Leaderboard

Kendy Ty has 666 Likes, 66 Channels, 66 Groups, and 666 Following. W. T. F.

This is a must watch if own a GH3 and have any interest on the GH4. He makes many great points. He also shows off the shadow and highlight curve manipulation feature, and a pedestal setting.

same day rough edit! password: ana it was shot with a 135mm pentacon as a taking lens that was harder to focus than the anamorphic, and had some jag, so we kept losing the vertical allignment. I need to find a better taking lens..but over 100mm to keep it from vignnetting in the full frame, suggestions welcome!

Nothing wrong with this list so far, but why present it like this? Of course I'd love 1080p96 with supersharp images. But it is understandable that Panasonic has to do some tricks to get so many frames of the sensor. Even though not as sharp as normal 1080p, I think it's perfectly usable. Especially with shallow dof shots it looks lovely imo: With deep dof and lots of detail, the resolution doesn't look as good indeed: Is this a 'problem' of the GH4? Don't think so. I still think the 96 fps is a huge PLUS for the GH4. Which other camera has this possibility?? Regarding AF: I haven't seen any proper tests in video mode. Have seen an example where the GH3 gets it focus faster in AF-S mode, but is that a big deal? In AF-S you are shooting something static anyway, it's just to get the focus point right for the beginning of your shot. How about continious AF compared? GH4 should be better with the new focus system indeed, although I'm not sure if that works for video. Anyway, I don't have a problem with a list of points that are worth mention, but don't present it like things that are wrong with the camera. Also Panasonic is pretty open about things like the extra crop. You can see it as a downside, but also as a upside, because it gives you 1:1 pixel readout so no ugly artefacts from scaling. Do you have a GH4? Or are you looking for reasons not to buy one? :)

To me the editing is wonderful, I don't know what kurth was getting at, possibly a bit confused? The segments with the yellow straps and the photograph are clearly intercut with him smoking his cigarette in a non-linear way. They're not supposed to be continuous, so continuity isn't really an issue, they're not action-matches.

Dilemma of the century. Do you take the advantages of raw or 4K? Do you take the full frame sensor or the crop? Do you take the DSLR form factor or the advantages for video of mirrorless? This is something I've been really trying to draw a conclusion on in recent weeks for my own sanity! Read the full article here

If you want to be a DP then I suggest truly fretting about lenses, cameras, and all that. However, if you want to be a true filmmaker, get your hands on anything and make something compelling with it. Can you tell a story? Ideas are free. Organize and shoot a compelling narrative, let the tech stuff follow. The stream doesn't always flow so much in the other direction. It does sometimes, just not as often as tech-centric websites would have you believe. Cart. Horse. I've recently been shooting documentary B-Cam stuff with a GM1 and a Pentax auto 110 lens. Every time I look at the footage I think, man, I could easily shoot a narrative film with this thing. Perhaps that's next...?

I think you can start with a smaller budget for your lenses. For filmmaking you don't have to buy brand new high end glass. Old glass is fun! dirt cheap and it has character. If you want to spend the money anyway, you can easily allocate it to your camera. The setup I mentioned will cost like €1500 (GH4) + €720 (18-35mm) + €100 (Speed Booster Clone). You still have money left to buy some vintage glass / adapters. Anyway, if you are serious about your film making, what do you have in mind for audio? You'd probably need a budget for that too. On another note, if you don't want to spend much on the camera, score a Panasonic G6 for CHEAP! (like €400). Image quality is on par with the GH3 and it has focus peaking, the GH3 doesn't. Yes - it is a plastic/cheap camera, but great for the money. Perfect to start with. Actually I think it makes more sense to start with something like that. Of course, if you have the money burning in your pocket, support the economy, that's all fine with me :) But I see you are 19, can't imagine €2500 is peanuts for you. The G6 will be a great tool to start with, image quality won't hold you back in any way (if you think it does, look at the frontpage at the videos of Kendy, shot on a cheap 550D)... Buy some old primes + Speed Booster Clone and you are all set and done for under €1000.

I don't think there are differences between the lenses you mention. Just not all sites mention the full name. There aren't multiple versions of the 85mm and 35mm T1.5 lenses as far as I know (there is a new 35mm Canon AE f/1.4 though, probably there'll be a Samyang AE 35mm T1.5 soon - this has electronic aperture control on Canon-bodies). http://samyang.co.uk/index.php/vdslr-lenses-cine

Obviously, he sold his soul to Satan to get such amazing work out of such limited resources! :D From reading more, it appears he's not even using the Magic Lantern hack except to help him handle audio, is this correct? Wow.

