kaylee

I buy most of my stuff used. Simply because you get more for your money. And it was during the release of the A7rii and A7sii that I got the idea. Why pay such a premium price for a camera thats going to be worth half within a year? And what can I get for the same amount today?(It was the same reasoning that lead me into my recent film endeavor.) So I found myself looking at used cameras in the €3000 segment. At the top of my list where the Sony F35, but no luck (since I needed a recorder as well). I also looked at URSA, FS700, 1DC etc but none was a perfect match.So I started lurking the Red user forum.There I saw Red Scarlets ready to shoot with accessories for as low as $6000. And when I saw the Red One with everything you need + a set of Rokkinon prime lenses for  a crazy low $4000,I knew it would be the one.  That particular seller didn’t want to ship to Sweden, but another one did. In less than 24h from leaving Spain, this huge box sat on my floor.  (Disclaimer: All IMO of course, totally get why one would rather have an A7rii, its was just my personal thoughts.) 

Cant speak for others but Im not excactly allowed to share footage from work. It belongs to my employer or client.
I can only share stuff from home. And eventhough I just finished a 20min doc shot on the bmpcc, bmcc, bmpc4k and lx100 that I own completly, I wont share it because it then looses value when selling it to a network.

shooting magic lantern on the 5dmk3 with sharp and fast primes and using the greatest sensor height you can (ideally the full 24mm height), alongside 2x anamorphics for a 2.75;1 delivery is about as close as you gonna get.  however you'll not be able to match the out and out field of view since most projection anamorphics are not designed for wide angle use.  
 
at the moment the closest thing you gonna get to the look of ultra panavision 70 is an a7sii in full frame 4k mode with a iscorama 54 and a fast 45mm taking lens.  this will get you pretty darn wide and with a 2.66:1 ratio and less pronounced oval defocus, as well as fine grain from the 4k low noise sensor.    

Home made Vanilla sauce

congratulations on your purchase andrew  looking forward to hearing more about it!!
...i think this is a fun discussion~!
cuz ykno, if we ALL agreed on this stuff 100% and we ALLLL shot with the SAME CAMERA...... well, how boring would that be~?!
cheers guys~!!

congratulations on your purchase andrew  looking forward to hearing more about it!!
...i think this is a fun discussion~!
cuz ykno, if we ALL agreed on this stuff 100% and we ALLLL shot with the SAME CAMERA...... well, how boring would that be~?!
cheers guys~!!

Thats pretty much what Gorilla Grain is. Just place them on a  layer on top of your video and switch them to "Overlay". Done. Looks great.
A tip, don't buy them straight away. Sign up for their email and download the demo, what a while and they will send you a 50 dollar rebate.
They have one for free that you can try first.
http://gorillagrain.com

Disclaimer: This is just for fun. Not meant to be fair, well lit, perfectly graded, scientific or anything else. Just a few shots while I had the two film cameras loaded.
IMO Film still kicks the ass of digital in looking what I consider "Good" and in dynamic range and color. But this is not suposed to be proof of that concept.
If you want an example of that I say watch "The Hateful Eight", "The Hurtlocker" or any other well shot movie on film.
In this video I compare some footage from a BMPCC, Digital Bolex and A7ii to a 16mm Bolex H16 and a Krasnogorsk-3.
I did it just for fun so don't read to much into it
The BMPCC was shot in Prores and the D16 in Raw. Both where graded with a 7207 LUT.
The H16 was shooting actual ISO 250 Kodak 7207.
The Krasnogorsk was shooting ISO 50 Kodak 7203 so thats the LUT the A7ii received.
 

EXACTLY! 4k on Youtube looks very close the the original footage before youtube compression. So 1080 uploaded in 4k is a huge benefit. For instance. If you watch my film above in 1080 the film grain/noise looks like blocky moving pixels and ruins the film look and feel, but in 4k mode it looks like fine grain and doesn't distract. 

from 0:00 to 1:34 is the T3i, and 1:40 to 13:59 is the Pocket, then it goes back to the t3i from 14:00 until 17:30.
I graded all the pocket cinema camera footage with Neumann luts "The Halfling profile" 
As a final render I upscaled everything to 4k and uploaded to youtube. So for best viewing results 4k is your best bet as it does benefit quite a bit with youtube compression. 
Let me know what you think  

I found an amazing lens LOMO OKC 35mm F2 with PL mount, perfect for special, amazing pictures. It has a central hole in one of the glass gives hallowed halos around objects and boke in the shape of circle.  In the movie version with a Pl mount and ARRI focus ring gear. 

I'm a huge fan of the bmpcc.  It's the ONLY camera that fulfilled the needs of my FORBES70 prototype camera in terms of DR, low light performance, resolution, compatibility with adapted specialist lenses, solid codecs, etc.   since the bmpcc's release there has yet to be anything that comes close to its overall performance when paired with fast modern c-mount lenses.
 
The sheer number of so-called high end cinematographers interested in FORBES70 but who disregard it based on that fact that the internal camera is a BMPCC is amazing.  Also those who complain about anything the camera does visually are asking far too much.  £800 for the best picture available from any camera in the price bracket where re-mortgaging isn't required to make a purchase.     
https://vimeo.com/136554487 password : fbs
 I hope the bmmcc does the same amazing job and better!

Most "tests" are terrible. 
This camera is obviously a powerhouse imaging device and will be spectacular in the right hands. 
I cancelled my pre-order as I needed to spend my cash on a camera system that was working now for next lot of work. Sure I'll be re-visiting a purchase mid-2016, if it ever gets released!

He is at 2.5 hours without overheating. I guess we should never speak of it again. I can say I did not expect this. Good job Sony. Seams to me companies have started listening more and more these days. 

