Leang

Can anybody testify that the Zeiss Distagon's are some of the best for HD vs. Canon or Nikkor?  Been really thinking of getting a cine kit of the PrimeCircle's.  The Zeiss cine CP.2's cover Full Frame and the extra blades offer a smoother oval bokeh...however, significantly more expensive than the modded Distagon's.

 

Eventually Full Frame (HD+) video will get better with DSLR's.  So the glass investment is worth it imo.  Hard to decide on the Distagon's vs. the CP2s.  Any links?

I do remember a while back some vimeo video of the Nikon D800 shooting Full HD FX and Full HD DX.  So essentially it's using full frame and APS-C auto crop modes since the DX lenses can only cover APS-C.

 

It would be interesting to test moire and aliasing from different crop modes since both the Nikon D800 & D600  provide Full HD.  Interesting benefits.  I regret selling my 35mm 1.8 DX.  

 

I've shot a lot with DX and regular Nikkors, and I prefer the DOF of the Full Frame optics whether it gets sharp or soft at the edges.  You get what you pay for.

It would be nice to test the AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G DX (APS-C)  vs. the Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 (full frame)  -  same shot, to test moire and aliasing.  I haven't had much time with my D600.

edit: I do like how you skipped over, despite all your "filmmaking" talk, that I'm one of the few here that's actually done it.  Not clever, but predictable.  Your talk might impress or intimidate other folks who also talk about making films but not me. 

 

I like the Fifth Element.  Particularly for the costume design and swag since it was done by Jean-Paul Gaultier.

 

I have some good stuff lined up soon.  you know like working with actors!  like filmmaking before the use of mice and screens and rendering.  just kidding.  :P

 

I'm not gonna pick a fight you anyways since I don't have to.  I realize your older anyway, so its in my nature to respect that foremost.  Just don't push my nuts on my opinions if I plan on posting here again.  lately its been boring.  the best for Andrew and Bloom.

 

oh yeah btw...http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/joelleang

A VFX lurker that has two fully independent narrative feature films under his belt in worldwide commercial distribution.  How many have you done?  How many has PB done?  On top of more than a decade's experience creating work that's been nominated or won multiple BAFTA and Oscars in his field, among others.

 

I don't like whipping it out, but I'll whip it out to bitch slap a douche bag.

 

So do you fully credit yourself for most of the clips you present in your reels?  Please do list the BAFTA and Oscar nominations you're describing, and exactly detail what you did?   Please try not to exclude any of your partners or the lead boss you reported to.  It's kind of like the bench squad winning rings too huh.   :P

I don't see any fault by Bloom.  Andrew stated and acknowledges competitive blogging, so why have a fit over another ''blogger'' that doesn't need to share ''original files,''  and for who's approval?  It's pretty obvious between these two bloggers who's doing what with footage.  My gripe is with anyone that disregards all aspects of filmmaking and narrows his/her mind to complete tech theory, which imo is better for those creating real films!   :P  

 

I'm curious as to what film school Andrew Reid actually went to or if any.  Reid's weird analogy about going to some actor's forum and talking about codecs, which was inspired by some VFX lurker, should then justify a strike-through for the word filmmaking on this site's header.  

 

But who cares really.  Let's see who goes far when discrediting the art of acting or directing and saying don't worry the camera is more important... lol     hence, ''filmmaking''  not general videography.  hence, ''filmmaking'' like this sites header.

 

8-bit 3:1:1 and some ice cream.

try and shoot things based on motion we are commonly familiar with in daily life.  Snow naturally falls slowly.  So if shot in 1080/60p or 50p and played back half speed you'd get the same effect for this particular montage.  

I've come to learn that you like to theorize any imaging research with filmmaking!

 

fantasizing for a bigger penis?!

How do I change the level of sharpness let's say if I do not use a Picture Profile setting? Is there any way to?

