Leaderboard

Hardware approach: Depending on what the project is, I'd consider renting an FS700 for that shot. It has good high frame rate modes. Check Philip Blooms slow motion shots in his review at 240 fps and 480 fps: http://philipbloom.net/2012/05/25/240brighton/ Depending on what kind of shot you need to use, and your budget, keep in mind that the latest Gopro Hero 4 also can shoot at 120 fps, although there's a bit of antialiasing & moiré going on there in the image. There's also a few compact cameras with 720p at 120fps like Sony RX100 III and Panasonic LX7. The LX7 is an older model and can be had pretty cheaply. Software approach, Twixtor and other similar tools: Twixtor often shows artefacts which aren't too beautiful, yet if you use it right the result can be impressive. Worst cases I've seen is when it's used around water, like surfing shots. The water looks odd, gets added artificial movements. Sometimes the bodies and clothing of people get twisted. I guess it's possible to find ways to hide some of these artefacts depending on how you overlay footage on the shot. If it is a project where the budget should be kept low, I'd personally try to see how I could make the shot at 50/60p to optimize it for use with Twixtor. I've seen Twixtor footage without artefacts, so it's possible if you know how to avoid everything that can produce artefacts. That's where I think there's a lot of trial and error included, since I've seen a lot of Twixtor footage out there that has the classical artefacts.

From working in computer graphics for the last 14 years I can tell you that this is absolutely correct. With a pinhole camera changing the focal length is identical to cropping in on an image. Changing the focal length doesn't alter perspective only moving the camera can do that. In real life they are not necessarily identical due to different depth of field characteristics and lens distortion, etc... but for all practical purposes zooming and cropping are identical - hence digital zoom. I find this to be a common misconception about speed boosters to, all they do is brighten the image and "un-crop" the image to a larger image but do not alter the perspective or DOF in anyway. Focal length only affects depth of field, the FOV is the result of the relation ship between the focal length and imaging size but the image itself is identical for all sensor sizes the only difference is how much of the image you see. Perspective is purely defined by the physical location of the camera.

Rather than Twixtor, download the latest software for GoPro. It is free, and apparently they own Twixtor and included that technology into their video editor. "GoPro Studio Flux": http://cheesycam.com/gopro-studio-flux-slow-motion-option/

I feel you man. My storage server (that contains all my data) is acting up and I'm looking at throwing in big bucks on that now, to build a new storage setup... So I haven't yet pulled the trigger on the FM lens module, although I really would want Santa to bring it to me. Especially since after I saw Häns footage! Soon... Soon...

All great choises with their unique strenghts and weaknesses. size of lenses = some what GH4 (smallest possible lenses) combined size + weight low light - Sony Most future proof 4k / best quality in good light is - perhaps Samsung. then again can you acchieve that at decent enought level with Samsung lenses? is some what a question mark.. the samsung "proper lenses" have nott been tested at dxo. even tho like Andrew test seems to show that CA might not be that much of an issue. Both mft and sony platforms are speculated / known to be getting interesting technological options later down the road. Sony A7000 (perhaps with 4k output) A9/A7RII GH5, Olympus EM5-II / EM6 even tho those cameras may not end up beeing video specific unil GH5. Samsungs platform evolution past NX1 is even more ellusive question mark. I'm personally learning with GH2 and G6 for now. During the spring I will likely invest into a cheaper GH4 or something else. Do what I do .. learn with cheap camera. get lights now from ebay. etc .. LEARN .. perhaps buy used or cheaper GH4 later. I sense this upcoming spring time will be soper hot competition between all brands. Even Canon will likely release a FF mirrorless.

I have been asking myself the same question for a while and finally went for the GH4. Couldn't be happier. You know when you get something and it just feels right? Panasonic really do know how to make cameras for filmmakers. I think the image quality between the three is all give and take - none are clearly superior. But in terms of loving using the camera, the GH4 appears to be well in the lead. It was the 10-bit out option that sealed the deal for me though. 10-bit 422 out option + 4K in a beautifully designed video camera for £900? Incredible really. :wub:

I had similar problem... Bought lx100.

