richg101

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. 

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. 

details: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?141427-FORGED-Shot-on-RED-Weapon-8K

Hyper focal distance. This is old school stuff.
My mostly used stills camera is a Medium Format Zeiss with no viewfinder what so ever. Doesn't stop me
Im sure they aren't talking about it as the only way and only camera to use. Just a bit of fun.

the interesting thing that happens when an oval aperture disk is installed is that the overall image quality goes up drastically.  - since the width of the aperture reduces to around the same diameter as if the aperture were closed down to around f4-f5.6.  Since the height of the largest 2x oval (f3.2) remains the same as the diameter of a circular f2 aperture the actual depth of field remains almost as shallow as it would be with a typical f2 circular aperture.  The result is a magical balance of shallowness of dof and the refinement of horizontal image quality from the smaller aperture width.  also, the illumination of the sensor becomes more even since instead of projecting a circular image circle, the image circle becomes slightly brighter on the horizontal plane.  - this reduces vignette and tends to create the look of a higher end lens which has been closed down to reduce vignette.
The only real downside is the reduction in light transmission.  However since at f2 most lenses don;t really provide a refined enough image/deep enough dof for scripted images anyway the slower lens speed just means a shoot can usually be undertaken without the need for more lighting than you;d use for a typical shoot.  The 250% extra light exposure from the speed booster and the 800 base of the bmpcc somewhat makes up for the light losses anyway!
 
 
 
    

optical viewfinder is a brilliant idea
Check out the Sigma ones. They did a few for different focal lengths on their DP and Quattro cameras.
14mm (21mm equiv.) and 30mm (50mm equiv.) are two I am aware of.
And the utterly superb Zeiss finder from the RX1 (35mm equiv.) http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-V1K-Optical-Viewfinder-Camera/dp/B009O06XAS/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1455806726&sr=8-2&keywords=sony+rx1+viewfinder

This badboy is seriously on my radar.    If i take the plunge it'll be mated with a super fast s16mm 16mm/1.4, a pistol grip, and a optical viewfinder, shooting Prores LT.  all focusing will be done with the focus scale on the lens and using hyperfocal distance.  even at f1.4 it'll be pretty easy to get focus right with the scale and knowing usable dof at 1m and beyond.

And for framing you add one of these 

adds to the fun.  13stops of dr gives you an awful lot of headroom!  grab a cheap analog lightmeter, get an exposure on the highlights and work from there.  The amazing thing is that for each clip you can push or pull the footage in raw individually.  with a roll of film if you are underexposed on one shot out of 20 you can;t just push process that one shot otherwise the rest will be over.  even with prores Lt and film dr the lumetri adjustments for exposure give almost as much control as with raw.  

This badboy is seriously on my radar.    If i take the plunge it'll be mated with a super fast s16mm 16mm/1.4, a pistol grip, and a optical viewfinder, shooting Prores LT.  all focusing will be done with the focus scale on the lens and using hyperfocal distance.  even at f1.4 it'll be pretty easy to get focus right with the scale and knowing usable dof at 1m and beyond.

I'm going to go ahead and say it. This $1,000 camera looks slightly better to me than the URSA Mini 4.6 footage I've been seeing -- in terms of color rendition and motion cadence. That's a matter of taste to be sure but damn it if it doesn't make sacrificing resolution a no-brainer for such a beautiful cinematic image. I have one pre-ordered. Maybe i should sell my Pocket and get two of these.
 
 

IMO the A7R2 is hands down the best current video and stills shooter if you have the budget to invest in two metabones adaptors - a non speed booster for  stills and a speed booster ultra for video.  
 
Onto the subject of CA caused by the sony camera itself.  This isn't a viable subject in this debate.  It's down to the fact that 90% of users are using lenses incapable of delivering good enough results for such a high end sensor - particularly with dslr lenses shorter than 50mm.  Try the Loxia 35mm/2 wide open and it's optimised for modern sensors with shorter back focus distances (and the micro lenses) - think of the loxias as modern leica M lenses.  Canon L lenses are prehistoric by comparison - most of which are derived from designs originating in the late 80's before they envisaged digital being the norm, kept in production out of laziness rather than because they deliver.  Ask any 5dsr shooter and they complain that the lenses can;t deliver onto their sensor.  To me the likes of lenses like the 85mm/1.2L are a waste of money for contrasty colour photography.  they fringe so badly that the dof advantage is gone since you need to be at f4 before the image becomes enjoyable to look at.  Take them in low light, indoors without any high contrast edges or use them for b+W work and they are magic.

