Jacek

So shaky again :(.   Lumix 14-42 shows pretty bad distortion (time 1:30, 1:50). BMPCC crop makes this lens 40mm on it's widest end and I wouldn't like to see distortion on such narrow fov :/.

Can You explain:   - what is the color of the candle in reality? (kineraw's orange or other's pink) - what is the color of the window blinds? (5D3's yellow or other's wooden)   - is it really half of the picture out of focus on 5D3 and kineraw or I'm too pixel peeper or it's just because of different fov? (on BMCC I see little more details: in the back - case pattern, in the middle - Carl Zeiss 2/35, in the front - silver lens numbers, Canon lens on the left)

It would be interesting to see comparison between 5dmk3 and BMCC (m43) + SpeedBooster (when available). BMCC will get 1 additional stop of light with all Canon EF lenses. For all low-light freaks this would be fair comparison :) .

  It's 1.4x compared to m43 (which is 2x compared to FF) = 1.4 x 2 = about 2.8x compared to FF as stated before.

It will most probably cover the m4/3 sensor with SpeedBooster: http://philipbloom.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Speed-Booster-FX-DX.jpg   and 18-35 f1.8 will act as 13-25 f1.2

I wonder if this adapter can be stacked with others for manual lenses?   For example: NEX   --(metabones)-->   EF   --(simple)-->   FD

What about medium format camera (C/Y, HS..) to NEX/m43 adapter [if it will be created]? - angle of view and aperture x4? :)

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1352923463' post='21648'] Haven't people been editing 4K Redcode Raw for years on Mac? The top of the line iMac has only a 2GB (mobile) card. Even the outdated pro has only 1GB (deskop) cards. [/quote] Different software uses different hardware acceleration. DaVinci Resolve supports (pretty modern) CUDA hardware. Maybe it can be used without it (using CPU power instead.. but not sure..), but overall that support looks like big positive rather than negative thing. It's like DirectX for 3D in the past: - First there were 3D games using mainly CPU - Than showed up 3D games which needed GPU with Direct3D support and moved load from CPU to GPU. The improvement was amazing. Today DaVinci moves load from CPU to GPU in video editing - thay do whole rendering calculations in GPU instead of CPU. The modern hardware (CUDA) allows to build cheap powerfull workstations and go futher only by adding more graphic cards (which is widely supported today) rather than using whole CPU power (not to mention pricy multi CPU systems). (ATI alternative to CUDA is unfortunately weaker.) So please stop blaming DaVinci programmers that Mac's can't be customized and outdate so quickly. If you have old PC, you could just swap your graphic card (for 300$) and enjoy smooth real-time 4K raw editing. Now you know that you get iMacs stability and look(design) not for free.. You sacrifice customizability. I'm happy to see computer hardware progressing so fast. It wouldn't be so fast without customizability of PCs (which make progress easier). If 20 years ago there were only iMacs on the world (no PCs), you would be still playing 3D games using only CPU :). Because everybody would say: "That stupid NeedForSpeed Direct3D doesn't work on my almost new iMac with fastest CPU! Do they think I'll buy a new one just for 3D card? F...k them, let's play Saper!" PS: I do have MacBook and I like it. But for workstation/server I would prefer PC.

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1352900067' post='21621'] Images look stunning. Your review did a great job pointing out it's strengths. Using RAW makes it so much easier to get the exposure curve you want. Great stuff. I almost fell out of my chair looking at the shots of the ferris wheel. Couple questions about the hardware. 1.) Why are you convinced the workflow bottlekneck is in the GPU, and not in the CPU or Cache? 2.) Can you please provide the basic specs of your PC? [/quote] DaVinci Resolve uses actually 2 graphic cards: - first for interface (probably may be simple integrated card) - second with CUDA for rendering (using only CUDA cores, other graphic functions are useless) So if you want smooth/fast preview and rendering - CUDA card is most important. Of course you will need pretty good other component to not cripple your PC - fast CPU, HDD(SDD), lot of RAM. Good info you can find in: http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/media/4805318/Resolve_Win_Config_Guide_2012-08-30.pdf or on their forum.

Wow, it looks great! Hope to see some more of your BMCC footage soon :). Following some advices from http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/media/4805318/Resolve_Win_Config_Guide_2012-08-30.pdf you can actually build a perfect DaVinci PC for about 1000-1500$ (capable real-time raw preview). So for Mac users it would be best to even build a PC just for DaVinci Resolve (and configure Windows to run DaVinci fullscreen on startup if you don't like the system ;)) - you would appreciate the performance boost.

From all posts/reviews I have seen, I still don't know which camera to choose from budget group for video: nex-5n, gf3 with hack, gx1 [with expected hack later this year] [gh2 is too expensive where I live - ~1000$ vs ~500$ gf3 vs ~700$ nex-5n and gx1] Any advice? Does gf3 with hack has better video quality (mostly resolution) than nex-5n? I like nex's manual video controls and focus peaking. On the other hand, Panasonic looks more promising for future cameras and by choosing it I'll be ready for future with adapters and native lenses. I'll mostly use m42 and Canon FD lenses for now. Another question is if Andrew's guide is also applicable for nex-5n usage?

Actually nothing new compared to A65 :(.

Hello everybody! What do You think about new Sony announcement? A57 looks pretty good (considering its price) for video: - the same sensor as NEX-5n (but -0.5 stop light loss through semi-transparent mirror) - full-time continuous phase detection AF - Sensor-shift image stabilization - AVCHD 2.0; 1080p60, p24 in NTSC; 50p, 25p in PAL - P/A/S/M in movie mode Jacek