Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/02/2014 in all areas

  1. Angenieux was THE lens of choise of all THE FRENCH NEW WAVE directors Jean Luc Godard , Francois Truffaut etc also Sergio Leone shot all the Clint Eastwood 'Dollar' Films on Angenieux too the 25-250mm T3.5 was the single lens used for 95% of these films.
    3 points
  2. The Leone/(Kurosawa inspired ;)) 'Dollar' aka Spaghetti Westerns looked great! I too have found the GH4 with a tweaked Cinelike D profile and a soft lens (e.g. Voigtlander 25mm F.95 wide open) to look magical on the GH4 in 4K. The most filmic images have lots of detail but are also soft in the sense there are zero digital artifacts. Using a soft lens and/or a Tiffen pro-mist (et al) filter / nylon stocking really helps bring the image into unreality, away from the video look.
    2 points
  3. The FZ1000 is all about the zoom range. If you need to go really long on the zoom then get the FZ1000. In all other respects the LX100 is better aside from the lack of slow-mo... and a few minor missing menu options. No CineLike D either. LX100 review part 1 http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/shooting-4k-pocket-camera-exceptional-panasonic-lx100/ FZ1000 review http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/panasonic-fz1000-review-bargain-4k-super-zoom/
    2 points
  4. I've heard good things about that one but for my money I would get the kamerar like andy suggested. The standout feature for me is that it's one arm, so much easier to move about on the rails or take on and off the rig. And it's just as stable.
    1 point
  5. I really like the way ML opens up possibilities on Canon, even if it is not very comfortable to work with in situation where you are in hurry: 5D MkIII's RAW is probably one of the best image quality under 5000$, but - apart I prefer a more S35like look - it's too tricky for me to work with ML. What I dislike about Canon's philosophy is the way they pretend not to know what ML can do on their cameras. They clearly consider their DSLR just photo camera and want you buy a 10.000$ device for video. It's offending, because they started a revolution and now they act as they did not know it: ​it does bother me their way to ignore how 95% of people work today. Just that :)
    1 point
  6. A little vid I shot a couple days ago, on FF with the takumar 85mm 1.8 this lens is killer! check it out!
    1 point
  7. Hmm.. not sure I agree with that after reading the reviews My conclusion was- FZ1000 Pros: Mic in, Flipscreen, Longer lens, Picture profiles, 5 axis stabilisation in 1080, more buttons/controls LX100 Pros: Wider / faster lens, looks cooler
    1 point
  8. Fair enough! Now let's get back to talking about why there is no high spec video on Canon cameras under $5000.
    1 point
  9. Please have a look at the music promo I made using a kowa 8-Z anamorphic adaptor, mounted on a voigtlander Nokton 35mm F1.2, using a Lumix GH3. I also had a Tokina .4 achromat and a Cokin Diopter +2 for the Close ups. It was all shot at night which presented problems as the Lumix isn't very good in low light. I was shooting at 50fps which reduced the amount of light I had even further. I also found that if the lens was fully open it was difficult to get a focus. Not because it was too shallow, but because it wouldn't focus on anything! As you can see I over-cranked the ISO on occasion, but I couldn't set lights up on the banks of the Thames at 3am, as we didn't have permission to be there. I wish I'd got someone to stand close by reflecting a bright torch off a white shirt though. I can only hope that I get away with the graininess in the spirit of low/no budget film making, and it looks like 16mm! Staying close to the subject, using the diopters, gave me a picture I liked the most. The bokeh looks lovely and soft and cinematic. Shots where I had to focus to infinity were difficult - the bokeh is ugly in those shots (in my opinion), taking the shape of a kind of horizontal tear. But I couldn't film the whole video in close ups! It was difficult to shot this as a one-man-band. Having to screw two different diopters on or off every time I wanted to change my proximity to the actors made it quite fiddly. I was also moving lights (I had x3 LED panels). I had some other taking lenses, but it wasn't practical to change during the shoot. Lastly, I know its normal to crop the super-wide picture you get from shooting 2x anamorphic on a 16:9 sensor, but I decided to embrace it. It's fun, and a bit silly, but its a music promo, so why not. Hope you enjoy. The track by Durlston George, his debut single, is lovely.
    1 point
  10. IronFilm

    Film Schools

    If you live somewhere with a decent film school which is free, or at least low cost, then sure.... go for it! But if it is an option of spending several years at uni while you get deeper and deeper in debt vs.... working for even very low pay (but not getting in debt) while gaining several years of experience, then I'm skeptical if uni is the better choice here?
    1 point
  11. elubes

    Fungus, Crack Or Neither?

