Leaderboard

Ignore those last pics of cages they were just some test rigs I threw together from spare parts from our grip store , The Cages I use to shoot with are GINI RIGS see pics of the 2 Nikon Bourne Lenses fully rigged up with Gini Rigs 5D MK111 cages , I like these big cages as I can get my hands inside on the camera to make adjustments , I dont like small cages that totally cover the camera - so all my shooting rigs have these superb Gini Rigs cages and lens supports and super smooth Gini Rigs follow focus , these are BIG follow focus great for very fine focus moves, the camera is mounted ona quick release plate inside the rig so you can de rig the whole camera and lens assembly out the rig when needed , lenses are all cable tied to lens supports to stop any lens movement due to follow focus .

One of the guys behind the looks in Instagram has released a set of LUTs. Whats great, and also bad, its that they are quick drag-n-drops for Rec709. So little to no adjustment needed. As you can imagine the "vintage" is strong with these. But there are some modern looks as well. I count at least 5, flipping through them, that will give a very nice base for a modern non vintage and non stualized look (only used one of them in the video, couldn't help myself, went for the Insta Look ). I just played around with them a little today. So don't take it as "finished looks" but more what base for tweaking they would give you. Some bars and grain and possibly a vignette would probably really make it true "Instagram", but I didn't do it this time, I plan on using them on NX500 footage which I almost exclusively shoot in standard PP and full auto. For Log I will stick to my regular grading. (even though Log to Rec709 Luts are included. BTW: Last time I did this, some where upset so I say it again to clarify. These are LUTs, they are ment to be tweaked. They aren't a quick fix for everything. The reason I didn't last time, nor this time, tweak to much is because then the viewer will have no idea what part of the grade the LUT stood for.

I think that channel is bullshit // 100% fake

Ginirigs.net has all their cool cages and stuff , the follow focus is great and the slider is superb too , I have tbe grab handle offset always as it gets in the way when I line up shots if its in the centre , plus it overhangs the lens if you want to get in there and focus by hand , its just there to lift the rig on and off the legs , thats all it does so off set works for me

I think your grading is awesome and the camera moves are sweet. The codec dying is just part and parcel with having everything in focus. (And to be honest, the video consumer usually doesn't even notice.)

Low light looks stunning, seems to be up par to a7rii super 35mm

Very Insta-resting.

The word filmic to me has only to do with the visual characteristics of film and film cameras. So colors, grain, DR, subject motion/shutter. Camera movement, audio, lights, composition, actors, etc, that try to look Holywood I file under cinematic.

A first report on overheating, he says there's none and the camera is much cooler to the touch compared to the A7's.

I own an F3 myself and I've been quite an advocate online for giving this camera a fresh breath of life in 2015/2016. If you can overlook these factors: Isn't 4K (but 2K/1080 is still more than good enough for most deliverables for the next couple of years plus) Isn't raw (but raw is overkill for many people's projects. While I feel 10bit 422 is a perfect sweet spot for most cases) Isn't the latest shiny new toy (but you'll be like the Red Queen from Alice in Wonderland if you try to play that game, constantly running nonstop just to stay in place as you try to keep up. Because there will always be a new shiny toy just around the corner which is about to be released) Doesn't have super slow motion (but 60fps FHD can meet the majority of most people's slow motion needs for the bulk of their projects. And just rent an FS700 for cheap when you need better. Or even buy a Sony RX10 mk2 for cheap slow motion usage, it can double up as your matching gimbal camera as well! Has slog too) Doesn't have AF (but to many filmmakers that is a complete non-issue) Is rather bulky (but that extra weight can be beneficial for stability, means you're not left with those handheld "shakeycam" footage like you might get from a DSLR if shooting in the same manner. Plus unfortunately first appearances do matter.... thus for those kinds of clients they'll love to see your built up F3 rig!) ....then (if those factors above are not deal breakers) you've got what I believe is the best possible camera that you can buy today for under US$2k! As nothing in that price bracket (including many options costing thousands more) can offer what the F3 can in terms of: feature set, low light capability, S35 sensor, built in ND filters, XLR inputs, SDI outputs, 12bit 444, slog, 60fps FHD, dynamic range, solid & versatile interchangeable mount system (including expensive high end PL lenses or an affordable Nikon F set, or many other options), and more.

