231279711956?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item35d95856d4 the version you have is about £90 on the bay http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tokina-AT-X-SD-80-200mm-f-2-8-Zoom-MF-Lens-for-Nikon-Ai-N-AI-f2-8-From-Japan-/111416685697?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item19f0f3b481 while we are on about Tokina's THE LENS TO GET is the Angenieux designed Tokina AT-X PRO 28-70mm f2.6-2.8 all metal all internal zoom all internal focus so matt box fits on the end all ok . Stellar lens I have 2 and its a real work horse I use alot superb bokeh and narrow dof on MFT , I use it on a Lens Turbo Zhyongi speedbooster which makes it an approx 20-50 f1.6 insane bokeh zoom !!

You could maybe try cineform but that is not free, other than that I do not know. Worst case you can do DNxHD using the following work flow, you can keep 90% of the resolution. 1.) In AE set your comp size to 1440 x 1080 with pixel aspect of HDV 1080/DVCPRO HD 720 (1.33). 2.) Set the pixel aspect of your footage to 1.33 then scale your footage to 90% :(. 3.) Export out to DNxHD at 1920 x 1080 using media encoder. 4.) Import in premiere and set the pixel aspect ratio to DVCPRO HD 1080 (1.5) and set the sequence settings to 1920 x 1080 with a 1.5 pixel aspect ratio. This will give you a final resolution of 2880 x 1080, its not 3200 x 1200 but it is better than 1920 x 720 and should be very efficient to work with and edit since it is just HD footage with a non square pixel aspect. For step number 1-2 you could just set the comp size to 1920 x 1080 and scale x by 120% and y by 90% instead, I prefer to use pixel aspect ratios when working with anamorphics since that is essentially what an anamorphic lens is changing. It keeps the number of real pixels lower and in turn requires less memory. The 1.33 aspect in AE combined with the 1.5 in premiere will give you a 2x stretch in the end. Just make sure that AE and Premiere are set up to display the pixel aspect ratio correction and everything will look as expected. If you go the DNxHD route you can use the extra resolution to slightly reframe your shots before exporting to DNxHD and not scale as much or at all, or you can shoot at a lower resolution in ML like 1472 and save some memory. On somewhat of a side note I always try and keep my footage the same resolution until the final output and use pixel aspect ratios to deal with the anamorphic stretch. So if you can find a codec that will export 1600 x 1200 keep the footage that size and just assign a 2.0 pixel aspect to it when working with it rather than scaling it to 3200 x 1200, it will reduce the number of pixels you are working with by half compared to scaling. I always keep my masters this way and then export out square pixel / black bar versions as needed when I go to the final format like HD. If you find a good alternative codec please post, I am sure many would like to know as well. Good luck. Maybe keep an eye on this for the future, it appears it will be open source based on cineform. https://kws.smpte.org/kws/public/projects/project/details?project_id=15

That you have anthropomorphisized a perfectly good descriptive word is why I'm not going to talk to you any more about linguistics. Please re-read what you wrote - you defined dull as lack of interest and then called Bay's shots dull because every shot has too much interest. That's why it's important to not attribute human feelings to words, it gets confusing.

Once you drop the price that much no one will want to pay full price for that camera ever again.

Rather than lock the thread I've removed the conversation that is of zero use to anyone, and there's a lot of it in this one.   I take a huge chunk out of my day, every day, to answer questions about cameras.   When some jerk asks rudely like Tone13 did   With his "??????!!!!!!!" And his declaration of "Basic info guys!"   ​You can't seriously expect anyone in their right mind to give them a polite reply. â€‹It is infuriatingly rude.   Tone13 has been banned because it only takes 1 idiot to bring further threads into disrepute and drag them off topic like he has done here.   I run a free forum, the minimum payment is a basic respect for EOSHD if you choose to use it.