mercer

Those look great!!!

That is what I finally figured out with the nx500. Every single person was using -5 contrast and I just wasn't getting good results. I assumed the issue was the saturation, but no matter what setting I tried, the colors were all messed up. It wasn't until I read the review by cinema5d that I realized he used default contrast, then all of a sudden everything clicked. A lot of the information out their about Samsung cameras are based on using their lenses, but they work completely different when using vintage glass.

You are getting some nice dr. The clouds are insane.

I have not tried an NX1, but I have seen people getting great results. Some of your work is the best NX1 footage I've seen. I really am not trying to knock the Samsung image quality, it's great. I really like my NX500. I have learned a lot about cinematography from it. It just feels like it's lacking something. Anyway, I have messed around a little with some m42 lenses... The Zeiss Jena 50mm f2.8 looks great with it, as does the Rikenon 35mm f2.8. I haven't tried Taks, but I do have a few. I just sold my 50mm 1.4 the other day, but I still have a couple others. Anyway, have a Merry Christmas!!!

Exactly. Some lenses would look better, or as you put it, you could see the little nuances of the lens. I remember when I stuck my Minolta MC 50mm f1.4 and my 35mm f1.8 on to the eos-m, I was blown away. On the nx500... Sure it's technically a better image, but the character was missing. It's like going to a bar and seeing a hot woman, sure she's nice to look at, nobody would deny her that, but that girl next door across the bar with her crooked smile, her freckles and her big brown eyes... There's a story in her eyes and it doesn't end with her tits. Sorry, not my best of analogies, but I think you get my point. Anyway, that's kind of how I have been feeling about the Samsung, it's missing a soul or something. Or I have been drinking too much... Haha.

This has been my dilemma lately. As I have said a thousand times before. I, like many, have a t2i, eos-m beginning. With those cameras you could shoot in Prolost Flat and use lenses to give your videos a "look." With the NX500, I started experimenting with color grading (usually disastrously) and I am just starting to get the hang of it, but it seems the "look" I used to get just by changing lenses is gone. With the G7 I have it back which excites me. I love putting a Cosmicar c-mount on my G7 and getting an instant filmic look with dialed down CineD. But with the NX500, no matter what I tried I never noticed a major difference between lenses, only if the lens can resolve the 28mp. My Minoltas look great on it, my Tokinas look great on it, but in a lot of ways they're generic looking and it requires post coloring.

Yeah, that's a nice lens, but a little out of my price range. Do all of the art lenses resolve 6K wide open?

Thanks for your service, man!!! Do you get to go home for Christmas? It's funny you mention the Sigma lenses. A buddy of mine has the 30mm f/1.4 and I shot a little with it yesterday and it is a beautiful lens. But he decided to return it and get a Rokinon so he would have full frame. The other day, I thought I had a Tokina 11-16, but there was a problem with the shipping, so it fell through. Afterwards I saw some footage from the Sigma 19mm and 30mm lenses. They're f2.8 but they're cheap and brilliant.

Every report I have heard from an actual user of the XC10 loves it and there is plenty of good footage floating around to confirm that.

Yeah, they resolve nicely. Different looks but equally impressive. Have you used the NX1 on any jobs yet? I recently picked up a Nikkor 28mm f2 and it is simply amazing. With just the 50mm f2 and the 28mm, I have eliminated 2 or 3 sets of lenses. I have too many anyway.

I have a couple of the K&F Concept adapters and they are pretty nice. They are one of the few cheap adapters where the lens markings end up oriented to the top of the lens. Which is nice. It better be for that money. How are you enjoying those Nikkors?

Thanks Phil. Are there any indicator markings on the Fotodiox adapter? Obviously, it won't tell us the f-stop, but anything to delineate a level of open to close?

Just picked up the Tokina 11-16 type 1 Nikon mount to use with my G7 and NX500. The specs say it's for the F mount, but since I don't see an aperture ring on it, I assume I need a Nikon G to m4/3rds or NX? I know this topic has been discussed a bunch lately on the main board, but can anyone recommend a good, cheap one? I usually use Fotasy, or KandF Concept adapters, but is the Fotodiox one smoother with the aperture control?

The shot of the girl's hair is insane. Good stuff.

Hey I don't mean any ill will towards the BMPCC (I've wanted one forever) or the G7 (I have one and love it - probably the best camera I have ever owned) But for $150 for full HD raw... It's a no-brainer. Of course, for some reason I thought the 50D was a full frame camera. But I guess if you already own a BMPCC, then I see why you might hesitate.

Google videos and you'll see the point. Better yet here's one by somebody who goes by Planetarium on Vimeo. Freakin' amazing!!!

I was messing around with 720p raw on the eos-m a few months back, but it just wasn't stable enough for me. For very short work, it is usable but the audio issues are a pain. To use .mlv raw, you would basically get one take with audio and then the camera would freeze up. Very frustrating. I loved the image, but the workflow is tedious especially the pink dots. I believe the 50D has stable full 1080p raw, which is amazing. So, if you can get a work around with audio, then I would go for it. I don't know how well the image matches up with the BMPCC, but the 50d could be a perfect b cam.

At that price, I would say it makes perfect sense. The biggest drawback, IMO to the 50d Raw is the lack of audio to help synch up dual sound, but not impossible. Great camera for music videos though, I guess.

I am actually glad this came up because I just started experimenting with ETTR and since different cameras have different ways in which their exposure guides work, it can be a little confusing. Isn't it just Exposing To The Right (obviously) just below clipping, by using zebras or the histogram as your guide? If I am correct, then that's what Riccardo said he was doing.

Yeah Ricardo, those look beautiful. Really, really good stuff there. Did you use the Custom picture profile? And are you still underexposing?

On the G7, the UHD crop is 2x. So, why would I have to add another 1.2?

Looks great!!! They were with the FD lenses, yeah? Have you tested your Nikkors yet?

Thanks guys! I keep forgetting the FL/FOV differences. Makes perfect sense now.

So, I recently purchased the G7 and it is the first camera where I can utilize a speed booster. I don't have the budget for a metabones, so I am looking at a Roxsen or RJ Turbo. Obviously, I was curious what focal lengths could be achieved with a speed booster, so I hit Google, but with my research, I feel like I am even more confused. Basically, it seems there are a lot of misconceptions about what the formula is for determining focal length with a speedbooster. I was under the impression it was... • Lens Focal Length X Crop Factor X Speed Booster Focal Reduction = Speed Booster Focal Length? Let's say I am using a 28mm lens on a MFT with a Roxsen speed booster... • 28mm X 2 X 0.72 = 40mm But then over at DPreview and a few other sites, forum members are stating that it's just 28mm X 0.72 = 20mm? So, which is it... Do you still multiply the 2x crop factor for micro 4/3rds, or is that negated when you add a speed booster. Sorry, I am sure this has been discussed to death, but this is my first adventure with speed boosters and have never had a reason to investigate them.

Yes, Sekhar, exactly what I was thinking. I guess I understand having a master in h.265 ( I would rather have a prores master) but for web delivery QuickTime is king, so h.264 mov is your best bet. IMO.