Leaderboard

I'm back from Guangzhou China, and starting to evaluate the footage, especially my modified Takumar 50mm F1.4 with the custom "insert" made from post-it notes and sticky tape. I managed to get out and shoot with it on a couple of nights. One in Beijing Road and the other in Yong Qing Fang. Some images from Beijing Road... these are all wide open, and lightly graded with Resolve and Film Look Creator. Overall, I'm really liking the aesthetic, which reminds me of mid-budget Hong Kong cinema, which I have a soft spot for. I mostly exposed to protect the highlights and then adjusted exposure in post under the FLC, and the GH7 has just enough DR for this, despite the scenes being quite challenging. The lens has a shallow enough DOF to be able to direct the viewers attention by choosing what is in focus, and the FOV (equivalent to a 71mm F2.0 on FF) is great for these type of scenes where the scenes would mostly overwhelm a wide lens with pure chaos. Some images from Yong Qing Fang.. same as above but with a touch of sharpening. This was a lot darker and I needed to push the ISO to get more levels in some scenes. It was also a lot higher DR, so some shots will be limited in post for how I grade them and I'll probably reach for NR in places. The lens is actually quite sharp in the middle, but the sides are more distortion than I'd like with quite a bit of bokeh distortion and coma from bright sources. The experiment with this "insert" was how strong a look it would be and I think it's probably too strong because the bokeh shapes are too distracting due to the sharp corners. It's distracting on frames with a clear subject (where you want the background to get out of the way) and on other shots its pure chaos and completely negates the idea of directing where the viewer will look. Getting DOF this shallow on MFT isn't easy, so I'll have to think about it more for future trips.

For sure, and I'd be excited to give it a try! I was a Kickstarter backer of the Z Cam E1 and I've bought a few Ribcage kits/cameras over the years. I was disappointed by all of them, but I'm still hoping for that magical/usable tiny sensor camera! I have a little bag full of D-mount and C-mount lenses just waiting to go on something! (I still wish there were a way to get a decent/non-laggy video feed from the Insta360 One R/RS series - I have a Ribcage-modded 1" module and the quality is really decent - but focus is hard, given the only options for monitoring are the camera's tiny screen or laggy wifi)

I found an interview with the person who shot the under-water sections of a GoPro promo video (IIRC it was for the Hero 3 or 3+), and the level of effort they put into it was simply incredible. He had a team of about 5, three crew and two cast, and they had a week for production. He was an independent DOP and had done some pre-production as part of his 'pitch' to GoPro to get the gig, but I think they did detailed pre during the week as well as camera tests and lots and lots of shooting. This was only for the underwater shots (the bikini girl diving beneath the waves). If we assume that each of the (maybe half a dozen?) locations each got 5 people for a week, then that's ~7500 hours just to film the 1-2 minute promo video. The level of cherry-picking is extreme - professional DOPs pitching projects, travel to the most exotic locations, testing of all modes with all manner of equipment, everyone in cast and crew are professionals, long shooting days at the best times (golden hour, etc), dozens of hours of footage just to make a short promo. Then people set it to auto, hold the tiny camera in their hand and film their family at the beach with whatever lighting and weather happens to be there at the time and then we wonder why it doesn't look like the promo videos... Having said all that, if GoPro make an interchangeable lens camera with a half-decent bitrate and a colour-managed LOG profile then it might be the tiny camera we've been wanting!

My archive on gh2 patches 1 GOP Intra 'moon' T7 - Top Grading - Best Motion - Best Setting Ever 1-SpanMyBitchUp patch is good quality for spanning with long record times 2-AQuamotion v2 is medium-high quality with decent spanning recording times + 80% slowdown / EX TELE 3 GOP 'Spizz' - Hi-Quality - Pro Motion 3-TerrAQuake is seAQuake but less quality frame sizes for poorer type 10 cards 4-SeAQuake is Very High Quality for hi-end SD cards 6 GOP - Middle Earth 'Nebula' 7 GH2 Flow Motion v2 - 100Mbps Fast Action Performance & Reliability 8 T9-gh4 like 9 12/15 GOP 'DREWnet' T9 - Traditional Long GOP 12 https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/blop84zqvmgob2qiab07v/ACl0mBKWCsMcidxL5qUcqgA?rlkey=3gb5igu910uyw5sipalzlovp2&st=1vsslgjs&dl=0

