Jump to content

eyesuncloudedphoto

Members
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About eyesuncloudedphoto

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The real trouble with the Micro Cinema/Studio format was that, by the moment you need to do some more serious work you end up rigging them anyway, with external storage, monitor, power, etc. The BMPCC4K, in theory at least, can (marginally) be used as is, thus resulting in a more compact form factor. Also I'm not sure heat dissipation concerns would allow a real "pocket" version of the BMPCC4K.
  2. At first glance this looks like a good idea, even a necessity in a certain sense. But let me play devil's advocate for a moment. The problem is with (a) availability of S35 sensors with the same properties as the one in the BMCC4K and (b) the lens mount. If they somehow manage to overcome the first problem, the one with the mount remains. Having an EF or PL mount defeats the purpose of such a camera; a BMPCC4K with a speedbooster will be its equal or better. They could go for a m43 mount (it can cover a S35 sensor for video) and also perhaps offer their own SB versions, with embedd
  3. Anyone tested the new version 2.4 firmware yet?
  4. Hey, just a quick question: any insights on the Voigtlander 28mm f2.8 SLII, with a Speedbooster? Looks interesting due to the size (compared to an equivalent Nikkor or other vintage 28mm)
  5. Up until very recently, traditional Fuji fans have been negative to almost hostile to even the inclusion of video features. I've been in epic fights over having decent video capabilities with the X-Pro2, for instance, and even the X-T2 should be a "pure photography camera" (sic!) for some of these idiots. Things have turned 180 degrees in the last couple of years: nowadays most consider the last breed of Fujis as the best hybrid camera system overall in the market, and some even buy them primarily for video. If the X-H2 lives to the expectations, it would solidify this trend. I'm al
  6. The 29:59 limit is there in any case (it also breaks up the footage in 4GB chunks because of the stupid file system). I haven't tested it with an external supply, but I'd suppose situation would not improve with one.
  7. Hahahah, true. You can safely bet you can find the newer ZF or ZE version for less. It's also not that small... but it has the mojo for sure.
  8. 28mm f2.8 or f2 "Hollywood" if you can catch a bargain (which happens from time to time).
  9. Voigtlander 17.5mm makes sense, and the Panaleica 15mm f1.7 would also serve well I believe. But I'm tempted to say SB+28mm vintage lens (Contax/Zeiss, Nikkor 28mm f2, Minolta 28mm, Canon FD, Olympus OM, options are limitless). Reason being, I'm quite fond of the ~40mm focal length you can get from this combination, I consider it perhaps the most cinematic one. Especially combined with a vintage lens' rendering and the effective f1.4 aperture you'll be getting with SB. And it's not that big or heavy on the GH5. If you go this way, de-clicking the lens would also be a good idea.
  10. I haven't noticed hot pixels in either the X-T2 or the X-H1, but, to be fair, I only did smaller clips with both, because of the length limitations. I'm heading to an athletic event later today, and will also be shooting tomorrow, and will make sure I'll share some short unedited footage, since also members on FB groups I administer have asked about it. Probably Monday. ?
  11. That makes sense. It's also refreshing to see battery power displayed accurately at last.
  12. I wouldn't say the 16-55 is sharper than the Sigma in "absolute" terms; have used both the Nikon and Canon versions on Fuji cameras, as well as the GH5. both with speedboosters and dummy adapters. The point is, the 16-55 is perfectly matched to the X-Trans sensor, can't put my finger on it, could be micro contrast, color rendering or whatever. The end result is, it produces a magnificent image, both for video and stills. Speaking of the AF, hell yes, it's bloody instant. This is true of other linear motor Fujinons also. I tested the X-T3 with the lowly 15-45 yesterday, a lens you can pick
  13. Exactly this. Zero to hero is a huge understatement here. I've been using Fuji cameras for photography almost exclusively for the last 3+ years and have been an X-Photographer for the last two and a half. "Video with Fuji" was comedy material 3 years ago. Now that I have slowly transitioned (or, to be more precise, returned to my situation 6-7 years ago) into doing 80%+ video work, Fuji has managed becoming a prominent player in the video field. I have the X-T3 sitting on my desk as I write this and I literally can't believe what they've accomplished in such a short time. True, there are
  14. You know what: let's take this one tiny (sic!) step further. ? Perhaps it's time for Panasonic to man up and acknowledge the fact that what 99% of their GH5/GH5s customer base really want, is a Panasonic-made BMPCC4K. Meaning a proper small-format cinema camera with enough stills photography features to satisfy certain needs for a cinematographer (i.e. all the basic ones plus timelapse/stop motion animation, etc). They could even get away with using an electronic shutter only and, if global shutter becomes a reality, this is a moot point anyway. They could have IBIS and non-IBIS versions
  15. This makes total sense IMO. The GH5 is still untouchable feature-wise, among hybrid cameras. What is perhaps needed is focusing on the video side of things even more, offering advanced features not found in anything sort of a "proper" cinema camera. Internal ND, for instance. Internal RAW and/or Prores. Perhaps the first application of global shutter? A number of things are easier and more economical to implement with a smaller sensor.
×
×
  • Create New...