Leaderboard

I am upgrading some members to moderator status. If they choose to exercise their newfound abilities, this upgrade comes with the ability to delete and lock posts as well as the all powerful, all conquering ability to ban members who misbehave!   Thanks for their positive contributions to life here at EOSHD I am promoting RichG101, mtheory and jonpais to moderator status for the main forum and all sub-sections.   It carries no extra work or obligations - exercising their privileges will be entirely at the discretion of the moderator. I'll continue as the main admin. But I think having extra eyes and ears plus a few more trusted people with the ability to clean up posts and ban members will help me a lot.   Also since they expressed an interest, JohnBarlow will moderate the Anamorphic forum and Andy Lee will get his own sticky thread on lenses and lighting which may build into it's own forum section if it is successful.   I'll create the moderator privileges later in the week. Any objections or any opt outs please have your say on this thread!

I will be making extensive posts on lenses.... new... old, vintage... cheap and expensive and what their main good points are and how to get the best out of them. And also some useful articles on general lens use that will help improve your shooting and make things more dare I say more 'cinematic' and less 'video' which seems to be what alot are asking for. so say tuned folks and watch this space......

This is a short trailer to my a brand new documentary movie about looking for yoga in India. I was used to shoot documentaries by very cheap camcoder but thanks to this forum lately I have switched to a DSLR world. In my opinion it is possible to make some good shots by cheap camera like Panasonic G6 :-)

Good move, but guys, I have been using forums for 15 years and one thing I always noticed was that the forums with high levels of moderation became boring, and the ones with light moderation were always more fun. I think that banning somebody should only be done as a last resort when somebody REALLY crosses the line, not just for one or two offensive posts. Otherwise this forum will have a reputation for being up-tight (like the RED forums) and not free-flowing and fun. Just my two cents...

I think you should have a sub-forum for Andy Lee. Lenses are so important to making great imagery. It's so hard to find any reliable source for vintage lenses.

Will do, hopefully it's usable. The cmount 25mm 0.85 is a really great lens, reasonable wide open, sharp at 1.4 and makes a great pair to the iscorama with only a couple of shortcomings: 1) physically too small so the rear of iscorama sometimes spins when focusing. 2) a little to long focal length for 16mm sensor, around 20mm would be the sweet spot. If this one is similar in quality it would be perfect :)

I'd go here & ask if i were you: http://forum.mflenses.com/

This is my fifth attempt to find an affordable stabilization solution for the BMPCC, particularly for the heavy setup with Speedbooster and Sigma 18-35. It works perfectly, and the only two things that are missing are 1. Pistol grip to be clicked underneath the cage with a quick release plate and 2. Lanc-controller with button on top of the grip for START/STOP. It consists of an old, self-built shoulder pad with counterweight (aluminum rack, ~$ 5,- , bent in a vice and padded with foam rubber, ~ $ 2,-), a micro goose neck with 3/8" connections, ~ $ 7,- , filled with a steel rod, ~ $1,-) and a ball head (~$ 30,-). The ball head allows for fast height- and angle-adjustments. I found this to be the most crucial aspect of all shoulder supports. You both stress your neck with only half an inch of unergonomic proportions and run the risk of unintentionally rotating your frame. Not with this ball head. If you loosen the ball, you can screw it on or off the cage within 10 seconds. The counterweight could be substituted with a battery pack, and the rod that helds the goose neck stiff could also be a steel tube (well, perhaps, it could turn out to be too weak then) to hide the cable. The shoulder pad doesn't look particularly elegant, I'm sure you can do better.

Yes I think that there is nothing better for the money it costs! I used: mostly Panasonic Leica 25mm f 1,4 Canon FD 50mm f 1,8 Canon FD 85mm f 1,8 fixed ND 8 and 4 Graded and processed in Sony Vegas Pro 12 BTW: Jsem taky z Äeska :)

What lenses did you use? I agree, for the price it's really small capable camera! short production video for http://antropogallery.com

Glad to help. What I love about this forum is that it is both non-corporate and mature, and I'd like it to stay that way, with strong opinions or language fine in my book as long as character assassination, gossip and spam stays out.

