Christina Ava

For his upcoming snowy western Tarantino unearthed special cameras and 1.25x anamorphic lenses at Panavision which hadn't seen the light of day since 1965.
The film was shot on 65mm film and will get a 'Roadshow' release on Christmas day in amazing 70mm.
Read the full article

I assume that SLR Magic 50mm f1.1 would have the same T stop spec or very similar - much cheaper and smaller, declicked:
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/slr-magic-announces-the-new-cine-50mm-f1-1-fe-lens/
Although, a wide-open test would make the comparison much easier.

I know Tony & Chelsea like it, not because it's perfect, but because the light gathering comes in handy and it's just loads of fun... maybe a decent watch for you:

The Canon 50mm L was the lens that convinced me to finally invest in high(er)-end glass. I had been shooting a vintage set of Pentax Super Takumars for years (the 50mm 1.4 Super Tak is my first love), but compared to the 50mm L on back-to-back shoot days it just couldn't deliver the sharpness and fall-off of the modern glass. That day and subsequent days shooting the L 50mm (and other L lenses) gave me so much confidence. 
After an exhaustive search I found that the Leica Rs give the right amount of sharpness and pop in the image, with a comparable amount of... "romance?"... character? that the vintage lenses often provide for my style of shooting and content.
If anyone else is thinking of jumping in to the Leica game, over the past year I've compiled this vimeo collection of stuff shot on them (none by me, sadly). You'll find that they're quite versatile.

Out of the blue Blackmagic sent me the new Video Assist, which isn't quite yet shipping at B&H (pre-orders are available) or CVP but will be soon.
Here is an early look at the device and what it can do.
Read the full article

Yes I agree that some part of the emotion of cinematography comes from degrading the image down to a 2D flat version of how our eyes work.
our hunter's vision is relatively limited in field of view, resolution and ability to focus on more than one thing or distance at a time... 
That can work for some shots but eventually it feels detached, like documentation rather than involvement.

looking at it i noticed it has a "video game" look, what strikes as odd in the cinematography of this movie,
is that everything shot is very clear and wide and that does not resemble the way we actually see things, our eyesight is not that good. 
so since there is no faraway blur in the backround objects it seems artificial to us.
and this is why old dated westerns like 1971s "The Hired Hand" will still kick this movie to the ground in terms of cinematography.

looking at it i noticed it has a "video game" look, what strikes as odd in the cinematography of this movie,
is that everything shot is very clear and wide and that does not resemble the way we actually see things, our eyesight is not that good. 
so since there is no faraway blur in the backround objects it seems artificial to us.
and this is why old dated westerns like 1971s "The Hired Hand" will still kick this movie to the ground in terms of cinematography.

Well that took a bloody long time! But I've just this minute completed my new reel and site. It's not "announced" until Monday.... social media campaigns etc blah blah. But it's live! Check them here: 
View my new showreel and website!
Some info
Each and every image -  I shot, lit, edited, graded. A little directing. Very involved in creative ideas.  Core crew was mostly 4-5 regular people in these productions (Director, DOP, Production Manager, Spark, Make Up Artist).  For the geeks - cameras used are Sony F55, FS7, FS700, RED Epic, GH3, BM Pocket.  All images are music videos, but going for commercial/corporate work aggressively into the next year. (and still many music videos).  The aim is to have 100% new material for Showreel 2016. Max creativity required.  Anyway, if you like it or don't like it, whatever. Just thought I'd share.
 

I would argue that one never needs image stabilization. It's nice to have, not need to have, especially for video, for which many other vibration-dampening solutions are available.

​yes its just you. if you owned it and used it you would understand the beauty of this camera. at almost half price, its a bargain, and they are so good, that you rarely find any good used ones.  This camera is no mistake. Its top quality photo/video magic all in one, the flagship of 80 years of canon camera tech...
yes good things are coming from canon, but this camera is future-proof.
love c.
 

​Would KILL for this in Nikon mount. I have a 40mm voightlander that's pretty much how I see. 
Also have to say I would love a low cost 50mm Anamorphic, even if it was f4 I would buy it comes in under a grand.

neat video does the job!

I know people like to poke fun at Canon due to their seemingly underwhelming specs (myself included at times!) but for what its worth, during my 3 months or so with an A7s I found it slow, clunky, unreliable (crashed occasionally) and the battery life was of course terrible. I was always thinking about the camera. During my 6 months or so with a c100, the opposite was definitely true. Theres something to be said for cameras that "just work" and Canon definitely has that figured out.  
Hoping the a7rII brings an improvement in this area as it looks like a slick camera! 

