Cinegain

If only it were £260, lol.

Probably better luck finding 'em as 'umbrella' holder brackets. http://www.ebay.com/itm/171328389547 http://www.ebay.com/itm/280683358148 http://www.ebay.com/itm/370597920394 http://www.ebay.com/itm/381101499545

Yeah, it kinda looks like a mashup! Not too shabby though! And yes! I agree. Looking forward to the GX8! Hopefully it's going to be everything the E-M5II was supposed to be...

Wouldn't these make a great match for the Bolex? http://shop.zenit-foto.ru/kinoob-ektivy

I still like the idea behind this:

​Well apparently it's from a series: 'Delve - video essays'. So... that leads to http://delve.tv/essays/ which leads to http://delve.tv/the-long-game-part-one/ where it says ' Watch Part Two here '. Which leads to http://delve.tv/the-long-game-part-two . Which tells you 'Oops! That page has disappeared...'. But given the Vimeo style video, you just search it up at Vimeo, https://vimeo.com/search?q=the+long+game , et voilá:

​Eh. You can already do this you know. eoshd.com/comments/profile/userID > Edit Profile > Basic Info > Member Title > 'Your member title is shown beside posts you make' You might've noticed I've been rocking 'Filmrookie' for some time already. That's a pretty spot on description I'd reckon.

Panasonic has gone through the process of WiFi certification for the GX8. So that's one to watch... (at some undefined point in time). Would be cool though. The GX8 gotta be like the the E-M5II, but then done right. The stabilization on the E-M5II looked really warpy at times and the general quality really seems to fall behind compared to the competition. I've read there's a new firmware release for the E-M1 next month. Hopefully the E-M1 will get something more than friggin' 30p. 24p/25p and higher bitrate please!

It's the V-Slider Mini from RatRig that came in about the same time as the 42.5mm f/1.7 the other day. Nitsan did a nice video on it earlier. http://ratrig.com | https://www.facebook.com/ratrighardware But anyways, to get back to it... I'd probably go with the new 42.5mm f/1.7, it's nice and affordable and gets you that OIS. Then you can add a SLR Magic 50mm f/0.95 for some bokeh extravaganza. Perhaps also consider the MFT Olympus 75mm f/1.8?

Seems that's the mindset you should begin with in the first place and should continue to have going forward in any future endeavour. If you're not init for the sake of having fun and doing what you love... then you're doing it for the wrong reasons. And what's the use in that? You know how many people in the music industry or doing comedy for example out there have mad talent but don't get the recognition they deserve? Kind of the same thing. You shouldn't expect to be the next big thing just overnight like that. Just stick with what you love and try to find some ways to get the bills paid. For these artists I just mentioned that means accepting the little gigs in pubs that don't pay very well. They might get their big break one day (and perhaps first have to sell their soul and identity to get there)... they might not (it's hard to get noticed in a world so big and with so many others). But atleast they're not working late cranking out those quarterly figures that need to be on the bosses desk first thing in the morning I guess and doing something they're passionate about. And you don't need to walk red carpets to have a fulfilling life. So just stick with what makes you happy. And if anything... you just doing your thing is exactly the thing what will bring you success in the end. It's not chasing after that magic formula, but staying true to yourself.

You could get the new Lumix 42.5mm f/1.7, it has OIS and is quite nice (I need to find some time for some testing!).

I really dug this video I came across one time. If you want to skip a bit, try watching from 23:45:

While it may be Andrew's site with his articles on the frontpage/blog, the rest of the threads on the forum its content is decided by the userbase mostly. So... if you're coming across a lot of tech stuff, that's mainly because that is what the userbase is into. That doesn't mean it's just a place for techies. The content on the forum isn't dictated by Andrew. I see it as an open platform where you decide what's the topic of the day. So if you feel like there's too little stuff going on in the artistic/creative direction, blame yourself, it's up to you to do something about it. Although I prefer when it's actually about something fresh and useful that benefits and motivates everyone, rather than the old flamewar debate that the best camera is the one you have with you, that you can enter a festival with something shot on an iPhone, that Kendy does great things with the T2i and that content is king. Yeah yeah, we've been over that before, heard it a thousand times, we even agree, we know. But imho there's nothing wrong with discussing the tools that make filmmaking possible. Cameras, lenses, lights, mics/recorders, monitors, stabilizers, et cetera. You can go full nerdgasm on any of these things by the way, not just camera bodies. But the way I see it most just want to explore new territories and open up new creative possibilities that allow them to create what they have envisioned. Nothing wrong with that. And in the end we all choose our own paths. You choose yours, let others choose theirs. Maybe you're oozing creativity and ideas, but are limited by the execution of things. New gear can enable you to move forward, to take it to the next level. Of course if you haven't even unlocked the full potential of your current gear, it's questionable if you really need that new bright shiny toy. But hey, as long as they don't ruin themselves financially, let them buy that RED Weapon Dragon or whatever and let 'em find out the hard way that it takes more then just buying stuff, right? Anyways. To end on a cool note, I like to share a video I came across the other day...

​Exactly! That's what makes the LX100 worth gold! Can totally recommend it, you'll be using it all the time. As for a baby tripod. I have two Cullmann Magnesit Copters myself. As seen on: Mic wise, I haven't really got anything RØDE, which I guess is what most people go for? Videomic Pro. Or a NTG2 / NTG3. I went budget. First to get was the Zoom H1 (who didn't start out with one of those?), then added the Takstar SGC-598 and HTDZ HT-81 with an iRig Pre. They do a pretty decent job. With so many third party choices I'm not sure anybody uses Panasonic's own mic offering to be honest. Heard good things about Shure as well though. As for the LX100 with external mic. Depends on if you really need it. If you're going to put an audio track over it and just getting the visuals, why bother? You can even use ambient/environmental sounds slightly muted in the back to cover up the fact that it's recorded with the built-in mic (like a music track with visuals of waves crashing on the beach, with the waves audible, perhaps you can even hear some seagulls). If you just so happen to find yourself at a live music performance and need that audio performance. Well, yeah, you might need something else... maybe one of these RØDE smartphone attachments?

Well, both of them have a lightweight on-the-go character. With the LX100 being the most minimalistic, yet still being able to pack a punch and the FZ1000 being a little more flexible, although the added bulk. But for me personally, it doesn't make much sense to bring 'em along together to shoot the same thing. It's gonna be just the one of them depending on how I want to go about it. I take one along when bringing the GH4 with lenses, tripod and accessories would weigh me too much down. I like the bare essentials all-in-one hybrid shooter's approach, so usually it's going to be the LX100. If I think I will benefit from the range, the LX100 stays at home and the FZ1000 comes along. In a controlled shooting environment, let's say an interview set up with lights and so on, you're not on-the-go. You're already there with lights and everything, so you're taking an interchangeable lens system camera with you... in my case my go-to camera would be the GH4. In such a controlled environment a LX100 would make a fine alternative angle though. The FZ1000 could work well too, mostly you just got to be mindful about the perhaps sudden change in the depth of field, depending on what your master camera is shooting with/at. If you are combining the FZ1000 with the LX100, that's an interesting thought, especially if you're on-the-go (unplanned out/uncontrolled environment) and take both (so, something I haven't done/can't really see myself doing). The LX100 is not that much different in terms of look than the GH4. Great optics really help here too. Just renders beautifully. The FZ1000 is a bit more tricky. Due to the small sensor and maximum minimum aperture (or is it minimum maximum aperture?) a great deal just looks in focus and sharp and the sensor resolves a great amount of detail (which can be trully awesome on it's own!). Add an outdoorsy environment with some white clouds that are blown out to keep everything else in check, and you're alreay starting to look pretty videoey with the FZ1000 though. For depth-of-field obviously it helps to zoom in, but it falls of to f/4 rather quickly and you might not want or can't change the focal length like that. Best chances in that case are to get your subject as close to you and as far away from the background as possible. For blown out highlights, you might be able to change up your shooting angle/framing. I mean, I might've pictured it worse than it is in all actuality, but that's just to make you aware of it. So... would these two intercut nicely? If you take your time to set 'em up accordingly, sure! They all share the same Panasonic 4K-vibe, color, etc, so it's mostly just a question of finding a balance through the sensor crop and optics.

