Leaderboard

Hi guys, We just shot this video with the BMCC, Metabones Speedbooster, Nikon Lenses and Iscorama 54MC. RAW files were developped in After Effects CS6 (with Camera Raw) to Prores444 2400/1350. Color grading was done in AE. Please let us know what you think, we'd love to get some feedback. Cheers, Mihnea

Agreed, full frame is not for everything, and for many applications a real pain to focus pull...but I guess if the original poster was worried about loosing the 'look' he was accustomed to with photography and video from the 5D2 - I would be worried to suggest a crop sensor such as the GH4, especially in 4k mode. Ah shucks... I've fallen into my own nightmare - actually debating what camera etc. Truth be told, there has never been so much affordable choice and logical reason to not be making creative work right now. I'm a believer in grabbing what you can afford to buy or rent at the time, try not to chase 'unicorn' cameras, spend your money in front of the lens because nobody will give a crap what you shot it on in 6 months time (unless it's film!)

I'm not enamored with it to be honest, even though I employed it for a specific purpose in one of my recent doc-shorts. That insane DOF is just not a visual I'm used to as a guy growing up on American cinema. However, it's handy for talking head interview shots. That low-light ability and deep DOF makes those types of compositions a bit easier. Even so, the M43 does impressive DOF too if you want it.

Totally agree with Bioskop.inc on this. Would it not make sense to try Magic Lantern Firmware on a camera you already own? The full frame raw video from Mk2 or Mk3 is pretty darn stunning and is still yet to be matched by any other camera on the planet (pre NAB announcements). If I were you, I'd give it a try and if you like the results you could use some of the money you would save on buying a new camera to get a high speed CF card to start with - all you need to purchase to try ML the most cost effective way is to grab a Komputerbay 64Gb 1000x CF card. If you want to stick with 5D2 raw then maybe buy an SSD drive (or two) to add or replace your current ones if your current system is a few years old. Raw processing can be taxing on computer drives, in terms of storage and transfer speed, but all the short term pain in getting it up and running is well worth the effort in my opinion. Cameras can loose value fairly quickly(always been the case for video), although your 5D2 is a great stills camera...and will remain a great stills camera for a few more years. Now (for video) there is a new lease of life to that camera via ML raw...effectively giving your canon DSLR a totally free 'sensor upgrade' for its video output. I suspect that a lot of people are going to miss the full frame look when they jump on these crop sensor 4k bandwagons.

I bring up Alexa because some on this thread think 4k is going to save the world. My apologies if I was "ranting", that was less than pro of me. My intent was to point out, that the IQ of the GH4 is purely speculation here as Andrew or no one on this thread has actually used it in any meaningful way. If it's great, more power to it! But until anyone's actually taken it to the mats, so to speak, how can you begin to say it beats out the C300's IQ. The tone here is beginning to feel like Reduser, a never ending toast to 4k while missing the big picture. Sorry Andrew if my working on "TV crap" offends you. It's how many of us have to make a living along with shooting feature and commercial crap. Not all of us are lucky enough to own our very own blog. In my world, what makes a good camera is more than just spec sheets. There's a reason why the Epic at 5k rarely makes an appearance these days on film or TV sets and not at all at the Academies. I still use it for commercials here and there because producers love to punch in post (they don't know what they want on set). I sold mine last year because I felt the colors were thin and honestly couldn't sell it to clients for all but a few jobs. So while slaying the 300, Mr, Reid, don't overlook areas that the Gh4 comes short - the C300's XLR's, Built In ND's, Insanely high ISO, Log C, and better lens choice. To your relief, I realize I stepped into the wrong playground and bid this forum adieu as I return to my TV, Movie, Doc, and Commercial Crap.

If FCPX works for you- it's a great value (+ Motion). I use FCPX for access to some of the effects but use PPro as it runs faster and has superior audio handling & better color grading built in (no color curves in FCPX?). Resolve is also evolving into an NLE- very fast and even better color grading tools (somewhat archaic GUI and flow, but nothing a little googling can't solve).