IMO the A7R2 is hands down the best current video and stills shooter if you have the budget to invest in two metabones adaptors - a non speed booster for  stills and a speed booster ultra for video.  
 
Onto the subject of CA caused by the sony camera itself.  This isn't a viable subject in this debate.  It's down to the fact that 90% of users are using lenses incapable of delivering good enough results for such a high end sensor - particularly with dslr lenses shorter than 50mm.  Try the Loxia 35mm/2 wide open and it's optimised for modern sensors with shorter back focus distances (and the micro lenses) - think of the loxias as modern leica M lenses.  Canon L lenses are prehistoric by comparison - most of which are derived from designs originating in the late 80's before they envisaged digital being the norm, kept in production out of laziness rather than because they deliver.  Ask any 5dsr shooter and they complain that the lenses can;t deliver onto their sensor.  To me the likes of lenses like the 85mm/1.2L are a waste of money for contrasty colour photography.  they fringe so badly that the dof advantage is gone since you need to be at f4 before the image becomes enjoyable to look at.  Take them in low light, indoors without any high contrast edges or use them for b+W work and they are magic.

IMO the A7R2 is hands down the best current video and stills shooter if you have the budget to invest in two metabones adaptors - a non speed booster for  stills and a speed booster ultra for video.  
 
Onto the subject of CA caused by the sony camera itself.  This isn't a viable subject in this debate.  It's down to the fact that 90% of users are using lenses incapable of delivering good enough results for such a high end sensor - particularly with dslr lenses shorter than 50mm.  Try the Loxia 35mm/2 wide open and it's optimised for modern sensors with shorter back focus distances (and the micro lenses) - think of the loxias as modern leica M lenses.  Canon L lenses are prehistoric by comparison - most of which are derived from designs originating in the late 80's before they envisaged digital being the norm, kept in production out of laziness rather than because they deliver.  Ask any 5dsr shooter and they complain that the lenses can;t deliver onto their sensor.  To me the likes of lenses like the 85mm/1.2L are a waste of money for contrasty colour photography.  they fringe so badly that the dof advantage is gone since you need to be at f4 before the image becomes enjoyable to look at.  Take them in low light, indoors without any high contrast edges or use them for b+W work and they are magic.

looks great.  classic case of a weak marketing campaign.  I expect very few here will have even heard of this camera, let alone looked at it as a option.  

I mean it ticks pretty much every single box. And its pretty darn affordable.
s35
m4/3 mount
Log
XLR
NDs
External controls
EVF
You name it.

Plus the nifty stuff like knowing how to crop, prime zoom, etc.
The only thing bothering me (and most Ive talked to) is the videos look. But Im thinking it might be that there isn't really anybody using it, thats how should I say, in our segment.
I mean most demo videos from cameras, be it cinema cameras or DSLRs, look pretty dull.
Its first when people like us get it, slap on our soft vintage glass, grade and cover it in grain that we get excited. 
Ed David could surely make the e-m5ii shine, the Samsungs look pretty boring without some care, and most Sony demos look like "home videos".
I wonder what it would be like, would love to try one. Might even do the (imo) dishonest thing and Buy/return just to put my mind at ease.
This video shows a lot of ungraded Log.
 

I recently acquired a leaf aptus 10-ii (56mm x 36mm sensor), 56mpx.  It's old, noisy and has less dr than my a7rii.  The difference in megapixels between the two is only marginal but each pixel on the aptus has significantly more area.  
Most of the later zeiss and schneider lenses for 6x6 format resolve the same information onto a full frame sensor as a full frame lens does.  for instance my hasselblad 50mm/2.8 distagon wide open is just as good at resolving detail as a contax 50mm/1.4 closed down to f2.8 when compared on the a7rii.  I'd say both lenses fall short of the 42mpx a7rii and just about resolve enough to view the 42mpx image at 66%.  at 100% the lenses run out of resolution for such finely packed pixels.
The difference between the above is that the hasselblad lens has an image circle almost twice the diameter of the full frame lens meaning the projected information onto the 80mm image circle of the hasselblad is nearly 3x the amount of pixels.  granted the performance of the 50mm hassy will deteriorate towards its corner limits on 6x6 but lets say we only use the 645 area (70mm circle).  This still results in a 2.5x advantage in optical resolution.  
 
