Timotheus

SOLD.

Andrew, sorry to hear you´re having a hard time inspiration-wise. But man, you built something worthy here. There is tremendous value in the site as it as, and in the community that surrounds it through the forums. I share your contempt of the amounts of crap that flood the net, but I am puzzled why it so demotivates you, seeing the activity in this forum and in this very thread.
Now I don't know (the change in) your traffic numbers, or what you want them to be. But the people that come here, seem to do so for quality and most contributors are sincere and mean well. Actually I think that sites/communities as this prove there ís a market for good content, in spite of the flooding shite elsewhere. Other places I like to visit for good content and atmosphere is Tony Northrups channel and (on another topic) the former Gametrailers guys, now working under the Easy Allies moniker.
Checking EosHD and the forum has become part of my daily routine. I enjoy coming here and feel inspired; getting into anamorphics as a hobby is this site's fault entirely ;-) So yeah, this place means something to people, sure does to me, so thanks for that. I hope that helps a little to keep your fire burning :-)

Such as 79,400 views for that camera test. Northrup and Dugdale have millions of views by making camera tests entertaining. Whether you agree with them or not, they are creating content that many people enjoy watching. My 'best' camera test only got 26K views- no story and pretty boring (this kindof had a story, though not much really going on (11.5K views)). How about yours?

My opinion is that IS within a lens isnt anymore important in the future, since IBIS will do it. The gx80 does it already extremly well and it will even get better.
your choice boils down to:
- do you accept fly by wire focussing lenses?
- is size an issue?
if you hate fly by wire as I do, basically all olympus and panasonic lenses are out.
if you want it small, have a look at the voigtländers.
if size is not an issue, go with any speed booster and any lens you like.
if you need AF it gets tricky - either you accept fly by wire or you need to go the EF route with a metabones speed booster.

The 0.33 Minolta is nice, achromat also (at least, if it's the one for the 100-500mm zoom). Tito uses it regularly in his videos. I have the 67mm diopter from Asahi Pentax and measured it...indeed 0.33 also. If you want to know precisely how strong your Pentax diopter is, focus on infinity with the diopter attached. Measure the distance from sensor to the focus plane. Diopter strength = 1/(max focus distance in meters). Oh, if you do, let us know, I'll update the list :-) Cheers.

No, they aren't, unfortunately (...as mentioned above ;-)) Could still be useful though.
Here's a list I made a while ago https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1cEzX4hb0NKbhPetTkVsnORNHeGnji7lhB4OmuCdQC-g/edit?usp=docslist_api

You are right. The genre of documentary was invented in 2016. Before that it didn't exist. TV news does not exist. 100% of the people here that shoot events etc use AF 100% of the time. Every documentary ever made is AF or with a huge crew. This is fact and thank you for teaching me. I will call my latest client and tell them the doc I did is illegal because I didn't use AF and must be deleted. I'm sorry for saying MF is usable. It was a lie. MF is only for Nazis.

When you rack focus with your taking lens is pushing the limits of the anamorphic's image quality, because the anamorphic block is set to infinity. So having a focusing solution ties the whole system together and by having both anamorphic and taking lens at infinity you get their focus to sync. Kind of confusing when put in words, let me know if you get it. hahahah
(thanks, man! it was fun doing it!)

Nice, a little too shakey in some places for my taste, but the piece as a whole really works.
If the past can teach us anything, its that there are no rules to music videos - everything goes. Its a music video & as long as it keeps your attention for the whole song, then you've done your job.

http://menexmachina.blogspot.com/2018/07/a-story-about-4k-xavc-s-premiere-and.html
 
 

I shot a small narrative (I won't call it a "short") mixing all 1.33x anamorphic adapters with various taking lenses. The goal was to test out if all that talk of "this adapter is good, this one is bad", to see if we can actually notice the difference between lenses when there's a story being told. I included both well lit and low light shots to evaluate performance with different apertures. The camera used was Kinefinity's Kinemini 4k, and I shot it all raw for more flexibility in post. Taking lenses were all Russian, from 28 up to 135mm. The blog post has a cheat chart with all the data for each shot.
Can you tell when this or that lens is being used? Is there anything in particular that bugs you? Do you think this test makes the difference between 1.33x adapters easier to notice?
Lenses used were Century Optics WS-13, Panasonic LA7200, Isco 16:9 Video Attachment I, SLR Magic Anamorphot 1.33x-50, Century Optics 16:9 (the small one).
http://www.tferradans.com/blog/?p=8333
There's more info on the blog post above, but if you're feeling lazy, here's the video.
 

