JordanWright

My review of the film:
https://www.eoshd.com/news/review-of-the-sigma-fp-4k-raw-film-sin-sin/

A few stills from a shoot last night all on the Pocket 4K XL and CZ 35mm 2.8. 

Now that's how to market a camera! 

Now that's how to market a camera! 

I can send a google drive link for RAW files if anyone wants. But I think this demonstrates the dynamic range differences.

Ursa 4.6k over exposed

Pocket 6k over exposed

Ursa 4.6k under exposed (zoomed in to show noise pattern better)

 
Pocket 6k under exposed (zoomed in to show noise pattern better)

S35 "normal" lens comparison:
 

Iscorama, early Rollei Zeiss 50mm f1.8.
Very good combination. If you like a vintage look, German Rollei Zeiss are the most underrated FF lenses on the market.
Same coatings as pre-T* standard speeds, slightly improved designs. Very sharp with slightly old school painterly bokeh:
 

To be fair, that might have been the mice that had obviously been living in your one before it arrived.

It was quite loose on mine and there's no positive locking adapter for EF that I know of at least.

Gonna link them later today or tomorrow, I'm out of town RN. They are pretty conclusive tho IMO 

This is a very strange one to me. I've seen online tests as well as examples from shoots I've been on of the Pocket 6k having really great dynamic range. Yet Blackmagic claims it has less dynamic range than the Ursa Mini and the same dynamic range as the Pocket 4k. Cinema 5d measured it at 11.9 stops while measuring the Ursa at 12.6. 

I tested the Pocket 6k against the URSA, both at 800 iso and the Pocket had more highlight and shadow information, by a good amount. If the Ursa has 12.6 stops of dynamic range the Pocket 6k has got to have over 13 maybe 13.5. 

I'll probably post the tests if anyone is interested. 

Hey guys, I started livestreaming on my channel - anamorphic on a budget, you're not familiar - and I'm doing a Helios 44 anamorfake next Wednesday at 11:30am PST. I'm giving away the resulting mod at the end of the process to someone in the stream, so there's a chance you can walk away with a fresh lens on the way.
 I'd love to see a bunch of you there. I'm answering questions there too, so if you got something to ask, that's a good chance!

I got removed from the RED Facebook groups years ago! Simply for mild criticism of them. 

Then again I've also been removed from /r/LocationSound/ as well for merely questioning the policies of the Mods of r/LocationSound.....  :-/ 

People in the Red forum are raving about the colour science and dynamic range, are they seeing something i'm not?

This one doesnt looks pretty good. And the first frame from Steven Soderbergh looks also pretty good.
(Allthough all previous video's did look kinda underwhelming, so it might not be all that bad, but I guess skintones will be quite easy on this camera)

This may help - in the second half of the video he demonstrates changing the mount (and de-clicking): youtube.com/watch?v=EUjUxKvXgpw
 

Working on a long documentary in Resolve and previously did a 25 minute doc in Resolve. Really all about organizing the footage and tagging as you shoot in the media page. I've gone all in on resolve at this point for projects. Just got the editor keyboard and it is awesome.

I'm starting to build my my Contax Zeiss MM set.
I started with the 35mm F2.8 and have since added the 28mm F2.8. They actually match very closely despite being quite far apart in serial numbers 35mm (79xxxx) 28mm (69xxxx). To my eye, there's no difference in sharpness. The 28mm was slightly brighter at 2.8. I had to adjust exposure offset wheel -0.2 in resolve, a very minor change. This might be because the lens is older and has a bit more dust in the optics bringing the lift up a bit? They handle colour very similar, I didn't need to make any adjustments to temp or tint. They would be very easy to cut together. When I matched the frame size they were almost indistinguishable in an AB test. 
I was planning on getting lenses with similar serial numbers but I found the 28mm at crazy good price. I'm not so bothered about that anymore after seeing how closely they match. I will say the 28mm's aperture ring isn't quite as satisfying as the 35mm. The focus rings are both very smooth and similar though.
I temporarily had the 50mm F1.4 MM (82xxxx) but had to send it back because it had significant separation and fog in the lens. It really messed up the lens when there was a light pointing down it. Even though the copy had severe optical issues, it was razer sharp at F2.8 and very good at 1.4. I didn't measure it in depth against the 35mm but the colour and contrast seemed to match very closely at 2.8. I will be looking for another copy. 
When I can build enough funds, i'll also be adding the 85mm F2.8 to the kit. The 25mm F2.8 also looks to be a very interesting lens but i'm not sure I can justify something so close to the 28mm
I've already got Tilta seamless Focus rings (£2 each!) and front and rear caps for 4 lenses. 3 Leitax EFmounts have been shipped and are on their way here now. Im not bothering with step up rings, im going to take advantage of cheap 55mm filters.
If you can get a good deal or two a set of these can be quite cheap to put together. The 28 & 35 have cost about £250 each (including Leitax adapters) and I predict the 50mm and 85mm to cost about £300-330 each to fully kit out.
Fingers crossed I don't mess up this mount conversion when they arrive. 
 