Now, if you then used your magic and created a nice focal reducer providing around a 0.7x magnification with some generic apo correction to help what are largely film lenses when used on a digital sensor.  squeeze the 2.5x more optical information onto the 42mpx sensor (and likely a 60mpx one down the line) I know I;d buy one.
I'm aware that a focal reduced 80mm/2.8 on the a7rii wont ever look exactly like the 80mm/2.8 on my aptus 10, but it'll be close.  
 
comparing to the slew of boring technically perfect sigma lenses who have no character is a mistake IMO.  I've seen lots of very clean images from the sigma 1.4 art.  but very few that exhibit the optical character/magic from a masterpiece from 1980's Germany.
 
That said, I can;t see many people willing to buy a MF speed booster in reality since it won;t give them the authentic medium format look without investing in the best lenses for MF and having to work around the slow focus mechs and the extreme weight.  my 50mm/2.8 distagon weighs 6 times what the contax 50mm/1.4 does! 
 
 
 

https://www.instagram.com/melting_bloke/

Here it is!
We recorded hdmi 8-bit 4:2:2 out of it and went to the odyssey
 
 
skin tones overall are nice!  and stabilization is amazing.
 The camera was interesting to use - especially considering that it's a 200 ASA camera and has moire and dynamic range challenges - sometimes this is interesting to have to maximize something with limitations. It's difficult, but I guess it disciplines you.

This stands out to me as one of the best tutorials.  what he shows in this video provides the basis for just about anything else you;d want to do as far as grading is concerned.  

This stands out to me as one of the best tutorials.  what he shows in this video provides the basis for just about anything else you;d want to do as far as grading is concerned.  

The film made me look more deeply into the US Presidential Election this weekend and Bernie Sanders appears to be a possible end to the nightmare the hidden hand (Rothchilds, Rockafellas, Bill Gates, etc) behind government and ultimately controlling what happens.  Problem is he'll suddenly get a brain aneurysm or get shot by a maniac before he gets to make a change.  They'll make it happen.  Then another Bush or Clinton will get into power and keep the war machine rolling.  

I imagine using maybe a speed booster 0.64x bmcc version on a M4/3 to E-mount adaptor ring will make that 120p 2.3x crop an advantage.

An anamorphic squeeze of around 1.75x to 1.8x is actually a really nice number.  good levels of defocus, without much loss of sensor area when cropping a 16:9 sensor to deliver a 2.4:1 end result.  It's not about resolution from a big sensor area for me anyway, - it;s all about fov/dof ratio that comes with the bigger sensor area.  to me a reduced squeeze ratio like 1.75x used on a wider sensor delivers a better image than a 2x on a less wide sensor.  a bigger sensor dictates a shallower dof since a longer FL taking lens is selected for the same fov.  the reduced squeeze also allows better image quality over a 2x unit.  16:9 sensors are here to stay.  4:3 is getting more and more rare.  if a camera has a 4:3 mode it's usually a crop of a 16:9 sensor (ursa etc).  The sensors are not tall enough to fully deliver the look of 4 perforation 35mm as can be achieved with the alexa 4;3.  even the new red 8k sensor only just provides enough sensor height
At the moment I see the most exciting prospect within the scope of affordability as an anamorphic system for the black magic micro cinema camera.  this in combination with the 0.58x speed booster and a fast 35mm spherical lens and a high quality 1.75x anamorph will be the ultimate.  global shutter, super low light, smaller sensor meaning easier achieving of image quality within a accessible budget.
 
I think an anamorphic speed booster would also be a wonderful thing to behold!  the a6300 looks to be an ideal candidate and will no doubt get the speed booster type adaptor sales booming again thanks to its aps-c sensor
 
 
 
yep.  it's that feeling of width while also maintaining the defocus separation of the longer lens I love.