PannySVHS

The Last Picture Show is one of my all time favorites. I also liked his first film, Targets.

Unforgettable.

https://variety.com/2022/film/obituaries-people-news/peter-bogdanovich-dead-dies-director-1235148166/
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59897962
 
The Last Picture Show
The Last Picture Show - Making Of

@kye
Exactely, to the point! I love the image quality from the BMMCC the best. I enjoy the promise of the F3 which is still untested. I dont consider my kitchen window a test of image quality.:) I think I enjoy the thought of possibility of testing and using all this gear and the thrill to buy them for cheap. Maybe we could start a thread with the best cam deals we made the last couple years.
BMMCC will be for my mini anamorphic set up and lushiest colors. F3 for the hunt for the magic underdog camera, the baby Alexa. FS700 for the ease of use and external Prores 4K60p with a speedbooster. In the end it is easy to gather gear over the years like i have in the last two and half years. So I asked the two questions in one topic. I think it makes sense to talk and write about the oddities and akward habbits of cinematography lovers and camera dreamers. I filmed two shorts this year, 7days all together, first one with the GH5 only, second one mixing a rented A-Cam C300II with a rented GH5 as B-Cam and my S1 as specialty Cam. With own equipment I always realize, I am missing rigging parts, reliable battery solutions, monitoring, etc. Why holding on to equpment which I am not using? Hard to tell. But that is why I imply in the title of the thread what I am, a dummie.
The Varicam question stands in relation to that but also for itself in relation to image qualiity and all the other important attributes. In the end I hope to have shared some questions of interest. The answers from you guys already were very satisfying and profound.
BMMCC and C300II grade the easiest from my experience. For the GH5 I have serveral Power grades in Resolve which work well for me. But S1 only really excells to me in lit sets or under low light conditions. I have not recognized any artefacts from the S1! GH5 though turns super mushy in super lowlight. I find the S1 harder to grade under natural lighting condtions than the GH5.
So the prospect of a Varicam would be, dynamic range and color response like my BMMCC, lowlight exellence and all the goodies of ergos and rigging, if bougth in a complete set. To buy a Varicam has only become a vague option to me, because I found a rigged out package, which is ready to film, with viewfinder, handles, shoulder pad and so. The price was very low for what this camera is. But seller raised the price again. So it´s out of my reach.
 
 
 

Don, I think I got all your points.:) @webrunner5 American West Coast Grunge Music just sounds great. Wonky colours, sure, why not embrace that wonky film emulsions! Your point of view makes me want to browse the vimeo archives for that (in)famous A7s treasures of video with wonky or surprising colour. 🙂

Nice little test. If you want an upgrade from that Cosmicar try the Zeiss Tevidon 25mm F1.4. Covers full sensor and has all of the c-mount appeal for around $100.

The konica hexanon 40mm is really really sharp.
I used to use it as an anamorphic taking lens but the "dracula's coffin" bokeh is very distracting.
Wish it had more blades!

I hadn't heard that about the Miranda. Interesting. I know that some of the Yashica ML lenses were made in the same factory as the Zeiss Contax and supposedly Yashica used some of the Zeiss glass. I have the 50mm f/2 and the 28mm 2.8, but the 50mm 1.7 and the 24mm 2.8 are supposed to be the real jewels.
The Cosmicars are nice lenses... I have the 12.5, 25mm, 50mm and the 75mm. I was thinking about getting an FP and hoping that the 50mm would just cover the FF sensor.
I also have the 10mm Zeiss Tevidon in the bayonet mount. I bought the c-mount for it but haven't gotten around to installing it yet.
My new favorite lens is the older Sigma 50mm 1.4... the EX DG. I've never used the Art version but I hear it's even better. My only issue with it is that the focus ring is horrible. It makes you want to buy the cine version of the lens. Here's a couple test shots from it...


 

over here we have a small goods manufacturer named don
i'm just going to leave the slogan right here. by the way you need to enunciate that with the proper Italian accent.... and welcome back don 😀 
 
 

Improvement would have to be seen when heavily graded. The thin AVCHD codec with its low bit rate should show so much mare artefacts than ALL Intra. Also in movements more mushiness due to compression.

The lantern will spill light everywhere (unless you flag it).
An octabox will be more focused with the light throw.
Ideally, you would want an octabox (or round softbox) as a key light and maybe a lantern as a fill light.
If you want to light from overhead, then maybe the lantern is the best.

