Leaderboard

Oblivion comes to mind. That is a movie I can watch just for the visuals and the soundtrack. Shot on F65: There are many beautiful shots in this movie. Naturally there are many computer generated images as well. But I remember sitting up straight in the theater during the scenes around the provisional lake cottage.

Schneider super cinelux surgery.I was tired of those big lips in front of my Schneider super cinelux version 1, so today I managed to do a little surgery. I did it because now it can go all the way down the FM, this mod allows me to use an 85mm lens with my 5D without vignetting. It worked great inside the FM with his lips too, but I was limited to use a lens from 100mm to above. So you don't need to this mod, I DO NOT encourage you to do this as you may damage your lens. Better be safe than sorry!

Looks like most of the shots were on the F65: http://www.creativeplanetnetwork.com/news/shoot/superhuman-power-and-sony-f65-processing-creating-spectacular-visuals-lucy/606871 Car chase was on Red Epics and other shots Arri Alexa. Really impressive look and fantastic color. Movie was pretty good too- Luc Besson writes, directs, and shoots good stuff! Curious how the F65 color science differs from F55 on down the line. For this film Luc put the F65 above the Alexa for color (not just 4K).

Damn. That was some serious damage on the front of that Iscorama 54! I wouldn't have had any hope for salvation of such a lens. Incredible result after polishing and recoating!

​Only as good if you have a very steady hand. Olympus in body stabilisation still the leader, but it can be prone to distortion at wide angle.

​ GH2 is normally like a 1.89 or so crop vs. full frame 35mm. So for any given focal length, you'd have to double it to get the equivalent frame of view in 35mm terms. Example...a 50mm lens on the GH2 will be approximately equivalent to a 100mm lens on a full frame camera in regards to FOV. Makes it difficult to go wide, and especially difficult to go wide and fast. Speed boosters effectively eliminate some of the crop factor. For the GH2, it takes the crop down to 1.3, which is actually more than the super 35 cinema standard. So the same 50mm lens would go from 100mm on the GH2 down to about a 65mm. So you can go wider! Also, it allows for approx. 1 more stop of light to hit the sensor. So it not only makes your lenses wider, it makes them faster! An F2.8 turns into an F2. An F1.4 turns into an F1.0. Etc. etc. I hope I've been helpful.

What is the question exactly?

Such a great resource! Thanks Tito.

I found this posted on facebook it was shot all using the NX1. Starting to see more and more nice videos short films shot using the NX1 now. I still think its the Underdog camera many are missing the potential of. My second one will be here tomorrow. Wish they had a Vimeo version

In the video quality charts from 2014 it's noted that the 1DC's ranking is based on "lightly graded only." Does it not grade well or have you reversed your decision about that? On a different note, I think I must be the only person who thinks that the a7s is the most overrated camera of 2014. It's gotten to the point where the differences in image quality between these budget "film making" cameras is difficult to truly discern without side-by-side comparisons and really focusing on minute aspects of the image. The a7s has some strengths in extreme circumstances (e.g. low light and high dynamic range shots), but if we're talking about bang for your buck, the GH4's image is just about on par with the a7s in most cases and shoots 4K in a more compact package for about 1/3 of the price. Needing to "see in the dark" is a feature that I don't see as very useful for narrative film or that I'd use except in niche circumstances. Even the BMCC, which I think is the worst for low light, can still produce fine low light shots if handled correctly. I've rarely seen any a7s footage that I feel justifies the extra $3K over the GH4. In my mind, there's no doubt from the footage I've seen that the 1DC is in a different class than the GH4, A7s, NX1, or even FS7 if we're talking about making a narrative film that emulates the Hollywood look. Watch a good quality download on your TV instead of pixel peeping and most of these cameras still have some sort of indescribable lack of film-like quality to them, while the 1DC footage looks much more like something straight out of Hollywood. I'm not a Canon fanboy and I really like my GH4, but I feel like too many people on forums and such are trying to tout some cameras, especially the a7s, as being far superior to higher priced cameras. If price were not a factor I'd surely trade my GH4 for a 1DC.

Wait for andy lee, he will tell you.

