Inazuma

So I bit the bullet over the week and bought the filter. From what I had read the filters work by spreading the light around the image, which is different to simply using a low contrast lens I think. And besides that, I don't want to add another lens to my collection when I already have three superb ones.
 
I started with Ultra Contrast 3. It had good effect but I thought I'd go further so this morning I received the #5.
 
The filters have an immediate effect of making the image look way more filmic. The reason for this is that really do spread the light around the image - but it's not so simple. They take in more ambient light and thus ambient colour. The result is that you get a much more balanced picture in terms of colour and tonality. These filters really are something magical.
 
I have been shooting a fair bit with them over the past few days and will be putting together a video, but for now here's a few images:
 
No filter, Standard iDynamic:
 

 
With FilmConvert:
 

 
Tiffen Ultra Contrast #5 (no iDynamic):
 

 
With FilmConvert and some additional saturation.
 

 
Each filter costs just over £100 for the 77mm sizes. I do recommend getting the strongest one (the #5). After further consideration I think the #3 is a better choice because the #5 washes out darker midtones too readily.

I do wish the GX7 had higher bitrates but having said that, I've never really had any problems grading. The codec is very maleable. The GH3 on the other hand, not only does not have focus peaking but its LCD and viewfinder are both so low resolution that I found it difficult to achieve focus even with a magnifier. Also the GH3 has noticeably more noise, starting at ISO 800.

I am using the GM1 for more than a year now and it is a superb camera. Buying the bigger brother GX7 is a no brainer if you dont mind the bigger size (which I do). Herea couple of examples what you easily can achieve:

I don't disrespect them. Well actually I do - threatening bloggers like Bloom and Reid with lawsuits left-right-and-centre for daring to voice a few negative opinions about their cameras is no way to earn respect from the public. But above I was just talking about my personal preference. I'm just not into anything about RED: I don't like the way their cameras look, I don't like their branding or media image, I don't like the Cult of Red, and though there's nothing "wrong" with the image from the Epic I've never been particularly taken with anything I've seen.
 
I certainly wasn't talking about/comparing anything to the 5D3's h264 image at all, anywhere. I happen to quite like it for certain subjects, but I was talking specifically and exclusively about ML RAW above. 

This is the camera guys i would get easily can fit on 6 guys back with no extra support
 

A little comparison of the GH4 and Red Epic by Daniels Peters

His videos for clothing labels and such were a large inspiration to me when I started out, so it's quite something to see him now use the two cameras' (with hugely different price tags) footage interchangeably.

Hello. We used Nikon D5200 and D5300 for this video.
 

I had some free time this past week, so I put together a fast-paced video for the Vimeo Weekend Challenge. The only rules were <60 seconds and had to be in black and white.
 

 
Hope you like it!

Here is a short we did recently. We hop you enjoy it!
 

Buying a new camera these days seems like the worst deal possible (unless it permits you to make more money). The A7 is selling for less than 800€ on ebay and it was released only one year ago, that's a 50% price fall in one year...

Yep pretty much nailed it. I might suggest having two reels. One promoting your artsy personality and projects. The other promoting yourself as a videography business, satisfying that need to excite people to work with you.

I was wondering why some of those shots looked so muddy. Turns out they were done with a Canon rebel :)

Sorry to bring up a dead thread but didn't really want to make a new one. I had my GX7 fixed a couple weeks ago after the shutter just randomly locked up and wouldn't open again. Something to do with a circuity malfunction. It was out of warranty and cost me about £150 to fix. However it also fixed the dead pixels I had on the sensor :)

Thank you. G6 with Micro-Nikkor 55mm f2.8 AI-S (and extension tubes I think). Can't remember if this shot was in Ex-Tele (3x MFT crop) or not. Also video monopod was necessary as focusing was done with tiny movements forwards and backwards (rather than using focus ring which though really nice wasn't subtle, fast  or stable enough.
 
I might upload a closed caption file that lists camera and lenses as the video plays...

Don't talk to me about having a beard and yet not being cool. I am the uncool beard MASTER!!!

Superb little GH4 video, shot with a rather interesting C-mount TV zoom (Ampex Vidicon 22.5-90mm 1:1.5 C-Mount):
 

It was well shot, but the original was so pretentious and narcissistic, many thought it was a parody. This parody though, manages to parody it:
 

The tongue of the wise commends knowledge, but the mouths of fools pour out folly.

Canon. Can. Non. Non-can. No can do. Cannot. Can't.
Just sayin'.

As far as I can see there is no camera that is not compromised in one way or another. The lx100 is no different. Everyone picks their camera based on their needs. The canonikons have dedicated movie modes but no evf or native focus peaking. The Panasonic g6 and gh3 have mic inputs but their iq isn't as good as the gx7, gm1, lx100 etc. The blackmagics have superb iq but a small sensor and no 60fps. The REDs have superb iq and slomo but require multiple expensive attachments to work well. Etc.. My point is that if a camera doesn't suit your needs then move on. There's no point arguing about it in forums. I have seen way too much of that on dpreview . Personally I think the lack of touch tilt screen says to me that there will be a mark ii coming next year. So I'm holding off.

Hi, 
 
When you watch the video below, you'll realize that I am not a video maker, but a programmer.. There are artifacts in the video that I couldn't get rid of..
 
