Jump to content

richg101

Members
  • Content Count

    1,828
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by richg101

  1. tbh for general video use your a7s and a7rii are gonna be hard to beat.  I'd suggest rigging the cameras to add weight and maybe length too - this will drastically affect the motion of the cameras.  the a7rii with the ibis set correctly for the focal length you;re using and some added weight will help motion a great deal.

    here is a pic of my a7rii in a birdcage and a chunk of aluminium billet as a riser - perfect height for a 15mm rail mount I made.

     

    for out and out stills image quality..  you're not gonna be able to improve on the a7rii.  it is single handedly the best stills camera (other than modern phase one MF cameras) currently available.    

  2. Leica R - f2 or faster..  native e-,ount and m4/3 lenses will depreciate in value since they'll always be less adaptable than slr lenses.  personally I feel if a lens requires electronic contacts to allow it to be used, it's almost certainly gonna devalue rather than increase.

  3. Yo Andrew.  Don't be put off by the huge influx of unemployed people who've recently gone into blogging/vlogging in an attempt to make a commercial name for themselves.  The days of celebrities like Philip Bloom are gone - gear nerds literally looked upon him as a god 3 years ago.  Personally I'd like to see you in a permanent product development position at Sony, while still keeping this blog running with details like your beautifully carefully written and informative articles.  I've been hoping to see your response to the Leica SL - I'm amazed you weren;t sent one before the rest of the hopeless 'brand ambassadors' who would sell their mother if it gave them a little more online respect from gear heads.

     

    Lots and lots of readers here can focus on things for longer than 5 seconds.  Even a few millenials might be able to keep reading to the end of the article.  Your depth is why eoshd is the best of the lot.  One problem is that since the A7S arriaved, we literally got everything we always wanted.  most of those who are willing to learn how to use a tool are no longer looking for anything else.  I think the acquisition of a a7s and a 1dc makes one less interested in looking for and reporting on better gear - the improvements are so small the other bloggers need to resort to click bait titles.

     

    finally, I think a few adverts wouldn;t do much hard to the site.  rather than brands, maybe partner with a retailer?  

  4. 5 hours ago, M Carter said:

    Seriously? Do you think a crap job using high-end gear makes everything else less "special"?

    Here's an amazing idea - it's not about the gear. The only way to make a WalMart spot "special" is with great concept, writing, talent, lighting, shooting and editing. 

    Another shocking concept: A crap job shot on an Alexa 65 will still look like crap.

    A stunning and radical suggestion: amazing and moving stories have been made with really low-end gear, few lights, and tiny crews.

    A soul-shattering observation: very few people can discuss at length the cameras and lenses used for "Citizen Kane", "2001", and… well, you get the idea (sheesh, I hope anyway).

    An intriguing question: Can you tell me, off the top of your head, the gear used by Wong Kar-wai to shoot "2046"? Does it even matter? (It's, umm, really damn gorgeous if you haven't seen it).

    And finally, an earth-shaking idea: many "true high end jobs like features" are crap, even when shot with amazing gear.

    I would sit down in a dark room and ponder those ideas and see if they make any sort of sense.

    you miss my point completely.  I'm talking about how we associate a look with a type of visual piece.  The Alexa65 will have been brought into the equation by arri in order to offer a prestige option to productions in the upper echelons of 'high end' that need to be able to separate themselves from everything else.  The Revenant 'looked' different optically to anything else.  They wouldn;t have bothered with the extra hassle of using multiple different cameras if there was no difference.  I'm talking about a situation you obviously don't empathise with = the reason movies began to be shot in anamorphic and theatres started projecting in a different aspect ratio to tv to bring people back to the theatres when tv's first came into the equation.  Half of the promotion for 'The Hateful Eight' specifically went into detail about how they'd invested so much into shooting in 65mm anamorphic.

