richg101

I expect an F3 and some PL adapted lomo primes would be a stunning setup with real cinema image

I believe when it comes to colour, S-Log was way better implemented on their Cinealta range than on the Alpha range.  ie. the implementation of S-Log on the f3, f35 and f65 was more carefully undergone and delivers more trustworthy results.  I expect @Ed David could shed some insight on the Cinealta range from the era of the F3.
Looking at the F3, I can't see a reason not to go for it at the current price.  as long as you can budget for an aftermarket fz mount adaptor or PL mount glass, as well as rigging and the external recorder for 4;4;4 you'll likely not find a more powerful camera.  I'd take 4;4;4 1080p from the F3 over any 4k dslr.

I believe when it comes to colour, S-Log was way better implemented on their Cinealta range than on the Alpha range.  ie. the implementation of S-Log on the f3, f35 and f65 was more carefully undergone and delivers more trustworthy results.  I expect @Ed David could shed some insight on the Cinealta range from the era of the F3.
Looking at the F3, I can't see a reason not to go for it at the current price.  as long as you can budget for an aftermarket fz mount adaptor or PL mount glass, as well as rigging and the external recorder for 4;4;4 you'll likely not find a more powerful camera.  I'd take 4;4;4 1080p from the F3 over any 4k dslr.

I absolutely love Fargo, but I have always thought the actual photography was the weakest element of the whole thing.  could never out my finger on why but I always felt it lacked something on the visual side of things.
IMO comparison to how No Country was shot and the photography looks ugly to my eyes 

the main thing about anamorphic for most is the defocus character rather than the flares.  using an ultra wide lens on full frame and cropping wont give you the falres or the defocus character, but will in some way get you nearly there.
Main considerations is that a true 'wide anamorphic' lens is approximately a 25mm/28mm with a 2x horizontal squeeze, and is used on a 4 perforation 35mm negative.  so effectively they provide the same fov as if you shot on a 12.5mm or 14mm spherical lens on 2perf uncropped or 3perf s35mm cropped to 2.40;1.  even at f1.4 a 14mm lens has very deep dof meaning the anamorphic defocus will only be visible if you were to shoot with the wide lens from under 0.5m.  any further distances and most of the image is adequately 'in focus'.
The point is that in real situations using a wide anamorphic lens doesn;t actually look much different to a wider spherical lens cropped to look the same.  and in resolution terms you'll probably get more res from a cropped spherical lens than you would from a wide anamorphic   
 
so to clarify, if you were to take a 16mm fish eye like the zeiss distagon 2.8 or cheaper a 20mm flektagon and use it on full frame a7s (36mm wide sensor) and crop to 2.40.1 the actual fov would be very similar to what you;d get from an unsqueezed 4perforation 35mm negative and a 25mm 2x anamorphic.
if anything you'll want to increase distortion a little on a 20mm flektagon (since most 25mm 2x anamorphics have around 20% distortion!, and i expaect the flektagon is sub 12% at most).    come to mention it the distagon 16mm fish eye cropped to 2.40:1 will have very similar distortion levels to a real wide angle 25mm 2x anamorphic.!
 
 
Final note...  I;d stack a few UV filters over the front of a spherical lens in order to increase the number of glass faces in the optical pathway.  a 25mm 2x anamrophic will have a huge number of elements so the uv filters will in some way create the look of there being more elements and more interactions between each surface.
 
 
 
 
 

the main thing about anamorphic for most is the defocus character rather than the flares.  using an ultra wide lens on full frame and cropping wont give you the falres or the defocus character, but will in some way get you nearly there.
Main considerations is that a true 'wide anamorphic' lens is approximately a 25mm/28mm with a 2x horizontal squeeze, and is used on a 4 perforation 35mm negative.  so effectively they provide the same fov as if you shot on a 12.5mm or 14mm spherical lens on 2perf uncropped or 3perf s35mm cropped to 2.40;1.  even at f1.4 a 14mm lens has very deep dof meaning the anamorphic defocus will only be visible if you were to shoot with the wide lens from under 0.5m.  any further distances and most of the image is adequately 'in focus'.
The point is that in real situations using a wide anamorphic lens doesn;t actually look much different to a wider spherical lens cropped to look the same.  and in resolution terms you'll probably get more res from a cropped spherical lens than you would from a wide anamorphic   
 
