kye

Is that where the majority of ARRI footage ends up? Genuine question - not trying to be rude or anything - I don't have any visibility of this part of the industry. I would have thought that Alexas were too expensive for 'free' distribution unless it was advertising materials, and that they'd mostly be used for movies and TV behind paywalls or at least licensed by broadcasters who pay with advertising revenues. These cameras sure seem expensive to me!

Cool! So is this a DIY rig then? I watch lots of 'maker' youtubers and I think this might be the first intersection of CAD and cameras I've seen

Interesting. I watched some of the wolfcrow review of the LF (I know some people here don't like him, but he has more experience of the industry than I do) and he said that the feedback from rental houses was that the cameras with larger than S35 sensors just aren't that popular. He suggested that the manufacturers might have overestimated lots of people would be coming from FF DSLR revolution to cinema cameras, but who knows.

That's a pretty tidy setup considering how many things are there.. cool

Ok, here's a quick comparison. I didn't do spot WB or metering, but it was in Aperture priority mode, manual WB, and nearly identical framing with no backlighting, so this is probably a reasonable test. I compared it to the Super Takumar as it has a similar FOV and aperture range. For reference, the focus was in the middle of the frame, which is the grass seed just above the lip of the glass on the left. I have essentially cropped off the bottom and right of the frame in order to give a complete diagonal from centre-to-corner, although in this case there probably wasn't much point as there's nothing in focus in that part of the frame. Anyway, the grass seed in the top-left is more than half-way to the edge of the frame.

360 video is shoot-now-frame-later but is low quality, so it depends on your style. I'm interested in shoot-now-frame-later but the quality isn't there.. yet. It's about film-making style.

The more lenses you have the safer you are from just putting one on the camera and leaving the house to go shoot something!

I keep my GH5 + lenses in a drawer and it's pretty tightly packed in there, and I keep pulling out the 135mm or 200mm, using them, then wondering why they won't fit back in the drawer. Then I have that "ah ha" moment where I set them back to infinity focus and put them back, then I have that "oh dear" moment when I realise I do that every time and still don't remember.. ???

Non-techie types do like using their phones, but "there is no zoom" is also something non-techie types who have a bit of interest in photography understand and care about. Don't confuse people not knowing about cameras or tech with people not knowing about what makes a good image or what they like. We are drowning in photos and video and therefore live in the most visually literate time in all of human history. When in doubt, go for usability and durability, then just tell them to shoot everything and not worry about the camera.

DO IT!!! DO IT!!! I mean, err, you know, if you want to ??? Cool about the 1.2L. I look forward to your tests

Ouch! I guess it depends on what stills lenses you're buying. For me $1000 is a crazy amount to spend on a single lens.

Delicious! what a word to use!! I think I will adopt that word as my goal for all images and colour grading The more we analyse those two images, the more confused I get about what is going on with that lens.. what other tests should I run to better understand what's going on?

If you struggle in post then upload some clips and others can have a go and we can all compare our results

I hadn't hear of them either. Whenever I'd dipped into the cinematographer world I've always been astounded by the price for lenses - they're normally 5-10x the price of similar stills lenses. Is it a rule that cine lenses exist in a kind-of non-overlapping price range? Or are we looking at the higher-end of stills lenses when the lower end of cine lenses overlaps them in price and quality?

One lens short? No worries - I'll mail you the Petri ASAP!

It would be interesting to see someone shoot a scene that includes a test chart, then apply NR in post to the XT3 and P4K until they match the level of detail and IQ from the A7III. If the A7III gives a certain resolution and noise level at some ISO but you can get the same noise level but with better resolution by applying NR in post to the other cameras then in the real-world they would beat the A7III. Far too many people are judging cameras like the entire post-production phase doesn't exist, when unfortunately half the image processing happens inside the camera these days.

I think it's also due to your personal preferences. There are a group of people on this forum that really appreciate the image from the original BMPCC and another group that don't rate it as being particularly special. Because of that difference, some people are willing to put up with the quirks and weaknesses of the camera, and others opt for better all-around performers as the 'downgrade' in image quality is worth it for the ease of use for them. I suspect ML is the same. Some absolutely adore the image and others don't. It also depends on what body you're shooting, what lenses you have, and what particular features you're interested in using. I really appreciated the 3x crop mode which turned my 55-250mm lens into the 35mm equivalent of a 264-1200mm zoom, and combined with the nice IS of that lens, it was even usable at 1200mm! Now I have a GH5 and the 3x crop mode of ML is still something I miss a little bit.

