richg101

45 minutes ago, exomonkeyman said:

Epic reply Cant thank you enough!!

No probs man:)  Be aware that what Allister Chapman says might not be what others believe is best for certain scenes.  - so often s-log might be very viable for certain low light scenes where you need the huge dynamic range advantage in highlight detail.  for instance just after sunset, shooting towards the sun.   for the scene in your images you;re dedicating a lot of dr to the strret lights - which will be blown out even if you had 20 stops of dr.

it's simply a artifact when the sensor is pushed too far.  Mine does this.  the effect only really shows where the dynamic range in the shot is beyond what it;s capable of handling - pulling the shadows down will remove this.  the difference between the black sky and a street lamp is almost an infinity number to stops difference.  a bounce board for your talent or a small led source on your camera will lift the talent and allow you to expose slightly less then the light sources wont cause this.  it's a bit like the vertical flares often seen on 1990's dv cameras when they flare.  

if you really wanna hide this artifact..  shoot anamorphic and the flares will hide it:)

PS.  S-Log isnlt the best profile for this type of scene.  you;re wasting a lot of the dynamic range that s-log provides.  try one of the cine profiles.  one of them (I think cine 4) has a better response curve for night scenes.

6 hours ago, Nikkor said:

You can't even imagine how much I envy you and your aptus, how much did you pay for it if it's ok to ask  

I got extremely lucky and managed to do a straight swap on some lenses and custom work.  The guy is a very high end photographer who had literally just bought the iq3-100 and had no need for the back.  It had been sitting unused for a few years after some of his hy6 lens shutters died and he moved to PhaseOne.  he'd seen that I was using HY6 lenses on FORBES70 and took a punt and asked if I wanted a back that I could use with them.  Put it this way, I never thought I'd get hold of a full width medium format back. - The going rate is still madness.  Goes to show there are some guys so high end they literally do jobs that pay for these things outright, and still pay the mortgage.

Even now, comparing it to arguably the most advanced sensor available (the A7Rii) I can't see the Aptus-10-iir ever not being something that delivers less than astounding images.  For my own personal photo taking the only thing that gets use is the 8 year old Aptus!    

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1532/25534678965_dd130814ee_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1585/26240955421_1f76d23d84_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1579/26138128015_a359966ef0_o.jpg

11 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

WOW! Yes that does look big - nice!

I love my 54, just because it is bigger & gives you the weight that you need to get steady shots handheld - under arm or over the shoulder. I feel this need for small is so counter productive - fixed shots on a [proper] tripod just can't be beat.

The only small attachment that i'll consider using (and am so glad I kept a hold of it) is the Widescreen 2000 - yes you can kinda focus through it (with practice), you do need diopters & you do need to stop down sometimes. All those sterile sharp cheap projector lenses just leave me cold - they really don't have anything to offer.

Rich, really stoked for you - I guess a lot of blood, sweat & tears has gone into the Oliviascope.

Does this mean that you'll eventually make some normal lenses?

indeed.  because the front sections of the trump lenses are so over engineered, they are just waiting for some refined main lenses to be used with.  it's looking like a 58mm biotar with an f1.4 widest aperture might be made this year - ultra clean, mc's, less of the biotar.  drop in to replace existing f2 glass in trumps.  it won;t be crazy good wide open, but will provide that extra stop to allow an f2.2 2x oval to be implemented.  a 1 stop advantage.  The 28, 38 and 88 attachments have been designed for 58mm/2 so when a 2x oval is used they'll be able to perform just fine.  and at f1.4 they'll not reduce transmission by a full stop, but more like around 1/2 a stop and they work great on a planar 50/1.4 so should be fine on a 58/1.4.:)

The only real disadvantage of OLIVIA Scope is that it'll likely only see popularity within the rental sector, due to the huge cost (compared to typical ownable lesnes like isco's and below.  However I'll hold rental stock here in Bristol for EU service, and there are a good number of indi rental houses signed up in the USA. a few in Japan and Australia.  I hope to be able to do a f2 - f2.8 unit later down the line which will be a bit more affordable, yet still not really a impulse buy.  problem is, there are so many options in this region.  The full size unit is an esoteric piece:)    

I haven't even acknowledged those comments because he's deluded.  There's nothing wrong with his camera.  My pocket reacts exactly how his does - as does every other bmpcc.  All his actions do is increase the price of future products from BM because they have to add costs for the idiot factor.  

BM's customer service personel:-

"We got another email from a customer expecting his camera to perform with a iphone torch as lighting.  What should I do boss?"

