Jump to content

Chrad

Members
  • Posts

    509
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Chrad

  1. ​It looks like that should be the proper "Blackmagic Ursa."  When I read "mini," I'm thinking Alexa Mini, or even RED.  Just a critique of their marketing, not necessarily the camera.  It's still too big for my liking, but I just think it's funny that it's called a "mini" camera.

    ​I agree with that. It sure ain't 'mini'. 

    I think this camera is what the original BMCC should have been. A camera with proper ergonomics for filmmaking that doesn't require a huge amount of additional rigging.

     now i know that this new camera with bigger sensor and 5000 bagllion dynamic range will make me better film maker  those 8 other camera that i  have are keeping my creativity down but i know this is the one

    ​It's a nice new tool that could solve some of the headaches we have to face. I don't think any of us are under the illusion that it's going to transform us into better filmmakers.

  2. I don't think it's fixed lens. I think the DVX100 mentions are just there to evoke the memory of a more innovative Panasonic that could still dominate.

    DVX100 was popular with filmmakers for the film gamma and 24p options, as they mention on the blog. I think that's where the comparison comes from. If this is meant to represent for today what the DVX did back then, it can't be fixed lens. Fixed lens is exclusively the domain of broadcast and documentary now. 

  3. ​Which is why so many full frame enthusiasts shoot very small, stationary objects?

    ​Bingo.

    The full frame DOF at f1.2 on an 85mm is so insanely thin as to be impractical for recording objects in motion. Sure, it's nice to have the option available, but the applications of that 'full frame look' are so niche, I don't think it should be a major consideration for the majority of video shooters.

    Stils are another story.

  4. Well that's a load of rubbish. I wouldn't bet against an actual video camera from Panasonic to take on the FS7, C300 etc. Long overdue. 

    ​It would be nice if they put out an 8.8 MP 16x9 'M43ish' video camera for under $4000. Would give them a good niche of the market to themselves.

  5. I just bought a Voigtlander 42.5mm, and maybe it's just my mind attempting to rationalise the new hole in my wallet, but oh my this lens is gorgeous. Just a pleasure to use and hold, and the rendering is brilliant. As long as you can live with the typical Voigtlander purple fringing, it even performs pretty well wide open - much better than the other Voigts in the series. By f/2 it's insanely sharp, but somehow more pleasing than the clinical Pana/Oly lenses.

  6. Bear in mind that Deakins is using an Arri Alexa these days, with a sensor slightly smaller than the super 35 negative in the diagram. So if he uses this lens with the Alexa, he's shooting with a field of view comparable to a true 48mm on a full frame DSLR. I'd say a 50mm will do.

    Of course it's not all about f.o.v., but also the depth of field characteristics of that focal length and the characteristics of the particular lens that matter as well.

  7. ​I understand all that, perfectly. What I think you are missing is that cinema lenses do not have the same FOV as their DSLR equivalents. I learned this at Alex Buono's workshop. He was using a 25mm Canon cinema lens on a Canon with APS-C sensor, but it was yielding a FOV of (roughly) 25mm on a Full Frame. When I asked him about this he told me the cinema lens is designed and marked that way. In other words, our Full Frame focal lengths are equal to the same cinema lens focal lengths on s35. I cannot confirm this with absolute certainty because I don't own any cinema lenses, but this is how I have been lead to understand it.

    Cinema lenses and full frame photographic lenses exist in their own separate worlds. There's no reason for cinema lens makers to manufacture their lenses so as to keep equivalent field of view with the 35mm DSLR standard that they don't even consider. 

    So if you're that guy, a 50mm is a 50mm, it gives the FOV you expect (which is equal to 85mm on FF, but you don't think about that, you just don't think in FF terms) But if you work with FF formats, you think in that formats' terms, so a 50mm is an 85mm.

    The significance of this is to keep in mind how FOV changes with sensor sizes, when you're shooting on a 5D and Scorsese tells you to put a 50mm lens, you put an 85mm one, because he means 50mm on s35. ​

    ​Technically a 50mm on S35 is a 75mm on S35.

    Pedantic maybe, but this is a thread about a 10mm difference. 

  8. Wouldnt sell your EM1 just yet... remember the whole widely reported firmware thing last year that turned out to be a hoax. The source is the same website

    Although, they rated this rumour as FT5 though, meaning it's pretty much guaranteed to be true. Plus, this is launching very soon, they should have correct information by now.

    Take anything rated below 5/5 with a large grain of salt. Not that they are always wrong; this site posted as an unconfirmed rumour that Blackmagic were developing an active Micro 4/3rds camera six months before the pocket was announced.

  9. GH4 is a nice upgrade. Burst mode is amazing. Colour just has a better 'feel' (as in video). The quality of the EVF can't be underestimated. I found it impossible to manual focus with the GH3 EVF, but the GH4 one is nicely sharp, and peaking helps a lot as well. Its comfortable to use, which means I WANT to shoot with it, which makes it hugely better than the GH3 to me.

     

    Dynamic range is similar to GH3, but obviously much better than GH2.

  10. Compare the $8000 (new) FS7 to the ~$7000 (used) 1DC. The 1DC has a very filmic look (1.3 crop)- perhaps the FS7 with a SpeedBooster (1.1 crop, +$600) will compete well. Gotta thank Canon for setting the bar so high- Sony's catching up.

    Does filmic just mean shallow DOF now? Why is a cinema sized sensor (the same as Alexa and Red) less 'filmic' than a traditional stills camera sensor size?

×
×
  • Create New...