I am always researching long and hard to see what equipment might improve my enjoyment of filming and the quality of my product (wedding films). I take my time over decisions as there is new gear coming out every month =) As I am running a business, whenever I get excited by new gear I ask myself the following questions: – Will it make my work flow more efficient and therefore save me time/money? – When will I see a return on my investment? – Will my clients notice the difference in quality, and therefore is it likely to secure me more/better jobs? Last year I filmed nearly 20 weddings with a GH3, GX7 and GH2. Unfortunately after 3 years my GH2 has died so I am in the market for a replacement as I find 3 cameras essential for certain parts of the day. I could get a GH4 as my new main camera, another GX7, the rumoured EM5 MkII for IBIS if Olympus can finally deliver a great 1080p codec, or I've even thought I could go for the Canon C100 MkII (partly so I could finally see for myself why so many people fuss over Canon!). From a technical perspective I'm not sure the speedbooster + sigma will improve your image quality much, unless of course you find yourself needing to use high ISOs in the studio and therefore the speedbooster + sigma at f/1.2 would help. Ultimately I would try and make the decision based on your business goals. You might decide your clients are happy with what you produce now and you can invest the money differently! Hope that helps =)

You can pick up an F65 kit for about $25k now... Pretty crazy. Very, very beautiful image, but cumbersome size and workflow for anyone not shooting with a huge crew

Yeah, Oblivion is my favorite F65 film to date. Beautiful color and sound+music- great acting and cool story too. Even on Apple TV at 1080p and highly compressed, the detail and colors come through. Sony can do great color- is it the result of pro colorists taking extra time for features, or is Sony holding back? The F55 doesn't look as good. For example, Marco Polo on Netflix was shot on the F55. The first few episodes didn't look very good, though it did seem to improve with time (cool series- well done). The older F35 also has the Sony 'magic' colors- some folks picking those up used for a fraction of what they went for new ($250K). I will say with a bit of time and tweaking and good lighting, the A7S can look pretty good. Perhaps it's time to get the FS700 out and try applying what I learned on the A7S to the FS700. A lot of other folks don't like the FS700 color- I'm curious with more experience can folks get better color. Sure, it's more work than Canon cameras, however they can't shoot 240fps. Initial examples of the FS7 are looking pretty good against the C300. Did Sony further improve the color science, or are people just getting better at matching Sony to Canon. That's how I'm learning- using 5D3 ML RAW with mlrawviewer straight to ProRes 10-bit 444 as the reference and tweaking the A7S to look as close as possible. Folks might wonder why anyone would spend so much time figuring out how to make the A7S look like 5D3 RAW. Well, once figured out, it will be easy to apply during production. The A7S can do 60p at full 1080p (crop mode), ultra low light, less noise, tiny files, can use autofocus lenses, etc. It's also helpful in learning more about how to work with color. In the software industry there's a saying, "Lazy Programmer", where a programmer goes to extraordinary lengths to work out a solution to problem that will save much more time later. The concept applies to filmmaking too.

​I'm about to list a Novoflex C/Y > M4/3 adapter on ebay. Of all the adapters I've seen (including Metabones) Novoflex are the best: it fits both camera and lens perfectly. If you're looking to get Contax Zeiss glass for your GH2, you'll do no better!

Buy a Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 for around £600 ($800 USD?) and a Speedbooster. You only need this one lens for those focal lengths and it is superb. Check out the posts from Andy Lee (who really knows his stuff) about this lens on this forum

I purchased one of these for $129: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00EAXU6UM/ (price has gone up). Optically excellent if the mount works for you. The viewfinder is held securely by a magnet, with no tape/glue on the camera. The magnet came lose (super glued from factory?), however easily fixed with clear tape (could also use super glue, epoxy, or perhaps the new UV cured liquid plastic). The tape is only need to keep the magnet from sliding out (other axis held by metal). I mounted a handle on one of the rails- makes for a compact, stable platform.

