Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by dinzitari

  1. Tested out the a7s for the first time. Used youtube because vimeo wanted to block my Lion King song.... my daughter is the star of this show and that's that!


    This was really run n gun, shot in sLog 2 and used a L.C.W. II filter. Graded using a LUT and some exposure adjustments. Second take shows denoising and sharpening. Was really taken aback by the amount of noise using slog2, I guess my experience with the F5 had me expecting bit much...


    PLEASE excuse the terrible mask job I did at 1:02, was trying to see what I can bring back from the sky, got lazy, and said eff' it.


  2. I'm curious about this also. I feel like I've read that it does both crops in all modes but I can't be sure where I saw that. Anyone see the B&H announcement? 2500 bucks and they're claiming 15.3 stops. That's pretty crazy. Curious what the rolling shutter will be like...

     Where di you read this dynamic range stat? Do you have a link? I find that number hard to trust, especially since an alexa is rated at about that. I wouldn't be surprised if that number comes from the stills side of things, marketing departments are shady like that!

  3. Perspective is the same on all focal length at the same distance, the crop doesn't matter either. The only thing that changes is distortion and the part of the perspective you get to see.

    You could take a picture with a 50mm and crop it to get the same compression as if it were taken with a 200mm. But the rendering is obviously a lot different.

    The explanation about why larger formats rock is rather easy, but I want to explain it also with mathematical formulas so the "I have no live and talent at all" trolls don't eat me alive.


    Btw, have you ever shot with a pentax 67? It's amazing, I got used to the weight in one day and ever since I don't want to touch my little nikons...

    Sorry, but this is wrong… revisit your 101.

  4. If you want to use super35 glass I think you will have to look for compatible teleconverters (1.5x).

    Most of my go to glass is full frame, but I wonder if the sensor allows you to shoot in super35mm/aps-c mode while recording 1080p. That's a major advantage for me. I don't need to change any glass, and I prefer the look. Can anyone clarify this?

  5. I really, really hope this camera lives up to its intention. I currently shoot wedding films as a primary gig, working on breaking in to commercial work, and just wrapped my first narrative short (36 min). On that short, we shot with the Sony F5. It was a dream, and I loved working with the extra range and PQ with the Slog2 and XAVC codec. 


    During the beginning of the year, I almost pulled the trigger on 3 Canon C100s to replace my FS100s. I wanted log workflow for my primary job, but the price was just too high. 


    Now enter the A7s, full frame capable (i think) of shooting in a super 35 format, XAVC S codec at 50mb/s, and the glorious sLog2 gamma. It's so much more than a "low light" camera (which many are already tagging it with) This just checks so many boxes for me, a premium event camera with advanced dynamic range and codec, and capable of being a great B cam for a BMPC 4k or URSA, or Sony F series.


    I really need to see what shooters can get out of it, and the "S" after XAVC has me suspicious that this could really be "AVCHD 3.0". I do think many of you are expecting too much from this camera though. I'm okay with 4k external, the camera has true pro cinematography tools featured in Sony's pro lineup, and the body can only dissipate so much heat for well implemented internal 4k shooting.

  6. I think that's very good looking, dude!

    You didn't use the diopter even in the opening shot? I noticed it has focus all the way to the background, did you close the lens until it came to focus?

    Ah haaaa! I should have mentioned that the first scene was aspherical only (needed to be wide on 16mm). Wanted to see if anyone noticed! Second scene is all on la7200, but no dipoter.... I had to choose between ND or no ND and diopter at f22. 

  7. Many cameras do vertical line skipping on the sensor to achieve 1920x1080 resolution, due to limited in-camera processing capabilities and how the sensor reading works - from top to bottom, line by line.


    This means that each horisontal line has the full line readout to use for downsampling, which if the in-camera processing is maintaining quality good enough should result in cameras having better quality/resolution on the image horisontally than vertically (where resolution & data gets lost due to lines being skipped).


    This is good for anamorphic use, since we stretch out the footage where there is most of the resolution & detail. If the upscaling interpolation is done right and with a bit of grain as Caleb mentioned - you will perceive the resolution as being better.


    If you compare an upscale from 2x anamorphic, 1920x1080 -> 3840x1080, the result of that will be perceived as having much more resolution than an upscale from 1920x1080 -> 3840x2160 - since then your footage has been scaled in two dimensions, which makes it much more noticeable.


    "Gain resolution" is not the best term in my opinion. Closer to the truth is: "you perceive it as much more detailed even when upscaling it horisontally, since the vertical resolution is still full res".


    For Blu-ray output, you'll have to squeeze your footage vertically instead.


    If you want higher output for theathers, your best option would be to deliver as a digital cinema package. Some more info about that available here: http://nofilmschool.com/2012/07/project-in-digital-theater-make-digital-cinema-package-for-cheap-with-opendcp/

    Thank you everyone for the insight, I appreciate everyone trying to clear this up for me. 


    Still, I am confused. Once you capture a pixel, that pixel is that pixel. You can't expand detail or resolution from it, right? So, If we expand the horizontal resolution to create the proper "image ratio/appearance" aren't we still softening? I mean, we can't create more image data, because we didn't capture it. It was captured at 16x9 and shall remain that no?


    These are pretty advanced topics, since we are now dealing with "tricking the visual perception". Does anyone know of some place I can find detailed info on this?



  8. So, I've read through this Anamorphic guide, which was helpful in many ways. Still, i'm having trouble understanding this "stretch" method of supposedly gaining additional resolution. How is it possible to output 2k/4k, when your actual recording is 1080p? How can we output to a theater in this "phantom resolution" when blu-ray is maxed at 1080p? 


    This entire concept seems mathematically and logically erroneous to me. Someone please prove me wrong, because i'd love to be wrong!

  9. That would be EXTREMELY helpful!!!


    I own a LA7200 as well, and have a Redrock Micro Mattebox here. If you can wait a little, I'll try to put them together this week and post some thoughts about it.


    (my panasonic came with the Cinetatics mattebox, never used it, though :P)

  10. So, I recently purchased a Panny 7200, and wanted to look in to True Mattebox options for the lens. I've never used a Mattebox, so I am wondering if the adapter is going to be able to mount flush behind this mattebox in some way. I'd like to get a Redrock Micro Deluxe, but not sure if this set-up will work.

    Im not looking at other solutions such as the cinetactics boxe, as want a solution that will allow me to use traditional film filters in the stage set up. Any help or experiences with this will be greatly appreciated!


    (Shooting FS100 if that means anything)

  • Create New...