Xavier Plagaro Mussard

I started shooting polaroids about 2 years ago.  3200iso b+w and 100iso colour from fuji.  it costs about £1.50 per shot, and within a year the entire supply of film will be exhausted.  .  only 3 out of ten pics are viable to be scanned and shared.  Even then the images get next to no likes on flickr. technically they're weak.  however each image I take on polaroid feels like a real photo.  a physical entity.  I've done a few birthday/wedding jobs where they budget £5 per photo.  They are willing to pay this because the pictures are so much more magical.  technically they're awful but on a human level they are magic.  The effort I went to making a camera that obtains the best from polaroids is pretty mad looking back on it - when you consider how technically limited the format is.  But from the private messages I get asking for a parts list to make the camera below, it's clear film is still important enough for kodak to develop this new 8mm camera.
 

Can't wait for the first non-reusable SD cards  

Yep that interview was also conveniently less than 3 min  

I think Samsung merely miscalculated how long it takes to break into a new market, especially one with products that are pricey. I wish they had sucked it up for another couple of years, came out with an NX2, an NX600, and a crap-ton more lenses, and they would've had a pretty good shot, especially if they had set up a pro support network. Half-hearted efforts won't cut it against competition like Canon, Nikon and Sony. Even Fuji & Olympus have made decades of experience in the field. It's the height of hubris to think they could just jump into the photo game and success in a short amount of time in anything other than the point-n-shoot part of the market. The deep end of the pool requires you to be able to swim and defend yourself against what else is in the water.

When writing plugins for PP you see just how ancient their software is. Apple wrote FCPX from scratch (perhaps with some bits from iMovie ;)), whereas PP's architecture dates back to the time of FCP with the recent Mercury engine tacked on. It bought them some time with 1080p, however it shows its limitations with 4K.
While FCPX has limitations and gotchas different from PP, basic editing and grading of 4K footage is fast and fluid which helps the creative process.
A 4K monitor should not slow a system down with a decent GPU rendering 1080p. Rendering or monitoring 4K is another story- depends on the software.

I'm a huge fan of the bmpcc.  It's the ONLY camera that fulfilled the needs of my FORBES70 prototype camera in terms of DR, low light performance, resolution, compatibility with adapted specialist lenses, solid codecs, etc.   since the bmpcc's release there has yet to be anything that comes close to its overall performance when paired with fast modern c-mount lenses.
 
The sheer number of so-called high end cinematographers interested in FORBES70 but who disregard it based on that fact that the internal camera is a BMPCC is amazing.  Also those who complain about anything the camera does visually are asking far too much.  £800 for the best picture available from any camera in the price bracket where re-mortgaging isn't required to make a purchase.     
https://vimeo.com/136554487 password : fbs
 I hope the bmmcc does the same amazing job and better!

4 hrs later...

But on a more serious note... indeed good job on listening to the feedback and make amends.

It depends on the codec. If you already see that you are CPU bound then upgrading the GPU will not make a difference. If you want better performance, you are better off trans-coding to cineform. H264/H265 are not editing friendly  
See here:

I've lost count at how many family/friends TV sets I've "fixed". 
Quite recently I walked into a friends house and they were watching the Walking Dead. My first reaction was "why does it look so cheap"? and within 5 seconds I picked up the remote and turned off that awful "Tru Motion" thing. As if by magic, The Walking Dead didn't look cheap anymore - it was looking great. Nobody in the room noticed the difference untilI I switched it to compare. "You are a genius!" they said. Erm...
To be honest, it absolutely bamboozles me why the TV manufacturers have this hideous setting on as default. It's as if they are trying to programme our minds to watch things differently. But it's just not right. Like the Hobbit in 48fps... it's horrible. The magic is gone. 
The magic of natural, seamless 24fps is timeless. It works. It doesn't need altering. The TV manufacturers need to stop. 

I don't know in your countries how broadcast tv looks. I bought a new 4K 55" panasonic tv here in Italy. I dedicated 10 minutes to cancel any "improvement" to the image from the tv set. But the problem is broadcast, it looks like shit. SD is a seminar on compression artefacts. HD is somehow better (only 5 channels on national TV in Italy and not all the time!).  SKY satellite is horrible too. Then I watched one of my videos on YouTube (with the tv app) and it looked wonderful! It's pretty sad that broadcasting is destroying the work of thousand of professionals.
I still remember when broadcast was the quality and for the web the bad one!!! Nowadays is the opposite!

This year I've shot 5 interview-based corporate documentaries all by myself. I have a Tascam DR70D, Zoom H4N and Zoom H1s. Out of all these available options, I far prefer the H1s because they are small, simple and easy to deploy. I use wired lavalier mics with them. My experience is that, unless you have a dedicated sound person, you need to simplify as much as possible. The most important thing with the H1s is getting your levels right.

