Leaderboard

I'd suggest Leica R zooms - I found that their construction is second to none except modern Voigts. They don't protrude, focus and zoom rings are incredible smooth, again only comparable with Noktons. If lenses are in nice conditions (and their long life period is unbeatable) they achieved quality that is the most important to me but I don't know how to better explain it: cleanness. Simply, image without predominant tone/shadow veil. Most of vintage lenses has it - and although it may be interesting in effect, it is near impossible to remove it completely in grading to get proper initial/neutral/clean grading point.

On another note about browser accuracy...someone posted this in the fb color grading group. Could be of some help, but haven’t tried it yet.

Hi, you are right. Your LUT is really accurate in terms of color e.t.c, I just posted my view on possible grading to achieve more 16mm look (like in video reference)

Lenses will generally last a lot longer than the camera ? They're always a good investment in my view Nikon do some lovely glass. But for us dedicated manual focus lovers, they focus the wrong way and that's not an insignificant issue with my decades of muscle memory. I usually like to pull of the barrel in these scenarios but you can get direction reversing gears and reverse a motor of course, but in this kind of area, that's less likely to happen... JB

I picked up a C100 again recently, I had dumped it previously after going 4K.. but shifted back after realizing i still deliver just about everything in 1080p and that the C100 gives one of the best 4K downsampled 1080p IQ (especially when externally recording to ProRes). Most TV channels around the globe still broadcast 720p / 1080i. And most hollywood movies today are still shot/projected in DCI 2K i believe. I do appreciate 4K material when i find it worth it ( sci-fi blu-ray or a sports game on a big screen) and of course on monitors for editing but in most viewing cases i find 1080p/2K still perfectly adequate. As for 5D3 ML Raw, it certainly has a great mojo.. let's not forget we're talking 14-bit lossless.. allows for some really good grading/pushing:

More classics from David -

Oh. I think this clip of it might actually be a metaphor.

Yep, turned that on months ago.

Well that’s a little unfortunate. Of course, I only watched the embedded video...

When there is no reference white, this is actually a good way to tell if WB neutrality (before the conversion) needs an adjustment. After the conversion, there shouldn't be a need to correct for color balance (rosiness of cheeks, brown rather than green hair). This visual judgement check on results is limited by the accuracy of the monitor, but it is a good indicator. Vectorscope is always a good objective assessment. And when WB is on point, the conversion can really lock in. WB will not only incorporate the nature of the source, but also the reflected alteration to the source. For example, if you are standing in a yellow wall paper room with window sky daylight providing general illumination, this will be a distinct white balance from the GH5 day WB preset

There's a two-touch version of the 80-200 AF-D. That's the one I'm referring to. I skip rails and just use the zoom's tripod mount with the camera hanging off the back. If I'm shooting with a tele, I'm generally on the sticks or a monopod. I use my lenses on APS-c and FF, so for me they cover a broader spectrum than m43. I would guesstimate that the 28-70 with and without a speed booster can cover 95% of what I shoot. If I like the P4k, I'll find an ultrawide like the Tokina 11-16 to cover the rest of my needs. Cheers Chris

Now I understand why Nikon cancelled the DL. If you can't make a modern premium compact and yet keep it under $1000, you better forget it.

So with no built-in ND filter (and still no filter thread) worse aperture, same bad battery life and same 4k recording limit (I doubt if overheating has improved) and of course no mic jack. Not to mention the price. How is this an improvement for video shooters?

I'll start with what I've been using and see how everything looks, then I'll start visiting this and other forums to see what you guys are using and the results everyone may share. Nikon 24-70, 70-200, 35mm F2, 85mm 1.8 Tokina 100 Macro, 11-16 Sigma 50 1.4 Helios 40 and 44, Jupiter 9 Kowa 1.5x

I used to have a similar set up (looks like we've all taken old Andy Lee's EOSHD lens advice to heart!) That 80-200 is one hell of a lens, sharp wide open, built like a tank. Just be aware that it is indeed a push-pull lens as well, if you're going after the one frequently recommended on this forum. The actual one used on the Bourne movies was the same lens, just re-housed for cine use. I liked mine, but eventually sold it because it was just too big and bulky for the type of shooting I do, as I don't really like to go all out with a rigged-up heavy cage/rails and lens-support setup, which I felt like I had to with the 80-200. Plus I rarely feel the need to go beyond 135 so it was kind of unnecessary zoom range for me. Eventually I had gotten rid of enough of my other Nikkor Ai and AiS primes that I started getting annoyed only having one lens that "focused backwards". Wreaks havoc on my muscle memory haha.

