Zach Goodwin

I bought an old Panasonic SDX900, it's the dvx100's big brother.  I thought maybe SD had something interesting about it - lacking resolution and dynamic range.
I tested it quickly against my Sony F65 going to 8mm or 16mm, and it seems to have its own weird unique feel that's kind of interesting.
Anyway let me know what you think - post workflow I can post as well how I kind of "destroyed" the image too.

Discussions like this really frustrate me because they're academic and digress into specs and possibilities. Every time there's a tech advance, the first reaction of many is to say they aren't impressed, as if that puts them on a higher pedestal than the mortals who are easily pleased. 4K? It's really about DR. High DR? It's about color. Great color? For pros, it's ergonomics. Everything? Camera doesn't matter. Full equipment? It's not about gear. Etc. Heck, I've seen people ridiculing the excitement over the first Internet browser Netscape (remember that?).
Going back to the OP, if you read my first response, I mentioned Cronenweth on the video talking about the advantages of 4K that I mentioned. I didn't make that up: it's from the same video. It may not fit the narrative on this forum, but it was actually said. 4K is NOT about higher res folks, even when you deliver in HD. It's about giving you choices in post WRT stabilization, framing, camera moves, etc.
I just put a video on another thread that has video from NX500 (a very low end 4K camera) cropped to be HD. NO extra res there, just HD, but you see a tight crop and framing that would have been impossible using a HD camera without additional lenses. And I was specifically comparing it (and NX1) with an actual HD camera BMMCC, not engaging in an academic discussion. My point is that today you can buy a 4K at comparable prices and get the advantages I mentioned, which directly addresses the OP. May be BMMCC's claimed 13 stops DR and RAW do shine, but I don't see evidence of that (not that it doesn't exist). Specs matter squat if the result is garbage.

Hi
So I borrowed a 100mm macro lens from a friend and experimented with acrylic colors, milk, water, oil and soap..
Shot it with my GH4, held by my precious gorilla pod and lots of duct tape!  
I have now entered my video into a contest.
If you like it, I would be really really happy, if you'd give it a vote and maybe even share
https://apps.facebook.com/dvxvideocontest/?video=16
Thanks!
 
 
 
 
 

Thanks so much! 
I actually considered to use text to make it a fake credit sequence :D
Maybe I'll be able to use it for some future scifi movie

I find it sad when people buy gear but are too afraid to scratch it and end up don't using their gear full potential.
If my camera is scratched, it's because I had to put it in a tough environment to get the picture. If you're too afraid to damage your gear, you can still work in studios, where everything is immaculate. But personally, I'd be outside shooting

There's a difference between creative under-exposure, or balancing levels of exposure relative to the chosen aperture, and general under-exposure.
Take this example frame from Miller's Crossing. It's not underexposed, everything is designed in such a way that it feels like night-time. The important thing is ensuring your bright spots are sitting right - in the OP shots, the bright spots are underexposed, and so the exposure should be bumped. Alternately, it may be a log gamma shot, or not have had it's exposure corrected properly from a log shot.

I think the issue is not seeing a dynamic highlight for reference. This shot would be a perfectly acceptable exposure for a David Fincher film if a practical was in the shot.

Maybe you just found your new shooting style... Infinity focus all of your shots and then wrap it in bubble wrap. No need to touch it. 

Yeah, it's very captivating. I really like your music choice. It feels like the opening credit sequence to a sci-fi thriller with a visual mixture of nebulous matter and alien dna. Nice job. 

Winning arguments is a waste of time unless prosecuting a lawsuit. Learning new things and helping others is time better spent.
MF vs. FF can be tested with the same camera and lens (changing lens settings and post cropping), which will typically show that the sensor size isn't where any effect is coming from. Now the point shifts to lenses- cool, that could be helpful to understand for those thinking about getting an MF body to take advantage of lenses. However Brian Caldwell stated that the current top 35mm lenses are as good or better than MF lenses. Posting equivalence-matched MF-cameras+lenses to FF could be helpful in showing the strengths of the MF lenses vs. FF lenses. Even more useful would be showing the MF lenses can more cost effectively produce images than very expensive FF lenses (Otus etc.). This same argument is valid when comparing FF to m43: FF lenses are effectively cheaper to get super shallow DOF.

