Bioskop.Inc

I for one, love DSLRs, but precisely because they do limit you. The consequence of this is that you really have to think about how you want to shoot something & this gives you good experience in planning a shoot. In a way its like stepping back in time, where you have to learn your craft - make mistakes, fix mistakes etc... I personally like to get everything right in camera & never have to say "I'll fix it in post". To me that is just plain lazy & you'll never learn from the mistakes that you should be making if you take that attitude.
RAW seems like a good idea (well its amazing really), but how many people will just use it to avoid learning to film a scene properly?
With film you had to get it right - no excuses. Why should digital be any different.
What makes a film look good is a DP creating a mood, seeing an angle etc... It doesn't really matter what its filmed on/with - if its a good film, its a good film.
If you have a good idea, just shoot it on whatever you've got to hand. It doesn't matter, as no one is going to say "Its filmed on a DSLR, so its shit!"
The highest grossing film of all time (based on how much was spent & the return it saw) is still The Blair Witch Project - made for the price of a used car, lots of ingenuity & some balls!
Of course i want a better cheaper camera - i'd kill for one. The future could & most probably will be bright for low budget filmmakers, but first you need the idea & the know how. In the meantime there's no point getting hung up on codecs, formats, resolution etc...
At the moment i'm as happy as larry & love my shitty 60D, with its moire, aliasing, softish picture & the rest of the crap that it throws in my face just to spite me.

I for one, love DSLRs, but precisely because they do limit you. The consequence of this is that you really have to think about how you want to shoot something & this gives you good experience in planning a shoot. In a way its like stepping back in time, where you have to learn your craft - make mistakes, fix mistakes etc... I personally like to get everything right in camera & never have to say "I'll fix it in post". To me that is just plain lazy & you'll never learn from the mistakes that you should be making if you take that attitude.
RAW seems like a good idea (well its amazing really), but how many people will just use it to avoid learning to film a scene properly?
With film you had to get it right - no excuses. Why should digital be any different.
What makes a film look good is a DP creating a mood, seeing an angle etc... It doesn't really matter what its filmed on/with - if its a good film, its a good film.
If you have a good idea, just shoot it on whatever you've got to hand. It doesn't matter, as no one is going to say "Its filmed on a DSLR, so its shit!"
The highest grossing film of all time (based on how much was spent & the return it saw) is still The Blair Witch Project - made for the price of a used car, lots of ingenuity & some balls!
Of course i want a better cheaper camera - i'd kill for one. The future could & most probably will be bright for low budget filmmakers, but first you need the idea & the know how. In the meantime there's no point getting hung up on codecs, formats, resolution etc...
At the moment i'm as happy as larry & love my shitty 60D, with its moire, aliasing, softish picture & the rest of the crap that it throws in my face just to spite me.

I for one, love DSLRs, but precisely because they do limit you. The consequence of this is that you really have to think about how you want to shoot something & this gives you good experience in planning a shoot. In a way its like stepping back in time, where you have to learn your craft - make mistakes, fix mistakes etc... I personally like to get everything right in camera & never have to say "I'll fix it in post". To me that is just plain lazy & you'll never learn from the mistakes that you should be making if you take that attitude.
RAW seems like a good idea (well its amazing really), but how many people will just use it to avoid learning to film a scene properly?
With film you had to get it right - no excuses. Why should digital be any different.
What makes a film look good is a DP creating a mood, seeing an angle etc... It doesn't really matter what its filmed on/with - if its a good film, its a good film.
If you have a good idea, just shoot it on whatever you've got to hand. It doesn't matter, as no one is going to say "Its filmed on a DSLR, so its shit!"
The highest grossing film of all time (based on how much was spent & the return it saw) is still The Blair Witch Project - made for the price of a used car, lots of ingenuity & some balls!
Of course i want a better cheaper camera - i'd kill for one. The future could & most probably will be bright for low budget filmmakers, but first you need the idea & the know how. In the meantime there's no point getting hung up on codecs, formats, resolution etc...
At the moment i'm as happy as larry & love my shitty 60D, with its moire, aliasing, softish picture & the rest of the crap that it throws in my face just to spite me.

Its not whining, just expressing disappointment!
Most people are working on a tight budget & want the best bang for their buck, which is understandable.

Having gone through the transition from Film, to SD digital & then HD, and having worked for small production companies to a massive giant like the BBC - there are a few things that became v.clear.

These companies don't go out & buy the next new thing - they take the side of caution. In fact in most cases they hire out the equipment or the cameraman with the equipment. When TV went from SD to HD, none of the cameramen who were hired for the BBC went out & bought a new HD camera. The reason was that they needed to test stuff out first before investing (of course, their investment was for £30k & upwards). Again they were looking for the best bank for their buck - they moaned & moaned & moaned. Some of them took a year to decide which camera to buy & took the hit in camera rentals first.

With DSLRs, a fluke revolution seemed in the offing for low budget filmmakers. It was a fluke & all these companies make high end cameras, so of course they want you to buy them.
People have been banging on about the Black Magic & it looks great, but you know v.3 or v.4 will be the killer & not v.1!
So why keep jumping ship for the next best thing? Its a false economy, unless you have cash burning a hole in your pocket & if you do, rent & test out your options (a few £100 vs. a few £1000).

When i went from Film to SD, i couldn't believe the moire & aliasing - it really bugged me. You learn how to avoid it & if you really can't, no audience really cares or notices.

The best advice (when i was starting out) i ever got from professionals was invest in good glass, as that will serve you for life!

I shoot with a 60D & love it! Best of both worlds for the price - photos & video. Its also got the best hack in Magic Lantern, which will only get better & better.
Soon i want to use a better camera, but i'm not buying one thats for sure, i'll rent one.

I love the whining or should that be practical criticism! Its natural, healthy & lots of fun!
It also shows there's a lot of passion out there from the low budget community & a need for more affordable/better cameras.

Firstly the Kowa B&H is an excellent anamorphic - the next best thing to an Iscorama (you hear that claim a lot & its true).

Also, it is great for landscape photos (& timelapses) - the 2x stretch gives you great panoramic ability.
The only thing that will let you down with the Kowa (if you have a good one) is the taking lens & the camera.

Use a prime lens, not a zoom with an anamorphic - this is especially true of the Kowa.
There are lots of vintage lenses out there, which are cheap & sharp. M42 mount ones are great, but since you have a M4/3 camera the world is your oyster as far as vintage lenses are concerned.

Don't fall into the trap of thinking that because a lens is new & expensive, that it will be better than an old lens. Save your money & experiment!

There are loads & loads of forums that deal with anamorphics and/or vintage lenses:
For vintage lenses this is the best resource (the reviews are good, but check out the forum sections)
[url="http://www.mflenses.com/"]http://www.mflenses.com/[/url]

For anamorphics check out the forum sections at:
DVXUser
Cinema5D
Anamorphic Vimeo Group

A 35mm lens will serve you well with the GH2 & the Kowa. You could go up the scale to 50mm.
Just remember that an anamorphic will produce wide angle images - so a 35mm FF image will convert to a 17.5mm on the GH2.

Also don't be afraid to move your tripod (or yourself) back a little in order to get a wider angle!

Redstan clamps are the best, you won't regret spending the money. They aren't lens hoods with holes in them, but proper machined clamps - they are light weight & of great build quality.