Cosmicar lenses were made by Asahi Pentax, so it's not that much of a surprise. These were probably made in the 70s, so right after the move from Takumar m42 to Pentax K. I have a full set of Cosmicar c-mount lenses I need to test on my BMMCC.

oOh  do tell us more... confession is good for the soul 

GX7 was a fav of mine.  
That had some great IQ mojo.  I like the image better than my GH5.
I'd shoot with that thing again without hesitation.  Still bummed I lost that camera.
It had the weirdest glitch though.  You can't do 60p with a 60shutter speed.  You had to set the shutter to 125 for the camera to legitimately record 60 frames per second.  60p/60ss would result in a 30p video...even though it would register as 59.97 in the meta data.  Damndest thing.

Here's some a7s color...
 

Welcome back Don and a happy new year from us!

Welcome back, dear Don! Now that sounds like a worthy phrase from cinema!:) Now I have to check out that Takumar 28mm F3.5!:)
Happy New Year, everyone!

No, I think you have that mindset... You know good POVs of other people contribute for deeper insights of ourselves : ) P4K is able of that contribution IMO : ) For some reason they've called it a Pocket camera! : D

Let alone, cinematography is definitely beyond lighting ; ) lensing calls for composition work and universe creation as you Marty fairly say, for sure :- )

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0347660

Ah, I see.
You need at least 2 hard drives and preferably 4 (or more).  The minimum recommended setup is:
Drive 1 - OS and NLE
Drive 2 - Project files, Scratch, & Media Cache
Drive 3 - Export and Storage
Some people further separate Project files and Scratch, etc.
 

Yeah I admit the colours are sort of wonky in todays standards but I think that is why I like it. Sort of like American West Coast Grunge Music. Gritty and great at the same time. A Modern OG BMPCC, well not that good but you get the point. But yeah to be honest I don't think I have ever tried BW on one so yeah I think you are onto something.
I just like how you can approach Photography, Video with a whole new mindset of doing both in low light situations you would never consider on a "normal" camera. Although I am not much into getting up before the sun rises LoL.
 

Fair enough.
Perhaps my reaction was to your rather polarised stance on a few of these issues.
I'm not against AF at all and I do agree that when you have one face in a static shot that it's a mechanical task and not an artistic one.  However, I find that AF picks the wrong thing to focus on when given multiple subjects, and I also find that the speed of AF is an artistic attribute, at least in some situations.  Maybe not for the content you're creating though.
I was also suggesting that there might be a depth of field that was somewhere between F4 and camcorder/smartphone.   For reference, the DoF of a 70mm lens at F4 at 10ft is 1.47ft, which I can understand a subject *might* move out of.  The 70mm equivalent on a 1-inch camcorder (a larger size camcorder sensor, as I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here) is a 23mm lens, which at f2.8 (once again, benefit of the doubt) at 10ft gives a DoF of 12.7ft.  
So you said you wanted a DoF deeper than 1.47ft, and when I suggested that you could stop down slightly, you leapt to the assertion that I was suggesting 12.7ft.  In my book there's a reasonable range between 1.47ft and 12.7ft.  Especially if you're willing to recompose, or try some other tricks, like maybe going to a wider lens, having the subject sit slightly closer, and therefore increasing the blur on the background.
I am also familiar with forums, and sadly that means that almost every question has a faulty premise, usually due to lack of knowledge on behalf of the OP who is almost always asking how they can buy their way out of their poor results, and frequently using shallow DoF to cover up for poor quality content.  I didn't immediately assume that you were in this situation, but as your statements also lacked nuance (eg, anything larger than 1.47 is at least 12) and didn't mention that you needed shallow DoF to cover up poor content that you weren't in control over, so that was what caused me to question your approach.
Anyway, now I realise that you're in the unenviable position to be trying to sell video production to people who want videos to be great despite being dull as dishwater and who have swallowed the latest marketing hook-line-and-sinker with the usual "more resolution / sharper footage / shallower DoF".
All the best with your search for great AF, great colour science, great codecs, small form factor, modest price - we're all waiting for the perfect camera too, come join the queue 🙂 

I knew a professional photographer (think Sports Illustrated covers) who switched from Nikon to Canon back when Canon F-1 was their top of the line camera.  He said he could only afford the switch because Canon sponsored him.  He also did a USA television commercial for Canon.
So, I think pro photographers will wait until it is absolutely necessary to switch.