Xavier Plagaro Mussard

So far they've only managed a picture of Darren Aronofksy
Too bad

If Digital Bolex got a picture of Wes Anderson holding the D16, people would go nuts.

Yeah, BMMCC, more like they Better Make Me Cameras, C'mon!

Would still call the doctor.

Hello my fellow anamorphic friends!
It's time for upgrades and because of that some of my gear must go! Lenses will be shipped from Vancouver, BC - Canada.
I only accept PayPal. Taxes and shipping are my responsibility.
If interested, reply here, send me a PM, or an email!
ferradans@gmail.com
One last thing before we get to the lenses: I'm currently selling a Cinemascope t-shirt, unique stuff. Price is $25, including shipping. Click here to get yours and be sure to send me which size you want it (M, L, XL). This is my attempt to fund the Anamorphic Cookbook and all the Anamorphic on a Budget videos so any help is appreciated!

Now to the pretty glass part...
ISCO WIDESCREEN 2000 MC (1.5x stretch, focus through)
Click for photos of the lenses.
The best focus through adapter out there (meaning you use the taking lens’ focus ring). 1.5x stretch, Isco branding and quality, excellent performance and a very compact, solid and lightweight build. I have two of these lenses for sale, each one fitted with a 62-72mm step ring for diopters or single-focus solutions. Glass is in pristine condition, no scratches, spots, dust or fungus (which is almost a miracle considering the age of these lenses). They come with original front and rear caps plus a regular 72mm front cap. SALE DOES NOT INCLUDE REDSTAN CLAMPS.
For more information, check my review!
Price - USD700 each, shipped
ISCO 16:9 VIDEO ATTACHMENT Mk I - or "1.33x Iscorama 54" (1.33x, single focus)
Click for photos of the lens.
This is an extremely hard to find adapter, in plain words, it’s an Iscorama 54 with 1.33x stretch, which turns a 16:9 sensor into an automatic Cinemascope machine. Single focus operation, set your taking lens to infinity and shoot away using the Isco’s focus ring. Focus is smooth and glass is perfectly clear: no blemishes, scratches, fungus, dust or anything. Goes as wide as 40mm on full frame. Comes with both original front and rear caps and a Redstan clamp (72-77mm), which makes rear thread 72mm or 77mm according to your preference. Front thread is 95mm.
For more information, check my review!
Price - USD2600 shipped
CENTURY OPTICS 58mm ANAMORPHIC (1.33x stretch, focus through)
Click for photos of the lens.
The Century Optics is one of the most recommended adapters for people starting out with anamorphics and I sincerely don’t understand why people even complain about it. This one is in perfect shape, no damage whatsoever to the glass (no dust, scratches or fungus) but one or two tiny scuffs to the body (see photos). Stretch is 1.33x and rear thread is 58mm, making it super easy to attach to taking lenses. Goes as wide as 35mm on full frame, which is very good coverage (losing only to the Panasonic LA7200) and focusing is done using the taking lens’ focus ring. Close focus can be challenging but a cheap diopter kit is enough to solve the problem. It comes with original front and rear caps and an adapted 77mm front thread for attaching diopters (not shown in photos).
For more information, check my review!
Price: USD650 shipped
 

We talk about image quality all the time, but the truth is we love old lens because of their defects!

In Italy or in Spain, when there is a corruption case, they always say it's a bad apple. But it's not a bad apple, the system doesn't work if you can steal money while being a politician or a high white-collar. It's the same system that makes most business to have adequate. If you competitor pay low-wages, don't pay software and pays with a 6 month delay, it's very difficult you can compete paying good wages, in time, etc. So with the idea of making money, the moral/economic/politic standards are plumbeting... 

