samuel.cabral

@samuel.cabral You mean https://www.vid-atlantic.com/anamorphic ?

Last time I checked Canon said they would sue ML if they tried to release more builds hence why there's been nothing for the 80D, 5Dmk4, and 1DXMK2. Canon still wants you to spend $7K (C200) for good video features.

I used to use Pentax as my main system and have had a few FD lenses too.        Most of those lenses have gone but I still have a couple of FDs and K and M42 mount lenses.    They were certainly different for the most part.
FD 50 1.2 L was my favourite normal lens (until I got the FE Sony Zeiss 55 1.8) but my Pentax 50 1.2 k was another I loved but they were very different (sold the FD and tossed the Pentax when it fell to bits from overuse) and both would have been fairly similar in age I think.
I might see if I can shoot my ancient Promura 28 2.8 in m42 mount against my ancient EF 20-35 2.8 L at 28mm and then the 20-35 against my also ancient FD 24 1.4 L at 24 2.8.
I am not even sure if the Promura has any coating or maybe a single coating

This is a typical filmmaking story: no time, have to hurry up and of course no budget ? This is a story about the shoot of our music video and about the mistakes, which you should avoid. 
 
The band: 3 people + me (also the director of the shoot) The crew: 1 DP, 3 assistants The lights: 5500K thungsten studio lights + Small Aputure Amaran portable LED light The camera: Lumix GH4, Mitakon Lens turbo Lenses: Soligor 1.33x anamorphic adapter, Pentax SMC 50mm f1.7, Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, Canon EFS 18-55mm, Canon 85mm f1.8,  Gear: Shoulder rig, Fotga DP500II follow focus, manfrotto 550 tripod + fluid head, 2m home made camera slider  
The pre production started one month before the shoot. I did everything myself: I wrote the script, made the storyboard, wrote the shotlist, etc. I tought that I am fully prepared, but I wasn’t since the whole video was shot at night with a very limited ligthning setup. I did not have the time to try out what are the best settings for the GH4, but will get back to this later.
A month before the shoot I sold my AGFA 1.5x anamorphot, which was a very-very big mistake. I missed two great anamorphic lens deals on ebay so 5 days before the shoot I was without anamorphic gear which was one of the keys to the videos feel. Just few days before the shoot, an EOSHD forum member offered me a 1.33x Soligor and I took it. It arrived 2 days before the shoot, so I quickly checked the fastest aperture I can use, than I had to realize: there is no way I can shoot every scene with anamorphic lens attachment. 
I have my GH4 for 6 months now, before it I was shooting on 5D MKII & t3i. When I got the Lumix I automatically set my PP to James Millers (i really like his work and trusted his settings). After shooting on several live events it performed great, it was easy to color correct and the image was pleasing. Too bad I didn’t read Noam Kroll’s article on GH4 PP settings before the MV shoot. I screwed up, and I did the worst thing that a videographer can do: I trusted my cameras LCD screen, not my knowledge and instinct. I was reminding myself, but we just simply did not have the time to figure out the best settings. Never trust your camera’s screen (but you already know that).
The location was nice a huge house with a garden. The first 1,5 hour went to packing and setting the stuff up, than 3 hours was the filming of the band with a very easy 2 light setup + 2m dolly. We thought that it would be great if the band is sitting while playing, but to make sure we’ve got everything, we shot the band in a standing position as well. And we did good, I ended up using just that one shot, because the sitting did not work as expexted.
When we moved outside I switched the anamorphot for a Pentax SMC 50mm f1.7, I shot it wide open, than I cropped the footage. I think I was shooting at base, 400 ISO. On the screen it looked okay, in fact blacks were crashed and the image was underexposed, which caused me a lot of noise. This is why an external monitor is handy.
The story part was filmed in 3 hours. There were 15scenes/34 perfect shots I had to make, the first 5 shots already took one hour of filming. We were getting really stressed that we can’t finish the shoot that evening. This stress caused a lot of trouble, we did not had the time to figure out the best lightning, we forgot to double check the camera’s settings so I filmed the half of the evening with wrong shutter speed which caused me a lot of flicker, bad ISO settings, and we didn’t even had the time to check the filmed clip to verify if the focus was pulled badly or not. 
During the post production I found out that some of the scenes are really blury, so I decided to go back, ask the actress once again, and reshoot some of the scenes. But I did not have my crew then, and I sold my soligor meanwhile, so a small Aputure LED was my main light, and i used a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 lens to reproduce the soligors 24mm anamorphic feel. I feel sorry that I did not tried to shoot it with a 2x anamorphic lens, that would give it better depth and flavour.
This all caused me a lot of trouble in post production. After cutting the video I had to spend a lot of time in after effects to remove the flicker. Grading was like hell, the picture was absolutely orange, we forgot to set the white balance, so I tried to grade it with Resolve, but the XML does not went through properly because there were too many interpreted footage (from 60 to 24fps), etc. Than I tried to make it happen with speedgrade but after messing with the clips I stayed with Lumetri colors. Every clip is graded with lumetri, well it took me around 10 days to adjust each clips settings, and it’s still far from perfect. Than came another issue: the noise. I tried to reduce it with denoiser, which helped me a lot, but it made my premiere really, really slow.
 
