Leaderboard

Yup. It's freaking ridiculous too. This is the main reason I put up with the other video limitations of the OLY cameras. The 5 axis feature trumps pixel peeping...if you're actually using the camera to shoot stuff other than a test chart.

The Contax Zeiss Distagon 'Hollywood' 28mm F2.0 is a classic fast wide for full frame and is incredible on Super 35mm as well. Wide open it's one of the sharpest F2.0 wide angle lenses available and it has very little distortion. The Contax Zeiss version fetches $800 on eBay but there's a $60 wolf in sheep's clothing called the Pentax PK 28mm F2.0 which has a fascinating story behind it. [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/10730/60-pentax-thats-actually-a-800-zeiss-with-optics-by-designer-of-stanley-kubricks-nasa-glass]Read the full article here[/url]

I would like to give my platform to up and coming musicians around the world to showcase their music through my cinematography to an audience of around 250,000 people per month. This is the EOSHD Music Challenge. Readers act as DJ - they can pick music from up and coming singers and bands, with suggestions that might suit the mood of my cinematography and future camera tests. Cinematic music is really important to me but I haven't been satisfied with The Music Bed or similar resources so far. How does the challenge work? 1. Suggest a band or musician on this thread. They have to be up and coming not signed to a major label or already huge. 2. I investigate and do the contacting of those which I like and credit you for the find! 3. If they agree to let me use their music, they will find a new audience through my blog and hopefully sell some tracks on iTunes from a link on EOSHD. You will be designated as the discoverer of talent and winner of the challenge. 4. You can have fun with this challenge and play DJ - use your taste to select the right standard of music to fit EOSHD and in turn you might discover new music yourself which you really enjoy listening to. 5. My cinematography at EOSHD is purely an artistic endeavour and experimental, non commercial and does not make any money but for all videos featuring unsigned acts I will consider enabling the Vimeo Tip Jar and sharing the proceeds with the musician 50:50! This is a new idea and it will start off as a trial. If it works then great! If not then we will swap things around until it does, because I am determined to find new music and up and coming artists. Good soundtracks are really important for filmmakers and I believe in finding new talent. Perhaps you know some artists yourself? Perhaps you are one?

its only related in that it is made by Pentax to one of their lens formulas - it is not made to the Zeiss formula I always found the Pentax 28mm f2.8 a bit softer than the Canon FD 28mm f2.8 - I prefer the Canon version you used on the video you just posted

I considered happy if Olympus at least improved the 1080p image add 24/25fps option or allow uncompress and clean HDMI live view output.

For me rumor doesn't seem that farfetched. How Canon 50D which never had video officially, got one from Magic Lantern hack? Obviously because the hardware (sensor and processor) were both capable for video but for some marketing or other reasons Canon didn't enabled it. The same idea was in the E-M1 rumor by way, hardware capable for 4K is there, Olympus just enables it now, because they were not ready at the launch of the camera. Don't want to argue about a silly rumor, we’ll soon know for a fact, just want to point that the idea is not that farfetched even more we have a precedent and a real one. Also have doubts about argument No1. The idea that 4K video needs some extra work that generates extra heat is most likely no longer valid. Will try to explain, just keep in mind that am no microelectronics engineer, so this is all speculation but logic is simple enough. Sensor is sampled / read line by line horizontally. At least that is how current generation of sensors work. Prove – rolling shutter. Most of the sensors has to skip reading one or two lines in the process in order to save time and maybe heat too. But it seems sensors used in Panasonic GM1, GX7, GH4, Nikon D7100, D5200 new generation from Sony - A6000, A5100 no longer skip lines. Image is almost moire and aliasing free. This can't be and is not achieved by strong anti aliasing filter. Prove Nikon 7100 which doesn't have anti aliasing filter has the same video quality as D5200 which has one. It is achieved most likely by whole sensor read and some smart pixel binning method. So GM1 sample the whole sensor and is in a tiny body and heat doesn't seem to be a problem. Don't see a problem to slap 4K in it if Panasonic processor itself doesn’t generate too much heat. Hence the rumor about GM2 with 4K is not that farfetched too. A5100 and A6000 are with bigger sensors than E-M1 but in smaller bodies and also seems to have full sensor readout without line skipping and heat from sensor is not a problem. So question is how E-M1 samples the sensor. In his review Andrew says moire and aliasing are present. So most likely sensor skip lines during sampling, which means 4K is most likely not possible, but for different reasons. Anyway we'll know soon :) Atomos CEO predicted 20 new 4K cameras at NAB. About 5-6 materialized. Those 14-15 cameras missing so far are coming at some point.