For £150 on a new tripod for regular video use, people would more likely swear at it - rather than swear by it. 
I'd personally search for used ebay tripod listings for that budget. Broadcast houses often turf out gear that is not needed any more - and it's possible to grab a bargain sometimes on some decent quality Manfrotto or Vinten model from the HDV days. I'd recommend going with a known name rather than the thousands of tempting cheap Chinese no-brand models, as it's always a lucky dip as to what the quality of some of the components are like....and they are often not as lightweight as they appear in pictures (if you are after a lightweight model). Going with a known brand also increases the likelihood of finding spare parts or online help if something ever fails.
Saying that, I'm sure people will chime in with good experiences with cheaper Chinese models they have had (E-Image brand for example) - but everyone's needs for durability and payload are different. But there is a reason that camera hire facilities do not rent out these models....they simply ain't built to last, unless you are handy with modifying/ upgrading failed components as they occur. 
 

A while ago I noted that FCP X was faster editing 4K material on a 2014 MBP and GT 750M GPU vs. Premiere Pro CC 2015 (latest) on a 12 Core MacPro and GTX 980ti. Today I tried FCP X on the MacPro in FCP X with C300 II 4K files. 4K editing was blazing fast- scrubbing instantaneously. This is full 4K resolution, native files (dual 4K displays). Curious to find the limit, I began stacking 4K clips and was able to get 6 4K clips (cropped so all 6 clips had visible elements) before there was visible slowdown (still usable!). 5 4K clips were fully real-time.
On the same hardware & OSX, Premiere Pro CC 2015 can play one 4K clip in real-time. On the same hardware and Windows 10, playback resolution must be set to 1/2 to get near real-time performance.
Resolve 12 (latest) wasn't able to play the C300 II 4K file in real-time on the MacPro in OSX.
For fast 4K editing, FCP X is currently the champ.

I don't know why FCPX continues to be bashed. 
It's an absolutely incredible editing program, very intuitive, very fast and greatly supported by third party software (plugins etc). 
 

At 60p you can have problems with lights!
 

It's an embarrassment of riches. And it's great. 
Even now I contend that even average consumer IQ is so advanced that it'll allow a filmmaker to create great looking cinema. 
5-10 years from now?  Whoa.  Its fun to watch it get better and cheaper  
If you can't manage to effectively create with this stuff, then you're not doing it right and/or paying attention to the wrong details. 

Speed to market, an instant range of well rated, fast lenses with a good AF system (compared to their current mirrorless lens range, which is dreadful). They would also have the benefit of being instantly popular with anyone invested in the NX system.
I guess it depends on whether Nikon have any interest in FF mirrorless?

Where are you re-locating to, Mars?  Can't be back to England or somewhere else in Europe as you'd just drive that shit there.

What's ironic here is that Apple are now the company with the monopoly in many markets who are no longer innovating. Look at what Microsoft are doing. They have one streamlined OS that works across all devices from phones, tablets to desktops. They've just released new phones (Lumia 950 & 950 XL) that you can connect a mouse, keyboard & monitor to, and use as a full functioning computer with desktop apps. Their Surface range also continues to get better and better. Of course, they also have that Hololens technology that looks quite impressive from the demos I've seen.
And what do Apple release? A big iPad with what is essentially the same OS as what the original iphone was running back when it was first released.
 

Let's put it this way, Sturdycam is not about italian design! If you want a beautiful object, their products are not for you. On the other hand they are very solid and well built. Ugly but sturdy! 
The LX100 with it's wide-angle and OIS it's really the perfect camera for any gimbal. And of course, you choose your gimbal, choose your camera, balance everything and then you stop fiddling with it!!!

Just wanted to let everyone know that I've rented a Blackmagic Pocket Cam for the next 10 days which *should* mean the Micro will ship any day now -- because that's how these things work.

It will be the 100 kronor. The 20 with a portrait of the author of Pippi Longstocking is already out as well. 

Sony RX100, you have 4 versions to choose from. It's the only really pocketable!!! All others can go inside a pocket, but it's not the same. 

Add the BMPCC-specific Speed Booster, and think about what you're getting for your money:

-Internal 10-bit ProRes
-Internal log-encoded 12-bit RAW
-1.67x crop factor
-An extra 1 2/3 stops of light on all your lenses
-The best color science in its price range
-13 stops of DR (11-12 in GS mode)
-The option to turn on global shutter whenever you need it

Add a cheap HDMI monitor or use your existing one, and you've got an insanely beast camera for ~$1500. 

The only problem of the LX100, besides the "penis-factor" ;-) is that it's zoom is short (size does matter sometimes!). At Iso 1600 (which is pretty clean) and f2 you can work even the darkest shows. The OIS will help too! Of course there are much better solutions, not under 800€, everything else will be compromised too!!!