TwoScoops

Wish the failure the trashcan MP was would actually reflect in used ebay prices. lol

Really good news!

5 hours ago, johnnyd said:

Philip bloom just posted this. New BM 4k pocket cam

 https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10155176035490426&id=177852000425

5 hours ago, BrooklynDan said:

That said, DSLR-level technology is just not gonna fly on a pro set. 

 

https://www.hdvideopro.com/blog/sundance-2015-shooting-knock-knock-with-a-canon-1d-c/



Just trolling. I know what you meant. . . 

Nikon mirrorless wish = raw, with the same malleability as the D750's raw stills. (not like they have a cinema line to protect) 

Another vimeo find. BMMCC + 1.5x scope. 

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Interesting, I really think all-i frames probably make a difference as well.

I agree, this is a huge part of it! 1DC, BM, 5D Raw all have that in common and are considered to be good in this area. 

1 minute ago, DBounce said:

No, the cheap way to achieve this look is with a can of haze.

I actually edited that after I posted. But those run out quickly. I've used them on photo shoots. Not very cheap if you're doing take after take. . . 

17 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I think it's almost an exercise in futility judging a camera by online footage, good or bad, because it really is the camera operator and the creative choices they make that determine whether a video looks great or mediocre. I just watched a clip shot with the Terra 4K that looks no better or worse than the GH4, and I'm sure it's capable of spectacular looking results. Just not in this case. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xpfFd-TDhk

 

that does look really GH4 CiniDish. 

49 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Not a big deal, but I was wondering whether Filippo Chiesa used a smoke machine in Ettore's Stargate. It turns out to have been real haze. 

when he says real haze, he means from a haze machine (more expensive than smoke machine), or some of that photography haze spray. I'd guess the former... 

cheap way to attempt that look is Tiffen's Smoque filter.

I was talking about the first video as far as cellphone, not the low light. Maybe I'm wrong but that video doesn't make me want to spend 2k+ on it. 

^ yeah. Besides teh focal length, going from the feel, those Gh5s vids could honestly just as easily be really good cellphone video. 

I remember reading the ASC guideline for how fast you should pan 90 degrees is something insanely slow (like a minute or more.) This rule was around in the film days, so it's a digital thing, but someone new might think their fast pans looking strobey = the cameras fault. Obv some still handle it worse though.

^ I've wondered about trying that. Has anyone exported CR2/NEF from LR as a DNG then opened in Resolve?

There is no 4K micro cinema. 

^ Quite fap-worthy, if true... 

Found this on vimeo. It's probably been posted before but this is really nice from the BMMCC.

22 hours ago, Kisaha said:

For me, the absolute minimum is the Focus right now, anything less is just not a very good buy. For that price (100$ more than cheap ones) is a steal.

 

I definitely agree in the states. In UK/Europe seems like a much bigger discrepancy in the price.

How do the cheapo Chinese monitors like Feelworld compare to the SmallHD?

Maybe I'm just being facetious but the colours/skintones in Northrup's vedeos look terrible.

8 hours ago, Laurier said:

The Voigtlanders are not the sharpest around but they are the most interesting IMO if you are shooting narrative/creative work or fashion/music videos.

If you mostly do corporate videos/coverage/docu I would rather go with panasonic/olympus  that are more sterile and pixel perfect.

I think the Voigts are just as sharp at f2.8 to f4. I did some tests when I had them vs the Pana 12-35 and they looked about the same at 2.8, but still a lot nicer colors, more 3D pop etc.

Definitely agree below f2 and really soft at 0.95 tho.  Really great for portraits wide open. 

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

When the Voigtlander Noktons were first introduced over seven years ago, they occupied a unique place in the micro four thirds ecosystem. Not only for their speed, but for their outstanding  build quality - you won’t find craftsmanship like this in any other set of native m4/3 lenses. Cosina later further refined their lenses for filmmakers, adding clickless apertures, something still not found on many native optics. Like the Veydras, the Noktons are completely metal and glass, with no motors or electrical contacts, ensuring that they should give years of dependable service.  Optically, for a long time the Noktons were the benchmark against which other lenses were compared - for their record-breaking resolution anyhow. We’re fortunate nowadays to have a much wider selection of optically superb, fast primes for micro 4/3, and deciding which glass to pair with your Panasonic or Olympus camera has never been more confusing.  It’s important to remember, however, that cinema lenses, more so than photography lenses, are meant to be purchased as a set. The filter thread size, front outer diameter, length and position of the gears are generally identical to make changing lenses when used with a follow focus and matte box less of a chore. Because cine lenses usually live on rails. So before deciding between photography lenses and cinema lenses, the first question should be, do you plan on doing a lot of focus pulling? And if so, are you prepared to invest in a cage, rails, a matte box, a follow focus, an external monitor, batteries, cables, a rig and so on? 

 I have owned the Voigts in the past and am well aware of the differences in still and cine lenses, my man! I was just asking which you preferred the look of.
 

15 hours ago, jonpais said:

 

I remember you commenting on using the Voigts in the past, are the Veydras better? I loved the 17.5 and 42.5 Voigt...

Probably a D750 replacement, which means I should sell mine before it drops further. 

How long can you get on 128/256 cards in 14-bit?