JazzBox

Thank you!! Until now I just worked as operator with professional lights that a DP puts on the set and when I work alone the only lights I have at my disposal are 1 little LED lamp and 2 work lights :)

its all basic cinematography stuff I learnt while shooting film all those years ago - I worked with some great DP's like Tony Coldwell who I learnt alot from when I first started Directing - all those lens focal length choises carry forward onto digital cameras - its all still very releveant in todays world for keeping that filmic look we all are used to from when we used to shoot film stock .

the whole Carl Zeiss Distagon 'Hollywood' look is all referanced to Super 35mm film field of view (in dslr terms thats APSC or micro 4/3 WITH a speedbooster to give a Super 35mm Field of view)
 
The Carl Zeiss Distagon f2 28mm lens has this reputation and the nick name 'Hollywood' in referance to it giving a similar look to a 27mm Carl Zeiss Master Prime Cinema Lens or a Zeiss Ultra prime 28mm
 
The Zeiss Master Primes is in fact a 27mm lens not a 28mm like the Distagon.
It's is David Fincher's favourite lens and used alot on all of his films plus DOPs like Roger Deakins use Zeiss Master Primes alot and large postions of the James Bond film Skyfall where shot on a Zeiss 27mm Master Prime.
 
 
To get the 'Hollywood' look with the Carl Zeiss Distagon 28mm f2 you need to shoot with it WIDE OPEN at f2
Its a very good expensive lens because it is sharp wide open at f2 - it is very very usable there!
If you shoot with this lens at f5.6 it just looks like any other 28mm lens - BUT VERY SHARP!
 
The 'look' is wide open at f2.
 
The other month I was fliming with a 2 camera set up and I wanted the same lens on both cameras.
I only have one Zeiss 28mm lens I was using on camera 1 on a Lens Turbo speesbooster on a g6
so I came up with a very good alternative for camera 2 that looks practically the same as the Zeiss.
 
Here is how I did it- poor mans Distagon 28mm f2
 
you take a Canon new FD (nFD) 28mm f2.8 and put it on an RJ canon fd - micro 4/3 speed booster - this gives you the Super 35mm field of view like you need and makes the lens f2 which gives you that look - the speed booster also sharpens the lens so its now of similar sharpness to the Zeiss .
 
When I cut between camera 1 and camera 2 in the edit it worked great both looked the same!
 
The Canon fd lens has the same warm look and great blacks like the Zeiss and its now f2!!
 
So there you have it Hollywood 28mm f2 lens look on the cheap !!
 
If you are serious about getting a Hollywood look on all your footage the three focal lengths you need to be using
they are
28mm , 40mm and 70mm all shot at f2 all the time in a Suoer 35mm field of view (so APSC or Micro 4/3 on a speedbooster)
 
28mm for the wides
70mm for all the close up head shots
and 40mm for all the rest the coverage shots
(use a 50mm lens if you don't have a 40mm lens and take 3 steps backwards!! haha that ususally gives the same look)
 
 
and for all of you that read about me harping on about the Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 'Bourne' zoom lens will see it covers all those focal lengths I have mentioned above in just one lens - instant Hollywood in one lens !!  stick it on a speed booster and  that makes it the all magic f2 you need to get the 'look'

Tokina RMC 28-85mm f4 - low contrast lens that flares like crazy - loads of filmic character.
The 'Helios' of zoom lenses!!
 
'' target='_blank'>>
 
'' target='_blank'>>
 
the other 2 zooms that are part of the RMC range also have alot of character
the TOKINA RMC 28-70MM f4 and the Tokina RMC 25-50mm f4
 
stick them on speedboosters and they are very usable f2.8 zooms!

To the OP, I have a couple of Yongnou YN300 daylight. I am very happy with them. They may not be the most colour accurate lights in the world, but they can work. You will probably put a film emulation or CC anyway. If you want the purest skin tones, you should better work outdoors. 
 
I also have a soft box with Ikea LED lamps. I work for a meat company and meat needs to be cold or it change colours. But the soft box is a PITA to move, transport, etc. The couple of YN300 with some serious batteries (than seem to last forever) just take like 20% of a normal backpack. 
 
To JazzBox, lamps produce lumens, not watts. It also depends what you must do with the light. When they use a lamp to fake the sun, they put a 5-10KW HMI. That's a lot of light! 

Here is a thread on this topic with links to videos where a guy from ARRI explains difference between various types of lights
'?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>

Jazzbox ... I find watts confusing also in regard to brightness for camera work.
 
If you click on the link in my post above yours you can get an idea of brightness of these 85 watt CFL globes (go to the table about half way down)
Note the 85 watts for a CFL globe is different to a normal globe so you need to take that into account for whatever you are looking at.
Maybe this can be of some help. He is using six globes in a soft box.

It wasn't though. (And, eh... in-body stabilization as a firmware upgrade? That's something hardware related... so... unless magic is involved that's a no)
 
I'm still going with...
 
So unless 2015 tech innovation suddenly finds a way to improve significantly on data infrastructure and cooling (hardware; new camera), I don't really see this happening just yet?
 