     

    When I say 'crap job', I mean jobs like walmart adverts.  cheap clothing brand ads, auto/home insurance ads etc.  no matter what the budget, who directs and shoots it, etc, the end result will never be good because of the brand they're trying to sell on a dream.  DP's who settle for doing such work their entire lives earn a good living but never really make anything anyone with an artistic eye really takes notice of.  They're somewhat artistic themselves and get bored of this shit and then look to new gear to make things more interesting.  in doing so they often end up devaluing the aesthetic such gear brings to the equation.  

     

    Your argument has about as much integrity as a kid telling Roger Deakins that he need not shoot in true anamophic on a 4 perf alexa, but instead shoot the movie on minidv because the script is good enough to carry it through without the need to make it look 'special'.  What I mean to say is that I'm on a different page to you in terms of my personal preferences and expectations

  5. I kinda hope they don;t get too easy to acquire.  The more there are, the more they'll be willing to knock down prices and make rental for crap jobs possible.  nothing worse than seeing a golden standard used for menial projects. like when a creative director or dp suggests shooting a walmart advert in anamorphic..  it undermines everything and removes the 'special' option that should only be made available to the true high end jobs like features.

  6. for typical scenes in outdoors bright daylight with dark shadows:-

    set your ev dial to +2 then use the histogram.  If you're not sure what the histogram should look like for correct s-log2 exposure just set the camera to auto mode and see what settings it wants for a +2 exposure.  then you know roughly how to set the camera up and how the histogram should look.  

    for fool proof exposure just use a +2 setting on your ev dial and auto shutter.  use a variable ND to keep your shutter as close to 1/50th as you can

     

    if you're not shooting in these conditions switch to another picture profile.  a cine profile will be more preferable for low light where less priority is given on maintaing highlights of light sources etc.

     

    for easiest exposure, I am a fan of cine4.  this was shot with the ev dial at -1.0

     

  7. 3 minutes ago, Ebrahim Saadawi said:

    i agree, worst type of journalism. Not to say Andrew actualy intentionally does it for clickbait but he more like trysts what he's saying. I just don't agree with it. First obvious matter, why the hell are we talkimg stills, and even stills Jpg performance , here on EOSHD? 

    When you factor in how much of the total cost outlay is dedicated to stills performance; and how much of the video functions have been crippled (compared to an ursa mini, a kine terra, an fs700 etc video camera, or the 1dc for that matter - canon's prehistoric sensor tech needs all the help it can get when we're talking about DR, and without c-log this camera is not going to deliver the goods that the 1dc does; you have to factor in the performance in stills mode.  Anyone buying this brand new for video alone - instead of looking at a preowned 1dc, c300mk1 or c100mk2 is mad.  

  8. 5 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

    I'd choose to run my own tests.

    I have zero problem if you test this camera and rip it to shreds, based on your own findings. The above article is just the worst type of "journalism" though... To then have the front to bad mouth the people you are cherry picking your info from and accuse them of sugar coating their findings is laughable. 

    You talk of seeking the truth, giving honest opinions.... yet peddle this misinformed, 2nd hand nonsense.

    The DPreview tests back up everything Andrew has said here...  Journalism is all about presenting information in a concise package.  DPReview's article is plagued with positivity - if they're not positive they don't get advertising revenue or free cameras sent early.  Andrews article simply points out and opens conversation regarding the less positive facts that are almost avoided by dpreview to best play political ball - brushing under the carpet hastily the fact that the 1dxii doesn't improve upon - infact based on the tests can;t even compete technically against a 4year old predecessor.

     

    I like the article because it's brought to light that from a stills point of view my investment in an A7Rii was a good one and from what I'm seeing here canon won't offer anything that will compete for at least a few years.  

  9. 9 minutes ago, hmcindie said:

    After using the RX10ii and it's horrible LOG mode, I'd say "who cares?". I mean, the RX10 ii has horrible colors and even slog2 clips and the shadow noise is horrid.

     

    A bad workman always blames his tools...  inproper wb settings and poor exposure.  get them right and you wouldn;t have had a problem

  10. 13 hours ago, DBounce said:

    Well, it says that it's designed to adapt PL glass to Canon EF, so I'm guessing that's what it does.

