Tim Sewell

Will it be shot in 10 second chunks in-between 10 minute tea breaks? 🙂

Sorry, I did not mean to sound mean. But this is not how internet works, I am free to voice my opinion. I see a BS post and I call it out. OP pretentiously talks about "galilean action" and "horizontal artifacts", yet the images are highly uninspiring home shots with some of the ugliest flares I've seen. Then he proceeds to post lenses that look butchered. It seems he just took a hacksaw to some schneider cinelux lenses, then butchered some other lenses and randomly paired elements until he got a useable image. Using pseudo scientific terms to describe this process does not make it anything different. Just pure lens hacking. Pointless exercise, because no self-respecting DP will use something like this to shoot anything remotely important. Sure, if you want to learn by destroying lenses – go ahead. They don't make them anymore though.

But what really worries me is that I see at least 4 different kids in these shots. I don't know how old OP is, and I don't want to assume their gender, but this is not normal. 

No offense, but this is pointless. I mean, maybe if you have too much time on quarantine it's an interesting hobby, but it looks like you simply ruined schneider cinelux lenses. Any cheap sankor lens can do much better than this, with nice waterfall background. Get yourself a good cinelux and it will be a proper lens with good image, that won oscar.  I don't know what's a point in these, they look hacked together, not suitable even for lowest budget indie productions. I don't think any DP would put that on their camera. Maybe you should look at Rapido Technologies, they make good products like cases for anamorphics with engravings. etc. They still don't look very good, just a dull black pipe, but anything would look better than this. I think this would scare away any model or client when they see it in front of the camera. Maybe that explains why you only photograph kids and have no serious work to show with these.

Over on DVX User, John Brawley was suggesting that Olympus might be continuing lens manufacture.

Over on DVX User, John Brawley was suggesting that Olympus might be continuing lens manufacture.

Over on DVX User, John Brawley was suggesting that Olympus might be continuing lens manufacture.

Over on DVX User, John Brawley was suggesting that Olympus might be continuing lens manufacture.

I recently acquired a Godox SL60W and a SL300W - both seem excellent VFM so far.

I would pay good money to see it!

DPAF simply can not feel the emotion of a scene to tell the story like a 1st AC can. 
A 1st AC has far more fine detail over control of the focus so he can express what the DoP/Director wants. 
 

I can not recall the last time I was on a shoot that used AF.
Guess sometime last year, perhaps?? Think there was a small corporate shoot I recall the cameraman using AF.
Yes, there are people that use AF a lot, but you can't deny there is a huge amount of work being done that never even thinks to use AF. As not even Canon DPAF is optimal. 

 
 

"Upstream Color" was referenced to illustrate how MFT can do ridiculous levels of shallow DoF. 

There is no level of DoF in Jaws that MFT couldn't do if you so wished. 
 
He could even be an Egyptian dentistry student. 

Or his grandfather?
 
Thank you. I'm not hiding anything, I'm easy to find/stalk!

 
  

Thank you :-) Although I am indeed "that audio guy"! haha
But also, I think I'm a bit more than "just an audio guy", am probably the most camera nerdy soundie there is. 

And just to be clear, I carry no ill will or animosity towards you! (or anybody else on this forum)
Hopefully you can see I'm just very robustly debating the topic/facts/opinions, and not attacking (or at least, I hope not!) the person themselves. 

 
  
liftgammagain is like jwsoundgroup, in that the vast vast majority of the active users there are full time professionals with years and years of experience behind them. (except, one is colorists, and the other is production sound mixers)

Reckon that is why they have the tone each do in their forums. 
  
Not sure I'd agree with that, I'd say for your average joe run of the mill working crew member on a film set who is making a good living, then having excellent social skills ranks quite highly. And you should aspire to being as friendly/agreeable/sociable as possible, and not an anti social intolerable asshole. Because networking is key in this industry.

I think that's possibly to do with the fact that the vast majority of liftgammagain's members are working professionals - many of whom probably know and/or have worked with each other outside of the forum (or might be asking each other for work at some point in the future). I visit the place quite often as there really isn't another resource like it for colour matters.

