Zach Goodwin2

Here is one dark selfie of me:

I was having a discussion in another thread and like I usually do, it got off topic. So rather than step on the other OP’s toes, I decided to make a new thread.
About once a year, usually when a new camera is announced, I become nostalgic about the cameras of yesteryear and I realize how many great cameras have been on the market the past ten years... WOW... has it been almost 10 YEARS since the beginning of the DSLR Revolution or as Andrew Reid likes to call it... “the democratization of filmmaking?”
I’ve been lucky to test out a few of those cameras, but there are a bunch that have eluded me. Maybe I am feeling nostalgic as I watch footage from my 5-6 year old camera but it seems there are some gems that are still available both new and used on the marketplace. Part of me wants to test them all before the new models make those fossils extinct. 
So I figured I’d love to hear some of people’s favorite cameras over the past 10 years and maybe some videos to show those cameras at their best.
I posted this in the other thread but I can’t stop watching the first and last couple minutes of it. It was shot on the original C100 and to me looks as cinematic as they come...
And here are a couple from the GH2 that makes me smile every time I watch them...
Please share some of your favorites and if you were forced to shoot with an older camera... which one would you choose?

Stabilize / lock-off your shots

Hi 😁
i use Luminar and photoshop..
Original sky vs modded
(A Hidden Life..a beautiful film)

Thanks, I honestly don't know zach goodwin work but cheers for the puppets!!!

I found out that the brass adapter for the EF mount is best suited for the situation and I made a list of OM mount lenses I could use and these will be my back-up lenses and are a lot easier to replace than Edmika FD:
OM 50mm F/1.8 (I already own)
OM 85mm F/2
OM 28-70 F/2.8 (I already own)
OM 70-210 F/3.5
OM to EF Brass adapter

Personally, I think FD lenses CAN be a bit of a pain due to the mount (same as some of the Minolta MC lenses) but optically they are fine, just as are all the old legacy lenses from Nikon, Pentax, Olympus and the third party lenses in those mounts as well as Minolta and Canon and others.    The new FD mount lenses are better than the earlier ones (in ease of use).
The FD lenses to get that make it worth while and a difference are the L versions and especially those that use a hand ground aspheric elements or Fluorite elements in longer lenses.     
The biggest factor in buying any old lens is how each individual lens has been treated as well as how it was made ....most likely more copy variation thirty or forty years ago plus many could have been dropped or thrown around ETC...has it got fungus ...all sorts of things.

I may go back to buying the Edmika mount lenses though. It's just that I'm sort of impatient with the guy along with many others. He recently brought back up his website.

Very good idea. It was with Nikon AI or AIS lenses on my Canon 550D (T2i) that I started shooting my short films in 2011. You get beautiful pictures.
Here is a site to identify all the nikon lenses that exist.
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html

Thank you all for your support. I have decided to go with trying out one Nikon lens and as an added note I already have a back-up lens, which is my 28-70 F/2.8.

That's it. Start with one standard lens. 35mm for an APSC sensor or 50mm for a Full frame sensor.

Nikon Series E lenses are great.
Lightweight, compact, but they feel quite robust (it's not like all those cheapo Yongnuo lenses nowadays).
Superb optics, nice handling.
https://matthewdurrphotography.com/2012/07/20/nikons-series-e-primes-compared/
Right now I own 100/2.8 and I wish I could find some more use for it.

Pick two or three of those focal lengths and buy quality lenses instead of trying to buy 9 cheap and poor quality ones.
Then go film something.
Even better yet, buy one really nice lens, then go film things and never look back and never take it off your camera.

I would think any camera lens is not going to do well after falling from a height onto the ground, not just edmika's
Is  the edmika a mount or rehoused lens ? cant say i know much about them
Not sure i'd give up on the fd glass so soon, Maybe search around for another edmika, but that may take awhile to find. Or maybe go to another 2nd hand camera body that easily adapts to fd glass. There's always the chance that another edmika mount may be tighter or looser.
Depending on how keen you are maybe get a new part machined depending on whats broken but machining is generally  not cheap

I like my Vivitar 28-90mm as a dirt cheap mid zoom lens

Technically it isn't constant F Stop, as it is 2.8 to 3.5

But just set it to 3.5 and then it is a constant F stop zoom ;-)
 

Well, Sammy the Sock turned into a serious drama.

Well, Sammy the Sock turned into a serious drama.

Well, Sammy the Sock turned into a serious drama.

holy shit!! did @Zach Goodwin2 inspire the sock puppet?? 
seriously tho, great work pal, keep it up!!! it totally inspires me to see ppl making things in these conditions 💯👍thank u

Well since that quarantine got us all...
I struggle a lot with inactivity, so i had to make a short film... Almost alone, by my self.
The point of this is just to entertain and motivate others to make, create even on this times. 
PD: I had a Panasonic S1 that was let to me for testing. I used this for the film.

@Zach Goodwin2 Hallo Zach, you might like the Tokina 25-50mm F4 zoom. One of the fun finds by Andy Lee, who started this thread long time ago. You could get it in Pentax or Nikon mount and adapt it to your EF mount camera. You can get them for less than 15 dollars or even less than ten! Great 2x range and quality. Nice haptic quality and great size. Got mine for less than 15 bucks with shipping included!

New photo that I took with the Canon T2i Edmika FD 35-105 F/3.5

Fine options if you just want your work to be seen. 
Making money doing it?  You need to put a lot of work into marketing. 
In order to make modest money with sales on Amazon or Vimeo, you'd need to make a product that 10's of thousands of people would be willing to pay a few bucks for.
Easier said than done. 

I don't think you're going to make any money going that route. if money isn't a goal, that's fine. but even if it's to be seen, the film will be buried so deep in their libraries that almost no one will even accidentally stumble upon it. a good avenue for indies that want eyeballs and decent money (that aren't picked up by a mini-major for distribution) is still cable VOD. it outperforms all other platforms. not that you shouldn't also get it onto itunes, netflix, prime, hulu, etc. but cable VOD will account for the majority of revenue. the last time i released a feature, it was 79% of revenue. itunes was about 15%. all other platforms combined made up the remainder.
my advice is to submit it to small distributors that have strong relationships with cable providers across north america. do a day and date theatrical release of at least 15 north american cities, and make sure the cable providers know you're doing it, so that your title is listed under "new release" and "now playing in theaters" on their VOD systems. Otherwise you run the risk of going in as a library title where no one will find you unless they already know you title and browse alphabetically for it. a day and date theatrical release will give you premiere placement on cable VOD system resulting in 5-10x more revenue.

My experience with Amazon prime video direct has not been great. It honestly feels more like a beta at this point, and to be fair, it has improved its interface in the past few months. It says they review titles for publication in 2-4 days, but it's more like 4+ weeks, and their system for telling you about issues is frustrating and poorly implemented.
In the end you will end up with like 5 cents per hour watched if you release for amazon prime users to watch for free. So you can do the math to figure out how much content and how many views you need to make a profit.