dhessel

Ursa retro.

Be sure to check with olex too, he services them and will know how to support it. They are from Russia and the Ukraine so it might be a little slower getting responses. They have both always been helpful to me in the past when I have contacted them.

this is from Olex's site might be helpful.

https://sites.google.com/site/olexservicelenses/home/spherical-zoom-lenses/25-250-mm-f3-5-35-opf-7-1

i would check with olex camera and raf camera. The specialize in lomos, even if they don't have anything they can probably point you in the right direction.

depends on the camera, it varies. The magenta cast is nothing easily graded away the magenta corners is a different issue. I think the magenta is a problem and BM has acknowledged it is and a working on a fix.

26 minutes ago, Dan Wake said:

it's the 4,6k. may you tell me more about the magenta cast issue please? isn't something that can be fixed with a firmware update on camera? is it a serious problem?

 

for the same price does exist a better aletranive to ursa 4,6k?

 

thx

they are trying to fix it via a firmware update. It is non uniform affecting the right side and corners more than the center. The magenta varies by lens, focal length and f stop so it is not easy to grade out. I would expect this will make it difficult to fix via firmware but I cant say. It can be minimal or quite severe and I have heard of people having to rma 3 cameras before getting an acceptable one so in my opinion it is a big issue. There are not many alternatives though. Sony fs5 or fs7 maybe? Or perhaps an older red camera, these are all assuming you are wanting a raw shooting camera.

On ‎9‎/‎7‎/‎2016 at 4:32 PM, Bold said:

I don't know of anyone who has done this... I think most filmmakers want the flexibility to switch lenses quickly and easily. A single-bodied anamorphic solution that integrates the taking lens would prevent that.  But if you only ever wanted to use one taking lens, an "all-in-one" solution could be done.  If you want it to be single-focus (where the taking lens is set to infinity, and you focus with the anamorphic), this limits your options.  You would probably need an SLR Magic Rangefinder or Rectilux DNA.

Many people have made housings where anamorphic alignment is set once, then all they have to do is swap taking lenses.  Here's mine:

Fabrication can be tricky depending on the the size & weight of your anamorphic, and whether your anamorphic already has filter threads on the front & back. But once you are done, shooting becomes a lot easier.  If you do a search (especially in this forum), you will find a lot of different setups that users have created to accomplish this.

 

 

The anamorphic is not oriented correctly in those photos. Is that intentional?

which version 4k or 4.6k? Both record raw video btw. Both suffer from fpn especially the 4k. You have to light well and cannot go over 400 ISO with fpn on the 4k, 4.6k is better and can be used at 800 ISO and maybe 1600 ISO but fpn might start to show. The 4.6k is suffering from magenta cast issues and neither has a olpf so moire and aliasing could be an issue. Note these comments are anecdotal since I have personally used neither.

1 hour ago, Kino said:

The Fairchild 4.6K is "off-the-shelf" in that it is available to the general public. John has stated that the Ursa Mini 4.6K sensor is not "off-the-shelf."

It is of course possible there are two versions, one for BMD and one for Fairchild, as I noted a few pages ago. John also maintains that BMD has designed the sensor, which is fine. I believe him and I even cited the lapsed BMD patent application that may be relevant. We will have to wait and see when they file those applications again. That's the only way to know for sure.

My understanding has always been that the 4.6K sensor is a custom modification of an existing sensor done exclusively for BM. This "off the shelf" fairchild may be the base that was used for the custom version done for BM but that would make it no longer "off the shelf".

On ‎9‎/‎5‎/‎2016 at 9:36 AM, AaronChicago said:

Too much magenta, push the tint toward green at it's gone. Same with the C100 mark I having a green tint. Push it toward magenta and it's gone. The cameras that are defective with the pronounced magenta corners is another issue. It looks to be getting better and/or fixed.

Not in this case, the magenta on the Mini is not an even cast but a some times splotchy uneven coloration that affects the corners and generally the right side more than others. It varies by lens, focal length and f stop. It is not a simple fix and BM themselves have admitted it is a problem also it can be seen clearly with no saturation boost. Not something that is easily graded out.

3 hours ago, jonpais said:

I'm not talking about technical issues with the cameras, I'm talking about accusing BMD of knowingly releasing faulty products.

\00a0

Seriously how could they not have known? It was present in beta footage from the beginning and after all that is what the beta testers are for, reporting these kind of issues to BM right? Even if the beta testers didn't forum members did and BM does monitor the forums. So they knew or they are incompetent, take your pick. I personal don't think they are incompetent.

They knew or they are utterly incompetent, it was spotted in beta footage by a non beta tester just looking at footage. The mega thread on BM's form dates back to Sun Dec 06, 2015. It also can be found at larger stops that F8, it is just that 35mm at F8 is universally bad on the affected cameras. There were some who had issues at even F4 at 35mm. 

