Pascal Garnier

​Very enlightening to read this from you, the administrator and owner of this site.
I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with you.  
If you don't see the problem with any white person saying that word (yes : WHO says the word DOES matter), then there's very little to say.  
Even behind closed doors or without a black person in sight.  Apparently to you it's OK to say it when there's no fear for the consequences.  
If Clarkson is the big guy you claim him to be, let him say it for comic effect in Brixton.  And see what big guy he really is.
You can't use a derogatory term like that like it's nothing and then be surprised people react when you try to laugh it off.  
This has nothing to do with political correctness, which seems to have become the cluster term to justify all kinds of bigotry.
 

​That's what you made it into, to justify someone else's racism.
I'm done with this site.

​Very enlightening to read this from you, the administrator and owner of this site.
I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with you.  
If you don't see the problem with any white person saying that word (yes : WHO says the word DOES matter), then there's very little to say.  
Even behind closed doors or without a black person in sight.  Apparently to you it's OK to say it when there's no fear for the consequences.  
If Clarkson is the big guy you claim him to be, let him say it for comic effect in Brixton.  And see what big guy he really is.
You can't use a derogatory term like that like it's nothing and then be surprised people react when you try to laugh it off.  
This has nothing to do with political correctness, which seems to have become the cluster term to justify all kinds of bigotry.
 

What a bunch of overgeneralizing statements, just to try to proove a point that you already decided on.
Photography has never been this alive.
People said the exact same thing about painting when photography came up.  People said the exact same thing about music when MIDI was invented.
This is lazy arguing at best.

What a bunch of overgeneralizing statements, just to try to proove a point that you already decided on.
Photography has never been this alive.
People said the exact same thing about painting when photography came up.  People said the exact same thing about music when MIDI was invented.
This is lazy arguing at best.

What a bunch of overgeneralizing statements, just to try to proove a point that you already decided on.
Photography has never been this alive.
People said the exact same thing about painting when photography came up.  People said the exact same thing about music when MIDI was invented.
This is lazy arguing at best.

What a bunch of overgeneralizing statements, just to try to proove a point that you already decided on.
Photography has never been this alive.
People said the exact same thing about painting when photography came up.  People said the exact same thing about music when MIDI was invented.
This is lazy arguing at best.

What a bunch of overgeneralizing statements, just to try to proove a point that you already decided on.
Photography has never been this alive.
People said the exact same thing about painting when photography came up.  People said the exact same thing about music when MIDI was invented.
This is lazy arguing at best.

You can put EVERY lens ever made on a Sony A6000.
I use M42, Canon FD and Canon EF lenses.
But you can use Pentax, Nikon, Zeiss, Leica, ... on this camera with the right adapter.

The Canon 6D is pretty bad for video (great for stills), so the Sony A6000 would be a much better bet (especially with the Metabones).  It's also smaller and will cost you less.

andy : there's a big chance they use cheaper glass, which is the only way to make it cheaper.  Which might introduce all kinds of artifacts.  
 
That's why the Metabones is so expensive : they use the best glass they can get.
 
I didn't buy the cheapest adapter, but paid $30 extra for something that had already been tested/reviewed with pictures to proove it. 
 
The only way to find out how this cheaper one does is to buy one and see how it does.  But all tests I've seen so far show there's a huge difference and image degradation with the very cheap focal reducers.

I'm sorry, but this isn't doing anything for me.
Mainly because the green screen shots are very very obviously fake, and the digital effects like the explosion or jump into the pool are anything but convincing.
Add to that the sound design and mixing which don't make any sense.  Like all composited shots from the 7:15 mark on, which have dry studio voice over sound, while they're standing outside.
The main problem I have with these technical aspects lacking, is that they draw me completely away from the story.  So much so, that I couldn't even tell you what this short is about.  Nor that I want to watch it again to find out.

After trying out various settings with the GH4, my impression is that the best way to shoot with it is as with my G6.
One of my last shoots with my G6 was for an Ikea commercial. The other cameras on that shoot were Sony F5's and F55's. In the final edit, there's no way to tell which shots were my G6 and which were the Sony's. Same thing with another shoot with Sony's ànd a Red. 
On the G6, I shot with the NATURAL profile with contrast, sharpness, noise reduction all the way down.  Saturation and hue are dialled in depending on what the scene needs.  I don't touch Master Pedestal at all, nor do I mess with the shadows and highlights. 