I have the bigger Moeller (16/32/1.5x) and I wouldn't swap it for the most pristine copy of any Iscorama ever. I'm getting buried with this thing :)

Great work. I said it before, but I'm gonna say it again: the G6 is the most underrated camera of 2013... Probably we will see a refresh this year, wonder what the G7 will bring!

superb , this looks great , and I like the pink lipstick and the rack focus pulls too nothing wrong with them , G6 is a great camera , and its all about how you use it ,

Sean please come over to the lens part of the forum and contribute here with me in this new section on lenses and lighting. Not many people on this forum have gone through the whole process from start to finish of making a full length feature film - you and your Brother have and we need you to share your experiences and how you did it and what 'do's and don'ts' you came across while filming . You and I are into the same style of lighting with Practials and augmenting it to looks real .....a la 'Fincher , Bigelow ' etc

  I love this stuff.   You're right the price of the Pentax is amazing and it would seem Sony are making huge strides forwards with their CMOS business. Usually very hard to break performance and price barriers both at the same time. Somehow they are managing to mass produce sensors that have unheard of until now spec for the price.   If Canon are playing catch up in 2 years time and image quality on their DSLRs lags significantly behind Sony, and Nikon are using Sony sensors, it could spell a serious problem for Canon, something not easy to fix overnight as Sony has been building up to this level of sophistication for years and have surely spent many millions of dollars in the process.

We could have a separate forum for selling lenses, but I'm not sure about it.   The for sale threads in the anamorphic forum keep it quite lively and bring about discussion of various unusual lenses. If we hid these away in a sub-section it might make the place a bit more dead.   What do you think?

Baby Hypergonar is focus-through. Wonderful lens though.

Thanks but no thanks Andrew :) I know I spend (too) much time here, but I can't and don't want to commit to anything right now. I'd still suggest bringing back the 'marketplace' sub forum though. I'll gladly report al the offenders who still dump their ads in the general or anamorphic forums. With the new police it should be easy to move them swiftly :)

Good decision Andrew!

The cost of producing big sensors rises exponentially. It doesn't have anything to do with pixel density. Smartphone sensors are dirt cheap and have very tiny pixels/high density. Sensors are made out of round 200mm (8 inch) silicon wafers. The bigger the sensor, the more (expensive) material you loose. This image explains it well: But more important is the yield. When producing sensors, you probably never have a 100% yield. I have no idea what the failure rates are, but the tiniest piece of dust or whatever can ruin a sensor. So if one fullframe sensor is affected, a big part of the wafer is lost. I have no idea what the cost is of a wafer. Tried looking it up and found this, that gives a 'typical processed wafer value' of $11,000. 11,000/24 would be ~$458 per fullframe sensor IF the yield is 100%. Lets say there are two faults on the wafer, two sensors fail, now the cost is already 10% higher per fullframe sensor. Compare the Nikon 1 sensors to this (I'm not going to calculate the rates for M43... be my guest :)). 11,000/244 = ~$45 per sensor. If this wafer has the same amount of faults you can still get 242 sensors out of it. The price increase will be less then 1% per sensor. Kinda off topic, but I felt like giving some insight in the cost of a fullframe sensor. I do agree that the A7S doesn't have to be more expensive than the A7 seen from the 'cost of sensor' perspective.

Baby Isco, but the quality is no where near up to scratch compared to its bigger siblings. If you can live without dual focus (I certainly can) then the best quality small adapter is the Bolex Moller 8/19/1.5x, simply incredible images.

that sounds good - lets get busy !!

So after using them on a test shoot I've come to realize that what you gain in speed you forfeit for security....like Lucian said above. It's so nice being able to change out diopters so quickly though, but I can only imagine after some time the magnets will start to fade. I'm not sure I would trust it with a expensive/rare filter/diopter, especially during handheld shots. Another thing I would note about the filters is the idea of magnets and media (SD/CF cards) together in the same gear bag. Makes me nervous. So in conclusion, I'd keep it old school and take the few extra seconds to screw on a diopter.

