heart0less

I would second this as well. I'm still using a Sony NEX 6 and it is an outstanding camera; it's actually got better low-light performance than the anything in the A6000 series, although the video is excruciatingly bad so I never use it. If you think you'd use video at all, the A6400 would be a good choice. The great thing about e-mount is that you can adapt almost anything to it (except micro four-thirds), including an enormous range of cheap vintage lenses. I've been building up a small set of 50-year-old Minolta Rokkors and they just sing on this camera (although since they were designed for full frame you won't really be able to get a wide angle...a 24mm on this camera ends up being 39 mm in full frame terms). The Rokkors duplicate much of Leica's look for a tiny fraction of the cost: my 55mm MC Rokkor cost me about $50 on eBay, shipped directly from Japan. Some of the others are more expensive but the excellent 100mm is typically around $100 USD on eBay. Here's an example shot of the Rokkor 55mm on the NEX-6:

and here's a shot using the Rokkor 85mm (unfortunately mine has some fungus so I won't be using it any more but this photo came out well:
 

I'd rather shoot with a cellphone than with a 35mm camera.

fuji xt-3 used are going very cheap at the moment, amazing video and photos, pick up the excellent 18-55 and a prime or 2 and you're set

I've been trying to report a bug to adobe since 2017.  This is not my record. That goes to a bug between lightroom and photoshop that appeared in 2008.  I tried and failed for years on that one. They say, don't they, the definition of madness is repeating the same futile action over and over...
I'm thinking about making a short film about what you have to do to get adobe's attention.  I've tried the forum, and the uservoice site (where they, in a Trump-esque stroke of not-testing-for-coronavirus genius, removed their bug-reporting form).   I tried phoning them, and then doing a chat session. I was lucky to make it out of that one alive.  Honestly If there had been any sharp object on my desk I would've been a goner. 
Recently I looked up a bunch of the senior devs and quality managers and tweeted them, or wrote to them on linked in.  Just now I've been sending any employees who engaged in any small way a message via their forum. I have very very low expectations. 
I was thinking maybe I could pull some stunts to get their attention. Streak in their offices, or skywriting maybe? 
Yes I know i should move to resolve.  But I'm deep in the sunk-cost fallacy, OK? 
Here's my latest pointless waste of time:
https://adobe-video.uservoice.com/forums/911233-premiere-pro/suggestions/40860028-fix-time-remapping-ppro2017-ppro2020
 
 

Congratulate them on making the first ever hybrid camera with a built in Timecode input! (the GH4 with its ugly YAGH doesn't count)

This was the GH5S, although it wasn't implemented quite perfectly. (as the GH5S needs to constantly recheck the current TC input for every new file started, not just do it once then the user needing to manually redo it. As this been fixed yet via firmware?? Or was it strangely a hardware issue??)

Hope the next GH6/S1mk2/G9mk2/etc also have timecode input support! (and done right too, not like the GH5S was at launch)

Has Panasonic thought about working with companies like Timecode Systems Ltd or Tentacle Sync so that their cameras can have frame accurate timecode over bluetooth? Definitely many ultra-compact handheld shooters would appreciate having less AKS/cables on their camera. (and instead a Tentacle Sync E or a Timecode Systems UltraSync BLUE could be kept in their pocket)

And on the topic of keeping things super small and compact, with a speedy setup, when will their mirrorless cameras get built in NDs? (at least 3 stages please! Or eND if possible) If their video focused bodies such as the GH5S/S1H had to drop their mechanical shutter so as to fit in NDs into the body, then most us would be perfectly fine with that compromise of no mechanical shutter. 

Also congratulate Panasonic on keeping the Panasonic DMW-XLR1  for the GH5 compatible as well with the GH5S/S1/S1R/S1H (the G9 didn't work with the DMW-XLR1 at launch, did a later firmware update fix that?). Ask Panasonic if they're planning on keeping the Panasonic DMW-XLR1 compatible with the future GH6/S1mk2/G9mk2/etc cameras as well? 

Lastly, the big question many of us want to know, is will Panasonic be releasing an EVA1 (or EVA2/EVA1mk2) with an L Mount or MFT Mount? Is sad that the Panasonic AF100 series was the last professional MFT video/cinema camera from Panasonic!

 
  
This!
  
Good questions. 
To give an example from the audio world, I was disappointingly saddened when Sound Devices had a change of tack with their product strategy, and started charging (very high!) prices for some firmware updates. 
  

Or when can we expect a "Varicam Mini"? (even if S35, that's fine)

As the Varicam LT is still a beasty big beast! A Varicam in the form factor of an Arri Mini (or even smaller!) would be interesting, and help support the Varicam LT/S35 lineup as well. (yes there is the EVA1 which can arguably serve the role of a "Varicam Mini", but it's not quite the same thing)

I'm sure it's a lovely lens but Sigma and Tamron are putting out just as good lenses for a lot less. Hard to justify paying that much. 

