tupp

You can make aperture/ISO/WB/shutter angle changes during the time-lapse either directly on the camera or via an app.
Shutter angles are 11.2 , 15 , 22.5 , 30 , 37.5 , 45 , 60 , 72 , 75 , 90 , 108 , 120 , 144 , 150 , 172.8 , 180 , 216 , 270 , 324 , 360
With regard to apps, I think there is someone on here who makes one that seems to work but if you don't want the extra stuff that that one does like recallable focus and exposure memories, custom white balance stores etc then there are a bunch of others that will do the job for what you're doing.
 
 

Read through a few pages and my brain is already melted.  Not from the technical aspects involved, but in trying to understand what people are actually saying.
I think that part of the problem is that so many variables are at play that a proper conversation can't be had because people aren't communicating the full picture and are changing multiple variables at the same time.  Even the animated gif in the thumbnail thread (showing the Canon camera and shallow DoF) clearly shows that the camera position has changed, which is hopeless - you can't compare the size of the bokeh if you're moving the camera around.
All the talk of 'getting closer' in these articles and comments indicates that at least some people are talking about the difference between close/wide and far/tele shots, which is a completely different topic to standing in the same place and comparing setups that have the same FOV and DoF:
a small sensor camera/lens setup a large sensor camera/lens setup, and a small sensor camera / large sensor lens with speed booster IIRC I have 55mm, 40mm lenses at home, plus a 0.71x SB for the 55mm, so should be able to do a comparison (55mm x 0.71 = 39mm).
I'll see if my brain recovers enough throughout the day to be able to do a test when I get home.

Thank you.
From that other thread:
I'm about to get my first MFT camera so I'm excited to do my own tests vs FF, but it really seems to me that mathematically there's no difference between formats, it just comes down to real-world imperfections and real world availability of manufacturing.
For instance, one thing that I think stands out with larger formats is shallow depth of field at wider fields of view: 24mm 1.4s are commonly made for FF cameras, whereas a 12mm f/0.7 doesn't exist to my knowledge so you can't match that look on MFT. It's technically possible it just doesn't get made because the cost wouldn't be worth it.(.64 speed boosting a Sigma 20mm 1.4 would be pretty close though)
 

A halogen bulb is one of the two primary types of tungsten light sources.  This type of lamp uses a thick, quartz glass "envelope" with a tungsten filament and halogen gas inside, hence the terms "quartz," "halogen" and "quartz halogen" -- all of these terms refer to the same type of bulb.
 
The other type of tungsten lamp is "incandescent," which is the same technology as traditional household bulbs.  Incandescent lamps have a thin, large glass envelope enclosing a tungsten filament and such bulbs are often filled with argon gas.
 
Quartz halogen bulbs are significantly smaller and longer lasting and their color remains consistent throughout their life.  Incandescent bulbs are more delicate and discolor as they age.
 
Never touch the quartz glass of a halogen bulb with your fingers/skin.  If you do, immediately clean the quartz  thoroughly with isopropyl alcohol and a clean paper towel or plain cotton pad. Otherwise, the oil from your skin will impregnate the quartz and weaken it when it heats up, which can cause the bulb to explode.
 
 
A 1/2 CTB gel cuts about 1/2 stop of output.
 
On the other hand, if you are mixing ballasted daylight fixtures (such as HMIs), it 's just as easy to put CTO gel over those fixtures.

The DP light is a great fixture!  I used two of them in a shoot just last week.  With the FEL (1kw) bulb, you have a lot of punch that you won't find in most LED fixtures.
 
 
Easy enough to use 1/2 CTB gels, so that the tungsten color mixes well with daylight.
 
 
Keep in mind that the dimmer has to be rated for at least 1kw, if one uses the FEL (1000w) bulb or the EHF (750w) bulb.
 
 
Completely disagree with you here.  Omnis are GREAT lights!
 
The reason why folks have had problems with the bulbs is that most of the bulb manufacturers initially did not include a central filament support, so the filament would break easily with shock, plus the focus mechanism on the Omni is exceedingly fast.  When the FTK (500w) bulbs started to appear with filament supports, most of the bulb problems disappeared.  However, one still should be careful not focus too quickly with an Omni light.
The Omnis have a greater focusing range than the DP lights, and two Omnis easily fit into the space of one DP light.  At 500w, the Omnis also pack a lot of punch for being so compact.  I would definitely recommend Omni lights, and I always carry at least one in my lighting kit.
 