If you want a cinematic look, f2.8 is a good place to be on the M43 cameras.

As a person that's also made 5DII-shot documentaries in film festivals (and that matters not) --I'm just saying so many people focus their concerns in directions that ultimately may not be as important as they think. If 2 stops of dynamic range prevents you from telling a good story, well, that's odd isn't it? Still, I do know why you'd want that capability. It's nice, but if you're strapped for cash don't worry about it. As it happens, I also just wrote that stuff above just for the sake of writing it. Maybe it's contrarian on a blog that's about gear, but that's my POV. I'm pretty sure point-of-view is what the entire global internet runs on. Hubris, opinion, and comatose humans radiating body heat for our alien overloads inside another dimension of reality. You've already said what you have is working and and right now you have no money. So it seems you're fishing for an affirmation to buy something new? Ultimately, do what you want, but do check out Andy Lee's advice. I'd say that's spot on.

This isn't true in my experience...or else I'm reading different blogs. You're not going to find much FF references in cinematography magazines for instance. And since this particular site is about filmmaking on photography equipment, having dual context-understanding between cinema and photography focal lengths is important.

I love how people slate a camera they have never used. How looking and comparing spec sheets actually means anything? I use C300'S FS700's DSLR's etc for actual paid work and the C300 is by far the best camera - the work flow, battery life, build in ND's and the sharpness of the image blows my GH3 away. Just because the GH4 provides better specs on paper doesn't mean its a 'Game changer'. I'm fed up of all the fanboys and crap content this site has been churning out lately...

I stopped thinking full frame when I started shooting motion pictures ;)

I shot on film for 15 years all through the 90s and early 2000s ......16mm and super 35mm Arri and Aaton Cameras so I never used full frame as a referance we never talked about Full frame so I still dont..... a 24mm lens is a 24mm lens in my head . anyhow the new FD to m4/3 adapter looks great I will be getting one asap thanks for posting this useful info , they also make a C/Y , M42 and EOS to micro m4/3 adapters too with the same glass these are all very cheap and usefull to have

Nope. Because... That's good enough a reason, isn't it. Other than that, yes, it probably is a good idea to sell the 5Dm2. As long as the video side of things is concerned, it would make sense to sell the 5mk2 soon, as long as you still might get decent money off it. That won't last for too long now, though. To which system to jump into, if changing to another one in the first place, is another matter. I believe that right now, of all times, before NAB, before Photokina, before a number of anticipated new releases, one may not want to be in a hurry. Unless you really need a new camera. If that's the case, none of this speculation really matter. You need a new camera and you want a new camera - two very different things. It sort of depends, but in general yes. So called full frame glass will work with full frame, APS-C/S35, mFT, 1-inch and S16. It doesn't quite work the other way around. The full frame glass is less likely to go obsolete, for that reason. Even though you can get along without it, too. Other than that, it's a matter of taste and your personal preferences. What you like, what you're willing to carry around and so on. So whatever fancies you but please... Please, it's 2014, stop propagating the silly idea that mirrorless equals micro four thirds. That is simply not the case, and the smaller size of the gear is just one part of the whole point in going for mirrorless systems. There are several other reasons as well. On the video side, more than on the stills side, the mirrorless system has obvious benefits over the traditional dSLR design, regardless of the sensor size. Even Canon have been moving towards mirrorless systems within the higher end video segment, hence the C-series. There are already mirrorless systems from S16 to full frame, so the shallow depth of field vs. mirrorless is a moot point. The Sony A7r, whilst perhaps not the best candidate for video, is just the first full frame mirrorless body. More are on the way quite soon, and probably not only from Sony. Same goes for APS-C size, they're getting better, too. There are three trade shows coming within the next six months, and I bet that until March 2015, the palette available for us is even wider. With compelling options in several different sensor sizes. So not much point in digging oneself into outdated trenches. FWIW, I for one have come to the conclusion that if you want to have the best of the both worlds, stills and video, buy two different cameras. A hybrid to do both will always be a compromise. At least within a reasonable budget. So all in all, I'd say if you fancy the GH4 just go for it, but if you're not in a hurry, well, then don't be. Your desires, your wallet, your decision.