Instead of reputation points, I am replacing the forum system with e-penis points from now on.

Here's the math- where's the error? http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/
I replicated with actual test and images, and got the results predicted by the math ( http://brightland.com/w/the-full-frame-look-is-a-myth-heres-how-to-prove-it-for-yourself/ ).
If Phase One or Hasselblad sent me a camera and lenses, I'd be happy to shoot equivalence tests against the Canon 1DX II and L-lenses and post the results.

Some observations about the Europeans right now...
Their engineering base is dwindling and they find it hard to complete on very complex projects. Berlin's new airport. Leica SL's LOG output.
They are transitioning to a softer services economy like the UK.
This means Hasselblad, like German companies and Leica, are full of marketing people (even though they're a Swedish company - the same applies right across the continent!)
It seems from the rumours that they have put a 50MP medium format sensor from Sony in a mirrorless camera, I sincerely hope it is more engineering driven than marketing puff.

Or use a scope and/or properly set monitor.

I think these things are more fun when you do the following:
- Expose properly
- Use an interesting shot to grab peoples attention
- Have 3 or more comparison shots, shot using different cameras
- Tell us what those cameras were, then allow us to link the shot to the camera
- Shoot wide open on the lens so we can tell look the sensor size / optics are giving. The shot you used is flat and doesn't give anything away at all

Bump that exposure up 

Thanks so much!  
I don't know ShanksTV, but I will definitely check it out.

I will go out and shoot soon!  Zach your words made some shine of sun to light my old gray cellar again! wow there is a lot of dust over here coff!! coff!! thanks

Thanks for the input everyone. Truly appreciated. I believe gsenroc was right. This morning I went to work on the worse of the two speed boosters, adjusting the rear optical element for infinity focus again, but also holding it in place with my thumb so that tightening the holding screw wouldn't lift it up. that basically did the trick. at f/1.4 I can still see the slightest variation at the edges, but at f/1.8 it's sharp across the board.

4k is about 8.3 Megapixels, 5k is about 14.5 Megapixels and 6k is a little under 20 Megapixels (they all depend upon the ration of the sensor, whether its 2:3, 3:4, 16:9 etc etc). 

While theoretically a 5k sensor should be more than sufficient for stills, there is a race for an Ever-Increasing number of Megapixels (as well as 'k' value resolution). So, now PhaseOne has brought out a 100MP camera with a Sony sensor, which in 5-10 years would sound less less to people in the Megapixel race. 

Quite Frankly a 12MP photo is more than sufficient for most needs including Billboards and Film Stills. Anything higher shows the weirdest details, which may need to be softened or worked in post (eg:- hair on someone's nose, or skin irregularities etc etc). 

Also, most cameras don't shoot RAW, so the ability to work in post on those photos (screen-grabs) is less. Plus slower sputter speeds (1/48th or 1/50th) for making things filmic and not the weird Hobbit experiment. So, maybe a middle-ground where 10-bit 4-2-2 detail is what is offered, or a very highly compressed version of RAW may be what's needed. 

For now, even the 4k in Panasonic's cameras is sufficient under most conditions. 

When the cameraman enters a class room uninvited, he really crosses the lines of moral and legal boundaries. So I totally disagree with one quote here that says "as many have said they can simply leave" 

Perfect for photogrammetry!

It is fascinating. I remember his earlier stuff from years ago.
 
I don't see what is the big deal.
 
Just walking down the length of my local main street will get myself filmed by HUNDREDS of cameras! Permanent installed cameras.
 
Who ever complains about them? Nobody. Ever.

dbp, you don't need to defend yourself from anyone -- they'd have nothing to criticize without inventing a fictional motive for posting this video. it is out of line to attack your character. i see that. i'm sure others do too.