I joined this forum in summer of 2012, and I lurked around and read the forum and blog posts on EOSHD quite some time before that.
Since people are commenting on the logo and name of the site:
My profession is as a designer, which include the tasks of creating logos, branding and profiling of companies & products. I can say: the branding and logotype don't keep me back from this site.
What keeps me coming back is the community here in the forum and your blog posts Andrew. It is the genuine core essence of EOSHD; discussions and information, tips on hardware, tips on how to get the most out of cameras - and good videos by you Andrew - and from the community. Very inspirational.
Also, I used to love reading at nofilmschool in the early days. Their rebranding was visually pleasant. But what they did, was to destroy the core (just as previously discussed in this thread): genuine articles from people with a passion for filmmaking and cameras. Somehow their rebranding weeded out the skilled people with interesting discussion too (it existed in the comments section of the blog in the early days). Nowadays I seldom visit that site.
I don't see anything wrong with this site having the name 'EosHD', it is a heritage from how the site came to be. The logo perhaps looks a bit dated, but on the other hand it is personal, non-corporate - not like some spam site that just wants to get ad money. Hence it works with the DNA of the community and the blog which are still very personal with genuine opinions.
I'm into climbing as well. In the climbing community there's a good example of a blog & site which has a horrible and confusing design: http://www.alanarnette.com/blog/ - yet I love reading that blog and keep finding lots of great content at the site, which makes me return to it, even on mobile, although it's a terrible experience on a mobile device. But I do it because of the great content.
In the end, sites with great content that provides learning, new information and good exchange from the users will keep on being relevant (in the meantime the big social media hypes might get replaced by the other latest & greatest competitors over time).
 
And on the inspirational level: I find that you need to take in a lot of creative experiences and process them - to be able to make creative outputs in new directions.
My favourite example would be the insane/genius Alejandro Jodorowsky. I remember seeing him lacking ideas for the progression of a story/character in a documentary about him. What did he do? He picked out a book on random, flipped up a page and looked at it - and found something he could use to progress the story in a whole new direction. Whenever I lack creative motivation/inspiration, I try to find something totally new/different/unknown for me to soak in and think about, be it a film, a book, tv series, music, documentary or other form of art. Then I like to contemplate about that to see where my thoughts lead me. Travelling also tend to give me new experiences the same way.
 
My five cents.
Cheers!
@Andrew Reid Also, with or without inspiration/motivation - I can understand that it takes a while for you to put out the blog posts. It's very visible that a lot of work goes into creating your reviews! And on a lot of other sites, it's very visible which reviews are copy-paste rush jobs...

Here are a few music videos that should be ashamed to call themselves music videos!!!!!! Just utterly against the music video universal protocol. Dear me.
 
Just home video footage if you ask me.

Dear people.
 
Shot this musicvideo for a friend when is was in US. 
Enjoy

I'm very happy with EOSHD being about gear, it's good to specialise and to have a niche to focus on. I love the tech, always will. From my own experience, I'm just not sure how much real value can be had from online articles about the art of filmmaking, it's something you're best off learning by actually doing it rather than reading about it. NoFilmSchool built a mainstream audience that transcended the gear community by mentioning Kubrick and PT Anderson a lot in clickbate headlines - the content was ALWAYS stolen and by someone else - the aggregation of material in a massive way. Poor original content creators make nothing from exposure at all whilst the aggregators gobble up ALL the traffic and sell ads around it, in the case of NFS they even had US venture capitalists funding huge online advertising campaigns, expert SEO and very very large social media followings acquired the non-organic way, I don't even consider them as competition to EOSHD any more, they are something different and I'd never go to them for camera advice or for a singular voice. The whole site may as well be computer generated.
Despite my temporary loss of appetite for blogging and the need to get some inspiration back in my filmmaking by moving out of Berlin, EOSHD is very strong at the moment, the forum has never been busier, the cameras have never been better and the visitor numbers are still as good as ever. Don't forget, we were first or one of the very first blogs to capture the community. That's why it was such a shame that the cat man Philip Bloom stopped blogging, I really miss his longer posts outside all the social media stuff. I didn't go back to the site at all when he stopped (apart from his very occasional reviews) because his forum didn't pull me in like it does here, there's still plenty to read on EOSHD when I am away. I think the forum could go on the front page actually with the best topics in the sidebar. It's a superb resource!
The internet has changed though. People's reading habits and viewing habits are changing. Some movie trailers even now have 8 second trailers for the trailer, because of Facebook.
There is definitely a race to the bottom going on in the content world.
There's going to be some big victims too.
First one might be Twitter.... it now has such a low engagement per post because the feed is a mess and each tweet it like a grain of sand in the beach, significant stuff is so easy to miss on there, even whole conversations. Personally I won't be focussing much on that from now on. I think Twitter is going to get sidelined by a lot of people and will eventually be superseded by an alternative.
Facebook is a monster, it will continue to hoover up half the entire internet and make it worse. Already there are very active camera discussion groups on there... why people would use them over a proper forum I have no idea... it's so viral though because of the newsfeed and sharing element. The danger is that Facebook ends up siphoning off a ton of traffic from the better independent sites and selling ads around them, just like NoFilmSchool does, as the main 'go to' source for discussions and news
Philip Bloom is now much bigger on social media than he is on his blog... in fact blogs are being hoovered up by YouTube and Facebook. He has a massively high profile on Facebook and Instagram with very regular posts and I only ever update the EOSHD Facebook page when there's a new blog post - I think that needs to change. There's a ton of stuff I'm doing behind the scenes which could go on social media but I'm not enough of a narcissist to really take it to the next level
So if forums will be superseded by Facebook groups and blogs superseded by YouTube channels and Facebook and news aggregators, it will be a real loss for the internet because there won't be a motivation for anyone to create long-form original content any more or proper communities like this one, it will ALL be about 8 second trailers for trailers, gimmicks, clickbate headlines and trolling. Very sad direction for the internet in my opinion.
The thing I am most proud of over the past 5 years of EOSHD are the regular readers and the EOSHD Shooter's Guides. I get a bundle of inspiration from people and I try to put some back into the pool too.
I will get my inspiration back soon enough and EOSHD will have a bigger presence on YouTube and Facebook and Instagram.
Thanks to those in the thread who have posted messages of support! Means a lot and really does get the fire burning again.

