Leaderboard

IMAX cat videos please.

The proof will be in the pudding. I for one hope a good quality medium format focal reducer comes out. But not for the aesthetic benefits - of which there will be none over a good quality 135 format lens. I'd hope if one comes out it delivers good enough optical quality to transfer undegraded the image circles from my hasselblad lenses onto the a7r's 36mpx sensor - which only a few 135 format lenses can fulfil. But i cant see it happening unless suddenly the world's stocks of 110mm f2 planars is multiplied by 1000 and they start selling for £250. only then will it seem worthwhile to manufacturers for the reasons you are hoping to achieve. Even then, on full frame the 85mm f1.4 will be similar to a 110mmf2 + focal reducer. It's not science or drawings i am using to back up my opinions. I'm just going by my own experiences. We all know an aps-c sensor + focal reducer looks nothing like a full frame sensor. it's similar, but it's not the same IMO. Phase One, Leaf etc wouldnt be making medium format sensors if there were no difference would they?

  It's not about shallow DOF, it's the whole rendering which changes especially with wide angle shots.

This thread is dedicated to the discussion and testing of Rectilux FF single focus CinemaScope adapters For product specification, pricing, availability and business matters please visit my web site below as a matter of courtesy to our host. http://www.transferconvert.co.uk/cinemania/ The vintage look digitally remastered... revisioneered I have a vimeo channel set up for the tests here: hxxps://vimeo.com/channels/rectilux (passwords are on the web site) I also have a flickr account set up to view stills, which is the best way to evaluate sharpness etc www.flickr.com/photos/125986580@N05/sets/72157646313357302/ I will shortly have a blog up and running, but you are very welcome to discuss these breakthough products here. Blog now set up at http://www.rectilux.com

  With three standard Alexa sensors stitched seamlessly together, 65mm film moves into the digital era and with it Arri into the 4K & 6K market. Read the full article here

My thoughts exactly. The video where Geoff Boyle said this is very much worth watching:

This is an age-old still photographers debate and worthy of a Phd thesis..........

'A 4k bayer sensor does not give you 4k. To get a TRUE 4k image you need to start at 6k +, what really matters is dynamic range and colour'. - Geoff Boyle Alexa 65 therefore will probably be the best looking TRUE 4k digital camera to many, as they are capitalising on their proven/ superior colour science knowledge, superb development with Sony for their sensor technology and camera build quality acquired from almost 100 years in the film industry. The larger format look is what will set it apart from the competition...at least until Panavision release what is up their 70mm sleeve. Alexa 65 was used (probably only for testing) on the new Star Wars film, comparison with imax acquisition/ projection no doubt.

That's pseudo science and you know it.The focal reducers may introduce aberrations, but they just modify the trayectory of the rays behind the lens, the lens in front and the real objects don't change. http://www.pierretoscani.com/echo_focal_length.html Same lens design, twice the size, twice the focal length. If you put a focal reducer behind the second one the focal length will change, the lens and the angles and the entrance pupil will still be the same size. The look doesn't come from some magical property inside the number 80.

the effortlessness of a 100mm t2.2 on such a big frame will be astounding. not much different to a 85mm f1.4 on full frame in terms of shallowness and field of view, but it'll be 10 times more pleasing since as we all know a f1.5 85mm always has rather a lot of fringing on contrasty grads like branches or telegraph poles.

Regarding availability of the alexa65 I really hope its cost renders inaccessible to guys shooting commercials and other lower end stuff. I see too many low profile things shot on Alexa and it devalues the look when you go to the movies. I don;t want a Asda / Walmart advert to look like a movie. It would be really good if arri keep this away from low profile stuff in the same way the alexa studio is positioned out of reach of small time stuff. And the same as Panavision's prestige I miss going to the cinema and being wowed every time. It seems only the case with movies by P T Anderson and Nolan that movies feel like movies nowadays.

focal reducers don't give the same rendering as a bigger sensor. the reasons? medium format + 80mm f2.8 has the dof of an 80mm f2.8. It's still an 80mm lens. full frame + speed booster + 80mm f2.8 lens = 50mm f2 lens. no longer an 80mm and no longer renders the gradation between in and out of focus subjects. The field of view and dof will be the same. but the rendering will be distinctly different. The only benefit to a focal reducer on full frame using MF glass is for resolving power. and to make it worthwhile the cost of a high enough quality focal reducer will be thousands due to the fact that there is not enough fast medium format lenses to go round and thus the market is small. As full frame sensors reach 50 and 80mpx the need for such a thing will be more important since a hassy 80mm f2.8 will outresolve all f-50mm 135mm format lenses when compressed down to a 0.7x image circle. = This is my forbes 70 test which shows the power of a big format - the width of view from a 50mm f2.8 is madness when matched to the dof.