This gives me a very flat image with proper skintones that grades very well and carries none of the noise that seems to plague the GH4 when shooting with Cinelike D or V.
I also suggest to keep the ISO at 400 (even though 800 is supposed to be the native ISO) and use ND filters when needed.  Or adjust the shutterspeed if you're after that look or have no ND.
I also use a Speedbooster clone with fast Canon FD lenses, which gives a decent low light performance with the GH4.
Finally, I record most of my serious work on an Atomos Ninja, so the 10-bit definitely helps, as does shooting in 4K and having the camera downconvert to 2K through HDMI.

I'm sorry, but it's only natural that sales drop over time.
 
Three major reasons why :
- normal people don't buy a new camera every single year, most people who buy a DSLR will use it for 3-5 years minimum before buying a new model.  Not all of us use them professionally or need to have the newest equipment the moment it comes out.
- the moment people replace their camera, their DSLR is being sold second hand.  The second hand camera market follows the new product market with a delay of 3-5 years.  Which means that the new DSLR's from 5 years ago are now changing hands.   To new owners who are NOT buying a new DSLR.  But will probably use their second hand camera for minimum 2 years.
- there's an economical crisis that affects the camera market too.
 
This is not exclusive to DSLR's.
New car sales in the Netherlands for example have dropped to the lowest level in 45 years.
 
And then to specifically blame Canon and Nikon for this doesn't make any sense.
 
Percentages don't tell a story here.  Considering that Olympus isn't shipping the numbers that Canon and Nikon are doing, absolute numbers would tell a more accurate story.  Also, people switch brands, so a decline in sales for Canon will automatically benefit other brands.  The point is, you need much more accurate data before jumping to these wild conclusions.

I'm sorry, but it's only natural that sales drop over time.
 
Three major reasons why :
- normal people don't buy a new camera every single year, most people who buy a DSLR will use it for 3-5 years minimum before buying a new model.  Not all of us use them professionally or need to have the newest equipment the moment it comes out.
- the moment people replace their camera, their DSLR is being sold second hand.  The second hand camera market follows the new product market with a delay of 3-5 years.  Which means that the new DSLR's from 5 years ago are now changing hands.   To new owners who are NOT buying a new DSLR.  But will probably use their second hand camera for minimum 2 years.
- there's an economical crisis that affects the camera market too.
 
This is not exclusive to DSLR's.
New car sales in the Netherlands for example have dropped to the lowest level in 45 years.
 
And then to specifically blame Canon and Nikon for this doesn't make any sense.
 
Percentages don't tell a story here.  Considering that Olympus isn't shipping the numbers that Canon and Nikon are doing, absolute numbers would tell a more accurate story.  Also, people switch brands, so a decline in sales for Canon will automatically benefit other brands.  The point is, you need much more accurate data before jumping to these wild conclusions.

I wouldn't call the NEX5N horrible for video.  When I used it, I liked it's footage better than that of my T2i and T3i.
At high ISO's the colours suffer, but for filming in daylight or proper lighted spaces, it's still a great camera for people on a budget.
And for stills it kicks the G6's butt.

The great thing about the G6 and other M4/3 camera's is that you can adapt any lens mount you want.
I have a Mamiya Sekor lens set and a Canon FD lens set. 

If you want to keep it simple, just buy a $10 adapter on ebay for your lens mount to M4/3.
If you have a little more budget, invest in a focal reducer/speedbooster clone for approx. $100.  This will help with the crop factor on M4/3 and low light shooting.

Don't buy a 85 as a first lens on M4/3. This will give you a 170mm equivalent focal length.  Impossible to shoot decent footage with handheld or even with a good shoulder rig.
 
If I have to suggest one lens to start with, get a manual 35 f/2 or a 50  f/1.4 or f/1.8.  You can shoot most of the stuff with that, use the ETC/sensor crop function on the G6 for teleshots with the same lens.  Expand your lens set from there over time.  If you can, stay with the same lens mount and lens type, that way you'll be sure shots from different lenses match.
 