By the way, I heard that QC dropped a little when Tiffen bought Lowel, so it might be wise to search for the pre-Tiffen fixtures.
 
 
Yes, but don't lick them.
 
Seriously, many of these "corn" bulbs have exposed contacts next to the LEDs, and you can get a little zap if you touch the contacts.

On the contrary, tungsten lights are usually smaller and lighter than their LED counterparts with equivalent output.  Plus, tungsten lights have no fans.
 
The Lowel Omni is compact and light-weight with a high power density and a nicely focus-able beam, but a redhead would work, too -- it's just a little bigger and has a more limited focusing range.

Thank you @androidlad ...terrific these "corn" bulbs are now CRI 95+
Would you know of higher wattage ones...to go in my Chimera Triolet (E39 mogul base) fixtures?

This in spades.  Super high quality - very cheap deals out there.   Just learn a bit about using them if you haven't before.

2ndhand tungsten lights

So many people are getting rid of excellent film lights which used to be staples workhorses of the industry, because people are moving over to newer tech 

I'd suggest a used Lowel DP. You can use them with a 1000w or 500w bulb. 1000w gives you a ton of light. Keep in mind where you'll be using it, obviously won't look great mixed with daylight. 

But yeah can't really go wrong with those lights. Will last forever and provide a ton of high quality light. They are also pretty dirt cheap used. Combine with a dimmer and you are good to go.

Avoid the omni lowel lights, bulbs tend to burn out easily and they are just not as good. 

We've had heated discussions in this forum on the DOF equivalency principle and on the difference in the looks of different size formats.
 
I am on the side that there is definitely a difference in the general look of different size formats.  I also maintain that the DOF equivalency principle does not account for the rate that the focus "falls off" outside of the mathematical DOF range and that this DOF falloff rate differs between different formats.
 
Keep in mind, that the assertions above apply not to the size of a sensor nor emulsion, but to the optics made for a particular size of sensor/emulsion.
 
If one compares the images from a 16mm camera to those from, say, an 8"x10" camera, the difference in look and DOF falloff is striking.  Here is footage from a recent 8"x10" camera:
 

ETTR is suitable for raw and uncompressed formats.
 
Just be careful going by a histogram alone.  If you have zebras, set them in the range of 95%-100%, and use them to determine your upper limit and to choose which parts of the image may or may not blow-out.  Waveform is also good for finding the upper limit.

Has anyone here bought a Panavision DXL?  ?
 
Whether or not someone on this site bought something has no reflection on the innovation nor quality of the item in question.
 
 
I don't think that I ever actually knew what the rental prices were on any one of the different Dalsa 4K raw cameras.
 
Nevertheless, Dalsa was offering 4K raw long before it was even a glint in Jannard's eye.
 
Keep in mind that the first ones to break ground usually incur the most development cost and sink the most resources into a type of product.  So, initially, a new type of product is usually very expensive.  Often, someone with deep pockets sees the development, and swoops into a market to take advantage of it (and gets all the credit).
 
 
How does that $15K, very late-to-market, buggy RED One compare to a $1,500 Pocket4K?
 
Do you see how that works?
 
 
Jannard just rode a wave.  Raw video and higher resolutions were inevitable in cinema cameras, as was raw compression.  He didn't invent really anything.

RED was not the first to offer a cinema camera that shot 4K raw -- that distinction goes to Dalsa.  Dalsa introduced their 4K raw camera at the 2003 NAB.
 
At any rate, 4K raw and compressed raw were inevitable and obvious in the cinema world.  At the Dalsa 2003 launch, raw files and the megapixels war had already been around for years in the still photo world.  So, it doesn't take a genius to simply apply such notions to moving pictures.
 
In regards to RED's wavelet compression, it had already been established in JPEG2000.  So, it doesn't take a huge mental leap to merely apply the same compression method to another video format.
 

Well, he certainly didn't invent tacky sunglasses and ugly shirts.
 
 
Promo-wear has built-in hype, just because it is part of the fashion industry.  On the other hand, the sunglasses and shirts probably didn't get as much hype as the RED One, which was vaporware for about 3 years.
 
