nahua

Thanks for your nice words tony! 
 
I think the bolex are the most beautiful/practical lenses behind the iscorama 36... it has a 3 feet minimal focus or less, amazing flares and that film tonality that we are all looking for.
 
I wouldn´t sell mine for less than 3000 Euros, i just love it.
 
Rudolf, with which anamorphic adapter are you trying to pair your lenses? All my lenses are Canon Fd´s in mint condition and with them it works just perfect.  I also have an Isco ultra star plus ( Red) 1,75x and it is SUPER sharp with the same lenses. 
 
Here i leave you a couple of frames of a video that im working on at the moment with my Isco
 
]
 
 

this camera is the biggest joke since the "expected release date" of the BMCC.
 
fake 4k (8 bit on top of it), no raw,  no xlr, soft as cotton, and basically $600 for 20 minutes of footage.
This camera is for people that wanna say "hey, look at me, I own the newest overpriced canon camera" 
I wouldn't even rent this camera to get a true opinion....why you ask? because I would rent a c500 and know
I'm getting everything I need from a camera.

Just found this on Vimeo.  Awesome, can't wait to see more footage!!
 
http://vimeo.com/55887965

The full frame video looks exactly like the 5D3.

yeah i'm in no hurry really, so i might just wait a bit. not like i'm doing this for a living  :P cheers for your input!

I'm convinced that with the proper marketing, moire can become an aesthetic like auto-tune became a "sound" lmao.. Rainbow bricks beeeotch!!

I fuckin hate this camera. $12K, and it only records 1080 in 4:2:0 on board.  You have to be shitting me.

00:45-00:50 are nice shots.  Really great little short!

Yes, he is a lively little fella. Truth be told I was just carrying the whole folded tripod with the camera attached. The added bulk makes for a nice poor-man's stabilizer. It doesn't stabilize much, but it cuts down on jello-inducing fast movement. 
 
No Hypergonar for me, I've got a Kowa with RedStan clamps and a LightCraft Workshop variable ND filter. The taking lens was the good 'ol Konica Hexanon 40mm f1.8. If my memory serves me there are a few other Kowa owners on the EOSHD forum that use this taking lens with their Kowa optics. My copy at least is pretty bad wide open, but at f2.8 it sharpens up. Most of these shots were at f2.8 or f4 . . . that or balanced in the middle :-)

Just thought I'd share this also on the anamorphic forum specifically. Gotta love the Kowa image!
 
http://vimeo.com/56519741

Well, I've found the Tokina to retain image sharpness. I don't know about the image improvement that some credit it with, but one thing is for sure, it doesn't make anything drastically worse, and that's saying something because many of the cheaper diopters available certainly do make things worse. Also, it is a low power diopter, which is less common and far more useful.
 
As for the front clamp business, I'd rather not go fiddling taking my lens apart to find these alleged threads. It is in very good condition, and the RedStan clamp is working just fine. I always do my research before buying anything, and I did no small amount before putting together this anamorphic setup. The RedStan rear clamp is absolute top quality as far as I am concerned. It is solid anodized aluminum machined to a precise fit with excellent threads and sturdy plastic lock screws that do not scratch my anamorphic. The front clamp is much the same, although it is a tad more bulky than need be, perhaps. 
 
I have been using this setup for half a year, and have recently completed a 30 minute short film shot entirely with the Kowa, Tokina diopter and Redstan clamps, not to mention many shorter videos. 
 
At the time of purchase, I emailed RedStan directly (I believe I found his email on the RedStan site), and I ended up trading RedStan for the package deal (Tokina and RedStan clamps). RedStan was courteous, prompt to reply and eager to work out a mutually beneficial deal. It is difficult to calculate precisely what I paid for this setup because it was a trade of goods, but there was no way with the exchange rate that I would have been able to afford the USD $300+ price of all these parts. Obviously I'm thankful and happy that RedStan was willing to cut me a deal, because I love anamorphic shooting and will never go back. 

anyone make music?
 
it'll probably follow a similar pattern,... emulator plugins will come that will letterbox+add cheesey flare+fiddle with colours/sharpness.etc all at the touch of a button and it'll have a special "add mojo" randomizer and a special algorithm that is written by an anamorphic "expert" ...
 
and lil johnnys and janes everywhere will have their first steps rendering in glorious faux-nemascope,..
 
but there will be a core of us that would rather shoot and capture the look at the shoot than spend hours fiddling with sliders into the wee hours of the morning, so the prices of certain lenses will remain high if not go higher as supply dwindles.
 
just like in music where you have guys who have gone back to portastudios and tape and four track recorders and vintage synths cos all that technology got in the way of doing what they want to do.
 
dual focusing is nothing compared to the hours you could waste fiddling with sliders and always going just a smidge too far  :P

It's not all related to this topic but here's John McTiernan illustrating composition and film grammar:
 
http://vimeo.com/56000479
 
...through all these anamorphic scenes the long lens stuff is a minority and pretty easy to pick out.  What's also interesting here is he illustrates and explains why he likes composing wide with wide angle lenses versus his reference to Tony Scott who will often compose a wide shot with a telephoto lens, even when he's shooting anamorphic.  Totally different feel.  Affects the viewer in a totally different way.
 