 

don't be afraid to fool around with the menu setting of your cam, ironically this is one of the most non-conservative sites around for fooling with pro cams.  you're not going to damage your cam when fooling with factory options...  also get your hands wet, bruv, read the manual

 

''The FS700 has 6 built-in picture profiles, each of which can be modified in countless numbers of ways.''

 

http://swainhart.org/2012/fs700-picture-profiles-and-operators-manual/

Please try and expose properly for sky levels and use the ND's within your FS700.  whichever profile you choose please customize to the lowest level of sharpness.  lastly, if you could please do a test for the exact same shot in 120fps and 240fps.  I would like to see how the aliasing behaves.  Know that any highlight reflection hitting edges will increase aliasing.  this is why you have to expose properly and use your ND filters.  don't worry if your foreground or midground are underexposed.  the test is for aliasing.  not lighting.  in a professional environment you light foreground and mid for exterior...

No thank you I think I'll invest somewhere else!  :lol:

lol.  anamorphic scams.  unique!  I mean you gotta give Zuwabe Djukambe some credit!  he's only 17 and going strong!

Nice.  It would have been great if he was a holding a bag of weed instead!

Kinefinity.com (sm) says they are still planning the S8 model, production has been held off so they may be able to produce one that is free of jell-o and skew issues so that it can be used handheld like a Super8 format camera, at least that is what I have been talking with them about, I'm still shooting lens tests with the KineRAW-S8p (tm) using 2/3" and 1/2" megapixel lenses as well as R16mm and S8mm lenses, I have yet to test the 8mm D mount lenses for the high speed modes, it goes to 220fps. If you are interested in the Super8 format with its light weight lenses you can tell them, so far the Schnieder R16mm lenses seem to work best, but the 5mm Computar-Ganz f/1.4 3MP lens and the 3.5mm Kowa f/2.4 megapixel lens work best, of the S8 lenses the Angenieux C mount 6mm to 80mm f/1.2 seems to cover the sensor in 2592x1104 wide screen mode that is maybe a bit larger than S8 film width.

. 4k is quickly growing.... promoting formats for non orthodox modern day lenses is ridiculous.

11 blade diaphragm versus 9. In a totally different housing. It looks like the cine lenses are legit.

I remember when Jeff Cronenweth did the promo for the c500, he was asked what he thought the best thing about the c500 was. He more or less said, the best thing about the new Canon cine cameras, is the new Canon cine lenses.

Lol.

that's what I've been saying. At the pro level and testing for 4k it makes more sense to give criticism on their cine 4k primes in 4k mode than anything. Anything else is just irrelevant theory. Shooting and proving is something else.

Yeah that's true!

Also, each sensor and supporting ADC and circuitry has very different noise characteristics. So though Canon codec implementation isn't hugely efficient, the noise pattern (especially after using Magic Lantern hacked bit rates) is an order of magnitude better for denoising than Sony AVCHD, I've found when mixing in timelines under the same lighting.

While the Canon EOS footage denoised cleanly, the Sony was horribly damaged in the lows, with very bright blue noise everywhere. The noise pattern and heavy compression of Sony AVCHD (I used RX100 and FS700) looks clean as is, but for the higher ISOs where you have to denoise, it's a mess...

Also, there's the profile level to consider.

H264, for instance has profile standards of Baseline, Main and High (among others), each requiring greater processing power for playback and encoding than the last, but also providing far higher quality than the last at the same bitrate and file size.

So although 120mbps All-I from the 600D hacked may sound awesome, it is still Baseline H264 at 8-bit 4:2:0, and isn't really directly comparable to Avid DNxHD 120 for example.

