JazzBox

I live in extreme south of Tuscany, where Caravaggio died! I've to study him a lot!!! :)

I think what people are saying above is accurate, it's a word that gets used a lot, and the meanings of it change quite quickly within the videography community. I think it's constantly used as a kind of gold standard that video has to aspire to, but which is always out of reach (JJ Abrams said something along these lines when justifying his decision to use film to shoot Star Wars 7, rather than video like the prequels). In other words, it means "not video", but the question of what is "not video" shifts all the time as video changes.
 
One example: I remember in the days of the HV20, which was just before the DSLR video revolution broke, people were really hung up on shallow depth of field, in part I think because it was very expensive and cumbersome to achieve with a small-sensor camcorder. People would attach their HV20s, upside-down, to a "depth of field adaptor" with a focal plane that needed to vibrate in case a speck of dust landed on it, and get a razor thin DoF that was a nightmare to focus. 
 
Then, as soon as large sensor video became readily available with DSLRS and mirrorless, videographers got less fixated on shallow DoF. This is good, as "cinema" shouldn't be stereotyped by one aesthetic, as it covers an enormous number of styles and practices. Citizen Kane is frequently voted the best film of all time, and what is it famous for, cinematographically speaking? It's incredibly DEEP depth-of-field. So deep in fact, that some shots are actually trick shots made with back-projection:
 
http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2007/10/10/do-filmmakers-deserve-the-last-word/
 
Nowadays, Kane DP Toland could just use a GoPro...  :P

A lot of the time when I think "cinematic" I think muted colours and contrasty tones. I guess you could say Saving Private Ryan is my benchmark. But it's really all about context. There's a lot of aerial shots in LOTR that I find very cinematic. Yet the same type of shots in The Hobbit I find to be less so. I guess it's because the latter is a more silly movie and of course LOTR had more original orchestral music.
 
I'm not sure how much grading helps either. Things like changing the overall look to be more teal or orange is very cliche now. Sometimes grading does make a dramatic difference to how something is perceived. Such as 58 secs into this video the mushy artificially lit scene ends up getting a properly cinematic spy drama look. But most of the time it really is simply about composition and lighting. The Sony a7s can see in the dark, but it still can't save a poorly lit scene. If light isnt hitting your subject or background in the right way, then there's nothing to draw the viewers eyes into.
 
Probably the best way to get a cinematic image is to think in terms of caravaggio or chiaroscuro.

Thanks Inazuma.
 
All the portrait shots (+ nature shots) have been done with the Olympus 45mm. Riders actions (tricks) with the Canon 35-105mm and close-up bike while he go with the 135mm 2.8.
 
Hope it will help you.

panny 14mm 2.8 is very good and cheap on ebay - look for a cheap gf2 with one on the front as a bundle on ebay
 
Olympus 17mm 2.8 is also very good
 
the new Sigma 19mm in micro 4/3 mount is killer too !! very very good
 
those are the 2 wide I use - both are rectilinear so no bends lines at the edges .
I dont go wider than that as it look unnatural
I have a Sigma 10-20mm but it has very bendy edges so does not get used much.
 
ps- the Vivitar Series 1 19-35mm is also rectilear and very good and cheap on ebay
its a very useful lens to have

you are refering to Full Frame - Im not doing that as I dont ever shoot full frame so no need to referance it - as the G6 is not full frame.
 
a 28mm Nikon + speedbooster (x0.7 ) = approx a 20mm field of view lens = wider than the original 28mm Nikon on a dumb adaptor
 
remember a standard lens on a G6 is 24mm (equivilant of human eye field of view)
 
ps also a G6 with a x0.7 speedbooster = approx Super 35mm Hollywood film camera perspective / APSC field of view
 
So the speedbooster makes the G6 like a cinema camera in terms of lens lengths.
So when Fincher says he uses a 27mm Zeiss Master Prime - you can put on a Nikon 28mm on your G6 with speedbooster and have a very similar field of view
 
you can quite happily shoot an entire move with 20mm 28mm 35mm 50mm primes on a G6
 
you can get 20mm via your 28mm with speedbooster so no need to buy a 20mm lens (they are expensive)

I just got a Carl Zeiss Pancolar 50/1.8 for $100 and it's just freakin awesome, sharp throughout all stops, loads of contrast, Zeiss bokeh!! My Canon FD 50/1.8 is pretty good too, very sharp, best skin tone too for video/film.

Yeh go for the Samyang 12mm or a Tokina 11-16. You wont find a bargain old lens wider than 24 really.

its difficult with short lenses as you need a lens support on your 15mm rods and a cable tie around the lens to hold it steady plus you then need to get the follow focus into position with the gears etc.......its all trial and error for each lens they all have different needs !!
 
and then Nikon is another story as they rotate the wrong way so you need a step gear to reverse it --aarrgghhh!!
 
in the end I just scrapped the whole idea of follow focus on micro 4/3 as it just slowed me down so much, try changing lenses in a hurry on set with actors waiting around ......forget it
 
So now I just use 3 cameras with different lenses on each rig .
When I need a different lens...I grab a different rig all set up its so much quicker

I have found that a follow focus on micro 4/3 is not very good so I stopped using it years ago
the lens mount is very small in diameter and you get movement of the mount as you turn the follow focus and this applies an upward or downward force on the lens , I had to cable tie the lens to the rods and always use lens supports to stop any movement.....so I dont use at any more .....
 