13 hours ago, squig said:

No, but it's 1s and 0s; anything is possible, somebody just has to figure it out.

It is not just 1's and 0's it is also hardware. ML runs on the cameras CPU and the CPU simply is not powerful enough to compress the data fast enough. They already know how to do it and have already tried, the camera cannot handle it. It cannot even handle reducing the bit depth down to 10bit which is even less demanding. Compressed raw on the current cameras that can run ML is not going to happen. Chances are it won't be happening on the Mark IV either.

It is wide spread enough that BM had acknowledged it and are attempting to fix it via firmware. No one other than BM knows how wide spread the issue is. It is clearly more than a few bad units because there were individuals who got at least 3 bad ones in a row even when requesting the cameras be checked during RMA. There were multiple people who had the same results. Either they are very unlucky or it is more widespread than just a few bad ones.

The build quality of the Mini probably won't be end of BM's cameras after all it seems the 4.6K is a very popular camera. One of the most concerning ones is that they apparently designed the camera to have a CPU right behind where the side handle attaches. There have been a few reports of the camera taking a fall and landing on the handle, breaking the outer housing, which in turn hits the circuit board breaking a CPU. In these instances BM has refused to repair the cameras leaving the owners SOL. 

https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=51171

My biggest issue with BM is that I really don't like the way the company, at least when it comes to cameras, operates. It is awesome that BM offers free versions of their software but the way they conduct themselves otherwise is downright disrepectful at times. They over promise and under deliever, they are deceptive and not really trust worthy. With the Mini two features were lost GPS in September 2015 and global shutter in March 2016 yet they announced at NAB the camera was going to be shipping in July 2015 when they were clearly nowhere near ready to ship. Some say it was over optimism but I don't buy it, I think they knew full well they wouldn't make that date an announced it anyway. Then for the following eight months they moved the ship date one month at a time stringing customers even though I am sure they also knew that it would not be shipping that following month in the many instances when they changed the date. It seems they like to create a buzz, offer a BS ship date to get people excited and focused on the product then string them along until it is finally ready. 

There are many other instances dating back to their very first camera and their communication still an issue. The biggest one for me is how they treated their URSA owners. At NAB they said that URSA owners would be given priority for the 4.6k sensors and would get their turret upgrades first. They even announced a lower price for the 4K URSA so new customers could buy it then and pre-order the turret for the same price as just pre-ordering the 4.6K URSA. That way the can use the camera now and would also be given first priority on the new sensors. Yet when the time came they backed out of their promise and released the 4.6k Mini first. Now I understand it is a business and clearly the Mini was the new flag ship camera. With it being so overdue they decided to release it instead of living up to their promise. Understandable but how did they handle it? An appology or at least an explanation to the URSA owners? Nope, they said absolutely nothing at all. They released the Mini and didn't even bother to mention the URSA in their announment email or video. They left the URSA owners in the dark with out any official announcment or explaination. The URSA owners still have no idea when they might be getting theirs but they are clearly at the bottom of priorities now. 

If someone can come up and offer what BM does I am sure many BM users would happily jump ship, especially if they are respectful and communicate well. Until then BM probably isn't going anywhere. 

Anything cheaper and you will have to give up something on your list.

Sony FS5, not sure what you consider affordable.

Sony really should make it easier to find information and LUTs for grading log material from their cameras. When I first started using the A7s I couldn't find a proper slog2 to Rec709 LUT anywhere that worked correctly. I spent countless hours looking for a neutral converstion LUT and I knew exactly what I was looking for. The slog curve is not the problem the problem is the sgamut color space that is the default on the camera when shooting in log. That colorspace must be converted to Rec709 via a LUT or color transformation matrix otherwise you can get funky colors. 

2 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

Anything including focal reducer is not possible on EF mount due to its long flange distance.

Not entirely true. You cannot make an EF to EF speed booster because the booster reduces the crop factor and increases the speed of the lens by shortening the flange focal distance - moving the lens closer to the sensor and refocusing it. Imagine the lens is like a film projector and you are focusing it on a screen that is smaller than the image being projected. If you want to get the whole image on the screen you can move the projector closer to the screen and refocus it, filling the screen and increasing the brighteness of the image at the same time.

It is possible however to make a speed booster that adapts large/medium format lenses to EF but that seems a bit rediculous to boost a medium format lens to get a full frame crop on of a full frame camera

6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Indeed.

Always best to actually login to PayPal and see if the transfer is present, then transfer it to your bank account, and if you're feeling extremely cautious even wait for it to turn up there as well.

What's the recap on Ebrahim, has he refunded people or is it still ongoing?