Of course.  A career that lasts 65 years is pretty cool.  We all should be so lucky.  Not knocking your appreciation for Ennio, just giving him credit for all the years devoted to the craft.

That just goes to show that time can be bent in many different ways.
( :
But just to clear it up: I didn't try to underrate his achievements in any way.
Like I said - Ennio is and always will be the guru of film score composers in my mind.
 

For the S1H it would be nice to ask if they could add the ability to record open gate 5952x3968 (full sensor area / 3:2 aspect ratio) in Prores Raw up to 24 fps on the Ninja V. The data rate at 24 fps would be less than shooting 5888x3312 30 fps 16:9 Prores Raw on the Ninja V, so it should be feasible? The ability to film with the entire full frame sensor area on this camera is unique and it's my favourite feature - I prefer it to the cropped 16:9 look. It's just a shame that the h.265 codec is awful to edit with (on WIndows at least)
It's actually already possible to record regular Prores HQ with the full 3:2 sensor area on the Ninja V, the resolution is limited to approx 3240x2160 though, which is ok - but Prores Raw at full resolution would be better!
 

Panasonic in Japan have agreed to be interviewed for the blog.
I'll ask some questions from the EOSHD Forum.
Anything GH5 / GH5S / GH6 even. S1, S1H related and more
Fire away!

Kazuto Yamaki is admirable.
He recently agreed to be interviewed on EOSHD, and I hope to bring you that soon.
I think we should think more about the corporate vs private business philosophy of camera companies.
Sony just released the 14-24mm F2.8 GM for $3000. At a time when a lot of pros have less work due to the pandemic and downturn in the economy, I think this pricing is sheer greed.
Meanwhile Sigma have their own 14-24mm F2.8 of similar or even better quality - $1200.
And their affordable 16mm, 30mm, 56mm primes for APS-C - all F1.4 and exceptional performance.
Sony and Canon will likely want $4000+ for their latest cameras.
A reminder that all large publicly listed companies exist purely for the benefit of making as much money as possible for shareholders, and it's also about moving manufacturing to where labour is cheapest - with all the environmental and social impact that brings to the planet too.
Sigma are different and we should support that.

Don't worry, The Washington Post are on the case.

Really sad to hear this..
He was a living legend.
Still being able to produce mesmerizing tunes after having worked almost 50 years in the industry..
Themes from "Cinema Paradiso" and "La migliore offerta" are my all-time favorites.
At least his legacy will live on.

The Morricone Duel - The Most Dangerous Concert Ever - Live - The Danish National Symphony Orchestra and Sarah Hicks

Here's some test footage I shot last year with the Tiffen BPM 1/4. As you can see, the look varies pretty widely depending on whether there's a strong light source in frame or not. Some shots are probably a bit too drastic for corporate work. For my taste, I like to see the obvious effect. Otherwise why bother? 😄 
 
 
 

I’ve done a decent amount of front/rear group mismatch pairing. What I’ve found is this:
1. you can often find mismatched pairings that function at equivalent quality to their matched arrangement.
2. mismatched pairings are not able to be focused, meaning that they are in focus only at infinity. (This is different from what anamorphic users refer to as “dual focus.” The anamorphic is infinity only just to be clear.)
3. The maximum angle of view is determined by the front element group, and cannot be changed. (Note a key distinction however that the squeeze ratio changes, which DOES change which taking lens focal length will be associated with the unchanging angle of view. This also means that the vertical field of view changes as well.)
4. the source-point flare comes from the rear element group, the secondary mirrored flare comes from the front element group.
To take all of this and give a specific example, let’s say I’m trying out pairings with the front element group from my Kowa 16-H. On my Blackmagic PCC4K, lets say my favorite lens to use with it stock is my Canon FD 24mm, which also happens to be the widest lens I can use if my final delivery is going to be a tasty, vignette-free 2.39:1. 
Let’s move on now to the (imaginary) mismatch pairing. I have an old B&L CinemaScope kicking around, and I pair the rear grouping from this scope with the front grouping from my 16-H, in front of my 24mm, which is set to infinity. The B&L elements are nice and cozy right up against the 24mm’s front, but things look blurry. I move the 16-H front grouping in and out until I get a nice sharp image. Neat! If I focus the 24mm on something closer, say, my C-stand at 5’ from camera, I can’t seem to achieve anything sharp no matter what the distance is between the Kowa and B&L element groups. Oh well... infinity it is! (That’s what variable diopters are for anyway, right?)
Ok, so we have our trusty 24mm. We have a Frankenstein of glass from two scopes in front of it, and it’s nice and sharp (at least at infinity,) so what now? Well, let’s shoot a chart, pull some footage into an NLE, and figure out what the squeeze of our new Frankenscope happens to be. A quick stretch of the footage to where the chart looks normal reveals..... 1.75X! Neat! Now, there’s definitely some vignette, but that’s ok, we’re after 2.39:1 delivery. Let’s crop in until the vignette goes away, shall we? The result? vignette free when cropped to 3:1. That’s cool, we could probably go a little wider with the spherical lens.
A quick scour through the camera bag unearths a LUMIX 21mm lens. Let’s ditch the 24mm and try the 21mm. Abracadabra, drop some 21mm footage into the timeline, desqueeze and crop out the vignette: 2.39:1. There now exists a 1.75X scope that can go as wide as a 21mm taking lens! That’s a wider taking lens than the Kowa could handle stock! 
 