Telephoto shots are, generally speaking, in the minority for actual motion picture production unless the filmmaker has a specific affinity for compressed, telephoto composition (whether or not this is motivated or necessitated by having multiple cameras constantly running) like a Tony Scott or Peter Berg.  They're the special cases though and not reflected in the bulk of anamorphic cinema that's 99.999% of the reason why we're even here talking about this stuff.

Increase in digital noise in the IMAGE ....not noise as in sound!

Olympus lenses work on Panasonic mirrorless, and vice versa.  AF works better for each maker, in other words Olympus 17mm on an Olympus E-M5.  Both cameras do AF in video, but the GH3 has much better video modes.  Olympus is stuck at 30P, GH3 can do 24P, 30P and 60P.  Might not matter if you only do web videos, then either works.  E-M5 is more a stills camera, GH3 is more video.  I suggest trying them both to see which one you like.  They are both in the same price range.

Thumbs up on the Redstan clamp.
 
The retaining ring threads onto the Bolex. The thumb screws on the outer ring lock the retaining ring in place and also facilitate precise orientation of the anamorphic.
 
I've posted these images before........but seems relevant to post them again...
 

 

 

But they're also the most expensive, and their focus rings are servos, motorized ones. That's why a lot of people fancy Carl Zeiss lenses for video, which are way more expensive still.

I love having a wide lens choice. I can put anything I want in front of my GH2. And the focus rings on the vintage lenses or the Voigtlanders are awesome.

On the other hand, I shoot a lot of low light, and although I light most of my stuff, it'd take a lot of light to get a good exposure at night with the lens stopped down at f/5.6. 17.5mm @ f/0.95 is beautiful.

Definitely come to Hawaii!  Wish I could go to Japan.  So much stuff to do there.  And I didn't know the difference in stills vs video.  But it looks really nice!  Keep it coming!

here's a bit of an update on the shigascope,....
 
i have been shooting tonnes of stills and since the redstan clamps came in, i'm never going to shoot spherical ever ever again!
 
unless threatened with castration,... and even then,... maybe,...
 
so here are some stills i've taken over the past couple of months, most with some post work done. i post more on flickr and me facebook if you like what you see.
 
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8306085973/][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8306085973/]Tak the writer, still chatting,...[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/57711921@N05/]nanntonaku[/url], on Flickr   [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8236683402/][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8236683402/]Simonさん[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/57711921@N05/]nanntonaku[/url], on Flickr  
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8177991354/][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8177991354/]paying respects[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/57711921@N05/]nanntonaku[/url], on Flickr   [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8287634022/][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8287634022/]Down at the Y 3[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/57711921@N05/]nanntonaku[/url], on Flickr  
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8302631709/][/url] [url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/57711921@N05/8302631709/]hoodie-ed[/url] by [url=http://www.flickr.com/people/57711921@N05/]nanntonaku[/url], on Flickr   you guys really need to get your hands on one of these,... had I an extra one i'd be happy to send it to more capable hands to see what can be done by a pro. unfortunately, these dont seem that common.    some footage should be up early next year.   merry christmas and happy new year guys, you've more than made my year by sharing your knowledge here!  

Working with the mosquito noise of the 5dmkIII just drives me batty.  After going with the GH2 w/ Flow Motion Hack, it's very hard to go back to the 5dmkIII.  Sure you get nice images, but the GH2 and GH3 are just so much better for video.  I've pretty much retired my 5dmkIII to photos only.  And forget about shooting ISO 6400 or worse.  Unless you want to be showcasing some night owls or something, practically it's useless.

Inappropriate mount? What mount would you have put on it? I'm assuming that by "Professional", you mean it should have had a PL mount? I don't think that would have been a good idea. Have you priced PL lenses? Plus, that would put it squarely in a "Professionals only" box and I don't think it wouldn't be able to back that up with the rest of the expectations that come with that claim. Maybe you meant the opposite and that it should have been meant MFT?
 
The whole point of the BMCC is to put professional image quality in a package that indy filmmakers could afford. It was never to make a camera that would compete head to head with Alexa and Red. It's for people who are on a tight (or no) budget. So, then the question is, what mount is the most popular, widely available and has the most options available for it? Well, that would have to be Canon right? What camera currently is used the most by indy filmmakers? It's Canon right? Some may argue that it's Panasonic now and to this we see the MFT mount version pop up.  But otherwise, I think it's safe to assume that the people who would be first to buy this camera probably have a lot of EF glass already. Right? Also keep in mind that there are a ton of popular lens mounts can be adapted to EF too. Olympus, Pentax, Minolta, Nikon, etc. So you really are not that restricted to began with. The biggest restriction seems to be at the wide end but as we've seen, there are options out there. And, the situation would really be no better with PL mount.
 