No post-processing done. The only adjustment I made between any of the shots was aperture (of course) and SS for exposure. The scene had very strong light coming from left-of-frame from a ~3m full-height window with full Australian sun, so I suspect it's a difference in the flare, and at the time I thought it was due to the coating, but the fact it varies so much between the two apertures that doesn't seem to make sense. The other thing is that the exposures weren't all identical because the apertures didn't always line up to full-stops and I didn't have infinitely adjustable SS, so just matched the exposure to the nearest third-stop SS adjustment. Maybe that is playing a role too? I'm not really sure why people don't like the Petri. The other lenses make it look low contrast, but in reality the other lenses are also low-contrast in comparison to other lenses, but unfortunately I don't own any of them and couldn't include them in the test!

Hooray!

That sounds vaguely familiar! Awesome you found it How are you finding ML? There are many people who prefer it, even to the BM cameras.

I think I figured it out eventually, but I can't recall what it was unfortunately, so sorry I can't be of more help. I do have a vague recollection that they are available in a different menu/mode?

I agree. For me, you have to look at the best examples that are available online, as a "this is possible with this equipment", combined with the excellent point below.. Absolutely. It's about what they can do combined with how reliable they are to do that, specifically for how you use them. Most lenses are great for at least one type of shooting. Even smartphone lenses/sensors - if you want deep DOF in a scene with lots of light for online publication and you use a third-party app with high-bitrate codecs then they're just fine!

lol at "CAT VIDEO MM/DD/YYYY" It's probably obvious, but the reason I do YMD at the start of the filename is because I can sort alphabetically and it sorts chronologically, even if you move/copy files between drives and the file system stuffs up the created/modified dates on the files. I'm kind of lucky in comparison to people with clients because I only have one brief, so I only need to be able to have the equipment to create one look (lenses, codecs, lighting, etc) but the downside is that I have the need to categorise clips by several criteria and nothing really supports that. Things like LightRoom are great for that, being able to recall images from certain dates, or certain subjects, or certain locations, or just those rated with 5 stars. I was using LR to do this for video clips, which was clumsy but it worked, until I moved to a 'real' video camera and LR doesn't understand the file formats and won't import them, so game over. In a sense video is about structuring things like CLIENT/PROJECT/DAILIES and if that's what you do then great, and if not then too bad. Also, the tools for managing footage are much more manual and tedious which is fine if you're running a big production and have time to pay attention to it, or you're not shooting most days, but when you shoot a few clips most days and it's not your day job then you really want something like the LR import tool that will sort and catalog the footage automatically on import. I wrote a unix script (I'm on Mac) to copy files and sort them into folders based upon the file creation date on the card, so I just run it and it copies all files from a card into the YMD folder structure. Of course, it's a PITA if I then rename the folder but don't delete the files from the card because then when I run the script again it doesn't realise I have a folder for that footage and so re-copies it. But I really wanted something that I could use when I was travelling and you get back to the hotel at night, and you can just put everything on charge, throw the SD card and USB HDD into the computer and hit GO and not worry about losing any footage. I'm happy to share my script if anyone is interested.

Yeah, the folks over at red.com seem to treat EF as a standard and have their vintage lenses modified to have EF mounts, including people who are buying sets to rent out, like the Contax Zeiss, etc. It is good when a marketplace settles on a standard because (if the standard is open) it benefits everyone. The only exceptions are lenses that have a similar flange distance to EF and therefore have to be modded but can't simply be adapted. Mounts like Konica, m42, Pentax-K and others are probably too similar to be able to fit an adapter, and the Konica is shorter than EF, so definitely no adapters! This is where having an adapter from that system to your mirrorless system comes in, so the EF mount works for everyone on lenses, but not on cameras. Can you white-balance to compensate for it, or is it a more complex colour shift?

Ah, maybe because I'm an International visitor. I thought the UK wasn't keen on those any more? ???