Instead of just a thread, how about a subforum?

Music promotion for the german band: CORTEZ
Made with Sony A7SM2, Leica Summicron (35, 50, 90) and the mighty Van Diemen Cine Iscorama M2.
Enjoy!!
 

Hey guys - I haven't been here for a while so I'm not sure if the new Sigma APSC Art zoom has been discussed much yet, but I just got one yesterday and thought I'd share my first impressions.
I haven't done any technical tests but I'll start by saying my first impressions are it's a superb piece of glass with the superb sharpness (even wide open), character and build quality that you've come to expect from the Art line. 
However there are a few things those of you interested in adding it to your kit might like to be aware of - especially if you're thinking of it as a companion to the now classic 18-35mm 1.8.
1. It's HEAVY, and pretty big. The 18-35mm feels like a modest MFT lens next to it! It's not exceptionally long but it's got a lot more heft to it and is quite front heavy, meaning it's probably a bit unweildy on a hybrid camera. On my C100 Mark II it's OK to hand hold, but only just.
2. Focus breathing is EXTREME. Personally this isn't a big problem for me but it does impose a certain style on your focus pulls, so if you don't like that look take note. It's going to take a bit of getting used to for me.
3. While the 18-35mm has minimal focus breathing it is not parfocal, which can be annoying at times. The 50-100mm however appears to be parfocal (or at least very close to it). I don't know if trading breathing for focus consistency was an intentional choice by Sigma, but it is another difference to the wider zoom.
4. I read somewhere that it was effectively as quiet when autofocusing as an STM lens. This is not the case at all - not with my copy anyway. It's at least as noisy as the 18-35. Of course this is only really an issue if you're using it on a Canon DAF camera or a6300.
The 18-35mm has been my go-to lens on my BMPCC and GH4 (with their respective speedboosters) for a while now. The relatively compact size of the lens was a big part of this. Now I use a C100 size is not such an issue, but if you're hoping the 50-100 will make a great partner for the 18-35 on a smaller camera as a full walk-around "prime" kit, you may be disappointed. It's so heavy in fact that Sigma's included lens case comes with a shoulder strap! Even on the C100 I'm going to be using it on a tripod most of the time, as the longer, front-heavy focal length makes footage pretty shaky. Of course the flipside of this is that the extra weight helps with reducing micro jitters and with a bit of practice focusing and holding it, it may be useable handheld. 
I'm happily holding on to the lens because the image quality is superb, it's made really nicely and the convenience of having prime image quality (minus the breathing) in two modestly sized zooms is invaluable for my work. In most cases I'll be using the 50-100mm as a portrait lens for interviews, so in general it will be on sticks and this negates the weight issue. It's by no means so huge and heavy I don't want to put it in my kit bag. 
If you want to keep your kit small and think you'll get by with one or two fixed focal length lenses and value compactness and ease of handling, I'd weigh up the pro's of sticking to primes before shelling out $1000 for the 50-100mm.
 