BM's customer service manager:-

"just send him another one.  Don't bother wasting Mr Petty's time.   The sooner we get his unit back, the less time he can spend shooting crap 'low light tests' and uploading them to youtube"

 

Just now, Nikkor said:

Yep, slightly different if not the same, or maybe he gets a defective one :S

Often it's cheaper to just send a replacement than try to diagnose the problem only for the customer to complain online.  I've yet to send examples of what I've found with my camera since I don't think the issue is really an issue unless the footage is pushed heavily.  I'm on the fence.    I always felt amazed how much the pocket could do, and know that what I'm seeing is likely a firmware fix rather than a physical problem.    because i know how good they are with customer service I'm happy to sit back and see.  if in 1 -2 months - or 8 months for that matter I feel the camera isn;t doing what it should I'll get in touch with them.

6 hours ago, BrooklynDan said:

The variable diopter design is nothing new. It has been around since the 60s, and not just in Iscoramas. It was first used in Japanese anamorphic lenses, before being brought to Europe by Technovision and Joe Dunton, whose lenses both used optical component built in Japan.

Note the 'Made in Japan' logo on this set of 80s-era JDC Xtal Express lenses, as well as the familar variable diopter design visible in the front of the lenses.

I'm excited to see how Olivia-Scope performs. I do fear that with such massive optical components, it'll be difficult to hand-hold and will require a 6x6 matte box, which will make the camera even more front-heavy. A 150mm front is basically the same size as the front of the Hawk V-series lenses, as well as Panavision Primos and Arriscopes, all of which are some of the largest prime lenses ever built.

Here's hoping for a smaller, cheaper, more nimble version with a 114mm front. Doesn't need to cover wide angle lenses at T1.4.

OLIVIA will indeed be more of a studio type lens rather than a hand holding affair.  what should be considered is that because the lens isn't actually that long, one could set up a red weapon 8k with a leica M mount and a set of M Summilux's from 35mm, 50, 75 and 90 and have a very short optical protrusion coming out of the front of the camera.  centre of gravity is closer to the camera body than with a typical 2x 25mm anamorphic from panavision meaning a well balanced shoulder rig is definitely possible.  The less than optimal focus mechanisms on rangefinder lenses (in motion picture terms) is no longer a problem since all focus is undertaken on the anamorph.  

6x6 filters will be a must for the lens if maximum fov capabilities are to be obtained. - as it happens I have Bright Tangerine on board supplying OEM matteboxes specific to Olivia

From the outset I was keen to go along the lines of a studio type lens - with so many manufacturers pandering to the gimbal crew, cutting weight and size, at the detriment of image quality, I see OLIVIA fitting into a production where traditional camera support is used.  And as such very little of the design considerations have been based on size or weight.

27 minutes ago, Brian Caldwell said:

If you're doing a wide angle Iscorama-style attachment with a large diameter front, then my statement about the variable diopter being "easy" obviously needs amendment, since the mechanics does become much more difficult.  Although I'm a big fan of big lenses, they tend to require exotic/expensive items like precision linear bearings to keep them moving straight and without play.

Maybe not entirely relevant here, but its interesting the the new Cooke anamorphics also use a pretty basic variable diopter focusing scheme, although the net power is negative rather than afocal:  http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20140300973&IDKey=735679DAC5C4&HomeUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fappft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect1%3DPTO2%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-bool.html%2526r%3D5%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526co1%3DAND%2526d%3DPG01%2526s1%3Diain.IN.%2526s2%3Dneil.IN.%2526OS%3DIN%2Fiain%252BAND%252BIN%2Fneil%2526RS%3DIN%2Fiain%252BAND%252BIN%2Fneil

Tell me about it! - the design and manufacturing of the focus mechanism for such a badboy has been a task.  it uses both a beautiful brass helical and a system of rollers / bearings to alleviate droop due to the weight of the huge pieces of glass.  

   

2 hours ago, Jimmy said:

The incentive is that there is a market out their (high end fashion, for instance) for stills and video from one shooter... For now, someone who is booked onto one of those gigs might have been desperate to use a Hassy... But had to opt for a Canon or Nikon, not due to budget, but to the fact that they could do stills and video... Now, they have the option to go Hassy. So they are competition for Canon and Nikon again.

Just guess work, of course.

No one in high end fashion will discard a phase one mf camera for the benefits of having video functions of a canon or nikon.  in high end fashion the stills are done one day on medium format and the video another - on an Alexa or Red.  Usually with the same creative director, but two different shooters.  That said, a lot of the guys I've dealt with in the high end fashion world are stills photographers who now shoot or more often direct video.  I can;t see them ever moving to a canon for the benefit of being able to shoot low quality video - not until they offer a medium format sensor and lenses that match or outdo the offerings from Phase One.      

