Bioskop.Inc

edit: FFS, just post a link, instead of all that shit!
I mean all companies have small print that can fuck you - ever read the iTunes agreement?
 
If they can actually deliver & the image is good, then this could be a groundbreaking product. You could simply start off with a simple set up & use what you've got already. Then buy as you go, until you have what you want.
If it has a sensor as good as or better than the (put your camera of choice here - not going to get into that debate here), it'll be a winner?
And...look,...they...gave...you...120fps...for...all...you...slo-mo...freaks...!
I wonder if its the same company that was talking about doing a modular camera a few years ago? Think that might have been a photography camera though?

Man, you can wash your blacks out a little bit - don't listen to these idiots, since taste is absolutely subjective.
And your footage always looks nice...

What I should have added, is that I'm using FCPX & it appears to automatically fit the 1080 height of the image into the new 858 height of the timeline, but the additional sides stick out.
So what is FCPX doing? Is it somehow squeezing the height into the new size and is that even possible - surely 858 pixels is 858 pixels?
Or is this so boring, that no one gives a shit? Too techy, for the techs?

Man, you can wash your blacks out a little bit - don't listen to these idiots, since taste is absolutely subjective.
And your footage always looks nice...

Fuzzy head this morning - absolutely confusing Focar for Foton. Now I see what you're doing!
Yep, you're best off getting cutting!!!
I remember a while ago, I was having a conversation (via e-mail) with QuickHitRecord about diopters & found a website that might do this sort of thing - can't find it in the ton of bookmarks I have at the moment, but do remember that it was in the US (I'll keep searching).

Man...you're living on a completely different planet from me!
If you give them money up front, like now this minute, then you deserve everything that's coming to you & no BS small print is going to save you from being scammed like a new born child!

Dark?  I think it look good probably used ND filter since its outside on sunny day plus film emulation. But to blame camera . Maybe he should have use best camera in the world (CAMERA NAME HERE PLEASE) instead of BMPCC. Yeah Armen why are you not using best camera in the world instead of BMPCC

Never shot a timelapse on the BMPCC, let alone in ProRes. Experimented in upscaling some of the footage by 100%, in order to zoom in - its possible but has its limits.
Looks Ok on a phone or tablet, but you'll notice the zoomed in bits on a computer.
Oh, wasn't mean to look too sharp - just in case any sharp freaks watch this!
 

Never shot a timelapse on the BMPCC, let alone in ProRes. Experimented in upscaling some of the footage by 100%, in order to zoom in - its possible but has its limits.
Looks Ok on a phone or tablet, but you'll notice the zoomed in bits on a computer.
Oh, wasn't mean to look too sharp - just in case any sharp freaks watch this!
 

Stick to Nikon ai-s - lovely lenses.
Here's some useful links, that really helped me out when choosing which lenses to buy (the first link has spot on evaluations, the second is just serial numbers/dates):
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#rating
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#35

Stick to Nikon ai-s - lovely lenses.
Here's some useful links, that really helped me out when choosing which lenses to buy (the first link has spot on evaluations, the second is just serial numbers/dates):
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#rating
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#35

Nikkor, I own the Mir 24n 35mm. It's an excellent lens for video, very creamy look and long smooth focus ring. Also like Bioskop.Inc states it focuses so close it is practically a macro.
If your looking for something in the Zeiss league you should look into the voigtlander lenses, I own the the 28mm, 40mm, and 90mm and they are all very sharp with great colors and rendering and small.
I have a D750, i'll throw up a Mir 24n test with in up in the next couple of days.

thanks

Stick to Nikon ai-s - lovely lenses.
Here's some useful links, that really helped me out when choosing which lenses to buy (the first link has spot on evaluations, the second is just serial numbers/dates):
http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#rating
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#35

I use the Mir-24 (35mm f2) a lot for video work & it is good - probably the best Russain lens that i've used (I just use Russain lenses or Nikon ai-s).
It comes in Nikon or M42 mount (i've got the M42 version) - the different mounts have different bodies & the Nikon version apparently has more/better MC.
However, I don't really think that its in the same league as a Leica, but then what lens is - it is as good/better than the Nikon 35mm f2. Very good lens, focuses very close (almost macro) & cheap for the Nikon mount version - quality control with Russain lenses can vary.

Problems, maybe?
Or they're all out shooting so much SlowMo that time itself has started to take a toll on them & they...are...moving...so...slowly...now...

Problems, maybe?
Or they're all out shooting so much SlowMo that time itself has started to take a toll on them & they...are...moving...so...slowly...now...

