Leaderboard

http://nofilmschool.com/2013/12/digital-bolex-d16-review-part-1-first-impressions-pre-order/ Joe Marine's of NoFilmSchool recent 2-part review of the Digital Bolex seems not very skewed in favor of that camera. In fact, it's a reasoned balanced opinion, I think. Personally, I like the idea that some folks had an idea and made it happen with "Kickstarting" support from the filmmaking community. I also like that they developed a camera for 16mm lenses. So many American university are full up on 16mm lenses going unused. This camera is near-perfect for those programs. I'd go so far as to say that the RAW workflow is a nice parallel to traditional film production. That's good for students. Learning footage discipline is a worthwhile skill.

There's always the risk of feeling buyer's remorse with technology but, realistically, your film won't be any better or worse off no matter the decision you make. 4K isn't something most folks should be concerned about. It's no guarantee of a better looking film if it was projected in a theater and if it's not being projected in a theater it's pretty much a waste of money and resources and effort that could be used elsewhere. Most theatrical films are still finished 2K (regardless of origination) unless a director has the juice to force production to pony up for a 4K finish. You would think that for $100+ million dollar blockbusters this would just be a given, since they're already spending a mint but that isn't the case. It's still quite rare. Not as rare as even a year ago but it's not standard practice to finish 4K. Making your own feature, either putting up your own money or getting some from investors, you should save yourself the headache. Spend the money that might be needed for extra storage or an upgrade to your editorial on something like catering, being able to bump your key talent's per diem a bit or the wrap party (or wrap gifts...I didn't understand the importance of these my first indie). And make sure you even really need to upgrade your camera, considering it's an asset you already own. $1500 goes a long way on an independent feature. I admit I never thought much about the T2i but that was before seeing Kendy's stuff... ...I'm a GH2 guy and know it's technically a better camera but operator talent (along with the quality of the content) can render technical jibber jabber and megabits rather meaningless.

Hello Forum! I'm from Russia This is my design - rig for BMPCC

Mirrorless camera sales in the US have slipped because in Japan they have a "smaller is smarter" mentality and love novelty, but in the US it is a "bigger is better" culture and people equate something like a Nikon D4 with quality, because of the heft and substantial size.   The biggest mistake the mirrorless market continues to make (even the Sony A7R) is that they are focussed around small size.   Mirrorless is the future direction of all cameras because digital technology is the successor to mechanical and optical technology. The mirror is not going to still be flapping up and down in 100 years time, we will have EVFs so good as they will resolve far more than an optical viewfinder and give us super-vision, better than our own eyes can see, especially in low light conditions.   Instead of driving home the fact that mirrorless is a POWERFUL technology and DSLRs are a past tech, the Japanese manufacturers gave us cute little GF cameras and dinky PENs. Ridiculous.   Only now are they on the right path going high end, but Sony are still trying to downsize their FE mount lenses at the expense of lovely fast apertures, and Olympus are still adding gimmicks on their high end cameras, and none of them have an answer to the workhorse pro cameras like the 1D X and D4. At least not for stills.   I have always found a use for mirrorless cameras because the video has often been better - both in terms of image quality and features. That hasn't changed.

I'm going with 4K too , I'm sticking with Panasonic as they make great cameras that just work , plus most of my glass is optomised for m4/3 So roll on gh4 or what ever they call it

Do people realise that blogs are an opinion and that an opinion is entitled to be in favour of something?   It isn't always about being objective.   Personal opinions matter a lot.   Unless the skewing is for reasons other than just liking something.   When people criticise Philip Bloom for example, for being skewed in favour of a camera, it's his opinion and he can be biased if he wants. It's his choice to use what he likes. We all have our personal reasons for using something in the end...

Yeah, I like both. I loved the original when I saw it but Fincher's version will be the one I reach for more often. Cronenweth's photography is a big reason.

Judged in isolation the A7R lacking IS isn't such a big deal but remember, this is a comparison and you are comparing a camera with the world's best stabilisation to one with absolutely none, unless you use a Sony 24-70mm F4 for £1100 or a crappy kit zoom, also with a slow aperture.   At least Canon and Nikon have a big range of IS lenses you can choose from when you need it, including fast primes like the new 35mm F2.0 IS.   I'm an A7R owner and a E-M1 owner so it's all real world experience I'm basing this on. Believe me, the stabilisation makes a big difference on the E-M1 by comparison, to overall handling and feel, not just for video.

The front ring on the 54 comes off just like the 36. I had to open up a 54 I got for about half the price that they usually go for due to a stuck focus ring and fungus spots. I was able to do a CLA and now it works great. The 54 is a much sturdier design that the 36 and the stopper is a large thick solid metal tab on the focus ring that contacts another large metal tab on the body. It is not like the 36 with a small plastic stopper that can be sanded down. While it may still be possible to modify the 54 it would not be easy and definitely is not something I would want to try to do.

Yeah, Fincher's film was well over half as good. I honestly thought he did a good job. It's not very interesting material to work with.

Jesus... it's about time this forum gets an option to make markm's posts invisible, this was a perfectly informative and interesting thread until he came in.

The PENS have two more stops of dynamic range than the GF3... It's EM-5 image quality, which is good. As good as Canon APS-C.

I really value your advice, it makes complete sense. You are right about investing the money in what's needed the most. Renting is out of the question, here the prices are too high. I really like what I see about the BMPCC, Andrew's review was very good. I think I will probably get it, but I will wait, priorities will fall into place with time. Thank you very much for your insights. Cheers

another point to note is some of these zoom lenses with Aspheric elements are sharper than most prime lenses Yes zooms with aspheric elements are very very sharp and I tend to use them alot as a 'variable prime' , meaning I dont go zooming them in and out I just use the zoom function to frame the shot how I want it if you get these 3 zooms you can cover 90% of you shots Panasonic 14-42mm kit lens Canon FD 24-35mm f3.5 Canon FD 35-105mm f3.5 That takes you from 14mm to 105mm (full frame equivilant 28mm- 210mm) then maybe get a fast f1.4 prime for night shooting and your bokeh madness arty shots the Fujinon c mount 25mm f1.4 is very sharpa nd very cheap on ebay