Actually yes (and sorry because I have a BA in anthropology) - this was how the majority of the world operated for roughly 70,000 years.  
There was no farming. There were no lords or slaves.  We lived tribal-based.  And we worked 20 hours about a week.
The world of today is based on the simple fact that life became unsustainable with the increasing population growth.  Not enough nuts on the ground.  Hunting animals was actually more done recreationally, as it wasn't easy back then with rudimentary tools to hunt down animals that are faster than us and stronger than us.
Agriculture started because of the population increase.
This is when different structures of society formed. In China, it was more a rent-based farming structure.  Rice was the main crop.  You would have your own rice paddies, and give a cut to the person who owned the land.
In Europe, it was feudal. Most people were serfs.  You worked for a king.
The world of today is run primarily by the military-industrial complex, as president Eisenhauer mentioned.  Our lives are dictated by those who have the biggest guns (nuclear weapons) and the most money (corporations).  
We can't ever go back to Hunting/Gathering.  There are simply too many people and not enough resources.
It's this world we were born into.
We can choose to run and participate in our countries in a fair and just way, such as many European countries and Australia/New Zealand, or side more with the USA, Russia, and China, which run their countries based on fear.

So, it's the FS5 with a Speedy Gonzales?

FWY, its not allowed to criticize Red or claim that they have missed deadlines on the internet, otherwise some Hummer driving dudes in Okleys will come to you're house...

Anyone else remember Red's 2009 NAB announcement?


 

I remember when I was a child in the 90s when seeing rehersals or takes on a movie set in a making off I always asked myself why everything looked so crap compared to how it looks later in the movie.

Haha, CSI at your heart out. 'Zoomify!', 'Now enhance!'. Finally the quality is there!
 

Finally a CCTV cam you can actually zoom in a little bit on!!!

Some LED makers are using different color temperatures as a reference to attain 100% CRI (or close too), when the actual CRI would be much less than 100% if noon day sun light was used as a reference. So always good to read the detailed spec sheet and see exactly where they get that rating from.
If 100% CRI is the ultimate goal in lighting, you can use the following:
Incandescent lamp = 100 CRI 
Candle Light = 100 CRI
Natural Sunlight = 100 CRI
...In other words, shoot with the lighting used on The Revenant...or Barry Lyndon. 
If the camera still renders skin tone as uncooked sausage meat with these lighting sources (and you can't correct easily) - it's the camera not having an accurate rendition of colour. 

You're using the Yongnuo's, aren't you? Might want to give the Aputure Amaran range (also a lot of other rebrands out there) a go. CRI95+. Aputure has an awesome collection of panels. Nitsan has tried a lot of them out over on his channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/NitsanPictures/search?query=aputure and loves the AL-H160 rightfully so.

I found this today, I think it's great: 
 

I just sold my A7rii today. After having it for a few months I had nothing but huge headaches. I did many test with a 4k video devices recorder. Besides the worst rolling shutter I've ever seen no one seems to be talking about the horrible judder when panning. At first I thought it was just I'm shooting in 24p and viewing on a computer monitor at 60hrz. But further test in every setting, shutter speed and frame rate seem to have far more than every other camera I've shot with. Another problem is in 60p and 24p 1080 the noise level is bad. I also kept getting bad moire and aliasing in full frame 4k and 1080p especially in the highlights.
Granted as a small compact photo camera it's frickin pretty awesome. But for video the image only looks good in crop mode 4k and as soon as it moves or things in it moves it falls apart. I barely took it on a shoot because of how much testing I had to figure out before I felt comfortable with all its down sides. And is not worth it.
I went back to my Nikon D750 with a external recorder for now until I decided what to get next, but even though the 1080p image is softer everything else is far better. Rolling shutter very little. Noise level very clean upto 6400. Slow motion just as good as the 24p and very smooth. Color science far better. Dynamic range little less. Post with it is super easy. It's a shame this camera has gotten no attention, but it such a reliable camera its what we wanted out of the 5D Mk iii but quickly forgot about with all the 4k cameras that just keep adding more new problems, headaches, time and money all for the sake to say its 4k.