Yeah, it is a bit heavy!
As @bluefonia suggested, Yashica ML primes - a lot cheaper than Zeiss Contax & in the same ball park.
Useful info about Yashica: http://cargocollective.com/yashica/About-Yashica-ML-Prime-Lenses
Or Nikon ai-s, I'm starting to get these & took a punt on a cheap 24mm f2.8, which focuses really close & is lovely.
Here's some really good/useful info for Nikon lenses:
Evaluations (which are spot on): http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_surv.html#rating
Serial No. list: http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/serialno.html#35

I used to think noise reduction was the key and holy grail to professional standard delivery when I first started handling footage in post.  It helps sometimes, but now I'm so used to making sure I'm exposing with base ISO and adequate light to avoid the need altogether.  I can't stand the plastic look that sometimes comes from it, and it really bogs down post-time for all the system resources it eats up.
I hate 'color noise' or the digital blotches that come from compressed video.  Guess that's why I hate seeing rainbow moire but can live with simple aliasing.  Desaturating shadows helps.  And as you said, a little noise never hurt anyone. 

I just got a bit curious and thought it could be interesting to get a sense of how many uses noise reduction?
Be it Neat Video or Red Giant Denoiser or what have you.
For work I have used it on a project in the past and on my first couple of t3i videos. 
But other than that I never use it.
In all my +200 youtube videos there is no noise reduction. Be it the BMPC4K, D16, Sonys a7sii, etc, nope dont use it.
I guess I don't think its worth the time, a little noise never killed anybody. I don't even have my Neat Video license installed anymore.
So what do you guys say, sometimes, never, always?

indeed.  because the front sections of the trump lenses are so over engineered, they are just waiting for some refined main lenses to be used with.  it's looking like a 58mm biotar with an f1.4 widest aperture might be made this year - ultra clean, mc's, less of the biotar.  drop in to replace existing f2 glass in trumps.  it won;t be crazy good wide open, but will provide that extra stop to allow an f2.2 2x oval to be implemented.  a 1 stop advantage.  The 28, 38 and 88 attachments have been designed for 58mm/2 so when a 2x oval is used they'll be able to perform just fine.  and at f1.4 they'll not reduce transmission by a full stop, but more like around 1/2 a stop and they work great on a planar 50/1.4 so should be fine on a 58/1.4.:)
 
The only real disadvantage of OLIVIA Scope is that it'll likely only see popularity within the rental sector, due to the huge cost (compared to typical ownable lesnes like isco's and below.  However I'll hold rental stock here in Bristol for EU service, and there are a good number of indi rental houses signed up in the USA. a few in Japan and Australia.  I hope to be able to do a f2 - f2.8 unit later down the line which will be a bit more affordable, yet still not really a impulse buy.  problem is, there are so many options in this region.  The full size unit is an esoteric piece:)    

WOW! Yes that does look big - nice!
I love my 54, just because it is bigger & gives you the weight that you need to get steady shots handheld - under arm or over the shoulder. I feel this need for small is so counter productive - fixed shots on a [proper] tripod just can't be beat.
The only small attachment that i'll consider using (and am so glad I kept a hold of it) is the Widescreen 2000 - yes you can kinda focus through it (with practice), you do need diopters & you do need to stop down sometimes. All those sterile sharp cheap projector lenses just leave me cold - they really don't have anything to offer.
Rich, really stoked for you - I guess a lot of blood, sweat & tears has gone into the Oliviascope.
Does this mean that you'll eventually make some normal lenses?

I haven't even acknowledged those comments because he's deluded.  There's nothing wrong with his camera.  My pocket reacts exactly how his does - as does every other bmpcc.  All his actions do is increase the price of future products from BM because they have to add costs for the idiot factor.  
 
BM's customer service personel:-
"We got another email from a customer expecting his camera to perform with a iphone torch as lighting.  What should I do boss?"
BM's customer service manager:-
"just send him another one.  Don't bother wasting Mr Petty's time.   The sooner we get his unit back, the less time he can spend shooting crap 'low light tests' and uploading them to youtube"

 

Tell me about it! - the design and manufacturing of the focus mechanism for such a badboy has been a task.  it uses both a beautiful brass helical and a system of rollers / bearings to alleviate droop due to the weight of the huge pieces of glass.  

   
 

If you're doing a wide angle Iscorama-style attachment with a large diameter front, then my statement about the variable diopter being "easy" obviously needs amendment, since the mechanics does become much more difficult.  Although I'm a big fan of big lenses, they tend to require exotic/expensive items like precision linear bearings to keep them moving straight and without play.
Maybe not entirely relevant here, but its interesting the the new Cooke anamorphics also use a pretty basic variable diopter focusing scheme, although the net power is negative rather than afocal:  http://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageNum=0&docid=20140300973&IDKey=735679DAC5C4&HomeUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fappft.uspto.gov%2Fnetacgi%2Fnph-Parser%3FSect1%3DPTO2%2526Sect2%3DHITOFF%2526p%3D1%2526u%3D%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsearch-bool.html%2526r%3D5%2526f%3DG%2526l%3D50%2526co1%3DAND%2526d%3DPG01%2526s1%3Diain.IN.%2526s2%3Dneil.IN.%2526OS%3DIN%2Fiain%252BAND%252BIN%2Fneil%2526RS%3DIN%2Fiain%252BAND%252BIN%2Fneil