funkyou86

1 hour ago, mattpitts74 said:

I'm guessing the panasonic will not match very well with a canon?  

Get the EOSHD C-log for your canon, than you can shoot any picture profile with the Pana camera, you'll still have the options to match colors. Or test the Picture Profiles on both cameras and try to find to most similar. The differences between standard picture profiles should not be very different, they tend to look like rec709, but with the curves can fix anything in post

1 hour ago, keessie65 said:

Bolex, my lens for a lifetime.... another 40 years ;-) pictures taken in De Efteling - The Netherlands. Film follows. First picture is not sharp, the X-mas tree left is better.

I know that feel, sold my Moller 19/1.5x and now I miss it so much, it was one of the greatest anamorphics I had in my collection. Now I'm really tempted to get a 32/1.5x.

1 hour ago, mattpitts74 said:

Hi All, 

I'm after some real world users experience of either the GH4 or G80 camera's?  it seems really hard to find that kind of info on YouTube etc. There are loads of review from people how seem to borrow the camera for a couple of weeks and then do a review!  

I have several video projects coming up in the next month and I'm considering my options for low budget camera's. I currently use a Canon 5D3, which is a great stills camera, but I find it hard work in a run and gun video situation, although I have used it many times.  So I'm considering the Panasonic options.   My budget could just about stretch to a GH4, but I'm looking at the IBIS and the weather sealing and thinking the G80 may be enough for me needs, but I wonder how either of these cameras will handle compared to the Canon?  I'm hoping easier to a lone shooter?

I'm aware of all the compromises between these camera's for me its more about ease of use and handling and I get the impression these cameras have many more video features which make using them more straight forward.  But I would appreciate some input from actual GH4/ G80 users. 

 

Hey Matt!

Andrew wrote some very specific reviews on both cameras, check out the eoshd blog. What kind of projects are going do shoot? Do you need weather sealing? Do you need lowlight capabilities? Do you have fast lenses? Do you need slow mo? do you really need IBIS?

Some pros of the GH4: you can shoot up to 200Mbit/s in 1080p which I think still keeps up in the competition. It does slow mo. Great handlng.
Some cons of the GH4: do not use ISO above 1600, no ibis, color is better on the G80, but you can still fix it in post.

The G80 looks great but keep in mind that the 1080p bitrate is very low! So if you're doing 4K, it's great. Also no options for slow mo. Andrew tests showed that it's cleaner in higher ISOs than the GH4.

Good luck finding the camera that fit your needs

Too bad that no rumors are coming up about the anamorphic mode, live stretch or the REC709 preview in VLOG... I strongly hope that these features will be improved. 

Also, can anybody tell me, why is panasonic setting time 29m59s time limit for a recording in europe?!

5 hours ago, ken said:

Actually, ISCO integrated lens is smaller then Cinelux.  There are more other ISCO made big lenses.  To say flares, they all have different version of coating.  And Cinelux new and old version are different too.  But basically they are all belong to quite week as flares.

i think that we can agree that the ISCO is much better choice than the cinelux (because of the focusing mechanism).

On 12/28/2016 at 0:35 AM, TomClancyClancy said:

I bought a CY lens adapter for my yashica 58mm f=135mm lens & that's attached to an anamorphic lens clamp but I'm having trouble choosing which anamorphic lens to buy off eBay?? Thought Schneider 2x cinelux would be a good cheap go to but don't like the idea of having an adjust knob right in front of the lens! So it's between a Isco 60mm or Sankor 16? Which one should I consider buying?? 

Depends on what you're looking for. I personally would avoid Cinelux, it's almost impossible to focus on the set via the screw. Both Isco and Sankor got great IQ. The Isco is larger i think, has no flares, but you can get it cheaper than the Sankor, which is smaller and got flares. Do some research in the Tito's anamorphic lens collection google documents where you can find pros and cons.

Otherwise, I still use my t3i as a B-cam. It's only problem is that you can not record raw video to the SD card.

1 hour ago, keessie65 said:

My new setup. 

fap content. Show us some footages pls

I really feel like spamming, but hey, it's up to ebay now, the bid ends in 24 hours. Merry christmas and happy bidding!

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sankor-2x-Single-focus-Anamorphic-Cinemascope-Lens-4K-FHD-anamorphot-/112240186795?mfe=si_en-GB_itemClick&mpt=1482499439847&clk_rvr_id=1143770964336

11 hours ago, Dustin said:

I am at the point where I need to create a good portfolio website. I'd ideally like one with a very minimalist theme and the ability to either host or embed video content. I have viewed and started making pages on the following sites: wix, weebly, square space. Would it be best to buy a domain name from something like godaddy or should I buy from the website builders? Trying to do this on the cheap and keep costs around $20 for the year if that is possible!

Buy a domain name for 10 bucks at name.com. Register @ tumblr, create a new blog, point your domain DNS to tumblr, add a free theme, bummm! you're done. Here's mine.

Price dropped to 599 GBP! Seriously Mate, bargain.

Also, reposting the music video I shot recently:

This might work:

Upload video to youtube » your translator easily adds captions via the online editor » download the captions from youtube » load into premiere like that » you're ready to cut.