Yep! I'm documenting the process for a video tutorial, IF IT WORKS. hahahahah
I think it would be enough to cover it, since 4 inches = 100mm. You'd have to be creative mounting it, but aren't we all?

remove from the metal housing and wrap the element in masking tape
draw a line down the middle
drill lots of holes along the line using a glass/ceramic drill bit - like an arrow head shaped drill bit - make sure the elements are in a shallow pool of water to aid cooling/lubrication during drilling.  don;t apply pressure - let the drill do the work.  high speed, use a battery powered drill for safety - 230volts and water don't go!
using a tile cutting fret saw slowly cut along the line - the drilled holes will mean you have less material to physically cut through
using very high quality 'wet and dry' glass paper from 240 grit down to around 1000grit to grind the edge flat.  the courser the paper, the more likely you are of chipping the edge so go steady when using he course grades.  grind 'edge ways' not 'across' to avoid chipping
once flat, apply a very fine chamfer to the cut edge using 1000 grit wet so remove any tiny chips.
thin down some enamel matte black paint and apply to the ground edge - thinning will mean the paint natirally absorbs into the frosted ground edge
dry in oven for an hour at 90degrees

 
since the cheaper single element diopters from vivitar are crown glass they are less prone to chipping  start on the diopter you;re less likely to actually use so you can practice.
 
DO NOT attempt this with cemented doublets!  you'll think you;re doing really well, then when that drill bit gets through the first layer and hits the second it'll shatter.

Im looking forward to completing the review, test all kinds of vintage glass like c-mounts and my K3-Bayonets.
Unfortunately I have to return it this week and don't really have time for another two weeks....
..so I have bought one
Here are 5 Reason why.
Im hoping to get my own copy in a week or so. Ordered it from Germany and they seem a bit slow. I suspect they bring them home on order.

Everyone is going to be a bit biased toward what they own or choose to use because it took all their research and money to get to that decision (plus the additional time and expense of buying and selling and renting and demoing everything under the sun before making the right decision). But while everyone's choice is usually eventually right for their needs–it gets pretty exhausting deluding yourself and going down the wrong path–many cameramen will then embrace the strengths of their given instrument the more they use it and their bias will only extend as their needs are changed by their choices, rather than the other way around. If you've got an A7S you're gonna shoot low light; if you've got a Dragon you definitely won't.
There are a lot of talented guitarists, each using and loving completely different guitars, and to what extent choice informed aptitude and aptitude informed choice is debatable there, too. It goes both ways. Causation, correlation, and whatnot.
I think the only mistake is believing everyone shares your needs and your taste (and your finances). I like just about everything if it's done well, maybe it's a lack of cultivated taste, so it's easy for me to say "do your thing," but I also think everyone is going to do their thing anyway so being too set in your beliefs won't help unless you're making your own decisions (which you don't need a forum to make). No one else's needs are your own, so every recommendation is going to vary.
You seem like someone who is very thoughtful but also opinionated, and it's good to think before drawing a conclusion. But don't be too quick to dismiss those who form their opinions intuitively rather than intellectually. A lot of the greatest filmmakers operate that way when picking coverage, directing performance, etc.–choices far more important than codec. I think Paul McCartney never learned to read music. Bias is good, it shows intelligence. Intransigence isn't, it reveals solipsism.

I recently got the VS-2 Fine HD for my Samsung NX1. Since your G7 is also a 4K camera, you may find that using focus peaking on external monitors is inaccurate. The VS-2 Fine HD is 1920x1200 resolution and seems to be about as accurate as the focus peaking on my camera. 
But to answer your question, the VS-2 FineHD has false color which makes getting proper exposure quick and easy. If yo don't need recording, get a good monitor instead and spend that money you saved on lights.
A quick explanation of false color: 
 

The responses here have been very thoughtful, and have given me much to consider.  I may modify my product direction a bit, but on the whole, it seems that my ideas aren't entirely crazy.

What camera you using out of interest...APS-C sized sensor or smaller?
3 initial ideas come to mind...
1.Configure or buy a camera cage or cheap baseplate with rods and attach handles and/or shoulder pad to act as a basic brace or full on shoulder rig for your camera. If your camera has fixed LCD monitor, grab a loupe to attach to it and configure a lightweight rig that suits your preference and budget. A loupe will also provide an extra point of contact between you and the camera to minimise shake and jitter. Building your own brace style rig can be done very cheaply by sourcing DSLR rig components on eBay.
2.Shoot at higher shutter speed than normal, so that each frame is crisp with minimum/no motion blur. Then feed the footage into Adobe's warp stabiliser in premiere or after effects to take the shake out. Having crisp frames enables the stabilising software to work much better. If you want to re-introduce motion blur to your shots afterwards, you can do this in Adobe after effects.
3.Buy a better tripod.