Canon (and the 5D3) has the nicest color processing in the price range, especially for skintones. In good/bright light, the 5D3 H.264 sharpens nicely and looks really good on a large HDTV at a normal viewing distance. It's very important to use sharp lenses and to nail focus. The 24-105 F4L is ok for closeups, but not so good for anything else (sharpness). The 16-35 F2.8L II, 24-70 F2.8L II, and 70-200 F2.8L II are very sharp and really help the 5D3 H.264 look its best. Nikon and Zeiss primes are also very sharp; the new Sigma 50mm should be spectacular. Canon L lenses with H.264 (IPB): looks good on HDTV: I also shoot with the Sony FS700 and Speedbooster. The FS700 is sharper and has greater dynamic range (at least 2 stops) along with smaller H.264 files. When white balance is set properly, color processing is decent but still can't match Canon, especially for skintones. The Odyssey 7Q (haven't used one yet) takes the FS700 to another level, though from footage posted so far the color processing is still not as good as 5D3 14-bit raw. The GH4 has resolution to spare but falls short on color processing and DR and has a tiny sensor (only S35 with a Speedbooster- an issue if needing full frame FOV). The A7S looks to have excellent color processing and DR though has a fair amount of rolling shutter. For run and gun, the 5D3 is better than the FS700 as it's lighter and easier to focus when using a quality viewfinder loupe. The FS700 can use autofocus lenses but they are slow and don't always focus on the desired object. 5D3 14-bit raw is spectacular, especially when processed with ACR. The tradeoff is card and disk space and processing time. For the price, this is the closest one can get to an ARRI Alexa/Amira- the best cameras in most people's eyes. (GH4 can't compete with this color; processed with Resolve- ACR wasn't used) http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?322289-Wedding-(RAW)&s=6bee780c6bd52fdfdd928bcee7cec245 (Low light raw, processed with ACR).

Just get the 5DIII, or something else that's readily available. If the speculation is to be believed, and Canon doesn't release anything until late 2014/early 2015, while also factoring in the innevitable ML hack for that camera, it may not be until May 2015 that you see a fully optimized successor to the 5DIII. While patience is a virtue, putting your dreams/visions on hold for a year for something like that is a sin. It's still no guarantee that the 5DIII successor will be worth it, because as more cameras become available and more accessible within than time, the next Canon will appear as more of a "me too" camera than a "hey look what I can do differently" camera. I'd like to be wrong on this, because I have nothing but Canon lenses. However, it's become evident to me Canon's primary objective is not to step on any other major camera company's toes. They're comfortable with their place in the digital imaging Oligarchy of planned obsolescence, and wouldn't want to do anything that might rock the boat, like actually innovate and improve.

Huh? The image quality looks pretty meh to me.

It's not 10 bit YCbCr, and I've been careful not to mention that. Everyone knows you can't get 10 bit YCbCr from an 8 bit source even with a 1/4 downres (maybe an 1/8 downres, though). The claim is that the result is 10 bit 4:4:4, which it is. The DPX file wouldn't work otherwise. :) I think I've been clear that due to the limitations of the 4:2:0 color planes, only the luminance channel contains "true" 10 bit information. The color planes are 8 bit, and since there's only 1/4 the resolution in color (4:2:0), I can't sum the color planes and maintain the full resolution. There are still discrete chroma samples at 2K (so it's true RGB/4:4:4), albeit with a combination of 10 bit luma and 8 bit chroma. Keep in mind, however, that luma contributes to RGB, so all three color channels are being derived from a mix of 10 bit and 8 bit information. Green is almost all from luma, so the green channel is going to be almost all 10 bit. Oh and as others have suggested, this app should work with other H.264/4:2:0 cameras just fine. If people find that it offers a real benefit, I'll consider adding a GUI and ProRes 4444 export. Or just maybe add the functionality to an existing product.