And remember that if someone comes out with a speedbooster for the A7s you will be able to get close to that look for just a few Thousands.

From the FD Times piece:   These greatest of all films, in their epic 65mm format, demanded epic logistical effort, 70+ pound temperamental cameras whose movements sometimes required oiling after every take, and set- ups that were not, shall we say, swift. Film, processing and dailies could average around $2500 for a 10-minute roll. 

I wanted to bring up one thing that happened to me yesterday shooting with the Gh4 and the BMCC Speedbooster. I've been using this combo since the GH4 came out without issue, but yesterday I was filming an event with very challenging lighting combinations so I used Custom White Balance. This may be common knowledge to some of you, but if you have Electronic Shutter on, when you try to set a Custom White Balance, that mechanical shutter activates, you hear the click and real the vibrations and realize you have a BMCC Speedbooster attached. My SP ended up stuck on my GH4, and received a message over a white screen that read something like "Turn off the camera and turn it on again" but that did nothing and I still could not remove the SB only more clicks each time. Frustrated and bummed out, I set it down and wen to sleep. The next day I had another shoot, so I went t put my GH4 away and went for the BMPCC instead, but when I went to move the GH4, I decided to give it one last try. Speedbooster came off without hesitation. All I can say is, don't use Custom White Balance, if using a BMCC Speedbooster. If it's common knowledge, I apologize, but I didn't know this.

it uses ED glass elements not aspheric elements the 24mm f1.7 - that sounds good to me as it will have a more cinematic look rather than the fully mega sharp aspheric clinical look of panny and olympus lenses

go watch all the Tony Scott Directed films as he shot almost always on the long end of lenses often with x2 extenders , Top Gun , Days of Thunder and my Favourite for long lenses - the Taking Of Pelam 1 2 3 (the remake not the DP Owen Roisman original classic) that gave his films that fast style , long lenses are great for movement shots also watch all the Sergio Leone Dollar Trilogy with Clint Eastwood - (he used and Angenieux 25-250mm f3.8 to shoot the entire movies the odd shot on fast primes at night but 90% on that one Angenieux ) long lens extreme closes ups where Sergio's trade mark he shot 2 perf Techniscope on spherical lenses. I prefer long lenses any day to wides !! long lenses are alot more cinematic looking . harder to use creatively as you need very good sturdy rigs for them, as you cant just hand hold these and expect it to look nice!!

Had this one brewing for a while. Shot in anamorphic to accentuate just how irritating vertical video is. Not for the easily offended. Bring your sense of humor. Shot on A7s in Slog2, Nikon 50mm & Bolex/Moller 1.5

I am thinking about buying the lumix GH4 and this is clearly a top contender. I use a x2 anamorphic kowa 8-Z and I don't feel like using 16:9 then crop sides and lose something to get à true 2:35 ratio. If the Samsung has a true 1.33 ratio mode with HiQuality codec I won't hesitate twice.

This from RedShark News: http://www.redsharknews.com/business/item/2038-canon-7d-mark-ii-debuts,-but-what-does-it-mean "The reality Canon's 5D Mark II kicked off the HDSLR revolution, but it wasn't planned. In fact, it could be seen as a mistake, as the advanced (at the time) video capabilities of its DSLRs made those cameras popular amoung shooters, which likely ate into its pro video profits. With this latest version of the 7D, Canon refocused on the action photographer, all but ignoring the video advancements of competitors with similarly-priced cameras. When you take a step back from it, it makes sense; Canon sells far more equipment to photographers than video shooters, and why should its DSLRs compete directly against other Canon product categories like pro video? The big take-away may be that Canon is quietly removing itself from the DSLR video revolution that it accidentally started." I don't tend to get into this whole Canon and Nikon are Video Grandpa's when it comes to video, but the above makes sense. Can't some of us just accept Canon's business decisions and move custom elsewhere? At this rate, it sounds like some people would actually go into apocalyptic meltdown if the Canon 5D MK IV didn't have 4k video and that Canon have "lost the plot."

  I simply don't agree!!

  It isn't that simple. No line skipped or pixel binned 1080p from a 20MP sensor will EVER look cleaner than 1080p from a 4K source file.

Nothing angers me more than to see so much innovation go unnoticed by the masses who continue to buy unoriginal big-brand greyness for more money.   Anyone paying $1800 for this camera and shooting video when they could be using a GH4 is simply nutty.

Seems to have an issue with inverted ghosts (of the child out of shot) in the time 00.03 - 00.06

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