I've seen the thread you started, be careful with eBay lenses. 'NO EFFECT ON THE SHOOT SO SLIGHT' sounds nice and all, but personally I would never accept a lens with known fungus inside of it. This can spread through the lens, might even transfer to other glass. Stay away is what I would say. I only accept some very light cosmetic damages, such as a scratch on a housing and fainting paint or something and you'll have trouble finding anything vintage that hasn't got a few specs of dust inside. But other than that, take care that it looks good, has no dents (especially not on the lens thread) or is otherwise impaired. The glass should be crystal clear, without scratches, funges, haze or cleaning marks (again, there's bound to be a few specs of dust, that's okay). Focus (and zoom) should turn smoothly. Mind with rubber rings, that these are still neat. Usually a light color shift from black and some whobbling indicates it might needs to be exhanged. Make sure the seller claims everything is working fine. No stuck apertures or anything. Also the aperture shouldn't be swimming in oil. These are the main things I care about when buying a 2nd hand/vintage/legacy lens. Feel free to ask a seller about something if you're unsure and always read the description very carefully. Maybe you're bidding on a lens with known defects, that's being sold for parts or repair. Carefully read what state a lens is in to avoid surprises. If you do this and pay attention to the upload pictures of the lens your bidding on, you should be fine. I've done my fair share of buying 2nd hand lenses and so far I've really been blessed. Most of the time the lenses look as good as new. I also check what's included. If it's being sold with original packaging, accessories & lens caps and is being shown used with an UV filter, this usually means that the owner really took great care of it. Only once I had one with a stuck aperture (partial refund) and one time there was some hazing going on, which wasn't advertised or noticeable from the pictures. But overall, I made some really really good calls. Carl Zeiss CP2 primes sure are nice, but I'm not sure if with cinema lenses you will be reaching the limits of the GH2 (in the sense that there's more potential to the lenses than is being captured). I think cinema primes make more sense on a little bit higher end cameras. It's kinda like putting a turbo charged V12 inside of a Volkswagen Golf. I mean, you can do it, but I'm not sure if it's worth it. Just my two cents. I guess the vintage Planar's should be pretty awesome though, but I know too little about them. Guess Contax CY mount types would be the adapters/focal reducers to look for if you're taking that route. But I would encourage you take a closer look at the recommendations as posted earlier as well.

​ If I were a lens tech / equipment procurer for a rental house in LA I'd see no problems hitting buy it now on some of the higher prices if it means i can just buy it and have it in a few days for a client that I know would rent it, then have it in stock for future clients looking for something different. nothing else does what an iscorama can do, and for the price of a single crappy boring compact prime (a budget lens for rental to film school final productions) the iscorama is a rather amazing item. The rental houses are dictating the buy it now prices. the guys with enough time to sit at the computer and snipe are the ones who get the irregular bargains. People are paying silly prices, but probably paying with a company credit card knowing 10 days of hire will pay for the lens outright.

I'm about to sell my Speedbooster for Contax/Yashica Mount > M43 so if you're interested in going the Contax Zeiss glass route and would be interested, let me know

​Not really, that's more a thing for NAB and Photokina I guess. But just in general Canon kind of seems behind if you're looking at the competition in the same categories, so it couldn't hurt them to break radio silence, perhaps giving Canon users a little glimp of what's in store for them with a little teaser of some sorts.

Andrew can you please share the criteria of ranking the list? Because if we are talking about bang for buck tools for the entry level filmmaker, considering the additional gear needed to operate the cameras, the 1DC comes dead last, and the difference between dumping that cash in the camera, and using it for your film... I'd back the guy putting more money into his film.

Yes, the omission of the FS7 seems weird. I've got the A7s + Shogun, but the FS7 is clearly a breakthrough 2014 camera, whereas the 1DC is not.

Here is my last music video of JAZill (Lisa Bandy) on GH4 anamorphic, enjoy I've made this music video with Lisa with : GH4 photomode 4K UHD 16/9 25p + 96fps FHD mode, all export in 24p Dciné mode -2 -5 -5 +0 Lumetri cine1 and cine2 color correction on Premiere Qioptiq 35mm f1.6 MeVis-C C-mount lens with baby Hypergonar 1.75x anamorphic lens SLR Magic +0.33 and +1.33 diopters. Manomi +3 diopter from 200 to 1000 asa 4K version downloadable here on Vimeo (for members) or watchable on youtube : youtu.be/kUzIs1dTCyY Lisa Bandy youtube and facebook youtube.com/channel/UCDBqyzLcmVbLOWvps9ViMBA facebook.com/jazilljazill

Noise reduction in post doesn't give you extra dynamic range JCS or make colour any better, you still need to adjust the curve to put contrast back into the image, thus trading the dynamic range of the flat LOG profile for acceptable colour and contrast. To some extent this addresses the core issue that is missing in this discussion. The deep shadows in the 1DC images are featureless, lacks texture and details. These are all tell-tale signs of noise reduction. Most if not all cameras do some form of noise reduction when recording internally even if noise reduction is set to zero. I will be extremely surprised if the 1DC is an exception. On the other hand the Shogun records footage from the A7s without any internal noise reduction which means that noise reduction have to be done in pp for a proper comparison. Alternatively direct recording from the 1DC sensor is necessary if you want to omit any pp in the comparison.

​I think it was because the Magic Lantern has entered the project Apertus .... Canon afraid !!!

S-LOG on A7s XAVC-S , this codec is so good you can basically grade it how you want....... As soon as you learn and understand how to grade using RGB curves you will see exactly what it is you need to do. Two frame grabs from a project I am editing which I also shot in S-LOG A7s Iso 3200.