There's a few on eBay right now...

One thing I'm not reading anywhere, that probably makes it impossible to handle 4K, is that it doesn't support UHS-3 speed SD Cards. Or does it? If the conditions were right though, I don't render the impossibility of a 4K firmware update. Sony has done it. From a business POV, it would be interesting to keep an older model alive by introducing a "in vogue" feature that would possible attract many customers that wasn't even considering it to begin with. Take me for example, I'm going to invest in a Gh4 later this month. But if, let's say, Fujifilm decided to give the X-T1 a 4K update, I'd buy it instead... in a heartbeat. Wouldn't you?

I shot a job for client last week outside with it , you can attach NDs to it , I used Tiffens on it outside ND16 , 8 , 4, 2 combinations of - stacked to get the exposure I want - I just dont ever use Vari NDs as I dont like the artifacts they produce - its all hard NDs on my lenses.

I dont use full frame so Im not quote full frame equivilants Im quoting actual focal lenths the speedbooster creates it is a very very good lens - a hidden gem - Canon got the glass on this lens just right with a speedbooster is the Full frame approx equivilant of 50-100 @ f2.8 which is a steller range to work in , 50mm being a 'standard lens and 100 range is right through to portait - this lens has little or no distortion suberb rich colours and nice solid blacks - and is sharp !! win win win !! see Ken Rockwell review here http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/fd/35-70mm-f4.htm quote from Ken Rockwell The 35-70mm f/4 is unusually sharp right out to the corners, even wide-open, and has little or no distortion throughout most of the zoom range. The Canon FD 35-70/4 is also built tough; it's almost all-metal.

I have to totally agree 100% with this!! Thats how it came across to me too. I appreciate the efforts Andrew puts into his reviews...there is some great information and he does a good job. I have the GH4 but I certainly didn't buy it on Andrews recommendation tho. However the mood of this article came across to me as being a little bit fickle. The GH4 was the best thing that happened only a month or so ago, and suddenly its now the Beginning of the end for that camera...wow!! OK Maybe he could have waited a few more weeks LOL!! We know the GH4 has some flaws and weaknesses and so does the A7S...as many have pointed out.. But after reading his article, it does read a little bit like "New Toy" and as you said that will definitely piss people off that bought the GH4 based, or part based on his previous enthusiasm...just a matter of weeks ago. The end result? People will be suspicious that his views are highly changeable and a bit fickle at best. I know Andrew loves Full Frame Cameras and all that, and I know technology moves fast, and I am sure the Sony fits the scope of his work very well, but the radical switching of opinion and the "Beginning of the End" stuff is really not necessary.

I think your exuberance with the A7s needs to be a little more balanced between personal preferences and real facts. Not because I deny anyone personal preference choices, but because there are people who follow your writings and respect your expertise and sometimes depend on your personal interpretations as vital information. Knocking off a camera from your personal likes doesn't make the guy who put his hard earned dime on the camera feeling very well. That same thing can be done using just results without deflating the follower of your site. Saying you want the Sony A7s because you have "full frame lenses" is not a factor in any decision making process at all. Those lenses will fit on many body styles and give different results on each. The guy that is in love with extreme shallow depth of field would certainly go for a camera that specializes in that. However, the truth is there is certainly a reason on the flip side to want the light gathering performance of an f/1.4 lens but have the buffer of an f/2.8 in the process. Saying it is the beginning of the end of a camera like the GH4 you have been heralding really puts a nice taste in the mouth of people who used your exuberance with that camera to put money down to purchase it. What is in the market now is a much wider choice than ever before and one does not cancel out the other. The GH4 gives you added light gathering abilities and the advantage of a wider depth of field, while the A7s gives the opposite with a very narrow DOF and cannot match what the GH4 does. The GH4 however can certainly give a very narrow DOF for people with the skill set to do it. So my objection really is very simple, there are a lot of people who read these articles and opinions standing there holding a camera they bought with their money that suddenly gets trashed for reasons no greater than personal preferences. I think that just ain't so hot :) There is really a ton of facts that come through a web site like this, and for me it is very appreciated. A little more respect for the guy "holding the bag" for a sharp turn of preferences would be nice. Exuberance of why a camera is earth shattering is lots of fun and exciting, but there are lots of people who already hold one of the other bodies that are suddenly on a poo poo list that can be done a lot smoother than this is being done. My 2 cents. Peter