I made more doing less 15 years ago than I do today. That's the reality. And since the gear is cheap, more creative fresh people give it a go --and have skills doing it. Can't stop it. If the solution is being a group of trades folks that are snobbish and cloistered about their skills, not sharing their enthusiasm for creation...then I'll just do something else. Bottom line, if you're good in a valuable way you can rise above the floor "talent" and make a living. For instance, maybe youre not the most creative dude out there but you have fun, are cool to hang out with, are always are reliable, and beat deadlines by a day. Someone's gonna value that and give you work.

I got the GH4 as I knew it'd work nicely via a Speedbooster with my EF lenses. Had it a few days and used it a few times already and love it. A7S was just that bit too expensive (double what I paid for the GH4) and I don't like the colours I've seen off it. NX1 I really like the look of, but no Speedbooster available for it to work properly with EF lenses, so that sort of made my mind up.

Now all we need to do is persuade video game makers that setting the frame rate of their game to sub 60 fps doesn't make it a "cinematic experience", it makes it jerky and nauseating to watch and we will have a full house!

Turns out Adobe Camera Raw does have a setting for the NX1 + Samsung 30mm F2.0, I just have to turn it on to remove the fringing wide open. Quite a nice lens for 250 euros if you need the AF and small size. It weighs practically zero.

I think it doesn't have so much to do with the color space, but with tone mapping or camera profiles. The same RAW file will give different colors in different RAW developing applications for this reason (because they use different camera profiles). Regarding the worse sharpness of image B: it's because of the CA of the lens -- different colors get different magnification and this reduces sharpness, but this can be corrected in software quite effectively by scaling the different color channels. The NX1 does this in-camera very effectively, as you can see in image A.

I'll vote fast zooms. Sure zooms are slower, but framing is hard with primes if you lack experience. ;) I own this set in Nikon mount: Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 Can be had for under 3500 and will remain useful long after your NX1 bites the dust..

  A sense of pride in your existence :)

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/cinematography-roundtable-roger-deakins-5-751367 Deakins, Libatique, Cronenweth, Beebe... wow, that's alot of damn talent sitting at one table and sharing wisdom. Interesting opinions on 4K and dynamic range.

My iscorama just lost it's value... goes to show how powerful an 85mm + full frame + 2x ovals + 2.66 :1 is!

FM lens + ES Cinelux + Olympus 85mm on Full Frame. Nothing exciting at all here, unedited and boring shots - but only had a spare 10mins to give the FM a quick spin. Tested everything wide open at f.2 on Olympus OM 85mm to see if wide aperture would introduce any fringe or edge nasties when the FM was attached, pleased to confirm that everything looks pretty clean and sharp. ( although .h264 compression for Vimeo has robbed it's true 'wow' sharpness)...so please download/ view 'original' file Very shallow depth of field when wide open at f.2 (perhaps too shallow for practical use most of the time) and the 2x bokeh when used with 85mm on full frame is pretty darn stretchy. Goes to show that sensible stopping down would make this setup even sharper whilst still maintaining plenty of attractive defocus. Footage was shot 1600x1200 ML raw on 5Dmk3 in 4:3 aspect, resulting in 3200x1200 8:3 (2.61) unsqueezed.This seems like an ideal aspect to shoot at - as it seems to bypass the edge 'warp' that people have noticed on the ES Cinelux when panning. Everything is handheld, racking focus by hand also...to prove it can be relatively 'run & gun'. The near focus abilities are very impressive, with practice it is pretty easy to do a full range rack focus by hand but a focus gear would be of great benefit when using in the real world for narrative work. So initial quick test is very promising indeed...noticed a very slight 'ghost' or 'glow' to extreme contrast edges, but almost definitely due to being wide open and the taking lens not being 100% light tight or aligned when shimmed against the FM rear. In general the FM lens seems to take the edge off the cinelux's clinical sharpness somehow, I suspect the fact that the light is now passing through extra glass means a subtle contrast lift and very slight softening to the image - resulting in a more filmic look, whilst still being plenty sharp. I did notice an unforeseen issue - it is pretty easy to knock the taking lens focus when adjusting aperture on taking lens. A tiny amount is enough to take the 'calibrated' focus from the FM lens - resulting in a non pin sharp result. Think the easiest way to remedy is to tape the taking lens focus in its fixed position with electrical tape when setting up for FM lens. More proper testing to come, just thought I'd throw this up in case someone was 'on the fence' about how usable the FM lens is when handheld and pushed to f2 on full frame.

