Jump to content

ScreensPro

Banned
  • Posts

    379
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ScreensPro

  1.   A full frame sensor will suck up far more light than an s35 or m4/3 equivalent... So stopping down (at full frame) just levels the playing field a bit. Having FF is only a benefit, when you talk about low light shooting.   even if you decide to open up to,say f1.4.... at least full frame gives you that option. On your s35 and m4/3 equivalents, you will need faster (and often expensive) lenses and, therefore, shallower DOF..  just as hard to control focus.   this is basic stuff.   also... With improvements in ISO.... Stopping down in low light becomes a usable option.
  2. Just stop the lens down.   I generally shoot f/4 or f/5.6 when using full frame.   As for the mount... Canon has the best still lenses, by far (other than the super high end stuff)... You can also get Nikon and PL mounts,plus a few other.... Plenty of choice.
  3. unless you are obsessed with resolution... It is much nicer than the GH2.   Colour rendition, DR and low light are way better. I'd happily shoot a short on a 5DIII   People get too caught up with paper specs.... Same reason the C300 gets a bashing. If you couldn't make a feature, ready for big screen release, on a C300... You can forget doing it on any other camera too.
  4.   So... you'd prefer moire and aliasing over a small drop in resolution and maybe 1/2 stop less DR?   Again, look at the bigger picture... Think about real world work scenarios that alot of us have to deal with.   The 5DIII is the best (maybe 2nd behind the 1D-X) on the market.
  5.   You realise the 5DIII is the top selling, full frame STILLS camera.   They would lose millions if they stuck on an articulated screen. The stills shooters would go nuts.   You really need to look at the bigger picture.... It is a stills camera.
  6. The 5DIII was not the huge step forward that some would like.... But it was a functional upgrade... Giving us fixes for the main problems of DLSR shooting.   Unfortunately, people have bought into the "1080p is not enough" line that RED sold..... and rather than push for 10bit, 4:2:2 and better DR etc... We are dragged back into a resolution war (one that might never go mainstream).   For 99% of us.. at least those who's work is aimed at TV viewers.... the 5DIII resolution is fine.
  7. I feel a bit sorry for Canon.... The 5DIII got a bashing from alot of people.....   But the most vocal comments about the 5DII were as follows:   Fix the moire - done Fix the aliasing - done Fix the jello - better Better codec - done Headphone out - done   Very few people were crying about the resolution when the 5DII launched and was being used in top productions.... Yet that one flaw is now magnified out of all proportions... Partly due to the craze for 4K and new formats like 2.7k and 2.5k... even though the vast majority of shooters will not need it yet and the vast, vast, vast majority of clients and viewers will be very happy (unless they sit 1ft from the screens).   The 5DIII is a great camera, a huge upgrade from the 5DII in terms of stills... and ticks alot of boxes for video.   As for the HDMI output.... It should make a bit of difference when you grade. You should see improvements in banding too.
  8. That's my point though.... It is a fantastic camera at what it does, which is POV shooting outdoors, with lots of light.. you can even get nice slow-mo, outdoors.... But to start going on about it being a something close to a cinema camera is just bizarre. For anything other than POV or action shots, it is a $400 camera. A decent one.
  9. "In fact with an interchangeable lens mount the existing Hero 3 Black Edition would make a superb 16mm cinema camera" I've got a GoPro3... had it a few days now.... It is amazing for the price and great at what it does... But the above statement is ridiculous. The sensor is clearly nowhere near 16mm.... The low light is still very bad and creates very ugly compression.. needs tons of light at 48p or more.... DR is about 9 stops... 9.5 at a push. 2.7k scales down to "ok" 1080p, not GH2 levels, from my eyes. Other than paper specs of 2.7K and charlie chaplin 4K mode.... what possibly makes you think this has anything close to the levels required for 16mm cinema work?
  10. Adding a 10bit infrastructure is not a "firmware rewrite".
  11. Very nice. Good to see a bit more camera movement than your normal work*, it adds an extra bit of depth and character.   * not that i have anything against your other stuff.
  12. I'm not sure that 4K or 48p are the problem here.... Film has often resolved that sort of resolution and 48p, other than less motion blur, shouldn't affect the set/make up too much.   I think the bigger problem is that 3D tends to rely on a deeper DOF, so more of the set/actors are in focus for prolonged periods of time.
  13. The problem with this is it is a bit of a Pandora's box effect..... As soon as one or two critics mentioned it, the other critics couldn't help but look for the issue.... and this will spread and spread. Even the general public will be looking out for the "48fps effect" that they have read about.
  14. I'm not sure the dragon will do much to the F55 sales..... Most people i know who make the decision are all talking about the global shutter, onboard, edit ready 4K and dual recording.   ISO will be similar and 14 stops of DR is alot for nearly every situation. Unless you happen to be a production company without lights, who exclusively film going from caves into midday sun.... Then 16 stops DR wont be a make or break deal.
  15.   It is worth remembering though, that if you want a broadcast/edit ready codec on an Epic (a must, for alot of productions).... You will need to add the $13k meizler module.   Both cameras, kitted out for a general production will be roughly the same price... with a couple of pros/cons over the other... Epic Dragon, maybe better DR and smaller (less so with the meizler).... F55, global shutter and (arguably) better ergonomics.
  16. If your current clients are liking the Canon look, i'd stay with them.   From what i've seen of the Gh3, the DR still doesn't seem to be of the levels of the 5DIII and Canon colour seems to get a nice response from the general public. It might lack a bit in resolution, but it still has something special about it.   BMCC will need a decent rig and, regardless of what some people will have you believe... will limit your shots due to the lack of wide and fast glass.   The wedding stuff i've shot, people just react well to shallower DOF... Maybe because it matches well with alot of their still shots and it has a more magical look to it.   Shallow DOF is being talked about around here as if it is something bad..... It is just another creative choice and fits perfectly with some wedding shots.
  17.   You think the RED1-M was a better sensor than the F35?   Sony and Arri have been ahead of RED on sensor tech... RED just used resolution as the ultimate goal, whereas ARRI and Sony concentrated on DR, colour, skin tones....   Please note, i'm not discussing prices, fps, raw etc.... Just the sensor tech and Jim Jannard's claim that RED are the most invested.
  18. i like RED products, but....   "RED is more invested in sensor development than ARRI or Sony"?   Really, care to share the proof, as ARRI are kicking their ass with current sensors. Sony's F55 has 14 stops with a global shutter....
  19. +1 for a GH2.... It's a sweet camera, if you can't make something great with that, you can't make something great, full stop. For the money paid, it still surprises me every time I check out my footage.
  20. Unfortunately, the sad thing is, the majority of shooters might be able to get their hands on an F55 before a BMCC..... Nullifying this whole conversation.   I'm fairly late on the pre-order list and don't expect to be shooting BMCC until well into next year.
  21. just checked out your site, andy.... some very solid looking stuff in there. Do you guys ship to central Europe?
×
×
  • Create New...