Anyway, here’s the result, it's not perfect but I did my best to make something watchable from it
 
And here’s a cut to show the difference between unprocessed and post-processed footage.
 
What do you think guys? Cheers!
Alex

It sucks. I remeber showing a doc I spent hours grading to a friend on his dads TV. It looked like a low quality porno.

The XC10/15 and EOS-M need to have a love child - the EOS-MXC using the C200's sensor and the EOS-M lenses. I dig the XC15, but the fixed lens is a deal breaker for me. So is the m50's rolling shutter. 
Chris

Thanks @EOSHD_Twitter and @mercer!
I need to do more testing. The rolling shutter is so so bad though. Is it worse than a6300? Looks like it to me. This camera just needs to be locked down when in 4K mode lol. 
Speedbooster is really working well. I need to pick up some EF glass to do more tests. M50 with speed booster makes Canons only fullframe mirrorless camera!  
One extra thing I’m trying out is adding an adapter to the 22mm f2. I love that little lens and it’s really the best part of the EF-M system. With a beastgrip wide angle lens, it converts the 22mm to a 10mm f2 lens! Haha. Fun stuff. Keeps the autofocus too. The beast grip wide angle lens is pretty crap. Only paid $14 for it. I’m sure there are better adapters out there. But this setup is nice and small. I ordered a step down ring so I can actually screw it on the lens. 
 

I really can't see how this camera will disturb the Lumix shooters. Apart from all the good stuff which BM is known for (such as colour science, colour science and maybe colour science too), the lowlight performance is expected to be worse than GH5 and the crop factor is a deal breaker for many shooters. You can't go wide enough with a 1 inch sensor, nor handheld. CFast cards are expensive too and the majority of GH5 users are still bitching for the terrible autofocus performance, oh wait to see this baby  Don't get me wrong, i believe this will be a monster tool for many of us, but it won't be GH5's Nemesis in any case. A better cinema camera? Yeah why not. But don't expect to see this used in weddings & documentaries. 

Whatever fantastical AI driven gazillion megapixel light field camera recording onto a grain of rice that manufacturers come up, you can bet your life they still won't put a microphone input on the entry level ones.

Did a quick review of the RX0 and shot on Pro Color 3.0! Really love this profile! It was a little over saturated on the RX0. Once I dialed the saturation down it looked great. 
 

It doesn't have a clean HDMI output... oh my...

https://***URL not allowed***/canon-m50-announced-canons-finally-goes-4k-mirrorless/

Last place I will paste this, promise
But I thought it was relevant in this thread since many wonder why Canon is selling so much more than others even when some specs are lower.
It could be because they nailed a spec that matter.

Now I'm just waiting for viltrox to make a speed booster to adapt ef lenses to M mount and I'm good to go.  V

Yup. The preproduction 200mbit HD that was released is what I always liked the most from the GH4 and it has many times tempted me to buy one. Specially now when they are so cheap.
I just wished I could get it in the smaller bodies.

Panasonic’s 1080p really does look nice. It’s a shame they don’t offer the higher bitrate 1080p on their lower tiered cameras.

Well... I didn't lie! 
But it looks like these guys came up with a very clever mod for the sony Rx0 (1 inch sensor):
https://www.back-bone.ca/product/ribcage-rx0/
With a Speedbooster i think we can have something close to 2x crop (or you can enjoy with your c-mount lenses like on bmpcc times). 
Unfortunately this price is hard to justify.. 

And just to stress that the purpose of this particular prodder is to help develop colour profiles rather than being an end thing in itself, in case you thought I was advocating twiddling around like Kraftwerk while you're recording video.
Though having said that, I think that there is a place for a similar type of control surface (one with faders as well as pots and a few switches) to operate the cameras in terms of the rest of its functionality like shutter, iris and focus. In that way, the colour profile function could just be switched into a second layer and be permanently available.
Should also mention that you will be able to save a lot more than the one custom profile that Panasonic offers you with this system so once you have all of these parameters as you like them then you can save the whole snapshot for instant recall via buttons on the controller.
If this gets any traction you'll also be able to easily share them with each other too to load on to your own cameras.

I have banned Evgeny's two accounts for trolling.