It depends on where you want to take your cinematography. For example if you have a Malik type shot in mind of a pretty girl on horseback in a meadow reaching up to grab an apple from a tree in magic hour with all the butterflies around and such (can you see this shot in your minds eye?) then you might think F5@400mm To pull this off you will need one of these.... Rectimascop 80/2x On the other hand for a Wedding reception where you want to use a 2.8/70-200 Canon L on a 5D , you can use the WA Cinelux which has a 63mm rear optic This was shot with the above using 2/90mm Again the WA Cinelux will give the full height of the couple in a bokeh background at F3.2/200mm

So true! I coudn't agree more. My concern is not because the videos are useful, but because it seems suspicious that they are not letting any pro -except for Den Lennie- touch a camera... On the contrary, it seems to me that they were forced to advance the announcement at NAB so that their target audience would decide to hold a little and not rush into buying a GH4. Imagine what could have happened if they still had not announced the A7S? I'm sure many of "their" buyers would already have the GH4

I hope to post some video soon. The a7 definitely succumbs to video moire. However, I bought it mostly for photography. It seemed obvious to me that Sony announced the a7s to take some wind out of Panasonic's sails. My guess is the camera will come out fall/winter. After a few days, I have not found anything I don't like about the a7. Being able to set the diopter to my vision and chimp in viewfinder is more useful for me than the d600. Focus zoom and peaking with manual lenses is extremely useful. Really, a remarkable camera. Sony keeps improving their firmware and ergonomics. However, the Sigma DP1M still takes a better photo than the a7 with a Nikon 24mm. Most wouldn't see difference though.

Looks like you're ready to make the move to a scope with larger rear optic for bigger bokeh ;)

The lack of test shots looks like another indicator towards some production issues we don't know about, doesn't it. Maybe the price point is not about deliberate secrecy, either, maybe they haven't been able to decide/fix it yet. Or maybe the moguls at different departments are still bickering about it. Nevertheless, I'm not too concerned about the lack of test footage online so far, as I'd rather see test results made with actual production models rather than with pre-production models. Whenever the product is 100% ready to be purchased. The typical online test videos alone aren't really that critical, either, as only a few of them are typically of any use, all of them are compressed and none of them tell the whole picture. So perhaps Sony should have kept a lid on the A7s until they're actually ready to deliver, after all. A delay this long starts eating up the hype advantage gained by the NAB coverage. A product without a price tag is mere vapourware, not actual hardware. People will only buy products with a price tag, like the GH4. And even if they told the asking price, surely Sony wouldn't want to "Blackmagic" their latest high profile product launch for too long. But let's hope they will indeed give us the price and the delivery date later this week. Or maybe even start delivering it on the 15th. I'm not in a hurry to buy a new camera at the moment, though. I just wish Sony won't fsck things up, as they've got an interesting thing going with this new product. Different enough from the competition, including both Canikon and Panasonic. PS. With the sheer lack of actual A7s footage so far, surely this topic turning into a regular A7s discussion topic is not actually off-topic, let alone unexpected, right? ;)

Even if the Speed Booster had big enough an image circle to cover a full frame sensor, what would be the point of having one? Using Mamiya or Pentax 67/645 lenses with a GH4 or A7s wouldn't serve any practical purpose, IMO. Using a focal reducer made for crop sensors sounds like an awkward way of getting a vignette, too. One of the main benefits of getting a camera like the A7s instead of a one like the GH4 or the BMPCC is the fact that you won't need a focal reducer between the body and the lenses made for full frame. If the S35 cine lenses work in APS-C mode, that'll be an added bonus. I wish someone came up wit a high quality anamorphic focal squeezer of some sort. That would be cool, especially with the mFT bodies, wouldn't it.

yes Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs also spring to mind . Tarentino does this alot I like non linear films , they make you think a bit more instead of being spoon fed!!!

I love A Drop In The Ocean, Kendy is truly a talented guy! It's really sad to see people saying that a movie is bad just because it doesn't respect linearity like most movies do now a days. Come on, open your eyes, Cinema and filmmaking is much more than that ! Every one chooses to do what ever they want to do in terms of editing, obviously keeping in mind that in has to be in service of the story and has to be well made and to have a purpose , not just because it looks cool. I personally think that the non-linearity in this movie is a good choice and is justified (showing for exemple the passage of time etc...) and it's really well made. Look at some amazing movies with non-linearity like the Tree of Life by Terrence Malick or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind by Michel Gondry and there are so many more... Imagine if everyone was like Kurth... Cinema is about experimenting with what we have, its about trying and founding something new. So Kurth please look at the bigger picture here, because you are missing a lot of things.

ED = extra-low dispersion glass elements, reducing chromatic abberation. Not reducing the price of the lens, unfortunately. AL = aspherical elements, used in wide angle lenses to get a flatter focus field and better corner/edge sharpness. Like ED, it costs more. IF = internal focusing. Only glass elements inside the lens moves when you focus, the rear and front elements keep in place. The lens keeps the same size at all focusing distances. A bit more complicated for the engineers, thus adds to the price of the lens.

