Ehetyz

Did you have any problems sending the money?
Best Regards,
Hakuna Matata

It's takes a village to raise a child, but it only takes two idiots to burn down a forum with their verbal diarrhea. 

Am I the only one who finds the motion in several of those videos to look really strange? Especially in the Beautiful Riot and Akiyama-go - videos.
Most of the motion is overtly fluid, like it's shot in 60i or very low shutter speeds. Or forced in post from PAL to NTSC. Very unpleasant look imho.

who cares what super 8 looks like now - it's mostly an image in our heads.  It's all psycosemantic. As long as you like the look, thats good, whether or not it confirms to "reality"

I've done something similar.
 
Had an old Sony Handycam Hi8 camera from my childhood lying around at the back of my shelf, and one day decided to see if it still works. Much to my surprise, it did, and even the batteries were functional. Those things were built like tanks, I abused the hell out of it in my teen years shooting backyard movies, and over a decade later it works like a charm.
So I fitted it with a cheap 35mm adapter, ran a few tests and then went out to shoot a small art short. Since the 35mm filter was mirrorless, I was practically shooting blind - the loop displayed a mirrored, upside down image, which really messes with your brain when you're trying to operate.
Nevertheless, I'm happy with what we got. We dubbed it our punk movie, because it has that look of cheap, grainy 16mm film from old underground stuff.
 

I've done something similar.
 
Had an old Sony Handycam Hi8 camera from my childhood lying around at the back of my shelf, and one day decided to see if it still works. Much to my surprise, it did, and even the batteries were functional. Those things were built like tanks, I abused the hell out of it in my teen years shooting backyard movies, and over a decade later it works like a charm.
So I fitted it with a cheap 35mm adapter, ran a few tests and then went out to shoot a small art short. Since the 35mm filter was mirrorless, I was practically shooting blind - the loop displayed a mirrored, upside down image, which really messes with your brain when you're trying to operate.
Nevertheless, I'm happy with what we got. We dubbed it our punk movie, because it has that look of cheap, grainy 16mm film from old underground stuff.
 

Really I could care less about the numbers. My 1DX Mkii blows my Sony A7Rii out of the water... period. In every respect it's in another league. Anyone that doubts this just needs to do a back to back test of both cameras. And if you haven't done a side by side comparison, don't bother chiming in,  you simply cannot appreciate the difference until you see them both head to head. 

Thanks! I'm sure one could easily get a cleaner image out of it by using a better capture deck (I had it set up directly from camera to a capture card via composite cable) and simply by using some fresher cassettes. The one I used was as old as the camera itself - from 1999! Probably taped over 100+ times too.

I've done something similar.
 
Had an old Sony Handycam Hi8 camera from my childhood lying around at the back of my shelf, and one day decided to see if it still works. Much to my surprise, it did, and even the batteries were functional. Those things were built like tanks, I abused the hell out of it in my teen years shooting backyard movies, and over a decade later it works like a charm.
So I fitted it with a cheap 35mm adapter, ran a few tests and then went out to shoot a small art short. Since the 35mm filter was mirrorless, I was practically shooting blind - the loop displayed a mirrored, upside down image, which really messes with your brain when you're trying to operate.
Nevertheless, I'm happy with what we got. We dubbed it our punk movie, because it has that look of cheap, grainy 16mm film from old underground stuff.
 

Bro. I have found the best profile! I've shared it with so many people because they all want it it's so good.  it's got a very "Canon" look to it and it grades so nicely. It really adds a ton of depth to the image that lacks in the normal Sony profiles. It's all about that "color depth". 
THE SONY PROFILE
Black Level: 0 (it's disabled in s-log2 anyway)
Gamma: S-log2
Black Gamma: Range- Narrow, Level -7
Knee: auto
Color Mode: sgamut3.cine
Saturation: +32
Color Phase: -2 (this is for a7sII and a6300, for original a7s use -5)
Color Depth: +6 (all of them)
Detail: -6
Expose 1.5 to 2 stops over.
You may need to dial the green tint out in the white balance shift. Let me know how you like it. I found this profile somewhere on dvxuser and have fallen in love with it. Now all my friends shoot on it 

This mirrors my experiences with the RX10 MK2. Slog in 8-bit colorspace is most of the time more trouble than it's worth - especially with the noisy sensor of RX10, which causes some insane, splotchy macroblocking in the shadows. I also tend to want to shoot saturated, contrasty images and most of the time the Slog just fell apart when pushed that way.
I ended up using the Cine2 profile with Pro colorspace. Still not particularly fond of the look the camera produces, but it drastically reduced the headache I had in grading with it.
 