'Need' is a strong word. But I'm sure a lot of folks would 'have use for' a new camera. Like any other piece of gear, it's a tool. And one tool might just get the job done better than the other. If you want to cut the grass by hand using scissors, go ahead, but wouldn't you secretly rather just use a lawn mower already? I mean, you don't care that much about the lawn mower itself, do you? It's about what it enables you to do. Now I'm not saying your old camera doesn't cut grass (although, uh, any camera doesn't, obviously; don't try this at home), but a new camera will do it faster and trims the bushes too (ok, this is getting ridiculous, I'll stop). What I'm trying to say. You say it's a bunch of technical nonsense, not expression. But isn't the artistic/creative choice purposely using 4K or slowmotion for example expression in itself? Therefor, isn't picking the right tool, a newer tool with more bells and whistles, allowing for more creative freedom rather than taking that freedom away? But even if you disagree. Where do you draw the line? When DO you need a new camera?

​I agree with your first paragraph. Once a while my tv happens to end up with a talent show on there... and you hear the saddest sob stories. They don't have any outstanding talents. But hey, you're supposed to feel for them, so go on and like it anyways. And tons of people fall for it. They eat it like pancakes with strawberry and whipped cream. I can't stand that sorta thing. I mean, I'm sorry for so and so, but come on, you've got a mediocre amount of talent, if any, and I'm afraid a sad backstory isn't going to push that to the next level. I do have to say, on the other hand. Something can be completely random and technically imperfect as can be, and still work. It's just a matter of random puzzle pieces from different puzzles just so happen to come together and create an new image that actually kinda makes sense and/or is beautiful. But you're right, then it has to be work on it's own. It doesn't matter who puts the pieces together. If they don't manage to create something stunning, it's game over for me, no matter who you are. The same way I wouldn't just like Ed's stuff, for the sake of him being a fellow forum member and a pretty well established cinematographer. I'm not on the same page as Ed on a lot of things he says or does, but that's okay, we're all different. I wouldn't just go and roast someone's work if they didn't ask for an honest opinion, but if they are asking, I will tell them in all honestly that it just doesn't work for me, explain them why and what could've been done to make me feel otherwise about it. If I do like what you did, I will applaud you for it! So if it's about 'say you found Ed's video at random without knowing who shot it', well... I would still have liked it as much as I did. I'm not sure how it would've worked with 'average looking guys', because it would require a completely different video altogether. You can't just change an element, a piece of the puzzle, and claim it's the same as before, therefor works as it did before. Btw, it's not only about forgiving/overlooking flaws that's inherent to the old days of film, it's actually embracing it or even going further and looking for it specifically! That is why I like vintage lenses so much. If you want the most clinical clean image, that's fine, but that might not work for all your projects since 'politically correct lenses' kind of lack a bit of 'soul'. Old lenses are often lacking multi coatings and hence flare quite a bit. Some really are able to render a background out of focus in a trully elegant way, as if it were painted. Contrast and sharpness are something else. So much character... so much 'soul'. Now, you might think: 'ah, you're going for vintage glass because it's cheap and just accept to live with the flaws'. Au contraire! People actually pay top dollah to get glass with these 'flaws'! It's a matter of stylic choice. The final work is a certain vision (which you might not get, but it nontheless is someone's!). Someone's vision might require vintage glass. Maybe someone else's vision (or your own vision on another project) requires a modern lens. Take the tools you have availlable to you and put it together as to make it work for your project. Put the right pieces of the puzzle together. Sometimes that includes not shooting stuff locked down on a tripod, but going handheld. That might include a certain audio track you envisioned for the piece; that might included adding grain, visual effects and jumpy cuts to your project. The one project is not the next. Sure you can have a certain recognizeable signature style throughout your work. But you will evolve, try different things and change things up... because everyday is a new one and every projects include other people and other situations. Go on the streets and shoot something today. Now go on the street next month and shoot the same thing. It will not be identical (two moments are never identical to begin with, so one piece is even timing if a thing works or not). And in the end, even if the puzzle pieces do make something great. Not everyone will see it. I guess it's kinda like the next video: You might see trash. I see art that I quite like. I don't know the guy who made that. I wouldn't have come up with that or done it myself. But I like what he did there. It works on it's own without knowing who made it and a lot of people agree. That doesn't mean that you have to agree though. There's no right or wrong when doing something creative/subjective. Although in some cases, some things are more wrong than right (but then the room probably isn't really devided on that and all draw that same conclusion).