Not a very good interview but the short and curly of it is The URSA Cine 17K 65 retails for approximately US$29,995. In contrast, the Arri Alexa 65 is unavailable for purchase and must be rented, with high-end productions often spending hundreds of thousands on camera packages.

We're all talking about aesthetics. We're talking about aesthetics when we talk about the "look", but we're talking about it when we talk about specifications too. A debate rages about what is "enough" resolution, "enough" sharpness, "nicer" bokeh... what is "cinematic"... what is "visible"... what is "practical". This thread is a reality check against the warped concepts that stills photographers and their camera-club specifications-obsessions have given us. Because, for the most part, better objective measurements are mostly worse subjectively. It's our imperfections that creates our humanity, and it's analog imperfection that creates emotional images. Baseline First, let's establish a baseline. Here are some test images from ARRI that are designed to showcase the technology, not a creative aesthetic. Note the super-clean image, lack of almost all lens-distortions (except wide angle distortion on the wide lens, which is actually super-wide at 12mm). If you were there, this might be what it actually looked like. Those were grabs from a 4K YouTube upload, but lots of trailers aren't uploaded in 4K, so here is a still from 1080p Youtube video that ARRI uploaded in 2010. Now, without further ado.... The Aesthetic - The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina These are obviously very distorted, and I chose frames that were especially so. This should instantly disavow you of the idea that somehow Netflix demands "pristine" images - these are filthy as hell, but this is appropriate to the subject matter, which is about witchcraft, the occult, demons, and literally, hell. Whenever I hear someone say "oh I can't believe how terrible that lens is - look at the edge softness" I just laugh. The person may as well be saying "not only don't I have a clue about film-making, but my eyes also don't work either.. please ignore everything else I say from now on". The Aesthetic - Sex Education A show with a deliberately vintage vibe, the look is suitably vintage, with some pretty wicked CA. One thing that's interesting is the last shot, which was either a drone with a vintage lens on it, or it was doctored in post, because it has pretty severe CA - look at the bottom right of the frame above the Netflix logo. Also note how nothing looks sharp - the first image should have had something in-focus, but softness of this level is deliberate because once again, the last shot is a deep-focus shot with a stopped-down aperture and should be super-sharp but isn't. The Aesthetic - No Time To Die Some shots are softer than others, but note the amazing barrel distortion and edge softness on the middle two shots. In case you missed it, here's the star of this $400M movie in a pivotal scene from the movie: Are there lenses that could have made this shot more "accurate"? Sure - just scroll up to the ARRI shots which look pristine (and they're ZOOMS!). This was deliberate and is consistent with the emotion and narrative. The Aesthetic. The Aesthetic - The Witcher Sharp when it wants to be, oversharp too - see the second image, but with anamorphic bokeh for the look. Ironically, a fantasy story of witchcraft and monsters, using cleaner more modern looking glass. The complete opposite approach of Sabrina. Note on the second-last image the vertical anamorphic bokeh, and then look at the last image and note the "swirl" in the bokeh. I doubt this was accidental. The Aesthetic - You Sharp and clean when it wants to be, and other times, really not. Appropriate for the subject matter. The Aesthetic - Squid Game Clean, sharp but not too sharp, neutral colour palette, but note the vertical lines on the edges of the frame aren't straight? Subtle, and perhaps not deliberate, but picture it in your mind if they didn't flare out.. it makes a difference, deliberate or not. The Aesthetic - Bridgerton Clean, spherical, basically distortion free, but sharp? No. Go look at that Witcher closeup again for some contrast. The Aesthetic - The Crown Clean and relatively distortion free, but lots of diffusion, haze, and low-contrast when required. The Crown is a masterpiece of the visuals matching the emotional narrative of the story, which is made extra difficult as the story is set in reality, and the emotional tone is so muted that had lesser people been involved in making it any subtleties may well have simply been bland rather than subtle but deep. The Aesthetic - Mindhunter Perhaps the most interesting example here. After looking at the previous images the above might seem completely unremarkable, except that this look was created in post. and I mean, completely in post: More here: https://filmmakermagazine.com/103768-dp-erik-messerschmidt-on-shooting-netflixs-mindhunter-with-a-custom-red-xenograph/#.YftoaC8RrOQ and here: https://thefincheranalyst.com/tag/red-xenomorph/ (there's a great video outlining the lens emulations in post in this one). That's enough for now. Hopefully now you can appreciate that "perfectly clean" optically is actually only perfect for "perfectly clean" moments in your videos. Sure, if you're out there doing corporate day in and day out then it might seem like "clean" is the right way, or if you're in advertising or travel where neutral reigns, but when it comes to emotion, it's about choosing the best imperfections to suit the desired aesthetic.