    Nope.  It will adapt 'some' pl mount lenses to eos.  sadly very few PL lenses people actually wanna use will adapt to eos.  a few zooms, that's about it.

  11. 1 hour ago, hmcindie said:

     

    20k budget to pay for edit/post? What the hell are you talking about? What in that video screamed a 20k post budget? It probably cost somewhere around 3 grands and that mostly just went to the editor who also did the grade.

    I had the nex5n. It's image quality is on the same level as a canon 7d. Which was funny because people screamed at the time how much more "advanced" the 5n was. It wasn't.

     

    it's an official promotion from Canon.  20K on that promo was a low estimate.  It probably cost canon more than 5k just for the travel, acomodation and insurance.  It may only look like 3k's worth of budget to you, but you;re obviously not aware of all the other costs associated with working on projects where the brand are going back and fourth with umpteen different creative directors and marketing people, asking for adjustments to edit and grade.  The post house probably charged £10k extra just charging for extra work

  12. 4 minutes ago, photographer-at-large said:

    Thank you very much.

    You don't approve of Zeiss' offerings (Otus, Milvus, Loxia & Batis)?

    actually of all the modern offerings the loxia are definitely my favourites.  If I had the cash I'd be all over them!  The problem with modern lenses is that they all seem to be over contrasty meaning they don;t render things like skintones quite as nicely as older lenses IMO.

    TBH, it might be that correct use of diffusers and netting might make canon L series more appealing to my eye, but the fact remains is that the lenses have been used extensively in non cinematic environments to the point where they impart a non cinematic look.  It's like the opposite of panavision lenses.  if you take stills with a panavision c-series lens the still looks like a frame from a movie.  when you shoot a movie with an L series lens it's like a series of still images taken by a newspaper photographer.  

     

  13. 48 minutes ago, photographer-at-large said:

    In your opinion, which are filmic glass for use on Canon, and Sony?

    For sony, You could fit panavision lenses if you wanted to.  But in the real world with a very cheap e-mount to oct18 adaptor you can fit lomo copies of the old arri 35mm format lenses.  at £100-150 a pop the oct18 lenses are the cheapest way to get the look I consider 'cinema'.

    for canon you are pigeon holed into using lenses that can be adaptoed to eos - so most 35mm motion picture lenses are not usable.  but IMO a set of old 1970's nikon adapted to eos are a good call.  or better, some leica summicron-r lenses.  The problem is that unless you're using the full sensor of the 1dxii (which you are not when shooting in modes where they take a full readout - full frame mode is mushy and lacking the image quality you get from the aps-c and aps-h modes), without having a full frame sensor area, you are then obliged to purchase an additional wider lens than you'd normally have to.  assuming a set of full frame lenses like a 35mm/2, 50mm/2 and 85mm/2 were in your budget they'd be great in full frame, but when in aps-h or aps-c modes you'll need to invest in a wider lens (25-28mm) whch will be more costly and likely not as good image image quality as a good 35mm/2.

  14. On 28/04/2016 at 6:45 PM, ajay said:

    For those that consider the look of the 1DX Mark II not "film like", what about this clip?

     

    I assumed correctly they shot this on L series.  and it looks like also the L series 'cine' versions.  It's not the camera that makes this feel the polar opposite of the look of No Country for Old Men.  It's the glass.  If they'd had cooke s4's on the front of the 1dxmk2 i imagine the image would look like a real movie.  The fact that they can be in just about the most filmic location I can imagine and it still feel like a dslr shoot is because of the lenses.  

    Canon glass = photo journalist snapping a criminal after his day in court 

    Cooke glass = Hollywood.

    Shame Canon stick with their EF mount and stop people using real lenses.  If you want it to look filmic you need filmic glass.  An Alexa mini with an EF mount and L lenses looks just as non filmic

  15. On 29/04/2016 at 4:57 PM, Andrew Reid said:

    Outfit an A7R II with a couple of decent Sony FE lenses and you're easily looking at $5k+ for a consumer camera.

