Leaderboard

Out of curiosity I made an ultra quick search for prices. In case anyone is interested, here's the chart. Please be aware that this can't be trusted blindly because I'm far from expert. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BweFGmvEN2CvRGZkYmFJVy1BOWc/edit?usp=sharing

Hans Punk shoots my kind of camera porn ;) Awesome stuff! Like Andrew meets Wim Wenders

This chart is an overall look at the whole spectrum of video and cinema cameras from the Arri Alexa right down to the Fuji X series of stills cameras. Read the full article here

Nada que si no está mi cámara el test no vale. JAJAJAJAJAJA Bravo por la Panasonic GM1 pequeña pero matona. Va a dar que hablar mucho mucho. Hay algunos que si no es grande y gorda no vale (igual que las gallinas). Yo tengo casi todas y me quedo en video con la GM1 señores. Ea lo siento.

Maybe it'd be a good idea to put all of these cameras in one place, but giving them grades for specific characteristics for video that we don't find easily on other sites, like the guys over at The Verge do when they review something. So, in one post we'd have all of these cameras like this for example: 5DIII DR - 9/10 Resolution - 7/10 Low light - 10/10 Ergonomy - 7/10 Codec - 5/10 Battery life - 8/10 Price - 8/10 Etc GH3 DR - 8/10 Resolution - 10/10 Low light - 8/10 Ergonomy - 7/10 Codec - 7/10 Battery life - 8/10 Price - 9/10 Etc On each camera you could disclose your reasoning and preference bias and let people know why you think said camera has better bang for buck, for example. And then let the readers decide what is the ranking based on their specific preference and needs/budget. As more cameras come out, we would get a monthly update with new posts. I think you've earned a very good reputation with all your work on this site. And I believe that having this kind of resource would turn out to be a very welcome reference, especially for beginners.

VIMEO playback is very different from browser to browser because on a given OS they don't all use the same libraries to decode the stream. I see a marked difference in playback quality on my Mac in Safari versus Chrome, for instance. Safari looks bad while the same stream on the same computer looks as I expect with Chrome. It's the same phenomenon with players. You will often see a different look playing back the same file in QTPro, VLC, MPlayer, etc., etc. I haven't used IE since the Win98 days so what happens in IE stays in IE as far as I'm concerned ;)

Show some G6 love Andrew! It's the real successor to the GH2. One of the most underrated camera's of 2013, it should get it's well deserved spot on your site of all places :) Why wait for march to put it in the list? Not sure if it's logical to put the GM1 above the GH3. Maybe the GX7 should be in that place? The GM1 doesn't have 60p for example. No audio in- and outputs. Also I'd say the D5300 / D5200 should be split. D5300 has 60p over the D5200, so I'd rank it higher. Why is the RX10 rated so low? Is the quality worse than the 5D Mark II stock? I think it'd be good to add a little bit of info to the list for each camera. Like strong points and weak points (moire, resolution, framerates, in/outputs, peaking yes/no, etc).

Not so strange. Coke has embraced multiculturism in their marketing going back to at least the 1970s. This is basically a variation on something like this: ...which were very successful ads here in the USA. They represent people of the world but that's what makes up America. Some people here forget that, which isn't too surprising since these folks, who will most certainly be right of center also get The Bible wrong and have a poor understanding of the "Founding Fathers" as well. Everything is twisted the further you get to the right. But enough politics, Coke has a tradition here which the latest Super Bowl ad is consistent with and it was the prettiest ad for the whole schebang yesterday which will likely go down as one of the most disappointing Super Bowl commercial years ever.

The advice 'when you want a camcorder zoom, buy a camcorder' can be taken literally. Indeed, there are decent camcorders that cost less than a decent zoom lens. And there are decent zoom lenses (parfocal, 20x, some even with electronic zoom lever) that cost less than a family sized pizza. They are calculated for SD resolution, true, they will vignette at wide angle and if not proper adapted will not focus on infinity, but for the odd 70ies zoom ... (kidding) Zooms, pans and transitions - these should be prohibited for beginners, but in the right hands, they are fantastic. Vocabulary of film language.