Indeed, though "Ursa Cine LF" would be a totally fine name. There's just no need to say "12K" on there. For the other? "Ursa Cine 65" since the 65mm sensor is going to be a whole lot more exciting to most people than telling them it has a 17k sensor that they will mostly use in 8K or 4K mode. Just about the only competition on the market, the rental-only Alexa 65, is a 6.5k camera. That is, of course, unless you're selling something to be used for projecting on The Sphere in Vegas. Then I guess there's a single camera that's competing - like literally just one body, as far as I know - that 18K thing with the 75x75mm or so sensor. I've been a bit tempted a few times now to try to rig up something with a medium format ground glass or a 4x5 GG, similar to an old DOF adapter for camcorders. I remember Gale had the Forbes70 which worked that way and there have been some 8x10 projects to do the same, like the FZero from Salazar and the one that Media Division put together. I should probably just go through my pile of project cameras to see if I have a pretty clean GG around and just do it...

At least Red choose some catchy names V-Raptor,Red Raven,Dragon,Helium,Gemini,Monstro,Komodo,Gemini,Red Epic

I really wish BMD would stop putting the maximum resolution in the product name! I make these jokes too about my own UC 12K ("finally, something for you to play on your 12K TV!), but in reality, it's just a really nice 8K/4K camera which has a bonus 12K mode for... mostly VFX shots. 😅

At this point Blackmagic should just buy ARRI and take over 🙂

Could do, I guess there are options. One thing that comes to mind for the vlogger crowd is having a small manual focus that goes between two useful focal distances, like vlogging distance and normal infinity focus. This is how the Olympus 15mm F8 MFT pancake lens works, and it's surprisingly functional. It sort of sits in that middle-ground where you need to adjust focus because you can't get 30cm to infinity in focus at the same time (like a normal GoPro), but the DOF is still deep enough that you don't really need to have much control over it. In practice it's sort of like a switch where you're either at one end or the other. Looking at those GoPro sample shots, both the shallow DOF shots are relatively macro, so that doesn't need a large sensor or super-fast lens, but the moon shot might actually be the more difficult one requiring both a long focal length and also a larger aperture to get enough light. I don't really do astro-photography but the moon is approaching higher-ISOs I would imagine. Seriously though, there are probably 5-year-old android phones that could replicate both those images, so I'd suggest that most of what we're seeing is the hype and that GoPro shares the same definition of cinema that most YouTubers do.

Oh yeah, they absolutely do. And as the article you linked said, they look like optical shallow DOF instead of simulated! Another possibility is that they release two versions, one with a small sensor for the traditional action sports use case - and one with a bigger sensor for the vlogger crowd. If they DID release something like the Z Cam E1, but with a modern SOC supporting 10-bit, a flat profile, and a decent H.265 implementation, I'd be excited for a GoPro for the first time in years.

