Leaderboard

You get a more robust lens but you loose a bit of flexibility – because of it`s design (as mentioned before). It becomes a real "fat lady" after the mod. And with the close focus mod done you'll need a FF with a faster gear ratio (2:1 like the Arri Cine FF). And this FF isn't a lightweight at all!! When I got my ISCO back from VD, I decided to mod the mod. A friend of mine – "SFX Lange" based in Hamburg – did the following: - we made it noticeable lighter (the mount is the heavy part of it) - we've added a solid lens support (Vocas) - we attached a torque motor on the lens support (redrock micro remote) The ISCO is held by the lens support and is just "pushed" in front of the lens (not screwed!) Now I can change the taking lens within seconds, without a recalibration of the ISCO is necessary. Have fun!

Pros are wondering what the benefit of 4K is to them in terms of overall image quality, when mastered and delivered for 2K / 1080p. A lot of work is still shot in 1080p and cameras like the Canon C300 are the workhorses of the moment. In the case of the GH4 it may appear from the specs that it's just an 8bit 4:2:0 camera internally. Actually the theory is 8bit 4:2:0 4K material from this camera can be taken through a workflow in post that converts it to 10bit 4:4:4 1080p - with all the smoother tonality, better colour and workflow advantages that format brings. This is a big leap for 1080p based on the much more expensive C300 which only does 8bit 4:2:2. I asked Go Pro's David Newman (Sr. Dir. Software) whether this theory was correct... Read the full article here

Hello guys! I have already received the new Olympus 25mm f1.8 and I did a fast test with autofocus to test the compability of the lens with the BMPCC. Here´s the video. I will do some other test soon. Thank you all for the information shared in this forum, I´m learning a lot with you, I´m just an amateur video man.

holy cow the porsche clip looks,.... Yow! Borrowed the holy cow line from AaronChicago. Just put the clip in after-effects and in my excitement threw a bunch of magic bullet looks at it and I'm drooling. OK, now I just dropped an Eastman 5298 EXR 500T film stock on it and I'm in love.....

Holy cow. Grades smooth as butter.

https://www.copy.com/s/EoeMcoA2T9L4/GH4 A little teaser...

A little bit of pee just came out...

I'm an old 16mm film shooter and professional video engineer who has a D16 on order. I have seen some early prototype sample footage from the D16 that I processed and graded projected on a 20' theater sized screen from a $60k 3-chip DLP cinema projector my company was installing for a corporate client. That is where the D16 really comes into its own, producing a seamless rich image with refined color, grayscale reproduction, texture and motion quality that no compressed codec HD video camera anywhere near its price can come close to. At that size all of the typical low end HD camera artifacts like rolling shutter, moire and aliasing stand out like a sore thumb. Compression artifacts like crushed blacks, macro blocking, and images that turn to mush when anything moves look horrid. The BMC's are cheap and do shoot raw and Prores, but they still suffer the same range of low end CMOS artifacts. Prores is just another compressed HD video codec, though better than most. Comparing the D16 to any HD video camera is a futile excercise. It's design target is to be a viable true 2k DCI format compliant digital cinema camera. An affordable direct replacement for an S16mm film camera. That it does extremely well. Better than anything short of a Sony F5 with the 2k OLPF installed shooting raw on an Odyssey 7Q. A week's rental for an F5 raw package will buy you a D16. It is very cheap for what it does. Can't wait to get mine! :) Joe and Elle, the developers of the Digital Bolex, are film makers with deep professional, social, and philosphical connections with the current indie cinema scene. Not the kids running around with $600 DSLR's shooting their latest take on the zombie craze, but serious film makers shooting narrative, documentary and experimental art films who chafe at the frustrations and image quality limitations of HD video cameras. The D16 is made for them.

Andrew, for someone who says "attention seeking for clicks." on the post above, You look like someone who knows how to play the game quite nicely too ;) Oh well, that was a nice april's fool :D

I'll second that - been clicking on EOSHD since Sunday night (California time - I'm used to Andrew's schedule with him in the UK) and am going mad waiting... And of course this is a great indicator of what a great site you run!

Sounds like a decent lens.... for stills. Like the GH3, I think this camera will shine most with manual glass if you are going for cinematic. That's what MFT is all about! ;) Electronic Panasonic lenses look overly clinical, knife sharp and very contrasty..... absolutely awesome if thats what you want!

Is the footage posted yet from this test? Really excited about this camera!

I have to disagree with Andy here. Try as I might, I can't "remove" the wifi from a g6 with my iPhone :) Remote, that's another story ;)

I use this too. I grew up with SoundForge and ACID for audio, so Vegas was the first editor i used.

If you already have good MFT glass then the BMPCC is perfect (compared to others) for that application. The only thing that really bothers me about the BMPCC is the moire that appears in DNGs when the image is too bright and sharp. I doubt that will be an issue with what you want to shoot. On the plus side, in low-light RAW based cameras become grainy, H.264 cameras become blotchy. When you shoot with any of the cameras above you'll get a nice, smooth image. But your blacks will be crushed. To see the difference in images lease look at these two shots I too with a H.264 and RAW based camera http://maxotics.com/?p=146 The BMPCC also need the fastest SD cards, plan about $50 per 32GB at current rates. Not a good camera to shoot long-form stuff; that is, leave camera on for an hour. In general, any RAW based camera will require at least 4 times the money, time, effort, etc. Out of the box, the video from a GH3 is, say, 10 times better than the image from the BMPCC. And it will stay that way unless you put 10 times the effort into the RAW based video. However, if you do that, then the BMPCC will end up 10x better than the GH3. All depends on what trade-offs you want to with your time.

These guys have just finished a Kickstarter campaign which I backed. http://www.24shots.com/articles.asp?id=282 This would be ideal - although you will have to wait until its on general release, or even see if you can get one anyway!

beautiful. I think I fell in love with your model a couple of times throughout the 2.5mins. rather than a test showing the camera image quality (we all know what great 1080p/2k and dr from cameras shooting more than 8bit h264 looks like), the piece actually highlights how use of lenses designed for the image plane they're being used on create their own amazing look. those 16mm lenses do marvellous things to the image. No other camera / lens combination would have allowed this piece to look the way it does. - the horrific black magic pocket may have been cleaner, but the shutter skew and stupid form factor would have hindered just about every creative decision you made that day. I can't afford one of these at the moment but will be sure to keep an eye out for one when they come down a bit in price.

sean cun what are you. you build up something like this thing like it is the second coming and you produce bilge complete and utter visual bilge. did you destroy all comers no. you counter attack with words to try to diminish cos your bland visual style is made for this rather cheap optic. keep the words cumin fella and leave the visuals to seb : ) i only came back here to give you a slap girly cos you are really quite horrid to people. and you lecture folks based on years of using an optex century. get back to your film set big boy leave the amateurs to polish nice proper glass. or should i say film studio tour of a film set.

when someone says movie i think of movie. i repeat nobody is gonna make a movie motion picture with this new optic. why would you. it does not make any sense. if your making a 1000 dollar movie ok maybe. but that is not gonna be a film a movie a motion picture. that is gonna be a you tube clip. with the new cookes coming companies like hawk are gonna have to take a price reduction on rentals. if you are making a cinema movie and you have a budget you rent the real magic stuff. not the fake stuff with the name magic on it. and plus no director is gonna wanna work around that ugly broke back flare.

http://panasonicprovideo.tumblr.com/post/80965679215/varicam-modularity ;)