Yep, fast-moving shots with a fisheye or ultrawide, mostly. Usually following/next to the skater, or getting right next to an obstacle and doing a fast pan/tilt motion, following the skater as they perform the trick.

I'd wait for proper raw support before making any conclusions. Did you try with GH3/GX7 files? I'm curious if it shows the same. Might be a software problem. Maybe send Iridient an email, they might have a clue why this shows up.

Please not this topic is from a year and a half ago.. So how did it go Nicogw? Would love to see the result :)

Not into the body shape being bigger or a £3500 price tag. That would 100% convince me to go with the GH4.

Wow Tito, you really are a mine of information, this is better than going to college. :)

mission acomplished! thanks for the tips, it was very hard but i think i have some nice footage!

The 100W (18W used), 1600 lumen Cree 5000K LED lights were $21 each. They are super bright, and look pretty good. When recording at 24fps, they look OK. However at 240fps (Sony FS700), they flicker. I tested the Yongnuo YN-300, YN-600, and F&V R-300- no flicker at 240fps. The old 120W (45W used) 5100K CFLs don't flicker (though some make noise & buzz). Here's a 60W Cree tested (no flicker at 24/30fps): Those looking for budget lighting, I'd start with the Yongnuo YN-300: 2280 lumens for $67 http://www.amazon.com/Yongnuo-Professional-300pcs-sheets-Camera/dp/B00AZFE5DS/ref=sr_1_1 and this power supply (in addition to Sony NP-970 batteries for non-AC use), $25: http://www.ebay.com/itm/110V-220V-AC-Adapter-Power-For-SONY-NP-F970-F960-F750-F550-YN-300-II-YN600-YN160-/291005963183 Based on specs only (not tested), 2 Cree 5000K lights are 3200 lumens for $42 + $20 for 2 clamp-on bulb holders = $62. The YN-300 with AC adapter is $92, however it's also dimmable, camera mountable, doesn't flicker at high frame rates, and can also run on batteries. The YN-300 II and YN-600 are "bicolor" and more versatile, however they are effectively 1/2 brightness when using the daylight LEDs (I'm using lights in the daylight 5000+ K range). I'm going to keep looking for LEDs that don't flicker at high frame rates to replace the CFLs. This info is helpful: http://www.davidsatz.com/aboutflicker_en.html

The negativity is just jealousy. Hats of to kendy to playing his one camera and lens like a guitar, instead of doing endless lens tests and upgrades. Love all his work and look forward to him digging into meatier things in the future!

Yes very helpful friendly members there, frequented the site for many years. Here's a SMC Tak breakdown, scroll down below the Canon FD bit: http://k10dpentax.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Repair And a short list ;-) of links to repair breakdowns and such: http://www.4photos.de/camera-diy/index-en.html Have you also tried pentaxforums? http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/54-pentax-lens-articles/179912-pentax-k-28mm-f3-5-disassembly-cleaning.html Biggest contention I've found over the years has been what sort of lubrication to use for smooth focus and I settled on this, which has worked well: http://www.ebay.com/itm/HELIMAX-XP-Camera-Telescope-Optical-Instrument-Focusing-Helicoid-Grease-w-PTFE-/271052175856?clk_rvr_id=631740458361&afsrc=1

If you couldn't follow the story you might want to try something simpler. Thor 2 might be more ya speed! Great film, the consistency on Thor's hammer throughout the film is flawless and leaves you feeling satisfied at the end of the film. I thought about his hammer for days afterwards....

GH4 shoots also 'just' H.264. With a higher bitrate than Sony though. I can understand you point regarding the Speed Booster. But it might be a nice excuse to try out some (cheap) vintage glass for the GH4 ;) No need to re-shuffle your whole collection yet.

Yep. If you are shooting ML raw, I'd go for 4:3. That'd give you a resolution of ~1706x1280. Stretch 2x and you'll get a resolution 3413x1280, aspect ratio 2,66:1

This site is excellent for info on manual lenses and has good info on care and repair, getting a basic toolkit together and all that. http://forum.mflenses.com/equipment-care-and-repairs-f6.html http://forum.mflenses.com/basic-techniques-to-repair-lenses-and-cameras-t32862.html

The Lens Turbo (.72x Speedbooster clone (.71x)) works with vignetting:

If you want your final image to be 2.35:1, (810x1920), you should horizontal scale the image from the camera by 150% and reduce vertically by 75% and then crop to 1920 wide from the resultant image. This means you are discarding 33% of the image width (you have to sacrifice something for your art) PS you can use a 33% wider focal length if the crop is in the center because you will be discarding any vignetted parts.