I believe when it comes to colour, S-Log was way better implemented on their Cinealta range than on the Alpha range. ie. the implementation of S-Log on the f3, f35 and f65 was more carefully undergone and delivers more trustworthy results. I expect @Ed David could shed some insight on the Cinealta range from the era of the F3. Looking at the F3, I can't see a reason not to go for it at the current price. as long as you can budget for an aftermarket fz mount adaptor or PL mount glass, as well as rigging and the external recorder for 4;4;4 you'll likely not find a more powerful camera. I'd take 4;4;4 1080p from the F3 over any 4k dslr.

Here is my first test with my run and gun anamorphic set up. Shot on a GH4 in 4k with natural profile. Lens used were Baby Hypergonar anamorphic + LINOS MeVis-C 35mm F1.6 Most of it shot at f1.6 or f2.8 Rectilux Core DNA with +0.6 diopter on close ups. No sharping or noise reduction.. I hope you like. The images at the end I really love. The Rectilux is a dream but you diopters to get sharp below 2 feet.

This was brought up in another thread, but I did not want to derail it too much. So, for those who hadden seen it yet, this video showcases the Coen brothers and their way of filming dialogue on a single (semi) wide lens: And to quote Ed David:

DJI have updated their consumer Phantom drone today, which will be priced at $1400. It contains some serious AI. Read the full article

this guys stuff is pretty good https://vimeo.com/123625593

I paid $0 for it, cant beat that profit margin

And that is certainly a decision you have the right to make. One remains to be convinced that it justifies this thread in the context of this forum however. Just as an aside, one might wonder whether you maintain the same degree of humanitarian concern for the workers and their families in (at least some of) the countries in which your equipment (not to mention your household goods and chattels more generally) was probably manufactured. It would be a more relevant exercise, in this context, to use your eloquence and writing skills to produce a "Guide to Lighting" for our friend Zach and others (including myself) who are new to the techniques and methods used by the more experienced.

For anyone who has not seen the effect for themselves - doubling the bit-rate will blow you away. The Panasonic GH2 had even more issues with the image quality than the NX1 does, and with the 150mbps hack the difference is HUGE. EVERYTHING is better and all the problems of mush in the image and macro-blocking and colors breaking up all just vanished. Really the only reason I don't use my GH2's as 'A' cameras is because their older design has less dynamic range...maybe 9-stops. 9.5 if your exposure is absolutely perfect. If we were to double the bit-rate on the NX1 even the Noise Reduction and Sharpening would be FAR less of a problem because they would both be working with so much more image data.

I wonder if they edited this in Premiere. RAW has become wacky inside of Premiere and adds a weird cyan fringe (which you can see on the edge of some trees).

If I remember correctly from working with GH3 footage the banding was nowhere near as bad as on the Samsung NX1 of course Samsung fixed a lot of the shitty colour bleeding and terrible banding issues with the newest firmwares but the banding still persists, its there if you pay attention and you definitely will see it when you work with the files. I can apply the LOG profile from EOSHD to the NX1 footage with the proper settings in place, if I push colours too much I see banding, I have some GH4 footage I shot before I sold it duo to the low light performance being unsatisfying, I can push the colours quite extreme without seeing any form of banding, even in the 1080p footage. Obviously the NX1 has way better colour range than the GH4 with Cine-D and I sadly its almost a year and half since I sold the GH4 and back then we had no idea there was an actual LOG profile coming for it at all, not even the news about the beta LOG being worked at. Its pretty clear its the HEVC codec doing it, I have reproduced some of the nastiness of the HEVC by using clean high bit depth images with gradients applied and noise in sections to see what the codec does to it, indeed the codec does cause banding at 8bit output, it also smoothens out noise in low detailed areas, I further checked with a still picture shot at 1600 ISO with some fine grains, again I see the same the codec smoothens out the flat areas, in high detailed areas it leaves but every area that has no details the codec smooths out, the earlier versions of HEVC were terrible at detecting detailed areas its gotten better. I will just assume here the NX1 uses the earlier version of the HEVC codec because its clearly destroying details in out of focus dark areas were the codec is struggling to detect details. It gets worse when you lower the video bitrate as well of course the in-camera noise reduction in video does not help at all just makes the issue far worse than it should be. Its managable but if we can turn off noise reduction in video, that would be a life saver for all of us because many of us does not have the luxury of light to shoot one or two stops over. Some of us are forced to shot stops under, its either that or very high ISO and we all know what happens then...