so to clarify, if you were to take a 16mm fish eye like the zeiss distagon 2.8 or cheaper a 20mm flektagon and use it on full frame a7s (36mm wide sensor) and crop to 2.40.1 the actual fov would be very similar to what you;d get from an unsqueezed 4perforation 35mm negative and a 25mm 2x anamorphic.
if anything you'll want to increase distortion a little on a 20mm flektagon (since most 25mm 2x anamorphics have around 20% distortion!, and i expaect the flektagon is sub 12% at most).    come to mention it the distagon 16mm fish eye cropped to 2.40:1 will have very similar distortion levels to a real wide angle 25mm 2x anamorphic.!
 
 
Final note...  I;d stack a few UV filters over the front of a spherical lens in order to increase the number of glass faces in the optical pathway.  a 25mm 2x anamrophic will have a huge number of elements so the uv filters will in some way create the look of there being more elements and more interactions between each surface.
 
 
 
 
 

I actually think the motion aspect of the camera 'look' is probably down to the ergonomics of the cameras.  for instance the 1dc needs to be used with an external vf or a loupe.  if someone has invested in the 1dc they will also not skimp on a good and solid loupe.  the weight and the ability to shoot with 3 or more points of contact without even having to think about it - the link between the eye and the camera by holding a dslr and a loupe is way different to how an fs7, fs5, f55, c100 can be rigged and handled.  all of which are generally handled as you would a documentary type camera.  they're turn key systems that work on their own - much like a eng camera.  none of the viewfinders on the video cameras have the same ability for the shooter to lock the arms, chest and head into a solid shooting stance like you can with a dslr held to the eye. - the number of points of contact with a 1dc and a loupe provides reduction in rotational wobble, up/down wobble and side to side wobble.  the shooters head is directly in control of the movement.  shoulder rigs don;t provide such a optimised shooting stance.
 
the bmpcc also needs to be handled differently, with novel techniques used to rig it in order to make it ergonomic.  Since it's a blank canvas those using the bmpcc in real situations are taking the time to rig it, adjust, and get it running perfect for their style of shooting.
 
 
 
  

I use Samsung 85 mm f/1.4 for 95% of the time.

This is amazing, Andrew!!!  Great work - you are literally improving a camera!!!  No many people can say that!!!!  The FS5 is a damn fine little camera and after you are done, even better!!

Friday 7am London time sees the release of a firmware update for the Sony FS5 which optimises the performance of internal recording, fixing the issues spotted by early adopters of the camera including myself (Andrew Reid) and Paul Antico.
Read the full article

Most Used?  Helios 44.  The greatest lens ever made.

 
 
Favourite lens? Helios 44 + FF38 WA Adaptor. for the reasons above but with wider angle>
 

 

Dream Lens?  Hassy 110mm/2 - there ain't nothing like it! >
 


 

Most Used?  Helios 44.  The greatest lens ever made.

 
 
Favourite lens? Helios 44 + FF38 WA Adaptor. for the reasons above but with wider angle>
 

 

Dream Lens?  Hassy 110mm/2 - there ain't nothing like it! >
 


 

Most Used?  Helios 44.  The greatest lens ever made.

 
 
Favourite lens? Helios 44 + FF38 WA Adaptor. for the reasons above but with wider angle>
 

 

Dream Lens?  Hassy 110mm/2 - there ain't nothing like it! >
 


 

I own a lumix cm1 and find it offers superb performance as a camera and as a phone.  battery life smokes an Iphone.  the images are also superb.  It aint just a smart phone.  It delivers stills just as good any fixed lens premium 1" sensor camera.  and it's always with you!  compact cameras take up another back pocket alongside your phone, car keys, wallet etc.
 