that is not a 24-200 f2.8-f4.5 it's a 9-72mm f2.8-f4.5 or 24-200 f7.4-f12.4 (opening is 18mm high which would be f11 so there is likely some errors somewhere in there or it's not optimal in size) At the wide end they could have made it a LOT faster than it is. Front element would have to be 44.4mm which is as large as the entire lens assembly. Or 76% of the cameras height. That would have been a 24-135mm f5.4-f7.5 or 8.9-50mm f2.0-2.8

I agree that a lot of stills lenses are rubbish to manual focus with. When I first started in my role as an "Olympus Visionary" I told my friends at Olympus the same thing. I actually have met with the optical and lens designers at their R&D facility in Japan and we talked very specifically about this as I mostly use manual focus when I shoot with these cameras. The Olympus PRO lenses now have hard stops when in MF, and you seamlessly transition from focus by wire continuous and then into MF mid shot if you want via the way you pull the clutch back. I love that Olympus have really tried to address this issue. So far the 7-14, 12-40, 12-100 IS, the 40-150, the 17mm, 25mm and the 45mm 1.2 PRO primes all have this manual focus feature. The focus ring itself is all gigantic and actually feels great too, its a true mechanical feel. JB

On the push pull zoom topic, FWIW I offer the Nikkor 50-135mm f/3.5 Ai-s. This is one of those "under the radar" lenses that was only on the market very briefly but is pretty widely loved by the folks that have shot with them. We've used it on the UMP and Micro with MB dumb and SB adapters. It's built like a tank but really wieldy with a 62mm front. Unboosted on the new P4k it will be a 100-270mm which would be a pretty great compliment to a Sigma at a relative 35-70mm. The IQ is pretty stunning on my and other copies I've seen. Great contrast and uniform detail across the zoom range. Definitely the vintage nikkor look w/a slightly cool rendering vs Canon glass, for instance. You can find them ridiculously cheap on ebay $100-$200. Absolute no brainer if you can find a good copy.

One part is to set up a natural behavior. This EOSHD member explains it for the Zhiyun (and why you would want to choose different settings): The second factor is the speed of pans and tilts. Too fast, and they will stop too abruptly. Not sure how this is prevented with the Ronin S. Must be a very sophisticated algorithm, ease-in, ease-out, with powerful motors.

You got me wrong. I didn't say the lenses were soft. Or 'crap'. One of my favorite lenses for my A6500 is the Sony 18-105. Mostly for practical reasons. But you can't for the love of god focus manually, because there are no 'positions', and if you try to rehearse a focus transition, the focus ring will just slip under your fingers. Even infinity is infinitely pushed away from you. That's what I meant with "completely useless there" (= on a 4k Pocket). And your son's clip proves little, because it's done with such a narrow aperture, it's almost fixed focus. Also, of the category I was referring to I only know Pan 14-40 kit lens, Oly 9-18 and Oly 12. There may be better lenses. On the official Pocket site BM shows the camera mostly with the Oly 12-40 f2.8, and according to this review, the manual focus is very useable: You might take a look at the Viltrox speedbooster, which seems to have a manual aperture control for the EF lenses (video timed):

Teal and orange, baby. Teal and orange. We'll always have our mid 'aughts Teal and Orange.

"sub optima" IS the reason I will use them. ? I don't want sharp as hell lenses like I said. And clumsy AF, hell the 4K BMPCC doesn't even Have AF in a sense. I am glad they don't resolve 4K LoL. I really doubt I will ever output in 4K. Maybe down sample at times to 1080p but I doubt even that often. You are stating the complete Opposite of what I want in a lens. If I wanted sharp I would buy a Sony A7r mk III. I think the magic of a BMPCC is that they are not razor sharp. Not like ML 5D mk III. I don't want to really have to knock down sharpness on every shot I take. But sure nice if you want that option thought Like I guess you want. Now if you want a smooth look, which I like, I think those lenses can do that, buttery smooth, I doubt we can get that other than using real film with Cooke lenses, we will never be able to afford. Cut your face, well no either. But I don't like cut your face stuff. Seems you do. I like to get a lot of the look I like in camera, not spending 6 hours on a NLE doing it. So I think cheap lenses on it will do fine for me. Plenty of old Nikon, Canon MF stuff around for peanuts for my needs. Plus I am a cheap slate, eh poor, and don't have all that money to spend on 1000 + dollars lenses, when I can buy what I want on Amazon for 60 bucks each and get my result. But that is the beauty of video, photography, we all get to make it look like we want it to look like if we have the skill. But yeah if you are going to try to make a living with the BM sure you will Need the lenses you are talking about and more of them. I am just in this as a hobby. At 71 I am too old to worry about deadlines, spending money left and right I don't have, on and on. You guys are funny as hell. I doubt ANYBODY has even made anything worth a shit with a 14.-140mm or the kit lens. Oh the vanity to throw tons of peoples stuff under the bus LoL. I did BIF stuff for years photography wise and video wise, and gee, they seemed to work fairly well doing it. Super duper ideal, no, but crap lenses nah.

