j.f.r.

​I guess even the new Tokina is outdated already - I believe it suffers from chromatic aberration and does poorly against direct light (serious flaring). I've yet to see a lab test of the Kowa lens. The SLR Magic 10mm would be the equivalent of a 20mm full frame, while the Kowa would be 17mm, and the Tokina around the same only faster. I want as wide as I can possibly get, especially since C4K on the GH4 is cropped so much. I'm thinking I'll be shooting in cramped, dark interiors, so speed could be an important factor to consider. There are so many cool rooms in the narrow alleys here in Saigon, if only I could figure out a way to get people to allow me to shoot them....

Hi guys, my name is Fred and I'm a long time reader of EOSHD. Great blog, thank you Andrew!

I just finished my first food video shot with the GH3 + 12-35mm, 25mm f/1.4 and the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 and was wondering if someone would give me some comments? The video is shot with the natural profile and very slightly color corrected in After Effects due to the not perfect but affordable Fotodiox 1000ASVL LED's mixed with window lighting. 

 

Tips and tricks to improve the videos would be deeply appreciated. I'm currently using GH3 with the two big zooms and the PanaLeica trio 15mm, 25mm and 42,5mm btw. 

Thanks!

 

After playing for a year with 4K in the Bmpc, LX100 and NX1 I've now moved back to HD. 

I don't really get any big benefits from it. HD broadcast in Sweden is 720p. 4k and HD on youtube looks the same. And anything looks good if not full screen. 

Instead I focus on having a proper robust codec that can take some abuse. Also there isn't any 4k cameras that ticks all the boxes of what I need. And if a project all of a sudden require 4K I will rent. (Worth mentioning is that I have never used my own gear for serious work. Maybe a small gig here and there but otherwise my employer takes care of it.)

I guess I'm on the same page as the biggest broadcaster here in Sweden. When asked recently where they are in the process of 4K development they said roughly,

"We don't care about that right now because it wouldn't look that much better. What really would look better and that we are working on is 10 bit and wider DR. 

The transition to HD isn't even done yet so no hurry for 4K. 

I know this wasn't exactly what the thread was asking but it's the thoughts that came to mind when I read it.

 

Hi,
I need some help understanding how things work technically mainly.
I own a cheap Opteka SV-HD http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-SteadyVid-SV-HD-Stabilizer-Release/dp/B00DRGQETA, even when I find a perfect front-back and right-left balance I'm never able to get a smooth shot no matter how hard I try.

Considering the more expensive options like the Glidecam 2000 or ProArm USA AutoPilot that actually look and work the same what exactly do they have cheap stabilizers don't? I mean if it's just a matter of physics once you find the balance what changes on the product that lets actually achieve a smooth shot?

Hi! Right now im using fcp x to edit and color grade all my work but i feel that i hit the celling of where i can't really do more with the program pretty fast, i would like to start with some basics motion tracking aswell as getting more into color grading. Would you guys recommend me to switch to the adobe world or is there any better sulutions? Da vinci resolve? 

I've started shooting landscapes for fun and I've managed to hit the DR ceiling with my BMPCC rather quickly.

What's the next smallest camera that can capture greater than 13 stops? There doesn't seem to be any consumer alternative to the BMPCC for capturing raw, high dynamic images. Anyone know of a USB3 image sensor that can do something like 120 dB of dynamic range?

Oh, and this is why I love shooting RAW. This is what I would've got had I shot H.264 or even ProRes.

Okay..

So lets throw the $200/300 budget away.. So if I had $1000, what prime/cine lens would you suggest?

​*THIS*, it is the direction I am going in. I'm going to pick up Sony F3 for a similar price to an old Canon 5Dmk2 (once you've kitted that out with a basic cheap audio recorder and monitor, to at least pretend to match the same basic functionality of a F3!).
How could a person say no?? 

I was planning to (somehow???) get an URSA Mini 4.6K at a stretch, but now my plan will be:

1) once I magically win lotto / get rich, then I'll get an URSA Mini 4.6K

2) once the first price drop happens to the URSA Mini I'll get one (like what happened with the BMPCC, BMCC, and BMPC4K to a greater or lesser extent).