  

I own a lumix cm1 and find it offers superb performance as a camera and as a phone.  battery life smokes an Iphone.  the images are also superb.  It aint just a smart phone.  It delivers stills just as good any fixed lens premium 1" sensor camera.  and it's always with you!  compact cameras take up another back pocket alongside your phone, car keys, wallet etc.
 
  

I own a lumix cm1 and find it offers superb performance as a camera and as a phone.  battery life smokes an Iphone.  the images are also superb.  It aint just a smart phone.  It delivers stills just as good any fixed lens premium 1" sensor camera.  and it's always with you!  compact cameras take up another back pocket alongside your phone, car keys, wallet etc.
 
  

I own a lumix cm1 and find it offers superb performance as a camera and as a phone.  battery life smokes an Iphone.  the images are also superb.  It aint just a smart phone.  It delivers stills just as good any fixed lens premium 1" sensor camera.  and it's always with you!  compact cameras take up another back pocket alongside your phone, car keys, wallet etc.
 
  

I own a lumix cm1 and find it offers superb performance as a camera and as a phone.  battery life smokes an Iphone.  the images are also superb.  It aint just a smart phone.  It delivers stills just as good any fixed lens premium 1" sensor camera.  and it's always with you!  compact cameras take up another back pocket alongside your phone, car keys, wallet etc.
 
  

Though the whole marketing seems to be focusing on the fact that its 8k.  to those who look at it properly it's all about the fact that it's a scaled up dragon sensor.  so all the magic from the 6k dragon, but with much more sensor area meaning the larger format look is possible.  a 35mm f1.4 lens can be used to get the same fov as a 25mm f1.4 lens, with the associated advantages such as better lens performance, shallower dof when needed etc.  
 
It's not that the 8k is making this stunningly clean image 'pop' it's the fact that the camera was being shot with the forefront of full frame glass (otus) - using longer focal lengths than would be used if it were the 6k dragon sensor.  there are no s35mm lenses that can be used wide open at f1.4 and deliver such optical resolution and that separation between in and out of focus areas we see here.  
 
I'm certain that if Sony made a pro version of the a7s, with 4;4:4 or proper xavc intra onto cfast2 keeping the 4k res, and you shot with otus lenses the image would have the same perceived resolution.    I see the power of a full frame sensor and superb optics outputting raw as the big thing here.  not that it's 8k.  I expect if that sensor were 2k it would still look as good. 

I've tried them and highly recommend.
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=8334

wifi doesnt have the range suitable for drone or remote control this unit is envisaged to be used on.  anyone with experience with proper pro level drones can put together a simple off the shelf circuit to control on/off, start/stop, focus, zoom and iris etc via a secondary RC transmitter

Though the whole marketing seems to be focusing on the fact that its 8k.  to those who look at it properly it's all about the fact that it's a scaled up dragon sensor.  so all the magic from the 6k dragon, but with much more sensor area meaning the larger format look is possible.  a 35mm f1.4 lens can be used to get the same fov as a 25mm f1.4 lens, with the associated advantages such as better lens performance, shallower dof when needed etc.  
 
It's not that the 8k is making this stunningly clean image 'pop' it's the fact that the camera was being shot with the forefront of full frame glass (otus) - using longer focal lengths than would be used if it were the 6k dragon sensor.  there are no s35mm lenses that can be used wide open at f1.4 and deliver such optical resolution and that separation between in and out of focus areas we see here.  
 
I'm certain that if Sony made a pro version of the a7s, with 4;4:4 or proper xavc intra onto cfast2 keeping the 4k res, and you shot with otus lenses the image would have the same perceived resolution.    I see the power of a full frame sensor and superb optics outputting raw as the big thing here.  not that it's 8k.  I expect if that sensor were 2k it would still look as good. 

I expect they are using the sony 36mpx sensor as used in the d800 and a7rmk1.  a stunning sensor - imo actually a little nicer than the new sony 42mpx.  the fact that they're providing a nice solid 14bit file it'll likely be closer to the d800's image than the a7r was.  add all the bells and whistles and the only thing I'd be complaining about is the pentax mount!