dbp

I find it funny how some of you assume that I side with the guy or that I condone his behavior. I don't. It's weird and obnoxious. I just posted it because it's interesting to watch, in a trainwreck sort of way. BUT it does amuse me how afraid of cameras most people are. To answer the question, no I don't mind being filmed that much, if we're talking about public places. Or when I'm a guest at weddings, or happen to be at some venue where they are making a video.

It's like an exaggerated response to what I often get at weddings

Oh, just hearing about the 120t now. Curious to hear about your experiences!

Wow, that sounds like a steal. That camera seemed like it never really hit at its original pricepoint, but the used prices might make it the bargain of the century. Looking forward to hearing your experiences.

Yes, I've combined both. I also feel like I've read that Pro Res is a bit less prone to moire than RAW. It's pretty bad in RAW on wider architecture shots. I'm used to shooting with the GH2/GH4, so having to account for moire all of a sudden is annoying. Don't know if that's a fact, though. Yes, always ISO 800 with pro res. Maximum amount of dynamic range, according to this: http://www.similaar.com/foto/pocket-dr/bmpcc.html

I agree, it is. It's not THAT bad, but with enough shots, enough work and just wanting to get things done, it adds up. I shoot RAW sometimes for work that doesn't require it. Just to play around. Then deadlines come and I always regret it. While I'm glad Resolve is adding some editing features, I still find it clunky and sluggish compared to Premiere CC...especially Premiere CC with a codec like Pro Res. So yeah, no doubt we all agree that RAW is better. It's just always hard to decide how much better, and how worth it it is for any given shot/project. I love having the option though. I'll definitely use it for challenging lighting situations 100% of the time.

Those grabs look great. XC10 seems to have a nice image. If I had the money and could justify it, I'd grab one for sure. Seems very useful for certain types of shoots. Poor dog

After using the BMPCC for a while, I still go back and forth on RAW and Pro Res. RAW is of course, fantastic. But I do think the Pro Res is underrated, and the workflow is such a delight.

^ That's a great post as well, excellent point on the emotional side of things. I'd like to think I'm in the same boat, a pretty easy guy to work with. If I'm being honest, lots and lots of people have the skills I do and can produce what I do, but I always try my best to not be a pain in the ass in any way. Video is stressful for a lot of people. Being on camera is rough. 95% of the people I film are quite nervous, but I usually get good feedback on how I made the process more pleasant. That goes a long way, I think.

What's wrong with R3D? It's a great codec.

^biggest downside with that lens, is attaching filters. I've heard that some will shave down the hood so that they can use a matte box. Still, something to consider.

Coming from editing H.264 files over the years, editing Pro Res from the BMPCC is a delight. I love the codec, and don't mind the size at all when you factor in the speed and smoothness of editing. I'm a huge fan of the whole Pro Res capture + edit workflow and I can totally see why so many shows still just shoot Pro Res with the Alexa. Agreed that the C300 .mxf files are a good happy medium. Higher quality but still cut like butter.

Always loved this Alexa highlight reel:

There seems to be a legion of folks who really love the Sony F35 image, so that's gotta be in contention.

I'll never understand that when a new tool is released to make life easier, there's a weird backlash. So what if people have been making due without it for years? If it makes life easier and makes the practice of what you're doing (in this case, pulling focus) more consistent and reliable, why not embrace it? It's just a tool. Don't use it if you don't want to or feel like you don't need to, but when manufacturers give us more options and open up more creative possibilities, it should always be celebrated IMO.

Twixtor / Post solutions can work to get beyond that 30p --> 24p range sometimes, but as others have said, it's very hit or miss. Seems to depend alot on the speed of the subject's body parts and what's going on in the background. Movement against a messy background usually trips it up. Fast shutter speeds definitely help. Premiere's new optical flow slow motion can produce acceptable results sometimes, and it renders MUCH faster than twixtor.

Natural is the best profile on the GH4, hands down I think. Perhaps not as much grading room as V-Log or Cine-D, but the colors are usually pleasing. GH4 is a hell of a workhorse camera, no doubt about it.

Wouldn't an iphone with a decent lav mic fit the bill? Especially if you were in a room with plenty of daylight coming in.

The LS1 is next on my shopping list. I've read/watched a ton of reviews and they seem to have nothing but praise.

I get your point for narrative, but for events/anything live, it's very valuable at times.

As soon as you get into heavily stylized grades, there's going to be a large degree of subjectivity. Still fun to discuss, though. When stylized grading is done well, I like it. But 95% of the time with stuff I see online, it looks hokey and I think the footage would've looked better with a more natural (albeit safe) look. It's risky for sure. edit: It's often done well with higher budget/hollywood stuff. I think it's because there's a specific plan and reason. The art direction, color palette are all designed to compliment the grade. Whereas with random online stuff, it's just some LUT thrown on to random footage with no real plan.

There was a Raven clip just posted recently. Unlit in some gym, and some people were getting nervous thinking the camera was junk. Not realizing that any camera is going to look ho-hum under crappy gym lights.

Gimmie proper CinemaDNG support or nothing Adobe! Naw, but seriously. That stuff all sounds cool too.

I do for some wedding videos where it gets nasty. Sometimes you just don't have control. I like the fine grain of the BMPCC. I *really* don't like the plastic look of aggressive NR so if I use it, I try and do sparingly.

For BMPCC raw, I'll go 90-95%. Pulled back in post, it looks great. For GH2/GH4, I'll expose closer to how it'll look in the end. Pulled back in post, even if not clipped, does not look great.