3) once URSA Minis start showing up on the second hand market at a decent discount

So in other words, I'll let my F3 last me some 12 to 24 months, and then I'll jump on an URSA Mini 4.6K :-)

I too would do A7s in this price bracket, but the OP already ruled it out. Also, having to spend so much extra for the Shogun just to get 4K out of an already expensive camera... Well it kinda rubs me the wrong way.

Bahahaha! Everyone raves about how the A7S opens up new creative possibilities, than slams the first real short to make use of its capabilities, even though some of you apparently paid so little attention that you didn't even know where the film takes place! I love it. Do you have any idea how hard Kubrick--hell, ANY filmmakers from before digital--would've creamed themselves over this? 

As a writer, a filmmaker, and a published critic, my opinion is that the short is good. The acting is good not great, the story is clear, concise, and kept me interested, it has a unique, ethereal look, and it the title left me with something to ponder. My friend, a very passionate physics major, insists that space is the next frontier, we'll die out eventually if we don't get out there, it could hold the answers to so many global problems, blah blah blah. But what if what's out there isn't our refuge at all? What if it's a trap, and we're the refuge for it?

That's not a lot of meat on its bones, but it's better than shaky street scenes, travel videos shot from the tour bus/boat, and endless boring landscape montages. 

It's important we give credit to the craft. After all, isn't that why we're all here?

IMO, out of the box the F3 gives images pretty similar to the A7s out of the box (the A7s having the advantage of the incredible low light performance). Pair it with an external recorder for the 10-bit output and you can get very nice images out of it. In my opinion, it's quite similar looking to the A7s. Essentially, imagine if the A7s had a 10-bit out via HDMI (as well as lower ISO in Slog, but at the trade-off of low light performance).

They aren't incredibly future proof, but if you're happy shooting 1080p, they can give you quite a good image for an incredibly reasonable price.

The Sony PL primes are stupidly cheap, and are actually not bad glass - I'd say they're about on par with Zeiss CP2s (although if I had a choice, I prefer the CP2s).  

Looks like someone has finally put the extreme low light ability of the A7s to full use. They shot the whole film I'm moonlight at iso 51,200.

To the person that asked "how does a new camera affect your creativity"... Well this is a good example.

 

I still see quite a bit of discussion and questions about the Nikon D750 here. I've had one for a few months and love it, though have never shared anything here I don't think. As a stills camera, its incredible. Makes the 5D3 (which I've owned and used plenty) obsolete in this regard, in my opinion. 

As a video camera, its great. Really nice image that holds up to grading quite well. I shot a lot of this in the flat profile, though some in the standard as well. Graded using Film Convert as a base and James Millers DeLuts to varying degrees. There isn't much of a narrative to this video, just an event recap video for the company I work for. Shot on Nikon 70-200 F4G (mostly), 35mm F/2D, 24mm F/2D + Cinevate Duzi v3 slider and some handheld action

 

I have to agree with Oliver Daniel. Specifically the 18-35, which I believe is nearly the perfect lens. I think we have lenses that are as sharp as they'll ever need to be. Consider Tarantino's Hateful 8 where he and Richardson actually looked for lenses that were NOT so clinically sharp. The Sigma 18-35 is the perfect focal length zoom. Rehousing it as a cinema lens, keeping the t stop to at least T2.6 (which is what it is now), add hard stops on focus and make it a parfocal zoom (I think that's what it's called). I realize the price would at least quadruple, but it would be one of the last lenses I'd ever have to buy.

Additionally, if we're dreaming, I'd love to see cinema housed Sigma Art 11-16, 35-70, and a longer lens, like 125, or 70-200. I wouldn't use those nearly as often as the 18-35, but knowing I could rent or buy would be sweet. 

TWO stops more DR? wow. I'll go test the raw stills to see if the sensor is even capable of a 2 stop improvement, that would be huge. I always found the raw stills to have similar contrast range/latitude to the 4K video, though not tested specifically. Going out to see, If I find two more stops in the raw stills then a log gamma can easily bring them into the video mode.