3 hours ago, Kurtisso said:

It seems that all the top end medium format cams that don't shoot video use CCD sensors instead of CMOS. Is there a reason outside of cost or processing power for why not? CCD would allow for global shutter no? Or am I asking for too much again...

Also, anyone know anything about medium format to full frame focal reducers? @richg101?

CCD has only just started to be matched by cmos in terms of image quality in the Medium format world (the IQ2-50, and the IQ3-100 - both are Sony developed sensors). - due to the smaller market there was less demand for development of cmos sebnsor of medium format size than there is in the dslr market.  - tech always moves quicker in the consumer sector.

CCD tech reached its peak 5-10 years ago and even now my Dalsa 56mpx sensor in my leaf aptus 10-ii (released in 2008) delivers an image that makes my a7rii cry.  Dynamic range is around 3 stops less than the a7rii but it's the 16bit colour, and refinement of overall image that has the edge on the dalsa sensor.  not to mention how good Phase One's 'Capture One' software is at processing the 16bit raw files out of the sensor.  Main reason for lack of live view is due to the number of pixels they're dealing with, and the prehistoric processing (when compared to the processing within an a7rii or a dual digic7 canon camera) - the buffer on even the fastest mf backs only permits around 1 frame per second for 50mpx-80mpx sensors.  I think this is the main reason for lack of live view.  

I'm definitely looking at the kipon medium format to Fe-mount with excitement.  They won't give a genuine medium format look, but will get close.  but to obtain worthwhile results it'll be down to what MF lenses you stick on the front.  atm there is only really the hassy 110/2 that really offers an exciting proposition to me - a resultant 80mm/1.4 will be magic.  however probably wont come close to an otus 85/1.4 and will only be slightly cheaper. 

I'm certain there will be a 50mpx fixed lens camera from sony using the iq2-50 sensor some time soon.  then naturally a interchangeable lens version a year later! 

OLIVIA Scope was originally going to be a straight clone of an iscorama, just scaled up.  It soon became clear that in order to make something really groundbreaking we had to start out with a blank canvas.  Though OLIVIA Scope is operated in the same way as an Iscorama, because of the wide fov capability a racking adjustable diopter type 'untactful isco copy' focus mechanism would need a ridiculously over-engineered helical to provide shift of a big diopter element.      

 

8 hours ago, Kristoferman said:

Looking at Sony primes, xeen primes, Schneider primes, or rehoused stills glass. In any case you'll still be paying thousands per lens. 

I think our friend rich here sells his DSO in PL!

hahahaha.  thanks for the plug.  though I'd advise against the DSO lenses as a primary lens set.  I am always quick to warn potential customers that the lenses are a speciality lens rather than a go-to lens set.  For me, some 1970's -1980's lomo's are the best option for 'cinema glass' that is affordable

17 hours ago, DaveAltizer said:

I was wondering if you guys knew of the best bang for buck way to get a PL lens set. Also, was wondering if there was any way to mod my CONTAX Zeiss set to PL. 

in purely aesthetic terms..

best value is lomo oct-18 lenses (35mm) adapted to PL with an adaptor.  Works out at about £300 per adapted lens.  fast, characterful, and filmic.  next are arri standard mount zeisses (35mm).  about £450 per lens adapted.  

IMO going for anything from Samyang or SLR Magic is the sure fire way to remove any sense of 'cinema' in visual terms.  Neither of these types of lenses are designed by artists or optical geniuses.  They're simply low cost copies/variants of existing canon lenses - of which impart the look of photojournalism rather than Hollywood IMO.  CP2's lack character and the majority of the cost is made up largely from the mechanical work - to provide solid workhorses to the rental sector.  glass in them is gross - the same fringing you get from the cheaper zeiss lenses for canon and nikon - immediately makes an image look like low budget zeiss offered as the cheapest option for film school renters.

Sadly adapting contax zeiss to PL is a costly and complicated process - it's hard to move such big elements far enough into the PL port to permit infinity focus.  IMO the contax zeisses aren't very nice either - the purple/green fringing makes the lenses a no go for contrasty scenes with apertures opened wider than f4 IMO.  

Out of curiosity, why PL?  personally I think early Leica R Summicron lenses are the ones to zone in on.  remounted with Leitax adaptors to EOS and these badboys are the most.  If you can rework your plans to allow for an ef mount camera your options for cost effective filmic lenses gets broader and cheaper!  