Furthermore, newer and more efficient codecs are quite amazing in terms of using bit rate. The H265 standard (approved just recently) shows a 70% decreasing of bit rate compared to MPEG2 of the same quality, for example. This means that with powerful in-camera processing, 50mbps H264 may not be so bad.

speaking like a champ! Get ready for XAVC

Thanks, but sadly I do not understand what you wrote... :)

Well one would doubt that a trendy HQ capture device, today, would provide anything less than 4:2:2. Therefore its not going to make the quality better than 4:2:0 aside from an elite compression. Hence you're capturing an 8bit 4:2:0 in whatever color space you want to capture. In other words "you can't polish a turd."

how about a firmware for shipments.

Hi evarybody,

 

I have a question regarding Atomos Ninja 2 and GH3. Does one work with the other at all, and if it does, is it recording as 8bit 420 or 10bit 422?

If they are not working together what other DSLR records 10bit 422 with Atomos (C100 perhaps???)?

 

Thanks gang...

 

you will be looking at an 8-bit 4:2:0 image in 10-bit 4:2:2, minus GH3 compression.  

Nikon 1 only does 30P correct?

I know that, I wasn't talking about Apogee AD conversion quality, I'd be glad with Zoom h4n quality, which is what most people are using with DSLRs anyway, and that is perfectly possible, in fact, Joe just wrote this on their blog:

 

"The audio components were carefully selected and should perform as well as a Zoom style device."

 

He also mentioned Phantom Power and Audio Levels on the display while shooting.

 

So it really is possible after all! :)

 

Zoom is crap.  I think this effect happened when DSLR video started getting popular at an underground level and become a trend to using a product particularly meant for the audio industry for musicians wanting a recording device without breaking the bank.  Apogee is another music recording related device.  Any audio interface in the semi-pro industry needs to sell their unique preamp technology and market the  flavor off the pres or market as super transparent.  Apogee went downscale because of their converter technology and decided to sell in a compact route.  Edirol, Sound Devices, Marantz, those are the best imo for low noise field recording at an indie level.   You can crank the gains and you still get a clean sound.  Aside from the recording device an additional field mixer does the job even better with getting unwanted highs or lows.  but whatever works for whoever.  I choose the best low noise latter.

The cameras already have all they need to record audio: power, storage, processor, even audio recording capabilities, why have all that again in a separate recorder? It's not like we're talking about adding audio to a camera that doesn't have it at all. The main difference in audio quality is down to the quality of the preamps, it doesn't take up more space or more engineering to implement decent audio, it takes a few more expensive components, since the rest is all there already. As far as we know, the audio in this camera could even already be as good as such a device, and the only absurd thing in this post is you picking on something they did well and saying the camera didn't need it just because YOU don't need it, that's not very positive is it?

 

Sound schematics is not easy when trying to filter out electronic noise interference within camera.  Alexa or F65 have A/D converters almost just as good as top notch Nagra's or Sound Devices.   It's really expensive for a company to even be at the pro level for sound development.  24/96khz capture doesn't mean shit in the audio world its just marketing.  high grade converters are everything.  preamps and 48v within camera is practical but as far as db and noise forget it.  You'll always get noise or some inconsistencies when you want to crank the boost level needed.  I rather have a top line-in with an external pre and field mixer setup and a good mic.  of course all that doesnt mean shit if your boom operator doesnt know where to place a mic or know the best crop from his monitor....  hidden lavs, etc..all need separate proper audio gear.  but whatever standard works for you..

What a nice and romantic project, doubt this will ever go anywhere. By the time they are ready to produce in masses (if they ever will be), consumer camcorders will be on the level of a sony f55.

 

Kudos though for trying.

 

I agree.  the website tries to justify through several paragraphs an ''improved'' pistol grip!  Buy a P&C pistol grip for $20.  They work like a charm and make any DSLR Super8 retro, but let's not a make a big deal about it...  I use to have a Canon 1014xls and a Bolex H16 with a wide, medium, and long.  proper old times

All jokes aside, selecting (or not selecting) a camera based on its exterior looks instead of what it can do makes as much sense as selecting a camera based on its in-camera audio capabilities.  Priorities.  Get some.

 

So what you are really trying to say is that the BMCC is for all ages?!