I was using the Kamera follow focus .

All from Amazon UK except for the followfocus and viewfinder - bought from ebay :)

I would not recommend those things which press against your chest. I used to have one. Because you're still using your arm to support the weight and to press the pad into your chest, you will still get jitters.
 
If I were you i would continue using the gorillapod, which rests on your shoulders.
 
My personal setup includes:
Four 15mm, four inch rods. One Z bracket Shoulder pad Baseplate with quick release to mount the camera on Counter weight Handle Kamerar Follow Focus Kamerar Viewfinder Magnifier I would not take this for casual shooting though :P
 
'>

the Zeiss 50mm f1.8 Pancolar is a great lens classic Zeiss and almost as sharp as the 50mm f1.7 Planar - there is not much in it
 
The Pentacon is a older Meyer-Optik Görlitz lens design carried over into the Pentacon range
 
its regarded as not quite as good as the 28mm version of this lens by Pentacon (which is a Zeiss Jena DDR Design)
 
this version is the Zeiss DDR design
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Pentacon-28mm-f2-8-Praktica-bayonet-PB-mount-lens-c-w-caps-pouch-/161398035922?pt=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item25941295d2
 
the 29mm is abit of an odd ball
 
 
all the above are inferior to the Canon FD 28mm f2,8 - which beats them all in my book and is very good and cheap on ebay ....

its only related in that it is made by Pentax to one of their lens formulas - it is not made to the Zeiss formula
 
I always found the Pentax 28mm f2.8 a bit softer than the Canon FD 28mm f2.8 -
I prefer the Canon version you used on the video you just posted

I think it's the other way round with FD and Zeiss. I find FD warmer.

I would like to give my platform to up and coming musicians around the world to showcase their music through my cinematography to an audience of around 250,000 people per month. This is the EOSHD Music Challenge.
Readers act as DJ - they can pick music from up and coming singers and bands, with suggestions that might suit the mood of my cinematography and future camera tests.
Cinematic music is really important to me but I haven't been satisfied with The Music Bed or similar resources so far.
How does the challenge work?
1. Suggest a band or musician on this thread. They have to be up and coming not signed to a major label or already huge.
2. I investigate and do the contacting of those which I like and credit you for the find!
3. If they agree to let me use their music, they will find a new audience through my blog and hopefully sell some tracks on iTunes from a link on EOSHD. You will be designated as the discoverer of talent and winner of the challenge.
4. You can have fun with this challenge and play DJ - use your taste to select the right standard of music to fit EOSHD and in turn you might discover new music yourself which you really enjoy listening to.
5. My cinematography at EOSHD is purely an artistic endeavour and experimental, non commercial and does not make any money but for all videos featuring unsigned acts I will consider enabling the Vimeo Tip Jar and sharing the proceeds with the musician 50:50!
This is a new idea and it will start off as a trial. If it works then great! If not then we will swap things around until it does, because I am determined to find new music and up and coming artists.
Good soundtracks are really important for filmmakers and I believe in finding new talent. Perhaps you know some artists yourself? Perhaps you are one?

I shot a job for client last week outside with it , you can attach NDs to it , I used Tiffens on it outside ND16 , 8 , 4, 2 combinations of - stacked to get the exposure I want - I just dont ever use Vari NDs as I dont like the artifacts they produce - its all hard NDs on my lenses.

I dont use full frame so Im not quote full frame equivilants Im quoting actual focal lenths the speedbooster creates
it is a very very good lens - a hidden gem - Canon got the glass on this lens just right
 
 
with a speedbooster is the Full frame approx equivilant of 50-100 @ f2.8 which is a steller range to work in , 50mm being a 'standard lens and 100 range is right through to portait - this lens has little or no distortion suberb rich colours and nice solid blacks - and is sharp !!
win win win !!
 
see Ken Rockwell review here
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/fd/35-70mm-f4.htm
 
quote from Ken Rockwell
 
The 35-70mm f/4 is unusually sharp right out to the corners, even wide-open, and has little or no distortion throughout most of the zoom range.
The Canon FD 35-70/4 is also built tough; it's almost all-metal.

The Contax Zeiss Distagon 'Hollywood' 28mm F2.0 is a classic fast wide for full frame and is incredible on Super 35mm as well. Wide open it's one of the sharpest F2.0 wide angle lenses available and it has very little distortion.

The Contax Zeiss version fetches $800 on eBay but there's a $60 wolf in sheep's clothing called the Pentax PK 28mm F2.0 which has a fascinating story behind it.

[url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/10730/60-pentax-thats-actually-a-800-zeiss-with-optics-by-designer-of-stanley-kubricks-nasa-glass]Read the full article here[/url]