I dont think it terms of full frame as I dont shoot full frame , I shoot m4/3 so a standard lens for me is 24mm and I think forward for telephoto and backwards for wide so 24mm with a speed booster like this is a 17mm in my head, so it wide angle I understand now that you think in terms of full frame - everyone does this different , I stopped thinking full frame when I shoot micro 4/3

here's a quick comparison of the crop factor of the RJ/jinfinance Focal Reducer : never mind the quality (heavily compressed jpeg), this is just to illustrate how much larger your field of view becomes with the Focal Reducer. colour shift and sharpness added in post to accentuate the difference in size.

Tim, feel free to stick to your TV crap and puny thin image, and I'll enjoy my raw and 4K cinematography tools for under $2k. Deal?

I'll say this: If you think the camera is what's limiting your creativity and productivity in photography, videography, and/or cinematography, you're not doing it right to begin with. ...So much more important things to worry about than the camera.

While your right to point out Canon needs to step it up, your lionizing of the GH4, a camera that isn't even out yet and one that you haven't even tested in a working environment is a bit speculative beyond reason, borderline fanboy. I use C300's constantly for national broadcast shows because the codec, form factor, storage and power draw ideally suit broadcast work. While you go on about the 4k abilities of a GH4, most pros and networks would take the 1080p of an Alexa any given day. And you seem to overlook the most glaring shortcoming of a GH4 - Micro 4/3's. It's a chip size that's neither here nor there. Too small to give a truly cinematic DOF and too limited in the choice of lenses. Then there are design flaws with the GH4. The HDMI cable will still get in the way of the flip out. Do you know if the 1/4" mount and lens mount have been reinforced since the GH3. I've ripped the 1/4" mount right out of the body from some mild vehicle mount and bent a lens mount with an Olympus zoom. The C 100/300 will easily hold a 70-200 without a lens bracket. In short, please stop talking like the GH4 is a success before you actually used one on a job with paying clients or extensively tested it. This sort of speculation serves no one, except perhaps Panasonic.

get a full set of Yashica ML primes - they are superb there is a full thread on this we have been debating prime lenses for a while now

People should learn to deal with criticism. Just because I disagree and have remarks about your methodology when testing, doesn't make me a troll. If you post something on a public forum, learn to live with people making remarks. Even with the new upload your way of testing makes no sense. You should match exposure, not the ISO value a certain camera manufacturer assigned to a certain exposure. As we all know, 1600 ISO means something else for Canon than for Pana since they use different sensors. Right now, the GX7 footage is borderline overexposed. The 5D almost underexposed. Any conclusions you're trying to draw from these shots is invalid. I have no problems with people doing their own kind of testing, but if you're going to share your "test" with people and expect serious feedback, then maybe post something serious to begin with. If you wanted to test noise levels at a certain ISO, you could have shot footage of both cameras with both lens caps on. That will give you the most accurate idea of noise levels and native ISO.

Oh I cant wait for another 8bit miracles from Canon.

  Some nice stuff on there, thanks Christina!

Part 2! All the night parts were done using m42 russian glass, iscorama and a 5D3 shooting raw. Lighting was mainly practical with flames, a couple flashlights and one "Kick" led panel (from kickstarter). we're currently moving towards an 8-episode first season, to be shot during May, using BMPCC and anamorphic lenses (Iscorama and Foton-A). :)

Whatever they paid you to make this, it probably wasn't enough. :D Fucking masterpiece. Looks like it was shot on film. Great story, great lighting, great shot composition. If forced to nitpick, i would say that the opening shots in the graveyard were not as strong as everything that followed.