    Though in a consumer branding/marketing strategy, I'd argue the A7Rii + native FE lenses is without a doubt the best performance full frame camera system out there (for stills in typical situations).  Best dynamic range, best resolution, and now 14bit raw - the three most important aspects of a camera for stills.  To get close (in image quality terms) to a 5k$ investement in a a7rii and some fe lenses you need the d810 and some otus lenses - a d810 and a single otus is enormous and costs over 2x the price of an a7rii and a couple of loxia lenses.  

     

    The AF argument and durability argument will no doubt be the card most nikon and canon fans pull, when really very few of these guys are actually using these cameras in arduous conditions to warrant the higher level of durability, nor are they shooting motorsports - where the af advantage actually matters.  INFACT, most of these guys to talk out are shooting with the canon or nikon non professional models which have lower shutter count durability and weather sealing properties than the a7 range!  

     

    I know of many professional photographers who now use an a7rii for their personal work, and Phase One for their professional work.  Nikon and Canon dont get a look in because they neither fulfil the needs of true professionals or professional level photographers in their time out.  

     

    For the sake of argument against those who claim nikon and canon have better ergonomics..  if this is the case then fine.  I don;t believe this is the case.  But if out and out image quality is important you should be willing to work around the differences.  A F1 racing team don't send their driver out in a volvo estate with side impact protection system, with lots of leg room and air conditioning do they? - they send the driver out in a dangerously lightweight and uncomfortable tin can that will win races.

     

  16. give the crew a $60k budget to shoot, and a $20k budget to pay for the edit/post for a promo video for the nex5n and the results would be just as awe inspiring.  The level of production value on this video makes it impossible to judge the camera because in real instances with these budgets they'd just add another $2k for the rental of an Alexa Mini for the couple of days of shooting.     $80k for 8bit acquisition and a lens mount incapable of using real cinema lenses, or $82k for arriraw acquisition and the ability to use cooke s4's..  

    Nothing more annoying than consumer advertising techniques selling a dream to people that they'll be using a dslr to shoot these types of projects.

  17. 17 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

    Wow, nice heads up! Really need some new Pocket & Canon batteries - 2yr warranty, free postage & local too (for me anyways).

    they're a little heavier than authentic canon batteries and twice the weight of the usual aftermarket cells.  also being white you don;t get them mixed up with your inferior batteries and know which are yours if you;re sharing batteries with colleagues.   

  18. 8 minutes ago, mercer said:

    I haven't had the pleasure of using the summicron, but there is something special about 35mm f2 lenses. I've only ever used them on aps-c and m4/3, though. 

    That crop feature on the a7rii sounds amazing. I think @Don Kotlos uses it with c-mounts which is definitely something I'd be interested in since one of my favorite lenses is an old zebra Cosmicar TV lens. 

    The helios-44 is another lens that has eluded me over the years. I have only heard and seen good things from it. 

    Yeah sure keep the LensTurbo... I have the MC W Rokkor 50mm PF f/1.4... Dang I almost forgot about that lens. Using that lens is probably the first time I fell for shallow depth of field. A true classic. 

    Do you have any screengrabs of the MD version? I have a nice little collection of Minolta glass and I am trying to decide between my older MC Rokkor-X lenses and the newer MD versions. 

    yep.  as a aps-c user the 35mm/2 is a must have.  Imagine you took the 35mm/2 you;re used to using on m4/3 and aps-c then used it on full frame for the next widest option.  If a particular full frame fast 35mm can deliver good resolution on m4/3 for short tele work, it'll do great for 'normal' on aps-c and 'wide' on full frame.

    The nice thing about the summicron is that it's nicely controlled in terms of fringing on high contrast edges.  so you can take full advantage of the big aperture.  I expect the loxia 35/2 will be even better than the summicron for a single lens option of full frame!

     

×
×
  • Create New...