I have the 28 f2.8, the 50 f1.7, the 135 f2.8 and the 28-85 f3.3-4 which I've built up over a few years if I see them cheap.
The one I've been after for a while is the 85 f1.4 but never found one cheap enough to make me cave in!
Until now....
Well, until tomorrow at least.
I've found one in London but the same place has also got a used Fuji 23 f1.4 for a silly price and which would probably be more useful (but I could easily persuade myself otherwise !) so I've been agonising over it as I can't get both. To break the impasse, I thought "I know, I'll put my Sigma Art 35 f1.4 on the X-T2 with the Lens Turbo and do a few shots and see if I can dissuade myself of needing the Fuji so I can get the Contax Zeiss....."
I took the Lens Turbo out of the ever growing box of adapters I've acquired, went to put it on the camera at which point one of the elements promptly dropped out and smashed on the floor. 
I don't know if this is God's way of telling me to get the Fuji (because there'll be no speed boosted Nikons for a while now) or the Contax Zeiss.
He was telling me to get both wasn't he?
Yeah, lets go with both.

Yes.
There are two polls running on here for features and controller choice.
So its very close now. 
A bit delayed because there will be some different hardware that its going to run on so I need to re-write stuff but its weeks rather than months.

You could do with some sort of hardware controller that let's you adjust the exposure compensation on the fly using dedicated buttons....

And wood tones.
You are absolutely right. I've  totally given up on trying to discuss with him now.
He ignores my questions but demand I answer his.
I tried in various ways explain that some full frame cameras cant use higher ISOs than small sensor cameras (it varies from camera to camera).
I tried to explain that not everyone is willing to change shutter speed because that effects the motion blur.
I tried to explain that for example a 12mm lens is more likely to have barrel distortion than a 35mm.
I clearly showed (what most of us know) that exposure doesn't change with sensor size, the notion that crop factor applies to aperture is a myth.

But most of all he doesn't comprehend that this is for ME and not HIM. If he don't give a rats about ISO noise, use NDs or only shoot landscapes then that's fine.
If DOF is all that matters then he can go ahead and calculate any way he wants. I don't care.

But I do care about the endless amount of beginners contacting me and asking if its true that their phone can do everything that a FF can.
Or the countless beginners who are told that they shouldn't consider for example a BMPCC because they then "need a f1.8 lens just to match the exposure of a f4". Only to find out later that it was total BS and that exposure remains the same.
Not to mention the guys (in my experience most girls just shoot and don't go on about meaningless specs as much as guys) who says "there is no wide angle for the BMPCC" just because they don't get that comparing formats is totally useless. A 12mm on s16 is a wide lens and the shooter shouldn't give a crap about what a 12mm looks like on an old box camera with glass plates and a gunpowder flash.
They should learn to use their camera.. that's all.
So your right Tweak. In order to remain sane I will stop trying. He can believe and think what ever he wants.

 

Funniest thing I know, and that happens all the time. At least once a week:
Someone tells me that camera X is much better and produces better images than camera Y and calls me an "idiot" (or much worse) for using camera X.
I ask them to send me an example of the images.
They say "sure" and send me 7... or 12%... or a graph......

Im sorry but charts can suck my balls

I think what people fail to realise here is that for most people using MF lenses (or any vintage lens) I'm sure has nothing to do with whether you can get other "equivalent" lenses to match or do an "equivalent" job... it's all about the things that aren't supposed to be there, the "mistakes" if you will that make the image interesting. It's like playing music, jazz as an example, the notes you don't play and the unexpected notes you do play make what you are doing interesting to some people. If you just played a super predictable structured melody I don't know many musicians personally who would be overly impressed...
That being said not everyone may enjoy what you are doing (they never will in life) but if something has worth and merit to you don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

I will give you the big secret, everything you do in your day to day life is pointless, in fact life is pointless. There's no plan waiting for you at the end, no one there to pat you on the back and tell you did life right. Just do what makes you happy and help others where you can  .

Sure, you can do that. If you want to be awesome at making cat videos. 
(Street scenes are hardly ever awesome)
If that's what you want, no problem. It's fine. 
If you really want to make films and movies however, TRUST ME: Do. Not. Wait.
Just go do it and try your hardest. Don't let ignorance about technical details slow you down. 
To hell with ignorance.  A little naïveté can be a blessing!
Never think you can't accomplish a scene or shot simply because you don't have the best "x" on the market.  Compelling stuff can be made with the "y" stuff you already have.
The simple ambition to go out and make real stuff will leap frog you over everyone else on the planet playing with their cameras rather than being filmmakers with their cameras. 
I don't know.  Maybe you just want to experiment with gear.  Most here are the same, including me.  All I can tell ya is that in filmmaking solutions follow creativity and not as often visa versa.
All that said, start with a cheap LUMIX M43 cam, a cheap Chinese speed-booster, and three cheap f2.8 manual prime lenses. 24mm, 50mm, 85mm.  --Outboard audio recorder with a decent boom mic (and operator), and a modest collection of Aputure LED lights.  That's more than enough and more powerful imaging equipment than most of the masters of cinema from the mid-20th century had at their disposal.