All true, but the sample images from the promo video all have shallow DOF, so that means another kettle of fish entirely with AF and/or focus guides (peaking etc). I'd question if it might have lidar rather than PDAF etc, but it's a GoPro, so let's just assume it's 95% marketing and only 5% actual specs, like almost everything else about their cameras (no proper log profile, barely-passable bitrates, etc).

It reminds me of how the people that do rug cleaning videos name their cleaning equipment. My favourite is this:

Wides are a completely different thing depending on the circumstances. If you're hand-holding and moving around for video it's a completely different beast than doing stills or doing video but on a tripod with very careful camera placement and subject movement etc. I also think it's pretty difficult to make wide angle lenses look professional - that demo from ARRI showcasing their ultra-wide zoom had more "amateur with an action camera" vibes than a shallow-DOF 85mm portrait shot from the standard video mode on a 5DII. This is the elephant in the room for amateurs - the pros choose equipment in support of the vision of the project whereas amateurs choose an aesthetic and then use it for completely inappropriate projects.

It sounds like an off-Road vacuum cleaner.

Do I need to use a VPN and a private tab to Google ‘Hardcore Henry’?

I'm making films with it. I was recently offered enough for an upcoming feature that it would more than pay for the camera, but it would have also been like half their budget. I suggested a percentage instead - which will almost certainly yield less money, but allow that money to be spent to improve the parts of the film which are more important than my camera, which is most of them. 😅 Just footage in general? The most recent couple of shorts on my YouTube channel (https://youtube.com/eatstoomuchjam) were with the UC12K. Otherwise, most of what I've shot is in short films that are still in festival rotation. Between the UC12K and the GFX 100 II, I'm happy enough with both. If I'm on set, I'm most likely to bring the Ursa, Ronin 4D, R5, and Pocket 3. If I'm taking photos or traveling, the GFX or R5, maybe with the Pocket 3. If I need to travel lighter or be more inconspicuous, the Komodo-X and/or Komodo, probably with the Pocket 3. I'm thinking about taking the train to Chicago to do a 48 in a couple of weeks. If I do, I'll most likely bring the Komodo-X and Pocket 3 with my DJI Mini 3 Pro - that's an entire shooting setup that easily can fit in a backpack, more or less - and with EF lenses, I can use the Canon VND adapter when outside and the Canon focal reducer when inside.

It’s only a matter of time before some big movie is shot exclusively on a Go Pro or DJI…

Like with anything, it's best not to get too revved up over the hype and wait until there are actual cameras around to check out. GoPro are, of course, hiring professionals and cherry picking the very best footage/images that any of them captured. Otherwise, the concept of using an action camera ASIC in a cinema camera isn't new - it was exactly the strategy with the Z Cam E1. Since then, action cameras have advanced a lot, thankfully. Similarly, the Z Cam E2 series used/uses an off the shelf Hisense board, though that one was intended for higher-end security cams/consumer cameras and not action cameras.

Any takers here?

I'll have a dig and host them here if I find the mother lode

Train Dreams on Netflix I don't know how many of you have already seen it, but I still wanted to recommend a film that I watched a few nights ago on Netflix that hit me right in the heart. It was presented at the last Sundance Film Festival but then went directly to Netflix without going through movie theaters. And it's a real shame because the cinematography is stunning. Shot in 3:2 in the Idaho forests with an almost documentarian feel. The story is infinitely sad and very slow. The reviews are almost all enthusiastic, and it has become one of the most viewed films on the platform in recent weeks. The negative reviews accuse it of being truly slow, but in my opinion and that of others, the beauty lies precisely in the film's slowness. If you manage to get into the mood, it hits you right in the heart. I don't want to spoil too much about the story, but the ending truly moved me. The DoP says that the film was shot almost entirely using natural light (à la Lubezky), and many scenes are set at dawn, sunset, and nighttime using real candlelight. The chiaroscuro is a delight for the eyes. https://filmmakermagazine.com/129137-interview-cinematographer-adolpho-veloso-train-dreams-sundance-2025/