    it looks like glue. i have glue on some of my kowas too.
    1 point
  12. Francis Ford Coppola liked the GH2 best in the Zacuto shootout. Are some subjective opinions more important than others in the opinion soup? I do believe they are.
    1 point
  13. The FZ1000 seems to lack 1080 at 24p... at least in MP4 format. I'd say AVCHD is usable option, but for me it isn't. That's the only bummer I have about the camera seeing as AVCHD is not a good codec to work with in the first place, and as I have a Macbook, it's practically hell. Other than that, it's a versatile camera. Cinelike D, Zoom Range, Mic input, flip screen. Both seem to have it's own advantages. Definitely, the two cameras pair up quite nicely for a budget combo. If Sony fails to offer anything similar early next year (but crossing fingers for a a6000 successor at a competitive price range though), I know the next camera I'll bet getting for my setup.
    1 point
  14. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/a86l8cq9vzio1gn/AACpiLt-1sPRWSie1nWFR9zRa?dl=0 6 shots. just jpg's. full frame 36mpx. first 3 images show centre performance at:- f1.4, f2. and f2.8 the final 3 images also show f1.4, f2 and f2.8 chart was approximately 2.5mtrs away. No focus adjustment between the centre and the corner sharpness shots flare isnt aligned since I had to tape the cinelux to the planar due to not having a suitable step ring to hand.
    1 point
  15. FZ1000 can always drop to 1080 for wider angle if needed, lack of audio / flipscreen I would say LX100 is more of the fun camera, FZ1000 a better contender as an A camera (if possible both used together are a great reasonably priced package!)
    1 point
  16. Disclaimer: I have used neither. LX100 for sure for your needs. I have read that it is better in low light. I see the FZ1000 as a fun camera for outdoors. Not wide angle. This would of been my preference but I have totally different needs.
    1 point
  17. Magic Lantern is the only reason that is keeping me working with the 5d at the moment, I enjoy fiddling with raw, although is tiring and takes a lot of space, but the results are still worth it. The 5d it's quite a bulky camera, not easy to take it around with you all the time, I would love to have something light that fits in my pocket. I was thinking to get the panasonic GX7 when I get some money. Ciao ;)
    1 point
  18. I like it! But I prefer to work with Panasonic G6 over a 5D MkIII 95% of the times. It's a matter of taste, of course there is not a perfect camera that fit all works. Last week I worked with a Canon 60D because the DOP that called me has that and did not want to use my camera. Other times I worked with a 5DMkII and MkIII, I had a T3i and a 70D... I admit I like Canon's menu better then Panasonic, but I like Panasonic image better then Canon because it's sharper and 60p in 1080 is something I use often. With Panasonic I have a better quality in handheld shots thanks to the smaller body, I can use lot of lenses (FD are superb)... I have the EVF and the focus peaking... it's something I cannot work without.
    1 point
  19. Here's another pro tip: Never make gear purchases this close to a shoot. You never know what hiccups you can run into.
    1 point
  20. richg101

    Film Schools

    as with most schools, the people teaching are quite often the ones who never made it in the real world. If they had done, they'd be on set rather than taking the money from people who don;t know better. Obviously this is a generalisation, but unless you're being taught by someone who actually has some proper background, don;t pay a penny! put the money in the bank, and live off it while working for free in the real world in a decent place with real people.
    1 point
  21. pablogrollan

    Film Schools

    Academic education is paramount in filmmaking. Any of those names that supposedly didn't go to film school actually did. Just, not the kind of school that gives you a degree in the end. Many succesful directors and cinematographers have built a career without going college or any "formal" film school. You can skip it if you read tons of books, attend seminars and experiment a little. You need to crawl before you walk, let alone run... Nowadays you can get the education without going to school (the Internet has made available many study programs an bibliographies that can serve as a guide), but you need to get the education anyway!! Making a feature with that money would probably a waste of money (one that I've seen more than once). Taking time to study and learn, and then spend money on some film (preferably not a feature) would be more sensible. I've been working for almost 20 years and you can easily tell the difference between the formally trained professional and the self-taught through experience. The latter is a one-trick pony, effective in his/her task but easily confused when taken out of his/her comfort zone. You see, the thing is that not only should you know HOW to do a task, but also WHY is that task performed in a specific way. The phrase "because it's always been done that way" or "that's way everyone does it" is sadly quite common and reveals a professional with shallow knowledge and little ground for improvement or evolution. Some gaffers will always be gaffers and some get to be DPs. And it's not beacuse of their "talent", that's a made up word which means "lots of hard work, perseverance and continuous study". Get some vast base -not basic- knowledge, either going to school or by your own means, watch and analyse as many films as you can and then go on screw up some minor production. If you've done the former, you'll be able to know why you failed and learn from your mistakes instead of repeating them systematically. And ten years from now you won't have to watch the expensive pile of crap that you shot when you were not ready. I don't mean to offend anyone or be patronising, but I've seen that mistake made so many times... and not once have I seen anyone spend their "college money" on a feature that was even watchable. And the worst thing is that not even they knew why it was so bad.
    1 point
  22. jax_rox