Or is it? A meander through the maths:
21/1.75=12mm lens equivalent horizontal
24/2=12mm lens equivalent horizontal
BUT!!! (You may say, and you’re correct) there is no vertical squeeze factor here, so vertically, the 21mm is STILL wider than the 24mm. Yes. You are using a wider focal length lens, but your horizontal field/angle of view remains unchanged. The two scope configurations both are and aren’t equivalent to each other. Oh the joys of anamorphic. This is why anamorphic lenses are said to have two focal lengths (one horizontal and another vertical,) and it’s why we get oval bokeh too! 
The final kicker is when we add our variable diopter of choice: an SLR Magic Rangefinder. The stock Kowa is now choked to a maximum of 28mm, and the Frankenscope can only do 25mm. It turns out that in practical application, the limit of all wide anamorphic adapter setups is the variable diopter, not the scope. The new Rapido FVD-35 is right at the limits of the very widest anamorphic adapters. What’s more, a bigger diopter setup to squeeze out those last few distorted degrees of angle-of-view would be laughably gigantic. The FVD-35 is 134mm in diameter. That means it already sits only 2cm above a 15mm LWS rod setup, so unless you want to go full 19mm studio rods and use 6.5X6.5 mattebox for filtration, the FVD-35 will do “just fine.”
Why, then, would anyone bother to Frankenscope? Well, because lenses are so much more than the numbers. Even by the numbers, you might prefer a novel squeeze ratio. You might want beautiful mixed gold and teal flares. You might want the thick, lush flares from an old scope with some added sharpness and contrast from one more modern. You might want a unique look, that’s all your own, completely custom. Besides that, the experimentation is really fun! 
A quick look at remotely reasonable anamorphic offerings reveals: Xelmus has a 40mm and Atlas has a 32mm, both of which only cover a standard 35mm open gate. The FVD-35 is right in this ballpark in any case. Unless you find an exceptionally rare 22mm LOMO, or rent some top shelf glass, you’re not going to go wider... never mind that depth of field becomes so deep when this wide that the differences between spherical and anamorphic are difficult for most people to differentiate. As someone who hacked scopes apart to try and go wider, here’s my conclusion: do what works for you, but you’re gonna need a big variable diopter, because that’s the bottleneck. After that, find your wide scope of choice, Frankensteined or stock, it’s just preference. 
I had some awesome results from very humbly priced pairings. I bought a half dozen or so scopes off eBay, and did my level best to spend $100 or less on each. A great trick is taking big/long adapters meant for 35mm projection, and pairing their front element groups with rears from shorter 16mm projection scopes. As a general rule, this seems to significantly shorten the scope’s length, and reduces the squeeze factor. There are a plethora of theoretical 1.8X, 1.75X, 1.5X, and 1.33X custom scopes out there for anyone with the willpower and funding to go on a mix and match bonanza.
 

Here you go, the film has a grand total of 8 views, go make it be 9!
 
 
Forgot that Jackson was there for of the days! He's "Grip" in the credits, but that I feel is totally inaccurate. General lighting (holding a flecky) / camera assistant is more accurate. 
 

After a fall where broke his femur a few days ago... : ( With his gift, the music he made cinema is not with him anymore, belongs to all of us.
 
 
 
(in a personal note, unforgettable to have seen him personally in a live concert... in Rome, a decade ago)

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-19626787
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/breaking-ennio-morricone-dead-legendary-22307636
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/ennio-morricone-wrote-the-perfect-soundtrack-for-a-time-when-we-miss-movies-more-than-ever/2020/07/06/3da3926a-bf8f-11ea-b178-bb7b05b94af1_story.html
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ennio-morricone-dead-prolific-italian-composer-was-91-858358
https://variety.com/2020/film/news/ennio-morricone-ten-essential-scores-listen-1234698965/
 

The last one I know
https://www.eoshd.com/comments/profile/42487-julien416/

Fuji giveth and fuji taketh away... IBIS jumping have been replaced with micro jitters in the 1.02 firmware and it ain't pretty. XF35/1.4 with IBIS only, no DIS or boost. 25 fps h264 200mbit. Watch in full screen to better see the jitter.
 

I think it's for the better.
The more space, the more efficient heat dissipation.
 
This design really reminds me the good old Canon.
Black bricks with funny buttons.

No idea, I've  been pimping them on here for years !

Why the hell haven't we all been using them then?! 

Saw this in the canonrumors comments...

I hope for the best, but people are way too optimistic. There HAS to be a catch. It's Canon!