RED Epic Dragon Sensor Shot at 6K. Credits: Production Co: Brunswick Studios Creative Agency: The One Off Director: Dan Smith Producer: Rohan Tully DOP: Steve Marshall Steadicam: James Davis Grip: Carl Dunn DIT: Valentine Rocha Post: MyTherapy

  Stop being a twit!   The legal disclaimer was put up after Jim Jannard tried to sue me / silence me over the negative Scarlet articles.   The inconsistencies - i.e. covering expensive gear like the Amira and Cooke lenses or judging a Sony aspiring filmmaker competition - are inconsistent with what exactly? EOSHD is not all 100% coverage of consumer cameras. I have at least 10% reserved for dreaming!!

the natural evolution is to get better and better cameras and glass , we all do it , so being aware of whats out there and if it can work on your camera is worth knowing in my book! there is alot of useful shared infomation on this forum , hopefully everyone can get someting form this to help their film making . I was looking at the Arima on the Arri stand last Novemeber at BVE- they gave me the full demo on it , its a nice camera ! Im not gonna buy one but its useful to know its always there to rent for a job, same with Cooke lenses , I have rented them for jobs along with Arri/Zeiss lenses I have no intention of buying them outright , but seeing how they perform on Andrew's test with a 4K (maybe Panasonic ...I hope so) camera is worth knowing!!

From the unofficial Cooke owners club at NAB: " We did some very critical tests with Leica Summilux-C lenses, Zeiss Master Primes, and the Cooke 5/i. We put them on digital cameras, looked at how much resolution they had. We looked for color fringing and many things, like distortion, and so on. They all looked very good. We tested with the same lens projector we do for film. The lenses were all very, very close. We looked for breathing. We tested for color fringing, because that’s very critical on digital cameras–they see it. We put them all on our M.T.F. machine. They all had high M.T.F. We looked at what I call fall-off illumination, or shading–in other words, how bright it is in the center, how bright toward the edges. They were all very good. Some were a little bit better in one area, some in other areas. They were so close that it didn’t matter a whole bunch. Then we did a film test. We did this on a stage that was very well lit by a very good DP, Isidore Mankofsky, ASC. We shot a grey scale, a color chart, and then we had a set with a desk and a practical lamp. We were looking for several different things, and one of them was narcissism (double image of hot spots) and other things. We tested all of that, and there was a young lady that was supposed to be our model. Well, she got sick. She didn’t show up, and so there was a young woman there on the set. We asked her if she would be our model, and she agreed to that. She was about 27 years old, and she had no make-up on except what a normal lady would use to go out. You know, a little bit around her eyes, and she did have a little blemish on her face. The film stock used on the test was Kodak 5219. The film was developed and we projected it. It looked better with the Cooke lenses. I was trying to analyze why it looked better with the Cooke lenses. All the lenses were so close, the Leicas, the Master Primes, and the Cooke 5/I’s. Why did she look better? I analyzed it more carefully and what it is, the Leica lenses and the Master Primes have higher contrast, and they showed the blemish. Even though the Cooke lens is just as sharp, it’s not that high contrast. And it almost hid that blemish. It was almost gone. So this “Cooke Look†is a real thing. I wanted to say that. We’ve always known that–at least I always felt that–and so many people know that the Cooke look is good." I found this article interesting. The "look" comes from lower contrast and was not mentioned as noticeable except on the film test models skin portion of the test. Also, For those wondering how the sharpness compares, here is a test by lensrentals comparing still and cine lenses in which the 50mm Cooke was mentioned. www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout. Congrats Andrew I'm so jealous!

http://www.amazon.com/Silica-Gel-Desiccants-Inches-Packets/dp/B009NH5S8U/ref=lh_ni_t?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=AR8XJJ19SNPNX

I am shooting with my new Iscorama 36 (non MC) together with a C100 in Tokyo now and all I can say: WOW! It's just mind blowing. I have used so far my good old Helios 44 (non MC) and my new Zeiss Flektgon 35mm 2.8 (declicked) and thats just... hands down... on of the best lenses I have used for anamorphic shooting yet. So that tiff is 300mb??? and: do you recomment the Sonnar? I am looking for a longer lens as well.