Leaderboard

Found this mock up comparison, thought some might be interested. http://wolfcrow.com/blog/a-fun-comparison-between-the-late-blackmagic-production-camera-4k-and-the-rumored-panasonic-gh4-4k-camera/

Shot with a Panasonic G6. "Natural" Profile with everything dialed down to -5. Steadicam shots with a Pana 14 2.5, all other footage with Canon FD's.

Seriously only 30p with no PAL version? Our electricity is 50Hz... Bizarre.

Undoubtably the helios 44-2 is the best lens on the iscorama 36 when used on aps-c. for full frame, i have found the zeiss sonnar 85mmf2.8 is very well matched and is incredibly sharp. the olympus 85mmf2 is a stop faster, but even at 2.8 cannot match the sonnar for sharpness, and at f2.8 has a horrible ninja star aperture shape which looks nasty on the bokeh when mated with the oval deformation, however I very much love the wide open f2 aperture for shots requiring selective focus where sharpness over the entire frame is not required. i really want to see the rama on full frame with the sonnar 135mmf2.8. I predict great things. funny thing is, the whole reason DSO was started was to make a lo-fi lens to get the Iscorama looking more like a smaller more humble 8mm anamorphic look. The exact opposite of the lenses I list above, which exhibit very little of their own character to the image. - even a standard helios 44 (from the early 80's, with more modern coatings) is very clean if the aperture is tweeked closed by half a stop. based on the success of a marriage between the iscorama and a helios 44, it prompts my thinking into finding longer focal lengths based on the same optical arrangement as the helios 44. (a simple double gauss design). an early 80mm planar for medium format could be an ideal choice, though the pentagonal aperture might not be to everyone's taste - particularly in oval form.

To me that sounds like it might be just an internal reflection rather than an actual bug software/hardware bug. A kind of a glare reflection which appears only during very specific circumstances; when bright enough a spot light source is shining straight into the sensor from a specific (low) angle, and then the shiny surface of the sensor gets reflected back to the lens, and then some of the lens surfaces or a filter surface (or some other reflective surface) will produce this ghost glare. I've seen something (kinda) similar happen before, under certain circumstances. The easiest way to minimise it was to use a lens hood. I'd try reproducing that scenario with different bright lights straight into the lens from varying angles, trying to create various glares on purpose, and then experiment with different lenses, filters and perhaps even the Speed Booster, if possible. Chances are the stripes will only appear with certain lens and light angle (and colour) combinations. It it really is what I believe it is, I believe it will make no difference if it's a still photo or video. The reflection may just be easier to spot and reproduce in a video clip. Well, just a thought, might be worth investigating.

pre-36 iscorama. I think this is paired with the original 50mm that came with it. I have had good luck with 58mm Helios 44m, a variety of Nikons (though the Nikon 50mm's I have tend to create vignette) and the Rikenon 55mm F/1.8 still photo shot with 5d Mark II raw photo capture http://bit.ly/1m9xgwU

Yes. Again, why do you think they chose lineskipping for the iPhone 5s video? You yourself said the iPhone 5s video was flawless. It is not. If they'd do a proper resampling from 1440p or higher down to 720p without line skipping and proper high quality video encoding, I can assure you - they would not be able to do it in realtime at 120 fps. (I don't know about the sensor in iPhone, but there are sensors that very well can output higher resolutions at up to 120 fps - but it's still very resource intensive if you want to process the full sensor data and resample it down to 720p or 1080p from a full readout. Line skipping might or might not be necessary from sensor standpoint in an iPhone.) Does 5dmk3 have the power to take 4k-10 bit raw and downsample that to 1080 in realtime 24fps or so? Nope. Outputting RAW is wholly another thing. That means reading data fast and outputting data fast. It's more about I/O than it is about a processor actually doing heavy processing. Downsampling high resolution at high quality at realtime framerates for video is much more difficult processing. So, why doesn't the Nikon V1 output 4k Prores, 4k h.264 or downsample 4k to 1080p to Prores / higher rate H.264? (No, it doesn't have the processing capabilities to do the proper DOWNSAMPLING and ENCODING in realtime). And, the downsampling is key if you really want the best possible resolution and accurate color for 1080p with RGGB grid array sensors. My whole argument in the original post was: from a manufacturer stand point it makes much more sense to go 4k and let the user downsample in post to achieve excellent 1080p, it is much more expensive to do if you want all the processing done in realtime in-camera.

I'm another G6 shooter interested in knowing how much of this guide would also be applicable for me.

I have the Panasonic G6 how useful/relevant would the new EOSHD GH3 guide be for that camera? Thanks