Feel better!

I imagine the front face is almost flat and will therefore catch the light at certain angles. Bear in mind the light causing the flare is the only light in the room and that flare wouldnt be very noticeable with more light in the room - i bet he was at 16000iso to bring that flare up! I'm seeing that nasty distortion from the 3.55:1 aspect ratio the 16:9 sensor is deivering - not as strong as what we'll see form the cinelux, but on pans it seems rather distracting. I'm dreading this thread as more and more tests show up - it means I'll need to get the mastercard out at this rate!

Initial mounting was really easy. Included was a small silver aluminum collar. The Hypergonar I own tapers towards the back so as a work around, I focused the anamorphic to infinity, gaffed the collar onto the anamorphic and slid it into the FM lens. Used the included hex key to clamp down on the collar and slid onto my crappy plastic cage. I'll need to figure out a more secure mount with the 1/4" threaded clamp. The weight of the focus module causes it to swing loose. Some pictures: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jlv1ubwd92kl8zw/Photo%20Dec%2004%2C%201%2057%2054%20AM.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ox1t8vwdzqnnekz/Photo%20Dec%2004%2C%201%2057%2021%20AM.jpg?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/0lyh6dqswxqsfez/Photo%20Dec%2004%2C%201%2057%2009%20AM.jpg?dl=0 And a short clip before the batteries died. Jupiter 9 85mm f2 @ f2. Hypergonar Bernoist Berthoit Anamorphic. Full frame on the A7s. Quick Lut thrown on. Exported as 3840 x 1080 ProRes 444. Download the original for best quality. Screengrabs from ProRes Master https://www.dropbox.com/s/bwe5gpq0z115nmo/Screen%20Shot%202014-12-04%20at%202.45.36%20AM.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/zvp8rwnlge2x3wo/Screen%20Shot%202014-12-04%20at%202.45.50%20AM.png?dl=0 First impressions: SHARP! So glad it's so sharp Focus throw feels huge but it's only the size of the lens. Focusing is really a breeze. Mounting was easy, easy to adjust anamorphic leveling. The rear collar could be a bit wider (ie two 1/4" holes) to keep the heavy lens assembly from swaying. Nothing a little rubber can't fix. More shooting tomorrow!

  Here's a 1:1 crop, as you can see the Samsung 30mm F2.0 has some chromatic aberration wide open in the raw (bottom image) but the video processor completely gets rid of it, which sharpens up the black text nicely. Best video processor ever in a stills camera.

A is video.   Some people got it perfectly. A bit more compression in the blacks on A and a bit more sharpening in-camera. The raw file had more C/A because Adobe Camera Raw didn't remove it by default and sharpness was left on default as well which is why it looked a little softer.   But the very fact that they look so similar to the general 'audience' with almost a 50-50 split between you on this forum over which was which, shows how good the video is on this camera.

Let me tell you another true story. Some ten years ago a friend of mine asked me if I would borrow her my VX2000. She wanted to shoot a video as a gift for her father's 50th birthday. She had Windows Movie Maker on her laptop. No experience with photo/video at all. Sport student. She interviewed her family, she dubbed her father's dog, live, during recording. She cut a wonderful 15-minute-video, she hand-made titles, in fact a sloppy but charming stop motion, a birthday cake gradually forming out of thin air. On a Friday I explained to her the basics of how to operate the camera. The following Monday she brought it back and showed me the film. I was gobsmacked. On the other hand, there is, as you put it, the market for enthusiast video. An invective? I linked this clip before:

Still waiting for Panasonic to surprise us with AF100 successor.