Leaderboard

A black & white test in slow motion of dancers on a parisian rooftop.

Nice project John. Though i am a bit hesitant to believe your focus system is miles away from the patented Isco system... :ph34r: Your stills look pretty good, but the video sample doesnt seem to show very much of that anamorphic quality we all want due to the fact that the shots dont seem to show any shallow dof or any proper focus pulls. What aperture was your zoom set to? I was surprised that even at 70-200 there was little infocus/defocus separation. If I went out with my nex5n, a 135mm f4 and an iscorama the depth of field would be razor thin compared to what i am seeing here. When you put these rather costly and heavy £3000 units up against a smaller, more compact £2000 iscorama36, (or £3000 vandiemen rehoused version!), be sure to show the capabilities between the two on full frame, with an 85mm f1.4 wide open. This is the only way you'll be able to properly show the capabilities against the benchmark 'rama, which will deliver sterling results even wide open!. I love the look from 2x anamorphics but I think the main issue your anamorphics will struggle with when being put up against an iscorama 1.5x is the loss of resolution from having to crop away so much from the sides. I believe selecting a higher spec Kowa 35 (1.5 or 1.75) would have been a better choice for usability in our current climate where resolution is very important. Very few people have access to budgets to rent an Alexa Studio with its 4 perf sensor.

I cant give out too much information as I have to protect my IPR, but yes there is a multi-element focusing front end which performs all the magic. Supplier information on optics and precision metal fabrication is sensitive business information. However if you fancy a trip down the East Lancs Road, we could meet up at the Hard Days Night for a pint and you could try it out with your GH4 and shoot some amazing scope if the weather is good. PM me if you want to set this up. Dont forget your wallet :)

Hi Cal, Yes sir, it really really really is single focus, its the real thing. You can pull focus, follow focus and get in really close. Furthermore you can use a zoom as well as your favourite prime glass. Its not only that of course - its CinemaScope just like the movies and it is a professional tool with minimum focus of 0.65m (thats 2ft imperial), no dioptres required, focus throw of 195 degrees, comes with a Steam Punk support rig for 15mm rails and works with prime lenses and zooms in the range 50mm to 200mm and it weighs just 500g (just over 1lb imperial). The mumps are almost undetectable. It is not just a conversion - it is a completely custom developed optical prescription using vintage scopes. The vintage look digitally remastered through a process I call Revisioneering. It is laid out here transferconvert.co.uk/cinemania/rectilux-3ff.html

I think it would make sense to update the a6000 as well if the lower end a5100 does XAVC-S. This sounds a bit silly.

Yes he did, I don't know the specifics but I have been in contact with him for months about this. It is old anamorphic lenses with new custom made optics that allow for single focus. I believe it is somewhat similar to a Isco where you have the anamorphic block fixed for infinity focus and then a variable power diopter in front, you set your taking lens to infinity and focus with the adapter. Although I believe the optics are different but the concept is probably similar. This one works the same way but I believe that the this adapter is not fixed at infinity focus so you can get closer focus. Set the focus on the lens and anamorphic block to infinity and focus with the new focusing system and you can focus infinity to say 2 meters. Set the anamorphic block and taking lens to 2 meters now you can focus from 2 meters to 1 meter. This is somewhat speculation on my part from my conversations about this lens in the past, the website so far has not been super clear to me on exactly how it works but I am sure John will pop in here soon and clear things up. Over all it looks like a very high quality and very flexible option.

Is it 720p or 1080p 120fps?

Great Job, quite an achievement !

guys, this applies to engines, whiskey, amplifiers, blu-ray players, vfx, lenses, monitor panels.. it's your job as DIY'ers, to find these imbalances, take the labels off, solder off the capacitors, hack the firmware, de-restrict the exhaust, snap the aperture rings... and keep it a secret: it's a good thing.