44 minutes ago, BrorSvensson said:

what kind of crop factor do you get with the 53 x 40mm sensor? 0.5x?

in video mode the frame will be 16:9 so the biggest they'll get is 53mm x 30mm vs Full Frame which is 36mmx20mm in 16:9.  It's a significant increase in sensor area, however I bet they window in.  - the 11,000 pixels of sensor width skipped down to 3800 will not be nice!.  Assuming they do use the full sensor width the horizontal crop factor is 0.68x.  When the lens speed tops out at f2.8 on Hassy's boring lens line up a 5dmk3 in raw and some otus's are likely a better bet for achieving the look of medium format motion picture.     

Since it's a Phase One back, I expect video will be offered on the phase system, - vastly superior lens line up.  Still I imagine the downscaling to 4k from over 16k worth of pixels is gonna affect image so much it won't matter what lens you use. 

definitely looks like more than 1.25x squeeze.  The defocus looks more pronounced and resolution is better than what I saw in the Hateful Eight.  With such a CG orientated production I doubt those old ultra panavision 70 lenses would be up to the job.   I wonder if the new Hawk 65mm anamorphics got a test drive on this?  

I've seen the fixed pattern noise from the bmmcc that wouldn;t be apparent from the same shot in the bmpcc.  I'd actually say the bmmcc might have a slightly reduced usable dr because of this - you can;t pull detail from the shadows as much as you can with the bmpcc from what I've seen so far.   I say this with a pinch of salt.  the image is still lush, and the 60p capability is worth taking a 1 stop hit on dr.  It just means i can't pull shadows up as much as I like to on shots where I;m exposing to retain highlight information. 

56 minutes ago, graphicnatured said:

This is why I love these forums. So simple, but often times people like me don't think of the simple things. Good looking out, righg101!

I actually modded both the a7s and a7rii with a cut down 5mm red LED glued onto the record button to it pokes out more and is easier to find.  Everyone who sees the mod asks how to do it.  it's the best mod to the camera.  the bmmcc is in need of this mod too!

You can buy stick-on buttons in various colours that will likely fit.  maybe look for stick on rubber feet for hi-fi furniture and the like.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/16x-Round-Rubber-Foot-Self-Adhesive-Black-Feet-RF05-Size-6mm-WIDE-x-3mm-HIGH-/191688158450?hash=item2ca1812cf2:g:3i0AAOxyPc5SAhXY

1 minute ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Actually yeah! This whole thing got me really curious, and I've been in full on research mode the past week or so. Once I have the necessary capital, I plan to pick up one of the "battle-tested" Kinimini 4Ks from their website. In fact, I've been talking to some of my film school buddies, and one of them will be putting in his pre-order for a 5K Terra as soon as his tax return comes in. 

I'm gonna ask @Rob Bannister to chip in on this discussion.  He's a user/owner of the kinemini 4k and from what I've seen him create with it, I started looking seriously into the kinemax as a primary camera for DSO rental purposes.  The plan was a camera and lens setup with loads of options as far as focal reducers, behind the lens filters etc - all the exciting stuff the sub-pl system permits!   

PMW-F3 - go to vimeo viewer to download

S-Log, Internal 35mbs XDCAM 4;2;0
Zeiss Distagon 25mm - from f2.8 to f11
ISO- 800 (0db/Base ISO)
ND's - Used throughout.
post - no processing applied to footage - dragged into timeline, exported at 150mbs 2-pass vbr (2560 x 1440)

4 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

Just to update everyone, got an email from apple today (2016/04/04) regarding Kinefinity's Apple ProRes license.

 

 

Moot.  Kinefinity wouldn't be broadcasting about prores support if they didn't have the licence in the bag in some way or another.  The person who responded to your email probably just went on their own website, saw the brand isn't listed and responded accordingly.  I seriously doubt the person handling random unsolicited emails is taking the time, let alone even able to access the list of pending licencing deals going on in one of the biggest technology companies in the world!

 

Never use the current buy it now prices as a guide.  an auction of an F3 tends to end at half the buy it now numbers.   Mine came with a rod/riser setup, a top plate, a nikon adaptor, a 16gb sxs (over 1hrs recording of the pretty damn rugged 35mbs xdcam codec), and a sxs-sdxc adaptor, vlock battery plate, 2x sony U30 batteries.  I paid just over £1000 and looking back since a few similar setups have gone for less!  Mine was a earlier unit which was 'unlocked' with the paid firmware rather than the later units which were unlocked as standard.  If i recall there is a slight difference - the paid firmware is marginally better when it comes to external capabilities?  not 100% sure on this.