In 5 years of EOSHD I have never seen something this weird from an established DVXUser member like he was, and a regular poster here and at RedUser. How was this handled over at DVXUser? Did anyone consider that maybe with all the termoil in Egypt, something happened to the real Ebrahim at some point and his stuff stolen. It could even be somebody completely different behind the screen.

There's no need to not trust anyone ever again - just exercise simple, basic caution when sending money to someone especially if they are outside of your country or in an unstable one - and always use your PayPal account and not a wire transfer.

To my knowledge he has still not paid back one person, even though I believe Ed David wired him some money to help out. Not 100% sure about that so maybe ED can confirm. Also the range finder that he did eventually send to the other 2 turned out to be a prototype with a non standard thread on the back which may have caused some issues with them trying to sell it.

If the F3 doesn't have the paid slog upgrade you will need the 7Q to get 444 or 60P. If I am not mistaken with out the upgrade dual link is required for either of these options and the 7Q is one of the only recorder that supports it. This is the main reason whe the 7Q is so popular for the F35 since it only has HD-SDI and outputs in PsF. I believe with the paid slog upgrade the F3 gained 3G over single link allowing many other recorders to work it. 

Many believe the size of s35 is a good balance between speed of lenses and shallowness of depth of field for motion picture filming. You can use fast lenses and still have enough DOF to not give your focus puller PTSD. Having shot with FF, s35 and smaller sensor cameras I tend to agree with that setiment. Of course having the option for larger formats is very welcomed.

11 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Oops, just realised I put a pic of a Cooke Varotal 18-100 T3, but it seems the one you're referring to is a similar size anyway?

Yes they are basically the same size, the 18-100 is the newer design of the same lens. It is a little bit sharper, so I am told, and considered a better lens but it goes for around $9000-$10000. I believe the 20-100 is about 14" long, has a 144mm front and weighs about 10.5 lbs. It has a min focus of a little over 2 feet so it can be used for closups on the long end. It is decently fast and has a slot for rear filters if you find one that still has the filter holder. It is a fantastic lens, if you can handle the size.

6 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Not 100% essential, but important to look out for anyway.
However there was a free s-log upgrade available which you can get if you don't have the paid version, and that allows you to have s-log 10bit 422. Just you miss out on 444, but the gain there is marginal in most use cases.

True but the difference in price is marginal and doesn't it also allow for 60P 10bit 422 over a single SDI as well where it would require dual link without?

25 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Maybe you missed focus on the wide shots as it wasn't properly calibrated for infinity focus??? Seems strange for RED 4K wide shots to be thought of as too soft?!

And shooting 4K for 2K delivery to give "more options in post" doesn't come with pitfalls, you'll need to be spot on with your focus, and the crop will mean deeper DoF than if you'd shot it originally with a longer lens without cropping. Plus 4K means heavier demands on data storage during production and in post. 

All of these can of course be overcome, but shouldn't be ignored casually. 

Even just 1080 10bit 422 will chew up a lot of space over a feature! Is what I'll be doing on my next feature. 

Maybe for my feature after that we'll have the budget to use 4K 10bit 422 cameras for the whole thing. (as would like to use a Sony FS700 with FSraw down converted to 4K ProRes HQ on the fly with an Atomos Shogun, but that would stretch our budget too far So Sony F3 it is! If we do get any spare budget at all, it will be to buy a second Sony F3 so we can shoot with two at once)

Yeah the director Colin Trevorrow shot his first narrative feature film on an F3: "Safety Not Guaranteed".
Note however, I believe this was shot with a pre-S-log camera and all internal. Or in other words, you now in 2016 using the F3's S-log and 10bit external would be getting a much much better camera than the version of F3 which shot "Safety Not Guaranteed"!

Colin Trevorrow went on to make Jurassic Park (4th highest grossing film of all time!) and will next be making Star Wars: Episode IX.

 

 

Oh wow, a Cooke 20-100mm T3.1, that sounds like a handy and great zoom range with a fast enough T-stop, all this with the Cooke name for $4K? Can't afford it now, or even probably next year, but sounds like something I could aspire to own in the medium term future!

But then I looked up what the lenses looks like on an F3.....

WHOA!! That seriously pushes the limits for me for an "everyday" lens to shoot a feature on. Hmmm....

Yes it is big and fairly heavy but not as heavy as I thought it was going to be. I own one that I use with my F35, beautiful lens but definately not run and gunning with it. It also has a interchangeable mount design so it can be easily changed from PL to EF, etc... 

Many who were not reading between the lines have no idea how involved Ed was with Ebrahim working towards resolving this. I am sure it is much more than I think. I do think he went too far in the beginning and I called him out but I know he was advising and negotiating behind the scenes.