That's also why I'm taking this: (FT3) Few tidbits on the new OMD (4K with 24/25/30p, weather sealed)... with a fair amount of salt. They refuse to give the E-M1 anything other than 30p, although there's quite a bit demand for 24p and 25p... and the 4K rumors turned out to be bollocks anyway. So suddenly they care? Haha, well, we'll find out, but better not trust any anonymous sources, 43rumors, and Olympus to come thru for you. Just sayin'.

Indeed.
 
And Mr Troll above says he is doing me a favour to visit the site. I should be so grateful to him! ;)

BTW there is no paid for advertising on EOSHD - Andrew does this for the love of filmmaking .....not $$$ off advertisers ....look no banner ads here!

I wonder if users of my own forum will learn from basic human ethics, that in criticising the owner of a free resource whilst simultaneously being a signed up member taking advantages of the online services like latest news and a forum is unfair.
 
Besides only an idiot would read a rumours article 'as factual'.

Ive never had a sucessful way of doing this , they all seem to be slighly different depending on who makes them , I use alot of Chinese LED tubes and they dont really correspond to anything to referance to.
So I just get used to what Im using with LEDs

...Or you could wait until this is available:
 
http://steadxp.com/
 
If it works properly, we'll see different versions from different brands, different prices and, as most software related tools, with bigger room for improvement in following generations.

keep a lookout on eBay. I got one by a DIY guy for 300-something. It doesn't look fancy but works fine. It's limited in weight to something like a nex5n with a kit lens, or possibly a bit heavier. It's a 3-way brushless gimbal and came preconfigured for my cam since happened to have the same on.

It's possible because they don't include the motors or controller ;)

I have the DJI Ronin and can tell you the build quality on it is top notch. I met another shooter who had the Came (forgot which model) and he said he ended up returning it because it didn't work for him. I let him try my Ronin and he said the overall quality versus the Came is night and day. I don't have experience with Came gimbals at all so I can't really comment on it. Also one thing you need to consider is that Came is overseas, so if you have issues and need to return, it's going to be a headache.
 
As for the Ronin, the rig is VERY HEAVY. Unless you have the arm strength of a NFL player, I don't see anyone lasting a day or even half with this rig alone. I have both the Blackmagic Production 4K and Pocket cameras... and even on a stripped down load (Pocket + DP4), I don't see myself lasting half a day with it. I just ordered Atlas 2 rod camera support the other day so going to see how that goes. With the Atlas, I should be able to last all day with the Ronin.
 
Having said all this, the Ronin is simply amazing. When I first received it, it took me 10minutes to have it up and running. Now it only takes me less than a few minutes. 
 
Side note.... I was at Photo Plus Expo last week and had a chance to toy with Freefly Movi and Defy gimbals and both are lighter than the Ronin, but the prices are also higher.

TCSTV had a nice video on the Ronin about a week ago, looks nice...


 
There's a topic on EOSHD about these type of 3-axis systems: '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>  ( >and ).
And there are already some cheap solutions availlable...
 

 
Of course, everything that's a little bit more DIY and cheap will come with challenges. That's the price you pay if you don't want to pay the price.

Another constructive forum post ehh

I have been shooting and grading the GH4 for quite some time now, but I shot and edited a little piece earlier this summer that utilized the ML Raw possibility of the 5d mk3 and I think the robustness of the raw files is outstanding. A treat to grade anyway I want. I ended up with this grade from one of my favourite places where I live. I enjoy the Canon colors every time I see them. More is in the description.
 

 
 
 

I know that behaviour - I once had the Olympus 12mm f2.0 which works about the same. However, as much as i like the scale, i dislike this "pop" effect since changing the focus smoothly is not possible... A lens like those from Olympus with smooth focusing would be my wet dream.

The thing is that the reason the cameras you've listed get talked about a lot is because they're ALL good video cameras. Now that the GH4, A7S and Blackmagic cameras are here, the cameras you've named (not including the BMPCC) are looking increasingly similar in quality. They simply have different strengths and weaknesses. There isn't one that is THE best. You have to decide which one YOU like best and/or which one fits your needs best. 
 
I've had the G6 and D5300 for a year now, and recently got a BMPCC. I've used a GX7 a couple of times but only briefly, but I am familiar with the image. Same with the GH3. This is my opinion of the following as video cameras:
 
D5300
Pros: Beautiful image when using long and/or fast lenses, and in low/ambient light. Colours are VERY appealing. Contrary to EOSHD review I recommend shooting with a Neutral or Flaat profile to grade in post, as colours can be artificial in standard modes and dynamic range can be very good with Flaat_11. The codec is fairly strong so banding is rarely an issue.
Cons: Just a bit too soft for wide, detailed shots or deep DOF. Not the easiest camera to use for video.
 