The thing that I think both sides of this argument have lost sight of is that the BMCC is not made for everyone. It was made with a particular user in mind. Indy filmmakers stepping up from DSLRs. Pros will want more from their camera systems and will appropriately choose to shoot on a camera that better suits their needs. Shooting a commercial with a high profile client? You're probably just going to rend a RED, a set of PL primes and shoot 4k RAW. But that's not what this camera was intended for. Can you use it for that? I'm sure you could! But with so much money involved in commercials and so much riding on a single day of shooting, I can't imagine it being the best decision. If you've ever worked on a big budget commercial shoot (and I have) You'll know that the choice of camera isn't always made based on price. The camera needs to offer such fine grained control that's just not there on this camera. But I don't think you can fault them for any of that because like I said, It's not intended for that kind of situation. I'm sure there will be a lot of crossover though. The more comfortable people get with the camera and the better the firmware gets, I'm sure we'll see more and more professionals using it for those quick jobs with less riding on it.
 
Where this camera will really sing though is in the hands of talented and motivated indy filmmakers who only care about getting the highest image quality and are willing to sacrifice a few niceties in the process. So yeah, a lot of the people in this forum actually. ;-) 
 
As far as resale value goes, only time will tell. If the next version comes out too soon then yes, I think a lot of people will be upset so I do think you're earlier point is valid. I hope they will wait at least a year before announcing anything new. But I have a feeling that even after a super 35 version (or whatever) comes out in a year or so, the original will still be a desirable camera with indy shooters. Similar to how the GH2 is still popular. The price will obviously come down a lot (maybe in the $1500-$2000 but that depends on how much the next version costs) but that might actually serve to make the camera even more desirable to indy shooters making low to no budget films. And just imagine, by then the firmware will have matured computers will be faster and SSD media will be even cheaper!  
 
My point is just this: The BMCC is not for everyone. If it doesn't suit you, then it doesn't suite you and that's fine. 

Most people wouldn't choose the BMCC in that scenario, no. But the comparison was made in regards to the image quality being comparable to that of the Alexa, which is way more expensive.
And you mentioned it's a consumer product, which it isn't. The price doesn't define its professional nature. It makes it affordable for the independent shooter and the low budget filmmaker.
 
I think that for the price it offers quite a lot, and the essential features it provides as of now allow for shooting and exposing the right way. Film cameras often give you just that and not the features we're used to on most DSLRs and video cameras, yet they fulfill their purpose. But guess what? The firmware improves and so does the camera's performance and features.
 
I do think it's a camera that seems to still be in a beta stage, but it pushes so much that I think no one can blame them that much.
It does what no other camera in its price range does right now! And in a level that will give you material that will last for many, many years to come, even if its value should depreciate more than that of the 5D MkIII.

If he had the budget he could alright. Because this camera delivers amazing image quality for an extremely low price, making it affordable, not consumer oriented. If a consumer was to buy one of this he/she wouldn't know what to do with it.
 
The only comparable cameras in image quality are REDs and Alexa, and maybe the new Sony's now. But if I had $4000 I couldn't buy any of them but the BMCC, yet I'd get that level of quality! The rest goes in front of the camera, and behind it of course. It's talent and work.

And I don't see what the point is in measuring a camera's worth in the longevity of its original price, its reselling value. I don't want a camera to place it in a locker and then resell it in two years. I'm not a finance company, I'm a filmmaker. And I want the best camera I can get, one that can deliver the best possible image and one that will hold the test of time, just like film does.
The BMCC is the closest to that I could afford right now, and shoot an independant film without having to deal with rentals or the budget it implies, and yet still get premium image quality.

BMC is not a japanese manufacturer where they have years of experience putting in all the little comforts you like. If I were to give you a 35mm panavision camera and lenses you would have so many issues with ergonomics weight and lack of features. Yet most feature films are made with similar.
 
This is what seperates real cameramen from amatuers. For a DP and a director its about the best picture with light. Of course you can film stuff for news for other stuff but for film making you need a good tool. As far as that goes the BMC has a better form factor than most RAW cameras including an Alexa. The BMC is so simple compared to whats gone before for the same quality. Its so frustrating listening to people bash waht the BMC have clearly done so well and right.
 
Companies like Sony dont want the consumer to have access to this technology They could easily make something like the BMC but in an EX1 style body for about £5000 to £6000.
 
They wont.
 
The BMC might be one of a kind. and they certainly wont be getting Japanese style gimickry at this price for a long time. They may come out with a 35mm version.
 
Give me the BMC anyday and with a few lenses Mattebox and batterries etc I can go out and make movies to the standard of Skyfall. Anyone though with anything other than RAW wont.
 
If you dont want a Camera that can make film quality pay more for something that offers compression Preferably without a big sensor and an automatic overide on everything Should just say BUY a point and shoot camera and stop trying to get involved with the professionals. OR hire a DP that will do it for you.
There is nothing worse than someone who doesnt understand what they are doing professing to the masses they are an expert.

I try to see things for what they are, not for what they aren't. The BMC has a lot to offer for the price.