    Film Schools

    My feeling is you should either go to film school, or spend those 3-4 years crewing on films, gaining experience and working in the industry. I have never been a fan of this 'don't go to film school, just shoot a feature!' mindset, as without some basis of training (whether that's learning from those better than you by being on a set, or in a film school environment), you're making a film blindly, and whilst you will learn some things from it, I see it as much more of a waste of money than film school itself.
    1 point
  23. There was this one test on youtube that I saw (I cannot recall by who). In that test a important prospect was that aprently the A7S is bit too thin for follow focus work. The bottom part of the camera is too thin and that leasds to bending vertically. So in that sense a wider base of a camera is not a bad thing.
    1 point
  24. I think to fully damp high frequency jitter you have to move the sensor extremely quickly and nimbly, maybe it just isn't possible yet with such a big one. Another issue is that maybe the sensor is too close to the edge of the lens mount so it doesn't move enough? The E-M1 has more room around the sensor, more margin. Anyway I'm not an engineer, but Sony need to fix it. Let's not write it off completely - it might do a hybrid IS when a Sony OIS lens is attached, using OIS for the high frequencies and IBIS for the larger ones on all 5 axis.   I just wish at the minimum they'd match the competition... Minimal moire like D750, nice and clean... And IBIS up to E-M1 standards. Oh well.
    1 point
  25. g6 is your best choise then , the EVF and peaking are essential - I can not work without them .
    1 point
  26. You must have very low confidence in your own ability to come out with this stuff. My clients don't come to me because of my secret tools. They come to me because I put much emphasis into the ideas and for my very stylised, visual style. They come to me for MY vision and how I apply that vision. My tool selection is just an ingredient of that vision. People who work with me share information, talk to each other, borrow stuff, debate, exchange skills, ask for advice - because we are collaborators who have strengths and weaknesses, and we help each other to make better stuff. This is simple, basic networking - you never know who you will need in future! I have no issues writing a blog post telling the whole wide world of amateurs and professionals about my entire music video production structure - from style to logistics. I'll be happy sharing because they will never have the same vision as me, and most importantly they may have something to share too which I can learn from and apply. The secret sauce is your very self. Your ideas, your style, your personality, your skill, your results - it is this that clients buy. Have confidence in this and what everyone else is doing doesn't matter. If nobody shared, nobody cared ;)
    1 point
  27. I have to disagree strongly... Stop sharing? If you learned from the internet and now are at a place where you can contribute back then you should. I learned something a long time ago. If you are always worried about other people catching up to you then you aren't progressing enough.
    1 point
  28. I don't know which business you are in and I understand there is a big difference between someone who is a DOP for feature films and someone like me who makes wedding films and shorts. The latter is much easier to get in to. But you have to understand that video production is a line of work many people would like to get in to, 'if only it wasn't so complicated / expensive'. And the thing is, with current technology and forums / websites like these, it isn't anymore! And the more people will realise 'hey I just need 2000 euro's and I can start a wedding video business?', the more people will do it. And of course, talent plays a big role, so 90% of those people will stop after a year or 2 because they either suck at it or they can't get their business running. But 10% will continue and have succes in some degree. And 10% of an ever rising population can add up to a lot of future competitors. And I'm not saying we should keep everything as a secret, I'm just saying that the more tips and tricks we share, the more we improve our competitors work. Being a good film makers is hard and requires had work, talent and dedication. I know that. But being a pretty good cameraman requires much less time and effort and with all these tutorials and easy plug-ins like filmconvert and simple tricks like 'use a 35mm 1.4 on a GH4 with Speed Booster' enhances someones work in a short period of time. And I prefer my competitors to shoot an 5DM2 with a kit lens at standard ISO 3200, who has never heard of a ND filter or plug-ins to make your footage look better in an instant. Why? Because my footage will look better anytime, even if the other guy has the same or more talent for composition than I do. Let me repeat again that this indeed only applies for 'easy entry businesses' like wedding films, corporate films and commercial stuff. But I guess that's where 80% of the enhusiasts aim for or are in at the moment anyway.
    1 point
  29. If Rembrandt could have made a video how he made his paintings and tell you what paint brushes to use it doesn't mean any beginner can just copy his work, there is still something called talent and that is something you can't teach.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...