Rudolf

Rich, this is totally astonishing. You are gifted with very much talent!
I lost much of my interest for digital cameras during the last year (and I don't understand anything about the technical background) but this...
man thats epic! 
 

The Panasonic GH4 is $1699 and available here at B&H Photo Video
Today only - tune into the B&H Studio GH4 live broadcast here (starting 1PM EDT)

The Panasonic GH4, is it a cinematic monster or a wimpy video camera?

It's a monster. Even compared to the full frame 14bit raw from the 5D Mark III the GH4 holds its own. It represents a big return to form for Panasonic, a consumer camera that pushes way beyond the image provided by the GH3 and AF100. As a 4K camera never has the format been so practical to shoot as it is with the GH4. With file sizes 8x less than on the nearest competitor and a price 5x less expensive than the Canon 1D C, the GH4 is the most exciting camera I have ever shot with at EOSHD.

Read the full article here

Buy an SLR Magic Anamorphot :)

I know Andrew. But that is not an excuse for copyright infringement. Make another edit with another score for your promo work, if you must... If a person is unable to do their business without copyright infringement, there is something terribly wrong with that business imo.

Btw, you mentioned I should research fair use, maybe, I'm not an expert. But I think you should do the same.. the Wiki you link to is exactly where I got that quote from, I'm pretty sure the way you use (copyrighted) music on your video's would not classify as fair use.
 
Also see Pablo's reply.
 
And: http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
 
Anyway, I don't like copyright laws either, but I respect them when creating my own stuff and uploading it to the public. And even though I agree with a lot of the arguments, I don't think justifies to just do as you like.

You can't just strip a sound track off an edit and replace it with a completely different one... Well you can, so long as you're not basing the entire concept of the video around that crucial song, the timing of the edit, the mood, the meaning, the lyrics, the soundscape and the pacing!
 
:)

It would be also appropriate to ask the artist who created the music to inspire your video for permission. Maybe the musician just doesn't like his music being used for any reason...
 
BTW I have made very bad experiences with so called fair music: I sold very little cds 5-6 years ago with a fair lable and discovered later that my cd was on no. 4 of their charts (I googled the my cd and found hundreds of obviously illegal download links).
 
However the only way for me to make some money with my music is to produce GEMA free music which my customers licenses from me
and then may use as agreed!

This discussion is too much about law and profit I think. There is an other interesting question: How big is the portion of the music on that new creation (the video)? 
I have been making music and doing some filming/video for 25 years with very little success but much fun and passion.
Honestly I don't think it is as artistic to create a video with random shot in any city with any people and add some music as to create just a nice piece of music. When you want to create something really new and try to be artistic it is much more satisfying to create everything yourself (including the music) or work with musicians together.
What I try to say is: In many cases the value of the music is higher than some more or less average footage. If you really like the song there is a much higher chance you'll watch the video then the other way round (in my case)
We have to rate the music as art much higher and not just talk about law and money!
 
PS I am not an artist. And I don't understand how so many people dare to call themselves artist?! 

Neither. Copyright infringement.
 
You can agree with it or not, but it's the law. Can't blame Vimeo for enforcing it.

So true, I cannot comprehend that on a creative site people are advocating copyright theft. Some seem so entitle  by them self that they think that there holiday video have to have the music that they want (some multi million dollars production) and that the 20 views from there family and friends is going to magically make a big promo for the artist. Others it is right to pillage the work of fellow artist because either way the money is not going to them but to the big corporation. So lets steal more from them so that they even get less from what they were getting.
 
I comprehend that the implementation, like errors from a bot etc can cause problem but the copyright is something fundamental to protect the rights of artist. If your ambition is just doing some cat, holiday, family and even wedding videos, I can understand that the concept of the sweat and tears that go into the creative work is a bit abstract. But to all those that aspire to create and that the word film maker and not cat maker is appropriate, then copyright should be defended at all cost.
 
Some people on this discussion are just lazy, if you are a genuine creator, either go out and meet and collaborate with other artist. Or take some time and go on the site that have been listed or the web and search for the music and artist and either buy or find venues of collaboration. If your work is of some value, I am sure that you will find other talented people to work with you. With the combination of digital, internet and globalisation it is harder and harder to live out of your art, so if even artist start to question the fundamentals and pillage other fellow artist work in not so long we will have on one side the big corporation producing mostly just mass market shit for only money and on the other side doctors/accountant/lawyers cat shooting film makers and all the artist will be dishwashers/cleaners, because there will be no more way to make a living out of your art.

this is a good thing as the music industry has been decimated in the past 10 years by internet free downloading.
(I have personal experiance of this , budgets have been hugely slashed by record labels as everyone is downloading for free)
If you use copyright material you should pay for it and have permission. nuff said.
This has happened on Vimeo as the Music Industry is finally reacting and trying to get its house in order 10 years too late.
Too many people think the internt is a free for all.

