QuickHitRecord

I made a living shooting with two C100s and an Atomos Ninja Blade for my first five years as a freelancer. It's a nice image but I never used CLog because the limited codec, even coming from the Atomos, didn't hold up to grading very well and I often ended up with noisy footage. Also, I found that it was pretty difficult to monitor and expose properly; the newer Canon Cinema cameras let you apply a very accurate LUT on the LCD that is actually great to work with. I always shot in WideDR. Lastly, it's a bit of a noisy image compared to the newer cameras (or even my EOS-R from 2018), even at the base ISO of 850. All that being said, when exposed properly I thought that the images were really nice and good enough for professional use. They had a more neutral, less saturated look than what I am getting from my C70. Form factor was great and built-in NDs are so freeing. They will change the way you shoot. And the DPAF, even though it's only available in the center of the frame (I set a button so that I could toggle it on and off with ease), was surprisingly solid. I'd say it was even more reliable than what I have on the C70. One more thing to consider. These cameras have internal batteries that can only be changed at a Canon service center, which isn't cheap. I started hearing about other shooters having these batteries finally die on them, so they would have to re-enter all of their settings every time they turned on the camera. This hastened the departure of these two fine cameras from my collection!

*16MM film stocks. There is no such thing as an S16 film stock.

For the sake of discussion, here's a little comparison from a while back between all of the smaller cameras I own (the SD9 is a CCD camcorder): ^FZ47 ^EOS-R ^GH1 ^G85 ^SD9 The two CCD cameras have that kind of muted, undersaturated skintone that I associate with some of the older S16 film stocks (though I really don't like the SD9 as much -- which is just as well, because you can't turn the auto ISO off while shooting).

Great clip! It had a real look to it. It did not scream "digital" to me at all. Blue on blue was surreal and cool. The FZ-47 has pretty wierd and not necessarily realistic color rendering that sometimes reminds me of a chemical process. I love mine. We're probably the only two FZ-47 video shooters on the internet in 2022. I would argue that despite its limitations (29.97fps, 1/2.3" sensor, slow lens, no HDMI) it's the FZ-47. There aren't many other contenders that have full manual control: Lumix LX5 (faster lens, but 720P) Lumix FZ35 (same as FZ47, but 720P only) Canon Powershot S95/G12 (720P, manual control available if hacked with CDHK; 24fps available) If there are any others, I would love to know about them. But I don't think there are. I've been looking for years. ; )

I just want to say that this is the first footage I've seen in ages that makes me want to brush the dust off of my anamorphic lens for the first time in seven years and take it out for a spin. And I have never seen anything from a GH5 that I've liked so much -- I am usually put off by footage from that camera. Really lovely. Thanks for sharing.

I had such high hopes for the BM Production when I bought one in 2019. I even went the extra mile and paid for the integrated speed booster. I did one shoot with the camera and found it to be the single most frustrating camera I have ever worked with. Ugly fixed pattern noise everywhere. I did this test comparing it to the BMMCC and sold it shortly afterwards: ^BMPC ^BMMCC

It was devastating to read your post and I am so sorry that this has happened. Your sister sounds like a remarkable person. Wishing you and your family strength and resilience as you navigate this extremely difficult time.

@PannySVHS Yes, that was the single focus Iscomorphot 8 1.5x. I also had the fixed-focus Isco Anamorphot 8 1.5x at one point (I have some footage from that lens that starts at 00:43). It's amazing to me how much money I spent on anamorphic lenses and adapters during the early 2010s. I could not imagine doing that now!

I had one a long time ago. I did a test with it that was actually featured in a blog post here, though I can't find the link. I found this lens to be terribly soft until f5.6 or so. Mine had the crazy "cleaning marks" on the front element, and I actually spent way too much money sending it off to have the front element resurfaced (and recoated? I can't remember). Which did not help at all. I did some tests with it after I got it back and sold it shortly afterwards.

I've been thinking about this since my first test with RIFE. The problem is that none of the old CCD cameras I would want to do this with can capture more than about 5fps.

Oddly, I found myself drawn to the imperfections of the GH4 in the test, which has never stood out to me at all. Interesting.

The Meikes look very good. I even considered buying a set for my work camera before I sent with the Sigma Art primes. But I am definitely looking for something cheap and cheerful for my old GH1.

I've never owned any of these lenses but I am curious about building a cheap, 3-lens set for MFT (something like a 18/25/50). This would be for casual shooting on my GH1. What are people's experiences with these lenses? Are there any good ones (or lenses to avoid)? At this low price point, I can deal with some softness, CA, and weak corners, but some of these lenses seem to display terrible field curvature issues, so any lens suffering from that is a no-go for me.

@Matt Kieley The shot of the woman on the couch at 1:07 in the first video is really nice. And it looks like there may have been a couple of other shots from the same film as well. Do you recall what lens you were using? The GH1 is plenty for storytelling. Dynamic range is a challenge but I find that I prefer the look to most modern cameras. Here's a test (not by me) that did a good job of showing the why the GH2 (with the same sensor as the GH1) creates a much more emotionally resonant image than the GH5. At least to me:

This. It's more satisfying to get a lot out of a little than a little out of a lot. And this applies in a much more profound way when you're just shooting stuff solo, for fun. It becomes, "Look what I was able to capture -- wow!" versus "This is all I was able to do?" Of course, it all changes in the context of a time-sensitive/high pressure paid shoot, when you need all of the help you can get.