Joseph Moore

What a self-defeating reaction to a perceived slight, or at worst, the insensitive words of one man. "Because my feelings are hurt, I'm not going to choose a certain tool that would benefit me."

Why should you (Andrew) or I or anyone give a rat's ass what someone else thinks? You're simply cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Hope some people find this helpful.

http://blog.josephmoore.name/2014/11/01/comparing-focal-adapters-the-metabones-speed-booster-vs-the-rj-photo-lens-turbo/

Very interesting. The announcement was so photos oriented that I missed the anamorphic implications. Almost enough to make me want to deal with the hassle...almost. ;-)

I really, really, (really) hope that Panasonic listens in regards to higher quality color output. Be that RAW, or even uncompressed 4:2:2 in a true log format. It's wonderful how the GH4 can record light weight 4K images in camera to SD, but it would be equally wonderful to have the option to record higher quality to an external recorder when warranted.

http://josephmoore.name/2014/09/21/gear-review-fotga-dp500iis-quick-release-follow-focus/

Testing the sharpness of the Rokinon Cine 85mm with Lens Turbo on the Pansonic GH4

Comparing the complete set of Rokinon cine-style lenses at 4K

I don't think anyone claimed that this was a new process. What is new is a very low priced tool for acquiring an image sufficiently high resolution to use this technique to generate a 2k image.

Supersampling a 4k image and interpolating to 2k yields true 4:4:4 RGB with more real color information (and a lot more luma information) than if shot at output resolution at 4:2:0. That math is pretty easy to understand.

All the nitpicking aside, the simple take away is that there are compelling reasons to acquire in 4k even if your delivery medium is 2k/1080p.

M43 is bigger than super16, but yields a similar feel, to me. With the use of a focal reducer, you can get a FOV more similar to Super35

 

 

a combination of 10 bit luma and 8 bit chroma

This!

It seems like many people are getting hung-up on 8-bit vs. 10-bit, but to me the real plus of utilizing this method is that the oversampled 4k 4:2:0 data yields a 2k image that is 4:4:4. The bonus is that one of that the luminance channel happens to additionally increase to 10-bits of resolution.

Thought I'd chime in with my settings. To each his own, but I did a ton of testing in a lot of different conditions (outdoors, tungsten and LED) and I've found that -5,0,0,-5 consistently yields the best results that I could come up with. (Sounds like what MaxAperture is doing as well.)

I started with everything at -5 to give the flattest image with the least chance of artificial signal enhancement, but in my tests -5 sharpness and -5 saturation actually harmed the image by throwing out actual picture information.

I then have a recipe of filters than I run on all footage (Neat Denoiser, SC Sharpen and finally FilmConvert) that I feel gives everything a very nice, natural look before I grade for style.

Once I got a diopter for closer focusing, I haven't noticed an edge sharpness issue. The old FD lenses wide open aren't particularly sharp, though.

https://vimeo.com/67529528

Little weekend project. Mainly an excuse to have fun with the kids, and to start re-familiarizing myself with shooting and FX after a long hiatus.

Taking lenses were old Canon FD 28mm and 50mm.

Selling a Century Optics anamorphic adapter. Focus through taking lens, no need to double focus. Perfect compression to turn 16:9 into 2.35:1. (Not overly stretched like 2x adapters.) Includes 37mm > 52mm step ring.

http://www.ebay.com/...984.m1555.l2649

Selling a Century Optics anamorphic adapter. Focus through taking lens, no need to double focus. Includes 52mm adapter ring.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/161031494756?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649

PS. Make sure you set your shutter speed at twice what you do for normal footage so that the motion blur ends-up looking the same.

Choosing to slow down in-camera is the same as choosing to shoot at 60/50 fps...the camera just automatically applies the metadata so that your NLE will play it back at 24fps. It's a convenience factor.

In other words, if you shoot at 60 fps in camera, you have to slow it down 40% in your editor. If you shoot with the camera applying the 40% slow-down, it records the exact same number of frames, you just don't have to do any extra work after the fact.

You definitely do *not* want to shoot interlaced. That's old info based on cameras that could only shoot 60i, not 60p.

Whether you can mix formats on the timeline of your editor is up to the editor. Most modern editors such as Premiere, FCPX, etc. do allow this.

Thanks, guys. I'll try closing down the aperture...I was probably shooting close to wide open.

I finally got my hands on a Century anamorphic adapter. Only had time to do very limited testing, but it seems like it is impossible to get sharp focus with any "taking" lens I tried. Is this an adapter that needs a dipper? If so, what strength should I try? (Shooting with a GH3, if that matters.)

Nice. All of the talent was good...I particularly like the Ron P. cameo. The only thing that screamed no budget was the flat digital blood.

Nicely done. Lighting and grade had plenty of atmosphere.

I assume after the taking lens. If the 37mm has to be adapted to a much larger diameter taking lens, will the small 37mm opening affect the field of view?

Would a Century Anamorphic adapter with a 37mm mount work with a GH3? I'm unclear as to whether this goes between the camera and the "prime" lens, or after the prime lens?