webrunner5

3 hours ago, noone said:

I will be spending $10 (Australian) on an old super 16 (I think) movie camera tomorrow just because it has a roil of (long expired) film with it.

 

After that I guess it will sit in a large box with all the other old toys.

Well Super 16, now that is different!  I guess I will take that Bolex then. 

But I guess if I was a very famous director that is as old or older than I am, well they are probably dead , it would be hard to change over to digital if you have been shooting film all your career. I can see not wanting to do that.

Yeah a Canon 40mm STM pancake has been known to work pretty well. And the price is right for them for sure. I know nothing about using the Voigtlander. I don't see why not though.

Well I know I will be burned at the stake here, but shooting real film in this day and age I think is, well a waste of good money, if you ask me. With so many high end and low end cameras that have raw I see no need to go that route anymore. Most people alive don't care about film anyways. The film look maybe, film nah. And heck a BMPCC can get that look.

I am sure as hell not buying a film movie camera, or film photo camera if they give me one. Those days are done. Give me a 8k Red Weapon, not a Bolex!

I am sure the GH5 will not be all we hope for. Not going to be that much different than a pumped up GH4. But unless most of us win the Lotto I would say it will have as good as specs as most people could ever afford. It will be as up to date as any camera for less than 5000 bucks used that I can think of.

James Miller is sure showing it can produce some damn nice output if you have the skill. The specs are just about impossible to turn down,

1 hour ago, zerocool22 said:

What camera, IQ wise would you guys suggest if the budget went up to 5K? ursa mini 4.6k?

I would have to go for a Sony FS5 for that money. The Ursa is a great camera also, but it seems a little too fragile, to flaky to depend on. The size on the FS5 is nice, can use them on a Glidecam, smaller Gimbal, and they seem to be bullet proof from what I have heard. Heck the Variable ND filter is nearly worth the price of admission alone. Some people are not thrilled about their color science though.

Heck there was a Sony F35 on ebay a couple months ago for 4500 bucks. but I am not sure about stuff that old. Not uncommon for a Red Epic X brain to come up for 4500 either, but damn cost you 4500 more to equip one. Unless you hate Sony, you would not be alone, I like them, I would have to go with the FS5 myself.

You need to watch both videos. This is a nice look of how it was made.

http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?19548-URSA-Mini-4-6K-Commercial-with-miniature-environments-and-CG-characters

I don't know if this video has been seen here before. Probably has, but I found it very interesting. Person did a pretty good job.

Yeah same for me, sell stuff, or it isn't happening! 

Well I have to admit if 1080p is what you need without a high fps Slo Mo, there is not a way in hell you can beat the Sony F3 you are using with the Odyssey 7Q+. They have the look no camera we can afford can do, like a Arri gasp!

And for Run n Gun for 1080p a Canon C100 mkII is not shabby either.

That is one impressive lens. How about a picture of the mount. What kind is it. Screw mount, PL?

36 minutes ago, Riadnasla said:

Totally! I don't think I could ever leave making videos behind, and while up there I fully intend to take whichever camera I own out to film wildlife and other personal projects, plus any work that comes my way. I'm just trying to go for something a little easier to bring around and less intimidating to others. (Like any pro camera, the F3 does grab attention  )

 

I actually got to use a GH4 the other day, and am pretty impressed! Not much low-light ability but being able to overcrank to 96fps was pretty cool! If the GH5 is just as much a dream to work with, I may go that route, though I think I'd prefer an "all-in-one" camera so I am not worrying about all the bits and bobs I need to build a rig out of. 

Yeah I am not a fan of Mirrorless or DSLR's for video either. Camcorder guy myself. But the GH5 just looks too damn hard to ignore. And I bet the new Sony A7 mkIII cameras will be hard to resist also!

On low cost stuff I don't think we have much choice to be honest, not if you want 10 bit, and 4k, and 180fps Slo Mo! Jesus, that 180fps is enough to make a person buy it.

I know it's early yet, but you Have to think maybe a GH5 has to be in the mix to replace your Sony F3? That camera, with the summer updates, has to meet 90% of what anyone really needs other than making a Hollywood feature film!

One of your Sony F3's would cover the cost of it selling it. I am sure it would be hard to match to a Sony, but hell you don't need the Sony with it! I don't see how many of us on here in truth can not think that this new GH5 is not what most have been dreaming for in reality. I sure as hell can't think of a camera, that I can afford ever, is going to beat it, new or used from what I have seen test wise so far.. This camera is a game changer for what it cost.

Yeah not much love on here for the A6500. Soft 1080p, overheating, no headphone jack, Sony color, etc. But for the money it is a good camera, especially at 4k if you get one at a good deal.  Are you looking for Just a Monitor, or External Recorder? Lots of cheap Monitors around. Though you get what you pay for. Cheap recorders, Black Magic are winners on that.