It would be so much easier to be a painter or a writer. You don't have to have equipment. You don't have to do all the things. You're not at the mercy of gear. You're not here and you're not there. It's a terrible pain to be a filmmaker, because you not only have the creative problems, but you have financial problems that they don't have. You have technical problems that they don't have. You have machines that are breaking down in a way that paintbrushes don't break down. It's just a terrible thing to be a filmmaker. And if you are a filmmaker, it's because there is something in the sheer medium that seems to be able to make some sort of statement that you particularly want to make, and which no other medium to you seems capable of making in the same way.
Not my words, but I do like them.  As much as I go on about it's only about what you do with the equipment, not what equipment you have, filmmakers are tethered to the technology.  It's the blessing/curse.
If you're curious about from where and whom the above sentiment comes from:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sH8FvTjESvU 

I strongly advice against that.

if only the A7s2 had an EF mount, and a bigger body.i cant hold it straight!
still CANON has me worked up in anticipation more that the sony A7S series.
im going to shoot with both a mark3 and a a7s in a wedding soon. and test how they work on my field.
?????????????????????
new canon mark4 what i expect
1. better low light, this is certainty as Canon historically improves it from model to model
2. 4k external, probably with a specialty gadget/recorder to milk more money and not sabotage the 1DC
3.the beautiful ergonomics and usability of the 5d series
4. same pixel count 
5. cleaner sony sensor ?improving on the softness..
 
 

i have stopped watching television almost 15 years now, i do not own one anymore.
i went to my friends house and they where watching tv in a huge samsung, i noticed what you said! the movement was spastic and felt out of place it was jumpy.
i questioned them if they saw it and they said no, for me it was unwatchable, garbage so i guess this is what you are describing. 
shooting at 24fps also helps i think to what you are describing

When buying/renting a camera - most of us look for features such as resolution, dynamic range, bit rate, colour etc....
The first thing I actually look for is motion cadence. The way the image flows and feels in motion. It's such an important characteristic, I wish more attention was given to it. 
Modern TVs kill nice motion cadence. They run at 120hz or have this feature switched on called TrueMotion or SmoothMotion. The amount of TVs I've fixed (by turning the feature off) because friends are watching The Walking Dead like a cheap soap opera. 
It helps the motion when it's 1/50 shutter, progressive blah blah. But there is magic in there too. (Digital Bolex).
My opinion is (for film like motion): 
- Panasonic GH4 (poor) 
- Sony FS7 (average)
- Digital Bolex (the king!) 
Lovely cadence is a massive feature as it adds character, emotion and beauty compared to "poor" cadence where the image feels erratic and ugly. 
I also think lenses add to it. Cheap electronic lenses ruin the look of nice motion cadence as the image is vastly over sharpened, brittle and loses ounces of soul within the motion. 
I don't intend this to be a technical thread with boring mathematical numbers and nerdy bar charts/graphs and other snores. More what the "motion" of an image means to a camera and your own work. 
How do you see motion cadence as a feature? Is it important to you? 

i think they dont look as good as the colors captured by you, and if you bought them so have other 100 people that will have the exact same look.
i think you should develop your own style, the footage is great, just tweek it a bit and it will have your signature on it.
they look instagramish, and unless there is a serious reason why they should look "green" or highly saturated because of a client or a story i am against luts and color grading.
i guess its my taste,and i am the minority here.
 and as i said your footage and the dog looks awesome.
c.

id starts with a used 5D mark 2! after you really do a check in the condition of the camera, 
try not to buy from a proffesional photographer /videographer  because it will have 1 million takes on it, since the camera has been around for ages.
try to find one from a camera enthusiast that kept it in top shape! 
70d/old 7d 60d rebel etc are not worth it the 5d mrk 2 is much better.
you can also do the awesome ML raw, but its hell to process and edit.
 

i think they dont look as good as the colors captured by you, and if you bought them so have other 100 people that will have the exact same look.
i think you should develop your own style, the footage is great, just tweek it a bit and it will have your signature on it.
they look instagramish, and unless there is a serious reason why they should look "green" or highly saturated because of a client or a story i am against luts and color grading.
i guess its my taste,and i am the minority here.
 and as i said your footage and the dog looks awesome.
c.

I don't these Luts at all. Ruining otherwise great footage. Horrible stuff 

if you want to wash your head from bad acting/script/cinematography i suggest you watch Inherent Vice...
if you like this type of flics i guess KUNG FURY is the one to watch!
 
Most of the raw footage over green screen had been filmed using a Canon EOS 5D and a Sony FS700,