Tim Sewell

Hey Anamorphic experts! I'm sure there's a logical answer to this, but it's baking my brain. If I was to use a Sirui Anamorphic 50mm 1.8 on my FS5, would the full anamorphic effect be preserved if I use Clear Image zoom to give myself additional focal lengths?

Thanks for the kind words - I've shot tons of family stuff etc since getting the camera and I think I'm starting to get used to it (and developing the muscle memory to hit the Push AF button - my biggest gripe thus far!) Having in the past used a FS700 I don't find the menus etc too intimidating, thankfully! The lens was an EF-fit Tamron 18-200. It was OK on my C100, but, of course, no AF with my Commlite EF-E adaptor on the FS5 and it hasa a focus throw of about 20degrees or something stupid like that, making manual focus a challenge. Also I was using the Clear Image zoom a lot, which really shows up any deficiencies in your lens's sharpness. As a comparison, when I used that facility the other day with my Super Takumar 20mm f4.5 you couldn't really tell the difference between the image straight through and the image digitally zoomed. *edited to add missing closing parens.

Pretty honest take:

Yet another bargain - Sony FS5 Mki for GBP1100! So off to the beach I go. Unfortunately I went with the wrong lens still attached, so some of these shots are a bit soft. This was on SLog2 with SGamut. Now working on some stuff in SLog3 with Sgamut3.cine, which I'm advised should give better results. Thoughts on the camera I really like the size and the ergonomics. WB setting is a little cranky and I wish I could map push AF to one of the handgrip buttons, but overall I'm really enjoying it - especially the 10bit HD 4:2:2 and the S&Q modes. I haven't even tried the 4K yet. Obviously the AF is the definition of shonky compared to the C100 mki with DPAF that I sold to buy this.

Genuine question. - did you get clearance to use the music, and if so, what’s the process/cost etc? I ask because I want to use a commercially released track (albeit a considerably less famous one) for my first montage shot on my FS5 (another ridiculous bargain I happened upon on the Bay) and I don’t want it taken down for infringement.

I'm sorry, but this just isn't the case. People buy C-line video cameras for a plethora of reasons and for many use cases there's no way they would swap out a full-control, fully specified professional cine camera for a hybrid body. The form factor of a hybrid just wouldn't cut it in a wide range of professional working situations. Codecs, resolution and so on are important, but they really are only one part of the considerations that apply to choosing a working tool.

Godox vl300 is blowing my mind currently!

Or an Alexa Mini with DPAF!

I must admit the main thing that was attracting me (the XF-100 more than the XA-10) was that it's relatively affordable and has 4:2:2 recording, which I'd find far more useful than 4K. There's no requirement to cut with the C100. What I'm really looking for is a camcorder that will give me that colour space, that I can get reasonably cheaply, for use on holidays etc where I don't want to lug a bunch of gear around. I have an EM1 mkii, which is lovely, but I've found more and more that I just don't particularly enjoy that form-factor for shooting video. Any suggestions you could make would be most welcome, @Avenger 2.0!

I'm actually considering picking up a used XA-10 or XF-100 for if I ever get to go on a holiday again so that I can get nice video without lugging my C100/Ninja 2/SmallHD/EVF monstrosity around.

Lovely piece of work. Thanks for sharing!

It ain't rocket science!

I don't earn my living from video, but my main takeaway from both the Canon and Sony launches is this: if, for your bread and butter, you need things like 8K, massively over-sampled 4K, 10bit internal from a full frame, top-of-the-range AF, high frame rates, minimal RS and cinema colours all in a single A camera package that is reliable to professional standards and doesn't overheat... don't buy a hybrid in a DSLR/hybrid body shape, as with current technology all of the above just isn't available in that format. To get all that, you need a proper cinema camera in a proper cinema camera form factor. Sorry, but that's just how it is.

Also - he tries to overheat it at around 18:10 - has to put it in some kind of toaster oven to get it to cut out, which seems encouraging.

PJ, above, says he's shot a lot of side-by-sides with the FX-9 which he'll drop tomorrow.

Potato Jet just got a sample of the 35mm delivered. Says he's going to review it soon!

I know what you mean - it'd save us all a fortune too! Sadly I find the physical act of filming or taking photographs on a smartphone utterly dispiriting.

In fact for me, the ideal camera would basically be my C100 mk1 with the only changes being a bit of HFR and external 'real' 4:2:2 10 bit up to 60fps.

I have an Olympus EM1 mkii that produces nice, stabilised 4K, but for video I've barely picked it up since I got my bargain-basement OG C100. The C100 still produces lovely organic-looking HD and coupled with a Ninja 2 (GBP200 off eBay) it's reasonably gradeable as well. My aim - as a hobbyist/would-be artist - has always been to create work that has that filmic quality we love and that aim is often in opposition to the ultra-sharp, high resolution video more modern systems generate. I have to do far more post work on my Oly video to get the look I want than I do to the Canon stuff. So I think you're correct, in one sense, @kye, although I don't know how much your proposition would hold true to people who are earning their living producing video for clients who, naturally, will generally want the 'best' they can get.

Thanks for the pointer - I'll check that out!

Thanks - I thought that was probably the case. I want to try the ACES route, but I haven’t yet been able to find an IDT for my ancient camera!

I should have kept up with this stuff, but I haven't, so I'm hoping for some pointers from the EOSHD hivemind. I've been shooting in OG Canon log on the C100 mk1, lately into ProRes 422HQ on a Ninja 2. I bring my files into FCPX and, when I drop Color Finale onto the clip, one of the options it gives me is to set the output target. If I set that to Rec2020 the image, as I'd expect of a wider gamut (am I right in thinking that's one of that standard's features?) looks much livelier. But what happens when I export that, in that, on my screen the exported file looks great, but if someone were to watch that on a TV, say, would it then look awful? Also, I have a bunch of film-look LUTs that take either log or 709 as input, but I can't find (at least, not with the same ease) similar collections of 2020 film look LUTs - am I missing the point, or is it a matter of the order in which I set these things? Help! Confused of Hove

No, I just happened to see the article yesterday and it was fresh in my mind.

https://www.redsharknews.com/akaso-brave-7-le-review-remarkable-value-for-money-and-outstanding-battery-life