I would pay good money to see it!

I think that's possibly to do with the fact that the vast majority of liftgammagain's members are working professionals - many of whom probably know and/or have worked with each other outside of the forum (or might be asking each other for work at some point in the future). I visit the place quite often as there really isn't another resource like it for colour matters.

Logged on and what do I see
Yes another topic waylaid by Super8 causing arguments
If you keep it up, I will have to do what's best for the forum as an informative tool for filmmakers. And you know what that means.

Yeah, Facebook proves people are willing to be as awful under their real names as they are under aliases. 
Though I do think when someone is being condescending to others and acting as though their experience is more significant/important than others, they should be compelled to show who they are and what they've done, otherwise they're just denigrating others work and experience while hiding behind anonymity. 
It's not too difficult to see @IronFilm's work/experience, as I subscribe to his YouTube and see him active on Facebook groups, so seeing someone diminish his knowledge and experience by just calling him "an audio guy" really kinda ticks me off. 

I'm currently building a set each (28, 35, 50ish, 85, 135) of M42 SMC-Takumars and early Minolta Rokkors, with the intention of keeping and building on the set I prefer and reselling the other. On experience so far I'll no doubt end up keeping both sets!

I'm currently building a set each (28, 35, 50ish, 85, 135) of M42 SMC-Takumars and early Minolta Rokkors, with the intention of keeping and building on the set I prefer and reselling the other. On experience so far I'll no doubt end up keeping both sets!

"When the market shrinks to one tenth its current size, yes, more expensive because the cost per unit to make anything will be dearer and in order to make a profit it will just have to be.      While there is lower stuff to sell in volume they can make higher end stuff a bit cheaper than it otherwise would be but once that lower stuff is swallowed up by phones ...well look at Leica....otherwise it will be cheap rubbish."
Absolutely this. The reason Zacuto can charge hundreds of dollars for pieces of shaped metal with threaded holes in them is precisely because - in manufacturing terms - the market for those bits of metal is almost undetectably small.

As an erstwhile tech-oriented ad salesman I have to tell you that any such person - on finding out that editorial were devoting 3 or 4 pages to a favourable review of a particular camera would, within milliseconds, be on the phone to a decision maker at the manufacturer's HQ. There's nothing corrupt about that process, it's just how it works.

"When the market shrinks to one tenth its current size, yes, more expensive because the cost per unit to make anything will be dearer and in order to make a profit it will just have to be.      While there is lower stuff to sell in volume they can make higher end stuff a bit cheaper than it otherwise would be but once that lower stuff is swallowed up by phones ...well look at Leica....otherwise it will be cheap rubbish."
Absolutely this. The reason Zacuto can charge hundreds of dollars for pieces of shaped metal with threaded holes in them is precisely because - in manufacturing terms - the market for those bits of metal is almost undetectably small.

When the market shrinks to one tenth its current size, yes, more expensive because the cost per unit to make anything will be dearer and in order to make a profit it will just have to be.      While there is lower stuff to sell in volume they can make higher end stuff a bit cheaper than it otherwise would be but once that lower stuff is swallowed up by phones ...well look at Leica....otherwise it will be cheap rubbish.
 Makers will also take longer to put out new stuff at the lower end to keep it cheaper or have to put up prices  and either way, phones (or devices that have both a phone and camera in them more like) which will just be on an even faster track comparatively.

Tim, there is nothing wrong with tasteful and honest advertising.
The problem comes when you mix the editorial with the advertising.

As an erstwhile tech-oriented ad salesman I have to tell you that any such person - on finding out that editorial were devoting 3 or 4 pages to a favourable review of a particular camera would, within milliseconds, be on the phone to a decision maker at the manufacturer's HQ. There's nothing corrupt about that process, it's just how it works.

@IronFilm I definitely agree with you on a wait and see approach with the Komodo, but I believe global shutters are just going to get better with the proper development behind it. With companies like RED pushing this technology, it’ll certainly invite other big manufacturers to enter the foray. 

This may help - in the second half of the video he demonstrates changing the mount (and de-clicking): youtube.com/watch?v=EUjUxKvXgpw