How about calling people involved a 'communitweaker'? Would love to see actual RAW developments for the D5300 (but I haven't got a coding clue).

Another hardware up from the LX100: the FZ1000 has a vari-angle display. Oh, and it has the Cinelike profiles. I also find the MF with the LX100 lens ring a little fiddly (should've swapped aperture and focus ring imho). But then again, the FZ1000 is quite a bit bulkier. Has the slower lens. The smaller sensor (so you run into highly clipping rather quickly). The bit worse low light performance. Depends on what you're going for. I've got both since the LX100 makes for a great daily on-the-go shooter. The FZ1000 is nice as an allround travelcam with a little more flexibility. One simply does not offer me what the other can. They also make for great B roll/2nd cameras to a GH4.

​I love me some up-tempo pacing (I have the attention span of a 6-year-old), so I didn't mind it, really. Also, a lot of these cuts seemed motivated by the music. Now at first I was like: oh no, this is one of these pretentious hipster vids with random all-over-the-place stuff just for the sake of it. But then after a few seconds the track picked up. The fragment visuals led up to the establishing shot of the street. Then showing the girls having fun on their night out in the city, playing pool, singing, dancing, chatting, laughing. Just a good time. Visually I just found it to have very pleasing colors and light. Very nice depth of field and softness, together with the motion and grain it felt very filmlike and organic. I absolutely adored the look in the screencap below. Very dreamy, nice silky milky blacks. Nice bokeh going on. If you don't get that. Well, I guess everyone's got different taste. Would be boring if we'd all be the same! About the fuzz and cuts with no clear purpose... you could also interpret it as 'the next day's memory of last night'. When you were out the night before, the next day you probably remember bits and pieces, but not everything is quite as clear. So in a way, you could interpret the way the footage is being presented to us as not an in-the-moment documentation, but more of a dreamy memory flashing by before the viewer's eyes. It was a fashion piece. I assume the bags were the actual main characters in this and incorporated in such way. Together with the bracelets they really stood out with their vibrant colors. So, I think this approach has paid off quite nicely. It works for me atleast. It shows the power of the tools used and Ed's creative and artistic side to set a certain mood. Now, you might not want (and you shouldn't want) to go with this look for everything you shoot. But just as a camera is a tool, so are different grades, cuts and grains...

You probably don't just so happen to have a bit behind the scenes stuff for us now, do you?

Looks stunning. Great stuff.

Yes and No. Yes, most monitors wouldn't know what to do with a 4K signal. ​No, the GH4 has a 'tv connection' option, that allows you to output a different quality output (1080p, probably even better to go with 'AUTO' altogether, a live feed which is accepted by most field monitors, just some might run into issues when shooting 24p, or playing back clips from what I've gathered). So, I think it should be fine for live monitoring.

Would say what I kinda said here: Here's some of Lilliput's offerings: http://www.lilliputdirect.com/hdmi/5-7-inch-hdmi . If you can stretch the budget a wee bit, the 663/O/P2? Or if you want to go to the cheaper end of things, an Aputure VS-2 might just be your thing...

​Jup, price according: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1140405-REG/video_devices_pix_lr_xlr_audio_interface_for.html .