Lucian

Does anyone find that due the weight difference of the isco and the taking lens that sometimes the taking lens focus  + whole isco rear section of the isco rotates when trying to focus the isco? 

I run into this when using smaller taking lenses sometimes and want to create some sort of collar that locks the taking lens at infinite, any ideas?

It doesn't usually bother me but I recently bought a custom focus gear and am trying to get follow focus going so the taking lens can't be wobblin round!

What folks who shit on 1.33x are saying is that films like Ben Hur, or How the West Was Won  and the other handful of Ultra-Panavision films are somehow degraded by using 1.25x optics.Those people were idiots and should have just cropped, is what they're saying.  They're trying to justify a hater attitude.  Smart people will see through it though, I hope.

Straw man bollocks. If it doesn't look good, it doesn't look good. This does not look good to me.

That is truly awesome. You should actually send these pics to van deimen as it's quite an improvement on their mod.

Well done sir!

It can be done, but there's no way around the fact that it will slow you down and add limitations no matter how skilled you get with it.

Practice definitely helps, there are lots of gotchya's that pop up. If time is a problem, i'd go with a single focus setup.

I also have a negative opinion on this camera. It just doesn't seem like a good camera to actually work with. There are cameras out there that beat it in every single way, literally, they have bigger sensors, they have MUCH better sensitivity, they have better detail and resolution, better screens, better ergonomics, better codecs besides raw, better prices, better everything. 
 

I'm not sure I can think of a single camera in this price range that shoots raw, doesn't have terrible rolling shutter and moire; does have xlr inputs and SSD. You pay extra for those features if they are worth it to you. Personally if I want compression, noise reduction, sharpening I prefer to do it myself and not have it done nastily on the fly by a dslr.

Bare in mind it's meant to be a cinema camera and not a replacement for a camcorder or a gh. If you want to shoot compressed video for weddings/corporate a gh4 makes much more sense. If you want to shoot narrative and are after something closer to 16mm film, the bolex might be for you. Try using the camera before declaring it doesn't have good ergonomics. I find it a dream to use after using a dslr, although a viewfinder is a must.

its way too expensive for what it is, it needs to come down to pocket camera price.

The Kodak truesense ccd sensor is much more expensive and more complicated to design a camera around than the cmos sensor in the blackmagic.  The d16 also comes with a 512gb enterprise class ssd.

the BM is a bargain for what it can do, but it also brings moire, rolling shutter and a more digital feel. There is no reason the bolex should be priced the same since they contain totally different tech.

We tried the non-debayered display, it didn't really help for focus on the built in screen. I don't think it can be used over HDMI. Can it? I didn't think it could.

 

Switching to greyscale helps a bit but really what they need is a sharper HDMI output!

The debayer  is helpful for exposure though not focus. Can't be used over hdmi as far as I know.

I find the 1:1 punch in combined with the small hd dp4 not too bad for focus, although I always struggle quite a bit as I'm usually shooting anamorphic, old lenses and low apertures.

Sharper hdmi is coming in the next firmware update! 

I've been experimenting with the d16 + iscorama and old c-mount and m42 glass and the results are very organic. The fujinon 0.85 is actually somewhat usable wide open with the Isco, incredible. The camera has definitely been a learning curve coming from gh2 though. 

The Digital Bolex has stumbled into the world. It is alive. Now it must find a place for itself. Most importantly of all - is this new replicant Bolex actually convincing?

Time to find out.

Read the full article here

Nice review Andrew, and you captured some of the best footage yet with the cam, well done! I've owned the camera for a few weeks now and think the review is on the money. I love the camera but wouldn't shoot a wedding with it.

One thing about exposure, I was wondering if you were familiar with the raw mode? the color display is not an accurate representation of what is clipping. Switching to raw/non debayered display is pretty critical for nailing exposure, but it's kind of hidden in the menu.

congrats :)

Thanks for the info! yes the front element screws off very easy after the close focus mod. But I think lighter fluid damages/melts plastic though? I might need to just send it to a pro :P

Hmm, I am not experienced with working inside lenses but I did do the close focus mod. Is cleaning and re-greasing pretty straight forward?

Hi folks,

My iscorama 36 is focus is pretty tight, it turns fine but it tends to jiggle footage if I try to pull focus.

I keen to have it serviced mostly for that reason, I'm located in LA and the most reputable lens store won't touch it "because it's plastic and could break too easily"

Does anyone know a place in LA they would trust to service an isco? has anyone successfully had tight focus dealt with ?

Bernie at super 16 receives many recommendations but one user sent their isco in and it came back just as tight and apparently they didn't know how to open it up. To that end i'm reluctant to mail to them.

Any advice appreciated.

Thank you.

my B&H kowa + redstan clamp went for $1000 US not that long ago. I'm not sure their is a bubble bursting, there does seem to be a flood of Mollers though. Great lens, i'd snap one up if I wasn't already so invested in other anamorphics.

I think you are right sean, it doesn't  completely look like real shadow, but at times you see the shadow interact with the environment in ways on the real deal could, most likely its the real shadow  with soft mask overlayed also.

You don't think? I'm assuming to get enough light to pick this up at night they must have used a fair amount of wattage. But it seems like the camera man is attached to the light so it must be carry-able and able to run off a battery.

can anyone speculate on how this was done? i'm assuming one guy with camera and a big ass light walking behind the other?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/tjF57zEbxpI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Thanks!

Also waiting on the EF to m43. Clearly this is the version everyone is after, I wonder what the hold up is...

If you are using a gh3 and you want a fast cmount lens,  you would be better off buying a 25mm switar 1.4 for about $270.

Optically superior, won't require you to maim the lens to get it mounted and 0.85 dof is useless on a larger than 16mm sensor anyway.

even f1.4 as andy says is 1cm. So persons nose may be in focus but not their eyes :P

Now we need a template for a 36!

Just wanted to say very excellent production values, especially for such a small crew and modest camera. Well done and good luck to you!

I know the usual step to cut down light is to add ND filters inside a mattebox.

but would adding an ND filter between the taking lens and and anamorphic lens, (mine is an iscorama 54) be a big no no?

im looking a the Hoya ProND filters but the biggest size available is 82mm.

 

thanks,

You generally want to mount the two optics as close together as possible. Small nd's are cheap, I'd buy one used and do a quality test

side by side.

Did anyone make any progress getting their isco working with a FF?

1. Blue velvet

2. Dead man

3. Rushmore

4. Chunking Express

5. Happy Together

6. Midnight Cowboy

7. Lost in Translation

8. Spirited Away

9. Taxi Driver

10. The Thin Red Line

I used to go to to a higher bit dipth, de-noise, dither and then output to cineform. Makes for a massive increase in quality and gradeability of 8bit mush for me. 

I've gone raw now and will never go back.

I saw the explanation video too, it sounded more like an infomercial for canon because I don't know how anyone with eyeballs could advocate the c500 over the alexa for a theatrical release with a straight face. Esp considering the footage shown in the tests looked like a wedding video.

I love Shane's posts though, full of insights.