I've decided that my next camera is going to be medium format. I don't care if I have to wait another 3 years. I want it.

This forum is better than the telly. Just bought an iscorama. (No disrespect to slr magic.) For sale My SLR magic anamorphot with diopters, 950 euros plus transport, location paris, europe

So this is the private message I had. WOW:- "I will kindly suggest you that the next time you'll open you mouth about me, you should me more careful/polite/gentle. The reason is obvious: You put your nose in things that are out of your business, while your sayings are results of your "supposes" and negativity. About my product: This is the final version of the Slr Magic, officially purchased & in full warranty period. Did I ever mentioned anything about the bullshits that you make? No. Did I ever said that you are a thief with the prices you're selling. NO. NEVER. Even that I don't like them, I never appeared in your fucking topics. So, and my word is final: stay out of my business (especially if they are clean & clear!) so I'll do the same. Gege? I hope yes... If not, be ready (as a start) to troll all your products in every site/forum/topic." Lesson 1. Primary use of a forum to sell sell sell is not productive for a community - I just looed at your post history and over 50% is selling! I came onto your topic because I felt your selling practice on this listing is not ethical and disruptive to the community on the whole. I find your listing to be unfair and on the whole something that appears to be taking advantage of those who are not aware of the importance of having the diopters as part of the setup. Lesson 2. Your personal threats about trolling my own work is pretty sad. As an open community I felt it necessary to bring up some of my assumptions since it is clear some of them are true. Lesson 3. Don't take it as a personal vendetta against you. I'm not trying to damage your reputation. But I have to say you deserved a bit of stick for your use of Iscorama, Bolex and LA7200 tag words in your title if nothing else. BAD PRACTICE. Lesson 4. Use of sexual swearwords in private messages is pretty low. Please avoid this in the future. So bring on your trolling if it makes you feel good. No skin off my nose. - I let me stuff speak for itself and this tends to deter bad mouths.