Oh, by the way, don't play with your receiver's settings, there is no background music :)
 

 
Hope you find it useful
 
Melih

Hi,
Couple of months ago, a photographer (nickname lenuisible) decode the wireless communication protocol between image app on smartphone and GH3 camera http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/6703/control-your-gh3-from-a-web-browser-now-with-video-/p1. I took these, and adapted to my 13 years old remote control software (originally written in vb6 for casio qv3000).
After a couple of days, the software now finds the camera, queries its capabilities, and allows user to control the camera from windows PC.
It is a very simple program, you just see the commands (like focus, zoom, exposure, aperture, white balance etc...) and use them.
 
You can also record those settings and play them back later. You can tell the program to repeat those commands. So you can make timelapses by zooming in each shot, or changing the white balance when its dark outside.
 
For examplle you can adjust the focus between objects and then you can set the focus with one click like this:  http://www.dijitalakademi.com/P1640788.MP4
 
You can program complex set of commands and make it replay those (or replay and repeat)
 
I also added liveview from http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/6703/control-your-gh3-from-a-web-browser-now-with-video-/p1, thanks to lenuisible.. You should just press "Liveview" button. But you have to have java installed in your machine. From the post,
 
"Java RE : download here : http://java.com/en/download/index.jsp
Add the java bin directory to your PATH, On a windows machine, the Java bin directory should be : C:Program FilesJavajre7bin"
 
I have a FZ1000 to test it, it works ok, but it should work with all wifi enabled LUmix cameras. So feel free to try it, and let me know how it works.
 
Before you run the software, you should enable wifi from camera, connect the camera either a wifi network, or your pc to your camera. Program should find the camera automatically.. If program gives "no response from camera" then check wifi connection, get closer to the router, try again..
 
you can download and install it from http://www.dijitalakademi.com/lumixcontrol.zip
Screenshot:http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~forums/54696040/62ebbbd324fa4551932accb5bf73f94b

just announced today this new service has some very nice lenses on the list for hire and most of the new camera bodies too
 
http://www.jessops.com/online.store/categories/Current%20Offers/services/rental/Show.html?partner=ukemail&utm_medium=email&utm_source=uknewsletter&utm_content=email&utm_campaign=eNewsletter%2005.11.2014%20FULL%20Rental
 
a nice way of trying that expensive lens before you buy - or that extra piece of kit needed for a job.
 

I had recently 2 awful experiences as a buyer, with this quite new "shipping+taxes" option (or "Global Shipping Program") that eBay uses:
 
I bought the first item and eBay's shipping company had it for days in their storage place, without never contacting me for delivery. I tried to contact them, and I had to pay for the call €5 (~$6.5), as they charge €1.34 the call, then 0.36/min and they have you waiting for at least 10-12min, without finally accepting your call, with the excuse that the lines are too busy and that you'll have to call later again...
Finally, one day, they came to deliver, but without even ringing my bell, they put it (a signed-for shipment) inside my box...
 
The second one, they never delivered any parcel, but their tracking status indicates that they did delivered to my hands and that they've put my name as the person who received the parcel... When I opened a dispute on PayPal for this, Paypal in dt time, closed the case, with the excuse that they can't help on this and that I have to find a solution with the seller!... In any other similar case, if the seller had shipped via any other carrier, they could ask him to show them (to PayPal) the proof of delivery, asking this from the shipping carrier... If the shipping company couldn't prove that they had my real signature, then the money had to be returned to me. But as this new company is eBay's (so & PayPal's) business, they of course closed their eyes, as they can't blame their own company. SO, I lost $273.76...
 
I will NEVER-EVER buy any item from sellers that they are using this "Global Shipping Program" again! NEVER! I've found though that there are hundreds of others with similar, like mine, problems...
 
If you are selling on eBay and you want to avoid any negative feedback caused by similar cases, never use this option again please.
To be able to do so, please follow this next steps, to block this shipping option from your sales:
Your ebay>>account>>site preferences>>posting and packaging preferences>Offer the Global Shipping Programme, then on the right hand side of the screen change yes to NO and save changes.
 
By the way I have to say that, with this "Global Shipping Program", buyers are paying more on import taxes, than if they had to pay straight to their customs...
 
That's all from me.

I love this comment, by which i mean its just plain idiotic.
Everything you've seen from the FS7 has been shot within the first 5 minutes someone has had the camera. Let's wait a few months before making such a wide declaration. Early A7s footage/GH4 footage also looked pretty crappy. Give people a few shoots with a camera - then make your judgements. 
 
Now to your "video" point. It has zero to do with frame interpolation. Its called over-sharpness. What really annoys me is people who shoot a digital sensor camera that isn't a RED, want a "cinematic" output, and yet use no softening filters (RED deliberately keeps their image as soft as they can get away with). None. An Alexa can look over-sharp shot poorly. 35mm film can too. When we shoot film (too rare!) we often have 3 layers of softening in front of the lens. 3 layers! When shooting a commercial or drama we have a range of Tiffen softeners ready to go for the Alexa or the F55, and we often will soften the highlights again in the grade. 
 
However - if you're shooting for broadcast, and you're matching $150k studio cameras which are horrifically sharp, being able to look 'video' is actually a plus! Sony and Canon and Panasonic understand this.
 
You want a more pure 'filmic' camera that's value for money? I can't recommend the BMs enough.
 
You need a camera that can shoot reportage, TV interview, a feature doc, a music video AND an indie feature? Better to start off hella sharp and adjust to taste.
I tell people all the time: A Swiss Army knife is actually a pretty terrible hunting knife. Unless you NEED that flexibility.