A first report on overheating, he says there's none and the camera is much cooler to the touch compared to the A7's. 
 

Will get a fake student ID.

That's the biggest problem of all. Not only they create pages and pages of menus, they don't even explain well how you should use all those options! 

I lens that would be high on the list for this is the 35mm f1.8 OSS.
I had it for the FS100 and liked it. Sharp and the stabilisation was good.
Its almost a pancake, so a sweet companion to the small pz zoom. Couple those with a set of vintage primes and you're golden.

Marco, the edge of the NX1 is that it has been out one year and a half before! Use your camera to make great videos and forget about "spec competitions"!

Now they must produce a Sony FS5 Andrew Reid Limited Edition!!!

I’ll admit it, I use camera forums a lot.  Too much, probably. I use them to check out the latest cameras and lenses and lights and accessories. I waste about two hours a day on them.  Time I could spend watching “the View.”
When I started out shooting part-time in 2005, I got a DVX100 because a juggler who was a featured extra on a tv show called “Sons of Saddam” told me to.  “Cause it does 24p.”  I didn’t know what that meant, but I plunked down $3,000 - all the money I had in savings on this camera.  
The camera could have been a bust.  But I did it because a juggler who played one of Saddam’s sons goons said so.  That’s how easily influenced I am.
Then I bought a HVX200, not even testing it first.  “Cause it can do HD.”   I bought the Redrock micro adapter because I watched the work of MacGreggor and some other DPs back then do stuff on a Gorilla 35 lens adapter that hadn’t even come out.  I hadn’t even tried it first.  Just sent in my credit card info.  
Rinse and repeat.
All these periods of time I bought things just based on videos I saw shot on them. No tests - I didn’t understand tests.  Just videos shot with them and the opinions of people I respected.  I could look at screen grabs but just scroll down to their opinions.
Well finally 11 years later, I am seeing what I was doing - buying based on people’s emotions.  Based on the emotions of people whose work I liked.
This is fine to do, but it’s not always the smartest thing to do.  
There are several, maybe twenty influential figures online in the cinematography world.  David Mullen, Shane Hurlbut, John Brawley, Art Adams, Geoff Boyle, and of course Andrew Reid, come to mind as leaders who people follow and listen to.
Even the opinions of the above people and the other influencers are, in the end, just their opinions.
When someone says, “this to me screams filmic” or “this looks digital” - again, that’s all an opinion.  If they say, “that grade is terrible” or “man you nailed the skin tones” - again, that’s all opinion.  Even looking at test charts and camera tests, the results are subjective.  Aesthetic is subjective.  There are scientific tests, but they lead to opinions.  This isn’t pure math - this is an art form.
There is no such thing as filmic.
Everything is digital.  Film emulsions see the world differently, but they go through a digital intermediate.  They become digital .  And I think that’s probably about 99.9% of all films shot on celluloid.  Maybe a few hipsters shoot film and use a steinbeck, but they still upload their results to vimeo, which converts this to a h.264 file.
I have very strong opinions, and a lot of people have very strong opinions.  That’s why we work in film.  It’s an art form that is full of passionate people.  But I also have low self-esteem.  My whole nature of existence is based on others approval.  I’m getting better at trusting my own self, but this is my basis.  
I think maybe most artists have low self-esteem or why would they want to share their art?  Is it ego?  Or the attempt for others to connect?  Yes that’s part of it.  But whether you want to admit it or not, we love when people love our work.  We live off the feedback, or why would we check vimeo 5 times a day to see if someone commented?  Why else would we have awards?  Especially in an art field where awards are just based on opinions of a community who may or may not get your work?
Something is beautiful if you think it is.  You don’t need an oscar in cinematography to be happy with your lighting or camera movement or angle, or have your opinion mean anything less if you aren’t in the ASC.  Everyone brings something unique to the art form.  Everyone brings a new perspective that is needed, especially now, when everything feels pretty much the same.