I agree with Quirky on a lot of his points. I'm not sure why 5D RAW comes into this at all... It's a massively different kettle of fish. Although I think it's ok to show how cameras such as the a7S can match it in perceived performance. I'm very close to ordering an a7S because I want a different look and toolset compared with my GH3. Rolling shutter, weird record button, odd skin tones on a7S.... Doesn't faze me. There will be work arounds... Love to learn and just shoot. I'll be renting the a7S first though. Don't know why more people don't try before they buy. Did this with the GH3. Loved it, bought it. Tried the BMCC, thought it was ok, didn't buy it. Same goes for pretty much everything. Also... You can't judge a camera just by watching a few Vimeo clips and tests, as this depends on skill and creativity. It's cool to see it's capabilities in the right hands, but to write it off just because someone had filmed something with bad rolling shutter or yellow skin is a little silly. Love camera and what they can do.... I'm just more interested in the subject of the filming :)

Really? His piece, especially the first half of it makes no logic sense. It makes him sound like yet another narrow-sighted gadget nerd. I agree with him about two pretty obvious things, though, that the piece is only his opinion, and that the A7s and himself aren't a good match. That's not the fault of the camera, though. It's merely tells us that the A7s is absolutely the wrong camera for him and for the likes of him. Which is fine, no camera is perfect, no camera can be a perfect fit for everyone, and there are plenty of other nice cameras around. I can't help feeling that it's a matter of how you read the stories, and what your own inner wiring diagram looks like. He may or may not be in a honeymoon stage, but that's irrelevant. It's quite possible that Part 2 will have a different tone, but the relevant part about that is why and how. If you read his entire piece with a pragmatic (enough) mindset, it was quite informative. The message that comes through is that in the 'right' (capable) hands the A7s is indeed capable of delivering fine and pleasant results, even pleasantly 'cinematic' even under lower light. But that needs some work, as always, including getting familiar with the features of the camera and understanding how it works. And also trying to work around the quirks of the camera. And doing the necessary work both during shooting and after it. Which should be common practise with any camera, shouldn't it. You can create pretty pleasant looking footage with some other cameras, too, if you know what you're doing, but that's not the answer people are looking for, is it? I can't help but feeling that one of the issues people have with Andrew's story is that they read his piece with a typical enginerdy, I/O, either-or kind of mindset, which only want to see product X being either the best or crap, either better or worse than product Y, because choosing between X and Y will dictate the fate of one's cinematography. Automagically with a press of a button, of course. Then, the moment they see Andrew considering the A7s being perhaps nicer a tool than the 5D3, or even the GH4 in certain areas, that's all they choose to see, and then they get blinded by that throughout the rest of the story. I also can't help but feeling that what peeks out of some of the comments is that questioning the authority of the Holy 5D3, that's blasphemy! :) But you shouldn't really worry, because the A7s is not likely to become a big mainstream hit. Mostly because it's not a Canikon, and because it "only" has 12 megapixels. No self-respecting pixel peeper is going to openly admit that he owns a FF camera with less than 36 megapixels. BTW, there is no such thing as "5D3 RAW." The RAW part is a 3rd party hack, not provided, authorised or endorsed by Canon. A regular 5D3 is another product. If you wish to participate in a length-peeing contest, doping your instrument won't take you to the podium. It only takes you on the top of the dunghill. Just saying. ;)

I think it's the other way round with FD and Zeiss. I find FD warmer.