Leaderboard

Watch your language or your going to be the subject of Ed's upcoming documentary.

lenses will only increase in value. think of them as money in the bank. if in debt, sell the lenses. if in credit, keep them and earn interest.

I have this same problem and have been trying to remedy it by walking out the door for shoots with only two primes. Maybe one prime, depending on the level of the job. After doing this for awhile and reviewing the results I'm realizing that I like the images I'm shooting on my 45mm M43 the best. All this came about when I decided not too long ago to shoot a documentary with a FF cam and a 50mm. The aesthetic had a cohesion that my typical undisciplined shooting did not. More visual creativity seems to come about when I'm forced into thinking about the self-imposed limitations of a shot and finding ways to compensate. Ironically, I'm getting more innovative by restricting my focal length freedom. Since I have a broadcasting background I've spent most of my career with variable zooms. Busting my old visual habits has been very rewarding. But, right now, I've kind of sworn off zoom lenses for motion picture shooting.

I have a set of Nikon Primes & Tokina Zooms. Started building a Voightlander set of pancake primes. You can never have enough Unless you can't afford it.

Goodfilm Hunting.

​same. you know what the best part of my day is? It's for about ten seconds from when I login to the EOSHD forum to when I get to the comments. Because I think maybe I'll get up there and I'll knock on the comments and he won't be there. No goodbye, no see you later, no nothin'. Just left. I don't know much, but I know that.

Any moment now...

That was good!

I must have about 30 lenses. I only ever use Canon FDs on set though, unless I have to go super wide, when I break out a Tokina 11-16....I don't like it though.

I'm not sure I can reciprocate this sentiment, but I'm guessing my experience, or perhaps just my perspective, is different. Here in Denver, I pay my PA's $100-300 a day, depending on the shoot. My business is modest, but that's right on spec with most any production in town, and I firmly believe in paying my crew appropriately. I also occasionally act as a PA for friends shoots for the same rate, sometimes for no fee at all. Personally, I know I expect focus and hustle when I'm paying, and exude these same qualities when I'm the low man on the totem pole, but I've never mistreated a PA, and never really been terribly mistreated when I've played that role. It's certainly an unsung position, but I dunno, my friend. I'm actually rather fond of the moments I've had in the past playing the part of a PA, and all that it entails. In a business that is so savagely saturated in over-inflated egos, sometimes our own, it's a very straightforward and humbling role. Pay attention, anticipate, move fast, and be thorough. I dare say it's downright good for you. Heck, I tended bar through film school, and though I made more money, I'd have jumped at the chance for regular PA work. I think it's pretty awesome you had that chance, and looking though your work, I'd say it benefited you greatly. You've some fine work there, my friend. Consequently, if you're ever in a pinch, I'd PA for you in a heartbeat. Sans union and all. =] As for the Fury Road PA's, perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see anything in the article you listed that mentioned the wage of the film's PA's. I did see mention of the wages for the extras (locals), which was $12-59, a day, which looked low, until I looked up some info on Namibia's economy. Namibia's per capita wage is only $8,200 a year, which already sounds low. But then I read on and find out that roughly 90% of it's population live on $2 a day, which is crazy low. Now factor in that these extras are not even wage earning adults, but school-age boys, and I gotta say this kids made some pretty good money (in practical reference) being part of a movie that many would have paid to be part of. Not a bad deal at all.

​$100-$300 a day for a PA ?! Lucky you. In Hollywood (unless its a big studio film) PA's make between $25-$50 buck a day.

I don't think it was off topic at all but thanks for the sentiment. Part of the discussion, for me is, when are too many, too many? Of course, that opens the discussion to any type of equipment. Other filmmaker's decisions and workflow can be very enlightening. For instance, I have been toying with the notion of picking up a B cam. I only shoot narrative material, and a lot of impromptu lens tests, so I have only ever had the need, and budget, for single cam. But since the G7 was announced, I am contemplating picking one up plus an FZ1000.

​I have a wide 10-20 zoom, but I've stopped using it. I also have a 12mm. As you say, there's always something that gets in the frame and it's very easy to quickly use a zoom lens to punch it a little to avoid putting something unwanted in the image. However, that's exactly why I'm trying to get away from zooms. Because it's easy to "fix" your framing by adjusting the focal length. It's more of a challenge to work to find the shot by positioning yourself around to the proper spot. And you never really get where you want to be, so you have to consider different visual options. It forces you to think of a new solution you wouldn't have otherwise. For instance, instead of a single shot that shows a building exterior, all of a sudden I'm finding that I need to shoot a sequence of medium shots and close ups to show the setting. That's different than what I'd do in the past and creates something new for me. BTW, most of this is for MY personal shooting. I will do this for clients if the job is right for it, but I do have clients where I just bang out coverage as fast as possible... Basically I'm saying I don't want a zoom to give myself quick solutions to framing. I want less solutions in order to force my creativity.

I rarely use anything longer than a 50mm with a prime, sometimes I'll throw a 105mm or a 135mm on if I need it, but I find I can get most of my long shots with just the 50mm and the crop factor. Recently I read another member, I think it was Andy Lee discuss how he will swap out adapters, dumb and speedbooster, to change his focal lengths. I don't have a speedbooster, but that seems like a great idea... You really can get by with 2 lenses in most scenarios. Otherwise my choice FLs are a 24mm, a 35mm and a 50. And I'll usually throw one zoom in my kit, just in case.

Simple Google search and voila he is in Las Vegas fallowing his dream camera business was just means to afford the costume

I'm pretty sure its just that he hates everyone here

​I would definitely suggest shooting with a more "baked" in profile. Cine V would be good, also see if you can attach a ring light to your rig as that should help tremendously with any under exposed areas you might run into. Shooing with F/2 lens and iso 1600 should give you great results, remember it is better to bump the iso in camera than to record an underexposed image. I definitely wouldn't shoot above iso 1600, but if shooting at 4k and down-resing your footage to 1080p - 720p + using a noise reduction plugin you should get some pretty good results.

​Unless they messed up something, the iMac should be faster! I must say I edit LX100 4K files on my Macbook Pro without any problem! The other day I handed a GoPro 2 file, 1080p25 MP4 to a guy with an i7, 16Gb RAM pc notebook and it played stuttering.......

video picture with a camera blackmagic 2.5k, tested a slowmotion a 24fps.

1000 euro could buy you a second hand 5D Mark II. Pop Magic Lantern on it for raw and you have the best low light camera but it might not be the workflow you're used to, therefore the Nikon D5300 is a solid bet or the upcoming D5500. Also consider 70D with raw. It's pretty handy up to ISO 3200 and you can keep your Canon lens.

The camera you have + some lights

Ok guys, here is the trailer(final) of "Brokenman" hope you like it, thanks for sharing Lumix GH3+voigtlander 25mm f/0.95+Tokina 11-16 mm f2.8