Legitimate question to you Andrew, not trolling here. Would you be okay with me downloading footage that you have shot and re-editing it or repurposing it somehow for my own creative use without permission? Uploaded to vimeo for as a personal or experimental project

As a musician turned video guy I'm not at all opposed to this. I hope that this encourages cinematographers/film makers to go find local musicians and work with them. I sincerely hope that it does! I started shooting a personal documentary on a local coffeehouse about a month ago, and two local musicians were practically begging to help score it. There are tons of musicians out there, just as there are videographers. Much like the video industry, it is now easier than ever to create music at home on a limited budget. 
 
Of course having the ability to write my own music makes this a non-issue for me, so I do understand why it is frustrating to so many. The way I see it though, the opportunity for more collaboration should only lead to better creative potential! 

I don't get the point: If you want something robust get a '54!
That "upgrade" makes all the advantages of the rather light and small Isco obsolete!

The sports car test that i posted was pretty much the same sharpness with & without.
& there have been people saying that with the Metabones SB moire etc... rears its ugly head a lot more than without - so sharper doesn't mean better.
As far as the other FRs, i think they are much of a muchness & getting anal about which is better isn't really worth it.
I'll just be happy to use my Russain & Super Takumar lenses again, with the added bonus of them being that little bit wider & faster!

£1,300 with the Tokina ATX +0.4 Achromat Dioptre...I have the same combination and it's beautiful. Even if it doubled in value from £1,300....you'd have to prise it out of my cold dead hands :).
 
Good luck with buying one, they are magnificent.

The Canon FD 35mm f2 is a safe bet as well as the old Nikon if you like the Nikon look (which you can also get in the 1.4 version but it's over your budget and for my experience I don't think it's anyway worth the extra price.  
 
Check out a clip I once shot on the GH2 with the FD 50mm and the 8Z for reference:
 

 
"Since I will use it mainly for anamorphic shooting, It doesn't have to be super fast" - why do you say that? with the 8Z you're still sharp on f1.4 (the 50mm version).

Julian, just saw your video... very nice and atmospheric!

I will  be making extensive posts on lenses.... new... old, vintage... cheap and expensive and what their main good points are and how to get the best out of them.
And also some useful articles on general lens use that will help improve your shooting and make things more dare I say more 'cinematic' and less 'video' which seems to be what alot are asking for.
so say tuned folks and watch this space......

I think you should have a sub-forum for Andy Lee.  Lenses are so important to making great imagery.  It's so hard to find any reliable source for vintage lenses.

Thanks but no thanks Andrew :) I know I spend (too) much time here, but I can't and don't want to commit to anything right now.
 
I'd still suggest bringing back the 'marketplace' sub forum though. I'll gladly report al the offenders who still dump their ads in the general or anamorphic forums. With the new police it should be easy to move them swiftly :)

Baby Isco, but the quality is no where near up to scratch compared to its bigger siblings. If you can live without dual focus (I certainly can) then the best quality small adapter is the Bolex Moller 8/19/1.5x, simply incredible images.

I would say in first place it depends on what you are going to do with the camera...
I have a GH3 and an OMD em5 which are absolutely enough for my needs (my customers don't have an idea of 4k and raw) - I don't
produce big stuff just for the web and some corporate stuff.
 
But when I want to make something special I grab one of my filmcameras choose appropriate stock and decide carefully on my motiv, subject, cinematography. That is a totally different approach and absolutely worth a consideration. Sometimes I have got the feeling the people who film are much more focussed on an artistic and creative work rather then tech-specs. And keep in mind for film you get a 100 year "warranty" (good storage needed)  :)

Thanxs! Just contacted my seller about the monitor. No I won't upgrade to GH4 as my camera is only one year old. I will use it for quiet a while. I'm not a person who upgrades whenever a new product is available - I think its over consuming. Bye the way not the camera but the person behind the camera defines if a film is good or not  ;)

I would say in first place it depends on what you are going to do with the camera...
I have a GH3 and an OMD em5 which are absolutely enough for my needs (my customers don't have an idea of 4k and raw) - I don't
produce big stuff just for the web and some corporate stuff.
 
But when I want to make something special I grab one of my filmcameras choose appropriate stock and decide carefully on my motiv, subject, cinematography. That is a totally different approach and absolutely worth a consideration. Sometimes I have got the feeling the people who film are much more focussed on an artistic and creative work rather then tech-specs. And keep in mind for film you get a 100 year "warranty" (good storage needed)  :)