I am not up on the A6500 to answer your specific questions, sorry.

Film grain, hell it looks like a snow storm. I could not watch it over 15 seconds! Jesus.

I think you just need to sell them, or buy something normal to adapt. You would it looks like have the only one in the world. Apparently it can't be done, or it would have.

1 hour ago, hyalinejim said:

Yes, do you? But if I didn't, does that mean I shouldn't complain about Panasonic colour rendition? Take a look at the Kai W boating in Cambridge video. The GH5 footage looks like shit, in terms of colour, and the C300II footage looks lovely.

Do you think you could match the GH5 footage from that shoot with the C300 footage, @funkyou86, if you're so fucking amazing?

Wat!!! 

Are we talking for photos or video? Unless you are shooting 4k I would think 1080p output would be pretty soft especially using the Hollywood Black Magic 1/2 Filter. I would not think using the 2 of them together would produce much  vignetting. Lots of people shot with a Polarizer and say a UV filter at the same time. But you are going to loose a stop or two using both at the same time. 

2 hours ago, AKED-M said:

GH5 IOS test, 8 to 10 bit comparison and also to the GH4

 

I don't know about you but 6400 is easily usable on the GH5. And 12800 in a pinch. I am just floored how much better it is. This does not seem possible! Damned if I know? I guess we will find out soon.

12 hours ago, Emanuel said:

What's the beef with the form factor of a GH5 camera for a feature film...!??

Certain stuff with ergonomics to be a catch for filmmaking in a set of a feature is yet beyond me... Still waiting for a reasonable explanation enough to drive me quiet.

Hell I can't stand using them to make something for fun, I sure as hell can't see them as a main A camera in a 200 millon dollar film, with what little outward controls they have, not counting the cramped space, and no weight to talk about. I am sure it Can be done, but why? It's not like one person is just operating these high end cameras,they are surrounded by people. Now a guy up on a boom, well yeah, but that is not the Main camera all the time.

3 hours ago, Philip Lipetz said:

 

This Miller guy has to be one of the best graders of Pansonic stuff I have seen LoL. Is this camera, the GH5 That much better! 10 bit adds that much, and they are not even using the higher bit rate stuff. What gives?

30 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

As for the sensor - you are not working that harder, as by nature the sensor is always outputting RAW data, whether in live-view mode for stills, or video mode (completely separate to whatever codec you're using).

Hmm, you have a point about that fact. But it still is a lot more data to write to a card per sec, which I would think adds heat? You have a card full of Jpegs, not much effort on that output.

Apple has Never used a AMD processor in any box or laptop computer they have ever made. So in essence they are incompatible. I am no computer wiz,, but I am no dummy on them either LoL. I have tried to make them work No luck on a consistent basis. Too risky with video footage. YMMV

No saying nothing Mac based will work, but later OIS won't, and if you do get it to work, you can NEVER upgrade the operating system to a newer one with a AMD processor. You have to blow away everything and start over with newer update.

Plenty of info on line for trying it, but not much to write home about working like it can with a Intel Processor. And that does work fairly well. Pretty much what a Power Mac was years ago. A dual boot system.

Just be aware, you can not run any Mac stuff with a AMD Proccessor. So no dual boot stuff, Hackintosh..

33 minutes ago, PhilipV said:

I don't think a gimbal would work with my double-focus anamorphic setup, right? If only I could afford a single-focus lens

I don't know of any that are autofocus. But there is a hillbilly one on here that sort of does....LoL. But yeah a single focus one would be a big help, but they are expensive. I am no wiz at Anamorphic. My brain is distorted enough without the help of Anamorphic.

I don't think many even fit inside of a Gimbal  because of length, or they are front heavy as hell and overwhelm the stabilizer. They are a good odd duck. I would buy a Glidecam if I was you if you want to stabilize it, they can be had cheaper than electronic ones. But once you re focus, carr putt, un stabilized again.

I do have one that does work with the autofocus on my iPhone, a Moondog Labs 1.33 Anamorphic lens. They work damn well.

It was pretty much tongue n cheek on my part, but... Bad music you can live with, like turn volume all the way down, shakiness well.... Welcome Aboard.

A little advice. I have been doing video a Long time. The first 2 videos you have the music is still too crazy on them. The third one was perfect. If the music is loud and crazy, guess what, you listen to the music and ignore the video. Now if your doing a Music video you win, but the first two were sure as hell not meant to be that type.

Music has way more of an effect than you think in a movie, even lowering the volume in it changes the mood your heart rate, your interest, you get the point. Audio is as important as video to succeed. Over and Out.