As a child, Batman, Jurassic Park and Terminator 2 were the first movies that made me want to make movies (even though I didn't know what that really required and meant when I was that young). But the first films that motivated me to make a movie were Scream and Halloween. I was way too young to watch them, but, nevertheless, I did, and they changed me. There was something so visceral about the horror in Scream (the satire was lost on me when I was 10) and Halloween was the first time I became aware of the camera, with that great steadicam cinematography (in 4:3 on VHS, no less. seeing it on DVD in widescreen years later was an even bigger revelation). At age 12, I finally made my first movie (on Hi8): a parody of slasher movies. Of course, in high school, the first movie that made me realize I could be a filmmaker was El Mariachi. My Hi8 movies looked like crap, I thought making real movies was too expensive and impossible, so I had thought about just being a novelist, even though my heart was really in film. With that out of the way, the films that really influenced me artistically... 2003-2004 were huge years for me. My sophomore and junior years in high school. Earlier that year (2003), Silence of the Lambs opened my eyes to the possibility of genre. It was technically a horror movie and a detective film in a drama's clothes. I think this was the first really artful film I saw, where I was more aware of the craft: the direction, writing, acting, cinematography, editing. I was aware of all of those things before, but this was the first film where I could see how they all worked together as a whole. And I realized film could be something beautiful, even with ugly subject matter. Speaking of which... The summer of 2003 was huge. It started with Taxi Driver. That film knocked me out. It didn't have a conventional plot to speak of. It was more episodic. It was crazy. It was gritty. De Niro, whom I had known better for Meet The Parents at that time, was incredible. THAT was acting. His monotone voice-over, his charmingly psychotic smile, his lack of emotion during the graphic shoot-out. And of course, Scorsese. The slow motion, the overhead tracking shot a the end, the heavily processed footage of the streets, from inside of the taxi. It felt surreal. And the script; the things Bickle said in the voice-over really got under my skin. Later that summer, in one weekend, I saw Rushmore, Ghost World and The Graduate. The Graduate I didn't really appreciate until I was older. I liked it, but it didn't fully click at the time. But , Rushmore was sort of a teenage version of The Graduate. I noticed the influence The Graduate had over Rushmore immediately, but I connected more to Rushmore. I was even the same age as Max Fischer when I watched it. Wes Anderson's filmmaker was so striking and bold. The tracking shots, the sharp, deep-focus widescreen, the colors, the wardrobe, song choices, title cards, curtains with the seasons, just...everything. Much like Taxi Driver, it existed in it's own slightly unreal world. Ghost World I watched three times in a row, in one sitting. Like Rushmore and The Graduate, it was very melancholy, but also, in my opinion, then and now, the funniest of the three dramadies I watched that weekend. The dialogue was so real and so sharp. The filmmaking was pretty anonymous, but the storytelling, tone and mood were part of a clear vision. It felt so real, and as a teenage boy trying to navigate the secret world of teenage girls, it felt like a real window. I knew girls like Enid and Rebecca. I was surprised that the film was written and directed by men. I also had a huge crush on Enid. Not Thora Birch, but the character of Enid. Ghost World is still my favorite film of all time. Later that summer, and into the fall, I saw Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Jackie Brown, and Kill Bill Vol. 1, which had just come out in theaters. Tarantino was practically all I thought about for a year. I read everything I could about him. I read all of his screenplays, and obsessively re-watched everything. I was an addict. I wanted to keep re-experiencing the high of watching Tarantino's films for the first time. Much like Wes Anderson and Martin Scorsese, the filmmaking was mind-blowing. It was bold, brazen, different. The structure and storytelling choices were unlike anything else I had seen. And that dialogue... I ended up writing a ton of Tarantino-inspired scripts for a year. 2004 included the release of three films that came out in theaters at just the right time: Shaun of the Dead, Kill Bill Vol. 2 and The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou. Of course, the last two were by filmmakers I had just fallen in love with, but Shaun of the Dead came out of left field. I saw it early, in the summer of '04 at comic-con, with Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright doing a Q & A after (Greg Noctero, Robert Rodriguez and Ken Foree were in that audience too). All I knew about the film was that it was a British zombie comedy. I hadn't seen a trailer, or knew much else. I hadn't heard of anyone involved with it. I saw it totally blind, and it was like walking down the street and finding a million dollars in cash in a bag. It was special. It was one of the funniest films I had ever seen, but it also had very real human issues and character drama. And of course, it was well-made and gory as hell. Earlier that year I had become obsessed with Romero's Dawn of the Dead, which had become more accessible because of the re-make (Romero wouldn't be a real influence, just an obsession at the time). After the screening, I was using the restroom and Simon Pegg peed in the urinal next to me. It was the closest I came to God at the time. I told everyone I knew they had to see it immediately. I don't really need to say much more about Kill Bill or Life Aquatic, since I said enough about Wes Anderson and Tarantino already. Later that year I saw two more important films, the first being A Clockwork Orange. I don't know what else to say about it, other than it was like Taxi Driver all over again. It was one of the most extraordinary films. The opening, with the synth score, the long-zoom-out from Malcolm McDowell as Alex, staring into the camera, immediately put me in a trance that I've never awoken from. That halloween I dressed as Alex. Around close to the same time, a kid name Johnny I knew peripherally, but not well, approached me, wide-eyed, asking me if I had ever heard of Eraserhead. I said I had heard the title, and indeed I had seen the iconic poster image of Jack Nance as Henry Spencer, with the hair sticking straight up, back-lit, with a crazy expression on his face and dust in the background. "You've gotta see it, man." Johnny told me. The next day, he presented a VHS tape to me. The cover art was there, though it was clearly a regular VHS box cut up into a slip cover to fit on a clam shell. I don't think the tape even had a label. It was a copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy, with video static at the bottom of the frame that Johnny claimed added to the experience of the film, and indeed it did. That night, I turned off all the lights in my bedroom and watched it alone. It was the first film I had seen that really, truly captured the feel of a nightmare. I thought about the visuals and sound design for several weeks after. I haven't been the same since. Looking back on my life, those were the films that really had the most profound influence on me.