 
The RED founder and "hoax" mentioned in the same post?  Oh, the irony...
 
 
Some guy made a video about RED's special drives.  I think he noticed something.

Has anyone here bought a Panavision DXL?  ?
 
Whether or not someone on this site bought something has no reflection on the innovation nor quality of the item in question.
 
 
I don't think that I ever actually knew what the rental prices were on any one of the different Dalsa 4K raw cameras.
 
Nevertheless, Dalsa was offering 4K raw long before it was even a glint in Jannard's eye.
 
Keep in mind that the first ones to break ground usually incur the most development cost and sink the most resources into a type of product.  So, initially, a new type of product is usually very expensive.  Often, someone with deep pockets sees the development, and swoops into a market to take advantage of it (and gets all the credit).
 
 
How does that $15K, very late-to-market, buggy RED One compare to a $1,500 Pocket4K?
 
Do you see how that works?
 
 
Jannard just rode a wave.  Raw video and higher resolutions were inevitable in cinema cameras, as was raw compression.  He didn't invent really anything.

Well, he certainly didn't invent tacky sunglasses and ugly shirts.
 
 
Promo-wear has built-in hype, just because it is part of the fashion industry.  On the other hand, the sunglasses and shirts probably didn't get as much hype as the RED One, which was vaporware for about 3 years.
 
 
The RED founder and "hoax" mentioned in the same post?  Oh, the irony...
 
 
Some guy made a video about RED's special drives.  I think he noticed something.

Has anyone here bought a Panavision DXL?  ?
 
Whether or not someone on this site bought something has no reflection on the innovation nor quality of the item in question.
 
 
I don't think that I ever actually knew what the rental prices were on any one of the different Dalsa 4K raw cameras.
 
Nevertheless, Dalsa was offering 4K raw long before it was even a glint in Jannard's eye.
 
Keep in mind that the first ones to break ground usually incur the most development cost and sink the most resources into a type of product.  So, initially, a new type of product is usually very expensive.  Often, someone with deep pockets sees the development, and swoops into a market to take advantage of it (and gets all the credit).
 
 
How does that $15K, very late-to-market, buggy RED One compare to a $1,500 Pocket4K?
 
Do you see how that works?
 
 
Jannard just rode a wave.  Raw video and higher resolutions were inevitable in cinema cameras, as was raw compression.  He didn't invent really anything.

Well, he certainly didn't invent tacky sunglasses and ugly shirts.
 
 
Promo-wear has built-in hype, just because it is part of the fashion industry.  On the other hand, the sunglasses and shirts probably didn't get as much hype as the RED One, which was vaporware for about 3 years.
 
 
The RED founder and "hoax" mentioned in the same post?  Oh, the irony...
 
 
Some guy made a video about RED's special drives.  I think he noticed something.

RED was not the first to offer a cinema camera that shot 4K raw -- that distinction goes to Dalsa.  Dalsa introduced their 4K raw camera at the 2003 NAB.
 
At any rate, 4K raw and compressed raw were inevitable and obvious in the cinema world.  At the Dalsa 2003 launch, raw files and the megapixels war had already been around for years in the still photo world.  So, it doesn't take a genius to simply apply such notions to moving pictures.
 
In regards to RED's wavelet compression, it had already been established in JPEG2000.  So, it doesn't take a huge mental leap to merely apply the same compression method to another video format.
 

Modified Sigma's smaller grip to allow it to hold a T5; haven't printed it yet so not so sure how comfortable it is.

15m2 are 5x3 m ca. ?

I love slider shots. And it feels like today there is an obsession with gimbals. Honestly the shots most people do with gimbals looks boring now a days, and even when trying to keep the gimbal steady, the camera obviously looks like it’s floating.  I like the look of a slider. It looks like a gimbal moving, but without the “floating in the air thing.”  They aren’t used too much, and one can make beautiful camera movements with one. There is something about the camera being locked down and moving compared to a gimbal where the camera is “floating and moving.”

Sample footage is coming soon, along with photos of my set up, I promise!  Just been busy with my day job and life in general as of late.  Anyone else out there with Andromedas still have any old footage laying around?  I found this short that was made using the mod here:
 

Forza 18K from April 2014.