Remember that your lenses will last longer than your camera.  My Canon FD's are over 40 years old, still in mint condition and will very probably last me the rest of my life.  It took me about 2 years to assemble my set, taking my time to look for bargains.  My set consists of a 24 2.8, 35 2.0, 35-70 4.0, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 135 2.5 and cost me less than $800. 

the only moment I use higher shutter speeds is when shooting slowmotion.
a higher shutter speed helps in getting nice slowmotion footage.  and if you're using twixtor or any other kind of interpolation, shooting higher shutter speeds will help the calculations and deliver a cleaner end result

I make 3-4 wedding videos each year.  The couples I shoot choose their own music for very particular reasons, mostly some kind of emotional connection to a song.   It might be the first song they danced to, or a song that was popular when they first met, ...
What matters to them is that it's THAT song.  NOT a song that sounds a bit like it, or has a similar vibe, or a cover version ...
 
What I have been doing until now, is use that music in the wedding videos (including the online streaming versions), AND include proper credits and a direct iTunes link to the song(s). 
This is the best I can do right now, since publishers simply don't care about clearing songs for this kind of use.  Believe me, I have tried, and have never ever received a reply, let alone a quote.

I would be very happy with an easy, accessible online system where you can pay for sync for popular songs.

For all my other work, I find plenty of material at themusicbed or even the Vimeo music store. 

 

I make 3-4 wedding videos each year.  The couples I shoot choose their own music for very particular reasons, mostly some kind of emotional connection to a song.   It might be the first song they danced to, or a song that was popular when they first met, ...
What matters to them is that it's THAT song.  NOT a song that sounds a bit like it, or has a similar vibe, or a cover version ...
 
What I have been doing until now, is use that music in the wedding videos (including the online streaming versions), AND include proper credits and a direct iTunes link to the song(s). 
This is the best I can do right now, since publishers simply don't care about clearing songs for this kind of use.  Believe me, I have tried, and have never ever received a reply, let alone a quote.

I would be very happy with an easy, accessible online system where you can pay for sync for popular songs.

For all my other work, I find plenty of material at themusicbed or even the Vimeo music store. 

 

I make 3-4 wedding videos each year.  The couples I shoot choose their own music for very particular reasons, mostly some kind of emotional connection to a song.   It might be the first song they danced to, or a song that was popular when they first met, ...
What matters to them is that it's THAT song.  NOT a song that sounds a bit like it, or has a similar vibe, or a cover version ...
 
What I have been doing until now, is use that music in the wedding videos (including the online streaming versions), AND include proper credits and a direct iTunes link to the song(s). 
This is the best I can do right now, since publishers simply don't care about clearing songs for this kind of use.  Believe me, I have tried, and have never ever received a reply, let alone a quote.

I would be very happy with an easy, accessible online system where you can pay for sync for popular songs.

For all my other work, I find plenty of material at themusicbed or even the Vimeo music store. 

 

Very useful videos for people just starting out with a GH4.
Best tutorials I've seen so far for shooting flat.
 

 

 
 

I'm actually selling my Pentax 110 lenses (switching to Canon FD), I have a 20-40 2.8 and 18 2.8 for sale.
Both include adapters for Pentax110 to M4/3, one with adjustable aperture (which cost me $50).
 
Asking $150 + shipping.

@ Christina : shallow DOF is a creative choice, just as deep focus is one.  There is no better or worse.  Both are legitimate options and part of the job of a DOP is to make the right choice for every shot.
 
Following your logic, you might as well argue that shooting everything with deep focus is testament to a lazy DOP who can't make up his mind where he wants the scene to go.  So he lets everything open to the viewer's interpretation.   That would be ludicrous of course.  
 
Shallow or deep focus should always be an artistic choice depending on the scene and what you want to say.  Exactly the same way we use lighting, reflectors, focal length, choose between handheld/steadicam/crane/dolly/tripod, ...  It is one of our tools AND skills as DOP's.  

 

andy, I bought the RJ FD to m4/3 adapter almost 2 months ago ... remember ? ;-)