I'm starting to build my my Contax Zeiss MM set.
I started with the 35mm F2.8 and have since added the 28mm F2.8. They actually match very closely despite being quite far apart in serial numbers 35mm (79xxxx) 28mm (69xxxx). To my eye, there's no difference in sharpness. The 28mm was slightly brighter at 2.8. I had to adjust exposure offset wheel -0.2 in resolve, a very minor change. This might be because the lens is older and has a bit more dust in the optics bringing the lift up a bit? They handle colour very similar, I didn't need to make any adjustments to temp or tint. They would be very easy to cut together. When I matched the frame size they were almost indistinguishable in an AB test. 
I was planning on getting lenses with similar serial numbers but I found the 28mm at crazy good price. I'm not so bothered about that anymore after seeing how closely they match. I will say the 28mm's aperture ring isn't quite as satisfying as the 35mm. The focus rings are both very smooth and similar though.
I temporarily had the 50mm F1.4 MM (82xxxx) but had to send it back because it had significant separation and fog in the lens. It really messed up the lens when there was a light pointing down it. Even though the copy had severe optical issues, it was razer sharp at F2.8 and very good at 1.4. I didn't measure it in depth against the 35mm but the colour and contrast seemed to match very closely at 2.8. I will be looking for another copy. 
When I can build enough funds, i'll also be adding the 85mm F2.8 to the kit. The 25mm F2.8 also looks to be a very interesting lens but i'm not sure I can justify something so close to the 28mm
I've already got Tilta seamless Focus rings (£2 each!) and front and rear caps for 4 lenses. 3 Leitax EFmounts have been shipped and are on their way here now. Im not bothering with step up rings, im going to take advantage of cheap 55mm filters.
If you can get a good deal or two a set of these can be quite cheap to put together. The 28 & 35 have cost about £250 each (including Leitax adapters) and I predict the 50mm and 85mm to cost about £300-330 each to fully kit out.
Fingers crossed I don't mess up this mount conversion when they arrive. 
 

I'm starting to build my my Contax Zeiss MM set.
I started with the 35mm F2.8 and have since added the 28mm F2.8. They actually match very closely despite being quite far apart in serial numbers 35mm (79xxxx) 28mm (69xxxx). To my eye, there's no difference in sharpness. The 28mm was slightly brighter at 2.8. I had to adjust exposure offset wheel -0.2 in resolve, a very minor change. This might be because the lens is older and has a bit more dust in the optics bringing the lift up a bit? They handle colour very similar, I didn't need to make any adjustments to temp or tint. They would be very easy to cut together. When I matched the frame size they were almost indistinguishable in an AB test. 
I was planning on getting lenses with similar serial numbers but I found the 28mm at crazy good price. I'm not so bothered about that anymore after seeing how closely they match. I will say the 28mm's aperture ring isn't quite as satisfying as the 35mm. The focus rings are both very smooth and similar though.
I temporarily had the 50mm F1.4 MM (82xxxx) but had to send it back because it had significant separation and fog in the lens. It really messed up the lens when there was a light pointing down it. Even though the copy had severe optical issues, it was razer sharp at F2.8 and very good at 1.4. I didn't measure it in depth against the 35mm but the colour and contrast seemed to match very closely at 2.8. I will be looking for another copy. 
When I can build enough funds, i'll also be adding the 85mm F2.8 to the kit. The 25mm F2.8 also looks to be a very interesting lens but i'm not sure I can justify something so close to the 28mm
I've already got Tilta seamless Focus rings (£2 each!) and front and rear caps for 4 lenses. 3 Leitax EFmounts have been shipped and are on their way here now. Im not bothering with step up rings, im going to take advantage of cheap 55mm filters.
If you can get a good deal or two a set of these can be quite cheap to put together. The 28 & 35 have cost about £250 each (including Leitax adapters) and I predict the 50mm and 85mm to cost about £300-330 each to fully kit out.
Fingers crossed I don't mess up this mount conversion when they arrive. 
 

Couple more with the Nikon 24-70 2.8G and Sony F3 Combo

IMHO, nothing beats the Godox SL60W if you want a cheap light with good light quality/color rendition, and one that works like a proper film light (with optional fresnel lens, beauty dish, soft box) which can be used as both a hard and a soft light.
So far, it has completely been in a budget-vs-quality league of its own, like only few other pieces of video gear. (Others would, for example, be the Canon EOS-M with MagicLantern RAW, the Rode Video Micro and the Sigma 17-50mm/2.8 zoom lens).

People in the Red forum are raving about the colour science and dynamic range, are they seeing something i'm not?

Doesn't always look good. I spent £6000 on a 1DX3 remember and got 32ms rolling shutter, worse than the 8 years old 1D C (24ms) in 4K 24p

Things tend to look good when you’ve dropped 10s of thousands of dollars on equipment? I think the GH5S is the best MFT camera because I own it 😁🤣