I have a tiny personal anecdote about the importance of 4K. I do a lot of food cinematography for a company that does video recipes, cookbooks etc. Their output is mainly online, on social media and the home pages of food companies.
We've been shooting 90% on BMCC in prores 1080p. On one production we had to knock out a large amount of videos in a short time, so I rigged an RX10 MK2 to the ceiling of the studio to get us an overhead look of the process, giving me two angles simultaneously. I suggested the producer I'd shoot in 4k to give him room to crop the image in post. He laughed and told me even 1080p gives plenty leeway for what they do - they delivered in 720p, and in the case of instagram, 640xsomething.
I've yet to have a client ask for 4K. I figure it'll be at least a few years before it'll be the norm or a requirement.
And if you're talking about a fixed price point, the choice often comes between 4K or other attributes like raw/Dynamic range. I'll take the raw and DR over 4K anytime.

I have a tiny personal anecdote about the importance of 4K. I do a lot of food cinematography for a company that does video recipes, cookbooks etc. Their output is mainly online, on social media and the home pages of food companies.
We've been shooting 90% on BMCC in prores 1080p. On one production we had to knock out a large amount of videos in a short time, so I rigged an RX10 MK2 to the ceiling of the studio to get us an overhead look of the process, giving me two angles simultaneously. I suggested the producer I'd shoot in 4k to give him room to crop the image in post. He laughed and told me even 1080p gives plenty leeway for what they do - they delivered in 720p, and in the case of instagram, 640xsomething.
I've yet to have a client ask for 4K. I figure it'll be at least a few years before it'll be the norm or a requirement.
And if you're talking about a fixed price point, the choice often comes between 4K or other attributes like raw/Dynamic range. I'll take the raw and DR over 4K anytime.

I have a tiny personal anecdote about the importance of 4K. I do a lot of food cinematography for a company that does video recipes, cookbooks etc. Their output is mainly online, on social media and the home pages of food companies.
We've been shooting 90% on BMCC in prores 1080p. On one production we had to knock out a large amount of videos in a short time, so I rigged an RX10 MK2 to the ceiling of the studio to get us an overhead look of the process, giving me two angles simultaneously. I suggested the producer I'd shoot in 4k to give him room to crop the image in post. He laughed and told me even 1080p gives plenty leeway for what they do - they delivered in 720p, and in the case of instagram, 640xsomething.
I've yet to have a client ask for 4K. I figure it'll be at least a few years before it'll be the norm or a requirement.
And if you're talking about a fixed price point, the choice often comes between 4K or other attributes like raw/Dynamic range. I'll take the raw and DR over 4K anytime.

I have a tiny personal anecdote about the importance of 4K. I do a lot of food cinematography for a company that does video recipes, cookbooks etc. Their output is mainly online, on social media and the home pages of food companies.
We've been shooting 90% on BMCC in prores 1080p. On one production we had to knock out a large amount of videos in a short time, so I rigged an RX10 MK2 to the ceiling of the studio to get us an overhead look of the process, giving me two angles simultaneously. I suggested the producer I'd shoot in 4k to give him room to crop the image in post. He laughed and told me even 1080p gives plenty leeway for what they do - they delivered in 720p, and in the case of instagram, 640xsomething.
I've yet to have a client ask for 4K. I figure it'll be at least a few years before it'll be the norm or a requirement.
And if you're talking about a fixed price point, the choice often comes between 4K or other attributes like raw/Dynamic range. I'll take the raw and DR over 4K anytime.

This doesn't come as a massive surprise. To me Digital Bolex always seemed like more of a specialty item than a workhorse camera (even though it may have well had the potential for the latter) and I didn't see any of my local colleagues using it, or very many productions in general.
I think the camera's reputation was a double edged sword, it intrigued people, but also caused a lot of people (including myself) to not take it seriously, but more as an expensive novelty. Coupled with feature set that had more than a little similarity to the more established BMCC 2,5K and the lackluster footage from the early adopters (apparently caused by using wrong Resolve RAW profiles), the camera faced an uphill battle.