Even unrigged i can stick the F3 on my shoulder and monitor with the built in screen - which is bright and easy to view in bright conditions.    It's so lightweight, yet feels solid.  

Now the magic happens when you grab a fz to oct18 adaptor and start using the multitude of lomo lenses which are copies of early arri/zeiss s35mm format lenses and go for less than the average vintage slr lens!    

Also, from looking at the image from the F3 it appears that on paper the DR might be less than that of the A7s etc, but in reality the peaked highlight rolloff is way more filmic than the new range of dslr's that outdo it on paper.  

Single best 1080p image? Easy to edit? Small file sizes? Cheap?   

Sony PMW-F3 (unlocked for RGB and S-Log) shooting internal.   under $1300

Slightly more grading resilient footage? - as above plus a bm video assist. Under $1800

Greenscreen work? - as above but with the Pix-E5 recorder. Under $2200 

IMO auto focus and 'cinematic' shouldn't really be uttered in the same sentence.  However for things like an impromptu talking head in a run and gun environment with a large sensor, a good af system capable of tracking focus of a face will always be welcome.  I highly doubt I'd ever use such a thing since I actually like the aesthetic of a human being pulling focus by eye.  

If people like to think a Canon will make their colours nicer without having to learn how to set up wb, profiles and learn how to use curves that's up to them.

The fact here isn't about af or colour.  It's about the fact that the image from the 80D doesn't even deliver true 720p.  it's mush.  and is noisy.    The lack of video ergonomics of a mirrored camera can be worked around when the image is worth working around for - the 1dc, 5dmk3 in raw, etc.  But entertaining any positive discussion about Canon cameras not of the Cinema EOS range or ML hacked for film making is madness.  Those still buying such devices for cinematic type film making are either ignorant to what else is available, blind or buying out of sympathy for Canon.  I see no difference between the 80D and the 550D/T2i in terms of video performance.  Canon hasn't made any worthwhile video improvements on their non cinema eos cameras since the 5Dmk2!    

I've hardly even had time to test the little camera.  It's soon to be fitted into forbes70, and I'm hoping global shutter gets enabled.  from some of the footage I've shot I have noticed more obvious fixed pattern shadow noise than I have seen from the pocket.  @Zak Forsman have you noticed this?

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Is by any chance KineMount an open mount like say Micro Four Thirds is? I am guessing it is not.

 

There is a thread over on BMCuser about possible interchangeable mounts for BMD cameras.

 

Got me thinking that the absolute best result would be if BMD adopted the FZ mount in future cameras. FZ mount is what is used in the Sony F3/F5/F55, which I've used and is an absolutely wonderful mount! You can adapt it to anything else, for instance I've got a rock solid Nikon F mount on my Sony PMW-F3. So it works, and FZ is an already popular mount used by many.

 

But Sony will never let BMD use FZ mount. Thus the very nearly almost as good option is to talk with Kinefinity and see if they'd open up KineMount for everybody to use (in many ways KineMount is like Sony FZ mount, and kinda better... as Kinefinity have a focal reducer option! Yay). As if that happened it would be tremendously good news for both companies, and a massive result to help the indy / hobbyist / low / medium budget film industry.

 

Be great if Kinefinity and BMD could talk together with each other to create a universal mount system which can go onto dominate the film industry in the future.

 

http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?16668-Possible-interchangeable-mounts-for-4-6K

I actually worked on a custom speed booster for a Kinimini4k.  the kinemount is exactly the same as a PL mount but with a ffd of around 20mm(from what I remember) rather than the usual 52mm ffd of true PL.  So their PL mount which you'd use for running say s4's or ultra primes is just a PL-PL extender tube of 32mm thickness.  the EF mount is a tube of 24mm thickness with electronic contacts and a ef mount instead of a PL mount on the front.  

Effectively you could make a Leica M mount or just about any mount.  infact I think kinefinity will manufacture custom mounts at your request, and have recently started offering their own speed booster (i think based on the custom work I undertook for Rob Bannister).

Personally i think the kinemount is the most important design attribute of the kinifinity cameras.  infact with a speed booster type adaptor the kinemax is just about the closest thing you can get to the new 8k vista vision Weapon from RED.  take some rented otus lenses and a modified speed booster ultra (the e-mount replaced by a PL mount) and you have genuine 6k resolution (both in sensor terms and optical terms).  There are not many sensor/lens combinations from other s35 setups that can really deliver such resolution performance.