It all becomes moot when you consider why a user would shoot 35mm rather than medium format.  It's all about cost and compactness.  Otus is a doubling of your investment of a 5ds or a7rii, for a 'normal lens' of 50/1.4.  
very few dslr users will think it viable to invest in the Otus lenses and a d810, a7rii or 5ds (which do get you very close to medium format).  If they do, their camera system becomes heavier and more cumbersome than a phase one system and the difference in price isn't as much of a factor (even if investing £20+k in a new setup (usually on a lease).  you can get a phase one camera with a 80/2.8 and a outdated 40mpx back for the same price as a 5ds and an otus, with 16bit colour (which actually makes the 40mpx more powerful than the 50mpx of the 5ds).  
 
The debate here is coming from those who wont ever have the need for an otus and a 5ds in either their professional or hobbyist endeavours.  Why bring them into the equation?    
 
The fact remains that assuming this adaptor doesn;t degrade the iq (and compresses the image circle down in a lossless fashion), users of the a7rii and a good MF lens like a pro quality 80/2.8, they'll have a lens of similar quality (resolution, fringing, distortion, frame illumination uniformity) to the otus 50/1.4.  get a good 80/2.8 for £300-400 and this adaptor and you have a sub £1000 otus setup. 
Unfortunately I doubt the optical designers, and the manufacturers of this unit are at the level of that from zeiss, who left no expense spared on the otus line.
 
 

The 5dsr 1080p/24 footage looks noticeably better than 5d3 non-raw footage IMO.  Nice and detailed; clean.  Shot some last night and the good 'old Canon colors are there.  The AF in video mode works better than I thought it would.  Not quite to the level of the 70d's dual pixel AF, but much better than not having it.  Very impressed with the still image quality of the 5dsr so far.  I've tried it with the Sigma 50 1.4 art, the 35 F/2 IS, the 70-200 II and the 16-35 F/4 IS.  All look great.
...which annoys me why Canon didn't include 1080p60 on this camera.
 

I don't know in your countries how broadcast tv looks. I bought a new 4K 55" panasonic tv here in Italy. I dedicated 10 minutes to cancel any "improvement" to the image from the tv set. But the problem is broadcast, it looks like shit. SD is a seminar on compression artefacts. HD is somehow better (only 5 channels on national TV in Italy and not all the time!).  SKY satellite is horrible too. Then I watched one of my videos on YouTube (with the tv app) and it looked wonderful! It's pretty sad that broadcasting is destroying the work of thousand of professionals.
I still remember when broadcast was the quality and for the web the bad one!!! Nowadays is the opposite!

Seems a few wrinkles have developed in the opportunity to view/show the film "Hateful Eight" in 70mm at a Cinerama Dome location in LA. It seems Disney wants Star Wars to be shown instead, during the holiday season....
Quentin Tarantino slams Disney over 'Star Wars' 'extortion' on 'Howard Stern'
 
 

I've lost count at how many family/friends TV sets I've "fixed". 
Quite recently I walked into a friends house and they were watching the Walking Dead. My first reaction was "why does it look so cheap"? and within 5 seconds I picked up the remote and turned off that awful "Tru Motion" thing. As if by magic, The Walking Dead didn't look cheap anymore - it was looking great. Nobody in the room noticed the difference untilI I switched it to compare. "You are a genius!" they said. Erm...
To be honest, it absolutely bamboozles me why the TV manufacturers have this hideous setting on as default. It's as if they are trying to programme our minds to watch things differently. But it's just not right. Like the Hobbit in 48fps... it's horrible. The magic is gone. 
The magic of natural, seamless 24fps is timeless. It works. It doesn't need altering. The TV manufacturers need to stop. 

Very promising.  I find the SL a very beautiful system.  Big is beautiful.  A full size HDMI connector sold it for me.  Their promptness to approach Andrew rather than a typical 'still photography ambassador' for opinions on video functionality is very promising. 
 
 

Since the issue of black levels in LOG mode on the Leica SL was raised on EOSHD, Leica have reached out to me. Here I can reveal Leica are working hard on video related refinements.
Last week in Berlin, product manager Steffen invited me to see the new firmware in action.
Read the full article

I don't know why FCPX continues to be bashed. 
It's an absolutely incredible editing program, very intuitive, very fast and greatly supported by third party software (plugins etc). 
 

regarding my vote:
i watched jurassic world the other night.
 
MY GOD was it terrible.

Generally there are differences in the look of larger format DOF vs. smaller format DOF, even though their DOF range can be made technically equivalent.  I can see differences in the examples given in the link provided by jcs, even though the author of that page failed to provide images that were anywhere close to full res.  The discrepancies are more subtle when comparing images from formats which differ by a factor of only 1.5 (FF and S35), but the discrepancies often exist, nonetheless.   In digital, the main differences appear in how cleanly the DOF, focal plane and blur/bokeh are rendered.
 
To illustrate this point, let's consider two dramatically different format sizes -- ultra large format (11"x14") and S16.  This is an early test of Gonzalo Ezcurra's "Mini" Cyclops DOF adapter with a 14"-wide ground glass.  To me, the very shallow focal plane looks extremely clean and "solid" edge-to-edge, while the softer FG/BG blurs nicely and smoothly without abruptly going into complete mush.  I don't think that a S16 lens exists that can give the same clean/solid look in a shallow focal plane with such a smooth, gently soft BG/FG.
 
Just the same, one wonders about the potential of mounting the Kipon/Baveyes medium format focal reducer to a MetaBones BMPCC speed booster.  Can't wait to see the results of that combo!
 
Of course, when shooting a given film emulsion, the differences between format sizes are even more dramatic.  Larger formats have less grain, more resolution and more color depth.

"more easily" was what i wanted to hear. ::boom:: thank u