This kind of practice is standard in many industries. Is it anti-consumer? Maybe, but at least let me present an argument that hasn't been talked about yet - you're an electronics manufacturer, you have designed a range of products. Because your design team are competent, they have designed them to share as many components as possible. Now you have two products in particular in that range, they perform the same function, but one does it with 4 times as much precision as the other. You talk to your quality control team and ask, what grade of components does each need. The more precise product needs grade 1 components, say your QC team, otherwise we hit a 7.5% failure rate after 6 months of use which breaches our internal quality. The less precise does not exhibit a breach in quality failure if we use grade 2 components. So the manufacturing process begins. You specify a batch of whatsits which are the component in question and you manufacture them. It costs you £1000 for the batch and you get 20 grade 1's and 80 grade 2's. You send the grade 1's to the machine assembling the more precise product, the grade 2's to the other assembly line. Products get made and you talk to your marketing department. What can we sell these for, you ask. Well, how much do they cost to produce they reply - well, how do you price the whatsits? Are they all £10 each or should you skew the cost of production to represent the different grades? As you get 4 times as many grade 2's, maybe you should charge 4 times as much for the grade 1's, giving you a cost of £25 ish for the grade 1's and £6ish for the grade 2's. Now imagine you have 3 such components in your product, your precise product has a manufacturing cost of £75 vs £18 for the less precise version. Cost at retail £300 for the precise one, £72 for the less precise one. What happens if a canny customer works out how to unlock the precise settings on your cheaper, but "identical" less precise product. They get the £300 version for £75, but 7.5% of people who do this are going to break their devices in 6 months, an unacceptable failure rate to you. I'm not saying this is what is happening, but if you put yourself in the shoes of a manufacturer, you can see how decisions such as these are made and you can understand that the true reasons for them are a little more complex that pure profiteering.

Just like the previous post from Ben said. Do you have any idea how much time was spent developing your product? If you feel it's unethical to differentiate products solely based on software, then that means you feel that software has no value. Software is intellectual property that breathes life into the silicon your camera is made up of. Also look at it this way, do you have any idea how expensive it would be to bring a product to market without the substantial leveraging of previous hardware? The price of the F55 was set at is based off of the quantity of F5 units they hope to sell so they can leverage quantity buying power (+20 points of cream for their troubles). In other words, if they couldn't make the low end camera off of the high end one, they would have never made the high end one, because there's just not enough buyers to get an ROI. Companies do this all the time, they just aren't stupid enough to leave the workaround accessible in cleartext!

Shot this guerrilla style about a month or so ago for Project Greenlight. Thought I'd post it here, as it was really my first foray into 4K filmmaking. Learned a lot about handling the new workflow during the making of this.

HUNTER shot on BMCC 2,5K edited on FCPX, Resolve and AE Directed, Shot & Edited by Marc Linnhoff Music by Broad Rush Label : Dub All Or Nothing With : Clarisse Hagenmuller, Denis Jelly, Pierre Riff, Joffrey Schmidt, Sandrine Pirès, Marine Gardeux, Sylvain Clauser Routier, Anne Sophie Gole, Jonathan Lagrave Sponsored by Frank Linnhoff DP : Dom Pichard aka P-mod p-mod.com DP Assistant : Ludovic Haas Camera Assistant : Vladimir Lutz lutzvladimir.fr Make-Up & Hair : Anne-Ka Lejeal, Sophie Renier, Elsa Parmentier Costume : Adèle Wucher Barbecue Spit made by Christophe Fruh Skull made by Jean Linnhoff jeanlinnhoff.com Special thanks to Brigitte Desforges, Kevin Linnhoff, Frank Linnhoff, Jean-Marie Hagenmuller, Elodie Heitz aka Mnémo, Jacques Roth, Bouna, Jo, Delphine Lagrave, Famille Lejeal, Ross Middleton, La Clairière - Longemer Backstage photos by P-mod : flickr.com/photos/p-mod/sets/72157646215719879/

What I Think I Look Like