Thanks folks! really appreciate your comments!

9 hours ago, Dr. Verbel' said:

Sorry, I read inattentively the description   I thought that everything was filmed using anamorphic. And I thought, surely there is autofocus ana?.. By the way, generally have autofocus anamorphot, except one diy Arduino sample video?..

No problem, mate

We planned to shoot this anamorphic, with long rails and a dolly, but since we were short on time we decided to give up on the idea. 

Thanks @PepperJay!

@Dr. Verbel', like I mentioned in my post, it was shot with a spherical lens. To be more precise: GH4 + Lens Turbo + Tokina 11-16 set to f2.8 (x0,72 = f2.0 &), shot in 4K (so 11mm x 2.2 crop x 0.72 lens turbo = 17mm FOV). I did not bother to add anamorphic lens flare to it in the post. Everybody can feel the difference between the shots so why fake it?

The camera was mounted to a glidecam, the operator was sitting in a trolley, therefore we eliminated the Y axis  but it was still a bit shaky, so I stabilised it in premiere, you can see some artifacts, but hey, like we care :D

As a GH4 owner I really do not understand the current GH4 bashing. Yep, there are much more "advanced" cameras in the market. There'll always be. The GH4 is still a solid performer for 700GBP (amazon). But not to go offtopic.

I have a Lens Turbo and it performs absolutely great, there is not much difference between the Zhongyi and the SB. Check out this video:

 Of course, If you wish to use your canon lenses, SB's got the aperture control. Lens turbo is great for vintage lenses where you set your aperture manually.

Love the flow!

So, we had a quick shoot, here's the result:

Setup: GH4 4:3 anamorphic mode, pentax 50mm smc f1.7, Sankor Compact 2x Single focus anamorphot which is still for SALE, DIY LED panels, homemade dolly with a fluid head and a regular tripod work. You might notice that the opening shot is with a spherical lens, well that's because of the glidecam. Edited & graded in premiere with some luts.

Cheers!

29 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

Nice tip, didn't know that this existed or that Moller had a focus through - the image from a Moller is absolutely lovely!

Sharpness really comes from the taking lens & you're never going to reach the levels of just a lens when you add an attachment on the top - but I know what you mean, every little bit helps.

Here are some sample clips:

Sorry for the bad focus, i shot this handheld with the camera LCD only.

31 minutes ago, Bioskop.Inc said:

Budget & 4K are not things that hold any interest for me what-so-ever. If a camera doesn't deliver in ProRes, then it's a waste of time. The same goes for 4K, it's basically a cinema format that is a pipe dream for the large majority of consumers - damn, they can't even give us proper HD tv broadcasts yet!

This. Topic. Again. Is 4K good? Do we need 4K? I wrote budget 4:3 4K, because the next camera that can do native 4:3 anamorphic is the URSA Mini. But let's not push this conversation to off topic.

IMO, try to search after AGFA 1.5x anamorphot commonly known as Moller 19/1.5x, it's the focus through version of the Moller 8/19/1.5x. Cheaper than the Isco, quality wise: really sharp!

Even Panasonic's budget line's got 4K 4:3 mode, and it's absolutely worth it.

I sold mine 1.5x anamorphot half a year ago, now I regret it

47 minutes ago, Justin Bacle said:

I don't think the rangefinder fits on the NAP3-2M, being a very bulky projector anamorphic adapter.
Plus the NAP3 is super cheap (got mine for 40€ on ebay), so I cannot justify putting a $500 rangefinder in front of it. (But I'm still putting money aside to buy a Rangefinder/rectilux for my Isco).

The best thing with the NAP3-2M is that it is super cheap and a fun lens. I had absolutely no second-thoughts about opening mine. Which I won't do with more expensive (refined) anamorphics. Great for this kind of experiments !

Okay, so how will this focusing mechanism fit your NAP3-2M, also do you think the price of this mechanism (with servo motors) will be cheaper than the RF?

So, I have finished the building of my two LED panels. And they work pretty good! I have used 6000K leds, and each got a luminance of 4000 lumen. Here are some screengrabs from the music video I shot few weeks ago (not graded, only the scr1.jpg).

All shots by GH4, the first one with tokina 11-16, the rest with Pentax 50mm SMC + Sankor Cinemascope Anamorphic, ISO around 400.

3 hours ago, Laquaglia Punto Ernesto said:

I believe that the rangefinder degrades the image too much for my taste , I mean I could use it if I wanted a specific effect, but my experience with it have left me with a bit bitter, oh and I LOVE the focus breathing you get with double focusing 

I know, that's why I wrote "or other optics", 3 other companies are pushing their optics on the market, we have a selection now. But you can't have everything in one focusing solution (sharp glass/no lens breathing/no aspect ratio change/lightness) and get if for cheap.

Great invention but I don't see the reason of using this heavy, bulky (double)focusing mechanism over a rangefinder or other optics.

Iscorama 1.5x is great, but i don't see a reason why pay from 1 to 2K for a lens, which is coated (does not flare) and in terms of IQ, can't do better than a Baby Moller (which you can get from 900 to 1300). 

If you crop from 3.56:1 to 2.35:1 than you got 720p from 1080p.