Well I think the main reason for ML Raw on the 5D mk III is how sharp it can be. Other than the 1DC most all Canon video footage to me is Way too soft. Now I am not against soft video footage at times at all. I just want to be able to Control how soft it is, not be stuck with it for Everything. I guess the next be thing about Raw is that if you goof up WB you can change it at your will. And I don't know about you but that is one of my hardest areas to really pull of even close let alone perfect. To make it consistent. And there is no noise reduction, no baked in stuff like every manufacturer has. So a clean slate as they say. But if wanted you have killer Canon Color Science, and the AF is not shabby at all. Not DPAF, but.. And there is the 12 bit date rate. Hell that alone is worth the price of admission. Sure it is kind of a data hog but wow what you have the ability to be able to push, and push hard. And I think it is the satisfaction that with Raw the finial output is what you created, your signature, your fingerprints are on all over it if you want to take it that far. You are not trying to Undo what someone else likes, it is what You like if you desire. And with a LuT you can just click on it and grade fast if needed. But it can be totally Your LuT if you want. You can stand out, not just be part of the same crowd as everyone else. And I know I can go on but you are able to buy a camera for not a lot that can look as good or better than a 1DC, Canon C500. No you are not going to get full 4K, even the 1DC is not, not yet, probably Never with the C Fast card data rate, but it can do a easy 2K and more. That is impressive for the money. What the heck FF Cine looking camera can we afford. Eh none. Well the 5D ML can make that happen.

That's a solid approach! Most especially if you have recorded a reference WB card, you can get perfect WB. Its key to make sure the card is representative of the key light cast (for GHa)

Yep, 5D RAW might still be my favourite looking footage out there, period.

Another one with this combination. Almost all shots filmed wide open.

Interesting to see how many different interpretations there are here. Not just in the like/dislike stakes (which would be expected) but in the technical stuff too.

nevermind/ let me put a point on this: @jonpais is a raging jerk. hes deleted my posts and threads. i think he needs some time off from the forum @John Brawley, had a fit over the word "sissy", which infuriates me. in America that isnt "hate speech", you act like he said fa**ot. /thats it

Yea, I screwed up on that one! I thought since he had no feedback no one would risk it. Opps.

Awesome - can you shoot a fruit bowl plate spread, with red apples, yellow bannanas - compare side by side your fuji? It looks beautiful but I really want to see if its red's are rich and not orange-y. That's an awesome shot!

Excited to test the image quality out of it. I don't think it will compete with a larger sensor like the GH5 that's optimized for still and video with V-log, but I mean, for a director on a shoot who wants to steal a shot of the sunset on the scout, and doesn't have a camera on their person, just a quick shot here and there. For instance I did a short film with Matty Brown - and he added a bunch of picks up because he has a beautiful hyper-connectic style. Say he didn't have a small mirrorless or DSLR on him, and there was like a scene with tons of birds flying in the air, and the DP was changing glass or whatever, and he just whips it out of his pocket, it may be okay in the piece, since it is 23.98, maybe a good shutter speed, HEVC codec - it may cut. It's exciting to me to think this. There have been so many missed moments on sets because the crew is wrapped for time reasons that the director would love to grab.

Yup - buy it! Redid the grade. no touching anymore - it is what it is

Well, I mean, has this group ever been the cutting edge bastion of science? Or is it, just a bunch of filmmakers and shooters trying to help each other with tips and tricks to improve? And if one person asks the question, and another person tries to help and answer it, should you, dear friend, Can'tSin, be upset? These are great mysteries of life. If you want true, science-based research and answers, go on cinematography.com and ask Art Adams or David Mullen. If you want to have a little fun, stay here.

This sounds like a really good understanding of it. Yes, in particular the GH5 looks like it definitely adds in-camera noise reduction. Gives it a plastic-y feeling to the midtones and highlights. As if using neatvideo on the footage a little too agressively. Interesting observation about motion blur and Blackmagic. Also I found shooting 185 degree shutter on the ursa mini 4.6k makes the motion feel more like an alexa.