zlfan

i want to point out that varicam's 720p is probably the best 720p implemented. the title may be more suitable as "best 720p vs 35mm film rolls in terms of resolution". for the organic feeling, it surprises me that varicam's 720p can be better than that of 35mm film rolls. if so, what is the point of shooting with film rolls? maybe because the film rolls are expensive, only exclusive to the big budget films? i guess i am mystery buster. lol.

Bruce Greene, his forum name

i don't see that this dp provides a link to his film.

although there is argument that 2k projectors can be replaced with 4k projectors or 8k ones, on the other hand, 2k projectors have been there many years and nobody complains about the lack of resolution on the big screen about the movies shot with 35mm film. seems to me that the current trend of shooting with 35mm or 16mm film rolls is just another way trying to differentiate but does not provide real technical advancements.

larry wants to buy the hollywood? then creates a big ai database like oracle and an universal ai language like java? lol.

seems to me that the resolution specs have been saturated long time ago.

seems that he thinks the varicam's 720p is about the same resolution as red one on a 2 k projection.

"I guess I'm making these points to say that, detail wise, 720p is darned close to 1080p. And when shooting a movie almost every frame has some amount of motion blur, making the difference insignificant to the eye, even on a very large theatrical screen. The low light advantage of the 720p chips, and the slow motion capability make these cameras a true rival to any of the 1080p cameras that I saw demonstrated in the ASC camera assessment series last month. And while I wasn't able to compare the 720p Varicam directly to the 4k camera named after a color, I would say that after seeing the ASC tests, the 720p Varicam is about equal to or more detailed than that camera on a 2k projection."

"Recently I had the experience of showing a small movie we shot with the 27H tape based varicam on a very large screen in a multiplex projected through Barco DLP 2k projector. The movie was still a work in progress, and so we played it on my MacBook Pro in quicktime and plugged into the projector as a mirrored computer monitor." The earlier paragraph about the large screen.

Just came across this written by a dp in 2010: "The film was shot in 720p, mostly using an AJA I/O HD box and recording to a HD in Apple ProRes HQ, though a bit was recorded to tape and a few scenes (mostly in cars) were shot with an HPX170. The camera was set to FilmRec mode and we used the lowest setting that could capture the needed dynamic range of the scene. This was usually Dynamic Level 200%, but higher when necessary. This meant that the uncorrected movie looks a little bit low in contrast and saturation so the Quicktime player was set to slightly increase contrast and saturation. I was a little bit nervous that the 720p image on such a large screen might look a little soft, but it looked amazing! Going next door to glimpse a big Hollywood 35mm print revealed that the 720p digital projection looked as detailed as the 35mm print, and much cleaner and steadier of course. The Varicam projected had much more "life" than the dull 2k DI film print in the next theater (I'm talking about basic image quality, not the cinematography 🙂 )"

"You reach a level where that 5% more cannot justify the 10, 20x the price." true

olympus used to have the best jpeg engine.

no surprise. 3 ccd. 1/3 inch means bad low light and no bokur. otherwise, good color.

nice. so using xqd card can have much higher codec rates?

what is this xqd card for?

"What has happened is the gap between the top-end i.e. ARRI and the cheap stuff has closed up. This has been going on ever since the start of the DSLR revolution so it's not a new thing but there's never been a smaller gap that exists now, for example between something like the Alexa 35 and a $1000 used Panasonic S1H." True

5d3 ml raw can do 1:1 1920x1920. i tried once, like hassy in video.

pantax cameras are good for mf lenses in the current era. i have a pentax q, amazed at its support for mf lenses even with such a small body.

at certain point, the lens industry is more for other things than the iq. canon l lenses are a good example, dust free, build quality (fine for me on this), af, optical is (fine for me in certain situations). they are working horses, but not creative tools. use another example, vintage voigtlander heliar lenses are so good for portrait. not sharp, but good enough, great oof, just right on the spot for human faces, even better in bw. even 50 years ago, they did it right.

once you are in the mf lenses realm, there is no way back. you will be a hoarder lol

don't underestimate gopro. its problem is low light. otherwise, very good for your case.

r means red?

looking my previous footage, i still like ml raw the best, no matter from 5d3 or crop mood cams, like m.

if the camera is too small, the heat will affect the footage. this is why the footage of the alexa classic is better than those of later alexa mini etc.

all true hands on experience. the cmos battery dying is no big deal. get a cheap sd card, save the settings on this sd card, load the settings when needed.