G6
Pros: Beautifuly detailed image in both wide and long shots with deep or shallow DOF. Colours in good light conditions are very nice and can be graded to a very decent level. It's a PLEASURE to shoot video with (I only wish it and a headphone jack). EVF, Peaking, good tilt LCD, form factor, mic jack, etc all make it a viable camcorder. AVCHD 24p has the best image, MP4 50/60p (1080) is indistinguishable without close/critical inspection. With a speed booster it is a S35 camera with stuff the C100 doesn't have (decent EVF, 60p) and an image that isn't worlds away from it at for about 1/12th of the cost.
Cons: Not so great in low/poor light (it excels in good sunlight), though it's ok and noticeably better than the GH2. Colours are nice but can get muddy quickly in poor light. Dynamic range is mediocre. No headphone jack.
 
BMPCC
Pros: The image from the BMPCC really is in another league to the other cameras here. I love it. It frustrates me that there is so much low contrast 'film effect' stuff on Vimeo etc shot with the Pocket and graded to hipster death with film convert or OTT LUTs. It is capable of such a sharp, punchy, saturated and contrasty image that is so much more pleasing than any 8-bit camera.
Cons: It's not an easy camera to use (there are a lot of things I DO like about the form factor and usage though, and firmware updates have added a lot of good stuff). Why bury ISO, WB and shutter angle so deep in the menu? And it DOES need a rig, VF, and very wide, fast lenses or speed booster. Moire is a problem sometimes too - it can be unpleasant.
 
GX7
I haven't used this camera enough to give an informed opinion, but from what Seb and Andy are saying it is fine to shoot with (I didn't like the EVF when I tried it) and if you don't need an external mic then you don't have much advantages in usability with a G6. The image is definitely better - this is obvious from any videos you watch. I think of it as somewhere between the G6 and D5300 - colour science and low light are noticeably improved.
 
GH3
Barely used it so can't really comment. A lot of amazing stuff has been shot on the GH3, but I can't see a compelling reason to spend the extra money on it now. The G6 has peaking, which really is a huge feature if you want to use manual glass. The GX7 has a superior image. And the GH4 has made it look extremely dated. On the plus side it has a headphone jack and a more pro-level body.
 
A6000
Haven't used this at all but I have ruled this camera out based on image problems alone. It's perhaps easier to use than the D5300 but if it really does share the same sensor Sony have really messed up. It has quite severe moire issues and is not great in low light. It's not as sharp as the Panasonics, the codec seems quite weak and I personally am not keen on the colours it produces. Unless you desperately want a native APSC sensor with an EVF at a low price (Sony is your only option really) I can't see any reason to go with this. I may be biased though, as I never seem to like Sony's image quality - even the A7S.
 
My recommendations (i.e. my opinion):
 
GX7 scores the most overall points here I think. If you don't need an external mic go for it.
 
The G6 is still a superb camera and a joy to shoot video with, but the image has some (small) limitations in comparison to the GX7. Of my 3 cameras it's the one I would keep if I was doing commercial or documentary work and could only have one. Definitely. It's very reliable and has great video features.
 
The BMPCC is by far the best video camera here in terms of image. If I was just doing personal/art stuff it is the camera of mine I would keep if I could only have one. But it isn't really suitable as a shot-grabber/r&g workhorse.
 
The D5300 has a special image and if I'm shooting indoors or want a very 'filmic' shallow DOF look it is the camera I go for. I love it. But it is not made for shooting video with AT ALL.
 
For the A6000, although I've seen some really nice stuff shot with it, I think it's image quality is the least versatile (i.e. worst) here. My recommendation is to stay away from it.

I've shot on two G6's since they first come out 18 months ago and as you all know Im a big fan of this camera
I just got a GX7 last month and it is a 15/20% better image than the G6.
 
Much much cleaner and clearer image with alot LESS noise , it noiticebale especially at night shooting in streets
GX7 is without a doubt the best Panasonic 1080p camera they have made so far .
 
The EVF is very good and nicley on the left side and swivels which is great on my shoulder rigs
Also GX7 has a much sturdier metal lens mount than the g6 - I get body flex on the G6 with the big Nikon 'Bourne ' lenses
THE Gx7 is more stable for these big lenses on a rig.
 
The menus and functions are 95% the same as the G6 - they have added a few extra features like 2 settings on peaking for how strong it is.
 
The main thing is its a better newer sensor and this shows in the image - I was stunned at how good it is!!!
this is now my main 'A' camera for night time shooting .

g6 , rj speedbooster, plus dumb adapter  and canon fd lenses as they are very very good and cheap
24, 28, 35, 50mm
 
or  get a canon fd 35-70mm f4 instead of primes its a steller zoom and cheap
 
on speedbooster its a 25-50 f2.8 very very sharp with practically zero distortion !! very good glass in this lens
 
 
then you can use lenses on dumb adapter and get one lot of focal lengths then use them on speedbooster and get another set of focal lengths

Im still using G6 and GX7 too (although we did just drop one of our G6's in a river!! I can tell you they are not water proof haha!)
 
I use Natural colour profile in the day time with contrast at -3 and saturation at -3 , then at night I use a custom saved version of Natural with contrast at -5 and saturation at -5
 
at night I shoot 2500k outside and day interiors 4000k for a warmer skin tone look under tungsten lights.
(David Fincher does this - House of Cards, Zodiac, Dragon Tattoo all 4000k interiors)

Were you using a pinhole lens on the GH4 or something?