Rectilux Core DNA: Extras to get by Ian Edward Weir I would highly recommend getting these extras to make the Core DNA ready for use. 1. M3/M4 Stainless Steel Nylon Head Grub Screw Plastic Brake Buffer Bolt Screws Hex This is so you don’t scratch up the coating of your anamorphic lens or housing. http://www.ebay.com/itm/281858121964?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&var=580836260280&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT 2. 86mm UV filter to protect the front of the Core DNA glass. 3. Metal back cap for whatever size you end up using for your coupler if bigger then 75mm. 4. A custom coupler made from this lens hood fits perfectly. “FOTGA Screw Mount 67mm Standard Metal Lens Hood for Canon Nikon Pentax Sony Olympus” http://www.amazon.com/FOTGA-Screw-Standard-Pentax-Olympus/dp/B009GFY858 Then a step down ring or step up ring for whatever the size of your front anamorphic thread is. I’m doing 77mm because this is what most of my front clamps are. I’m making a custom 75mm to 77mm coupler for Kowa 1.5x and Kowa 1.75x. 5. 86mm Fixed Spacer Ring http://srb-photographic.co.uk/86mm-fixed-spacer-ring-5713-p.asp You want a uv filter to protect the glass but having it on you can’t completely go to infinity. Lucky, even with the uv filter on and not being able to turn the Core DNA to infinity, I’m sharp for over 100 feet. This spacer is for clearing the full range of the focus and using filters. 6. You want to get some 86mm or higher diopters. You need them if you want to get sharp and close.

I use the original .74 I think Metabones that I got for a steal over at Fred Miranda. I use this on my G7 with no issues on all my Nikon lenses. The only issue I have had is with my 1.7 extender from Nikon, it got stuck on the Metabones, I thought I might break both to get them apart, but I was finally able to get them loose. I am looking to get a second G7 and another Metabones, probably the XL, or try one of the cheaper ones.

Safety Not Guaranteed was shot on an F3: Interestingly is I believe it was shot entirely internally recorded and was done pre slog update. The difference between that F3 camera they shot with and an F3 with slog and external recorder is like the difference between a 90lb weakling vs Arnie Schwarzenegger in his prime and on steroids!

In the comments I found this info: ISO 800 in S-Log 2 and 3.

I expect an F3 and some PL adapted lomo primes would be a stunning setup with real cinema image

Great to hear! OT: Did you know that the new Samsung Galaxy S7 line features liquid cooling? http://www.phonearena.com/news/First-Galaxy-S7-teardown-reveals-the-liquid-cooling-system_id78671 That's the kind of stuff they need to put in digital cameras too!

Gonna look for a deal or a used body to try out. Andy you've sold me on giving the G7 a shot. Thanks for all the info in this and the other thread. Chris

Once I've discovered 28mm and 35mm f2 lenses, I can see why someone may use only one lens. You can get tight for close ups with some nice depth, or pull back and focus to infinity for your wider shots. I am going to be testing this one lens solution out in an upcoming project.

^damn, I didn't realize the F3 was spec'd like that. That really does sound like an insane deal for 2K. Like a souped up Canon C100.

Pentax makes a 43mm full frame photography lens which I think is the perfect focal length. The equivalent would be something like 28mm on a Super 35 sensor.

They shot with the Arri Alexa and while I'm not sure of the crop factor I think it's Super 35 (1.5 when compared to full frame). So a 32mm lens on it is equivalent to a 48mm lens on something like a Canon 5dmkiii.

Seems he just wanted to know: But, I guess that 2011 brochure cleared up the fact that the person he talked to was right. So yes, he can use one of those cheap 10bit 4:2:2 recorders and does not have to upgrade it first.

Obviously if you can, you want to buy a secondhand F3 with the paid version of the firmware upgrade if you can. But practically speaking most of us would see only a minor if any benefit in getting one over another. (Paid vs free upgrade) As the main benefit of the paid upgrade is gaining 444. But up until recently 444 recorders have been VERY expensive. At least now we've got a great option with the Video Devices PIX-E5. But even that is too pricey for some (I don't have one. But I'd like to have one!), while the 10bit 422 recorder options have become *AMAZINGLY* cheap!!! :-o We've got multiple options which are sub 500 dollars. Plus not all projects are suitable for 444 anyway. As it means a large leap in data requirements, that not everything will benefit for. While 10bit 422 is the "sweet spot" I feel personally for high quality but easily manageable amounts of data.

Not everybody here owns an F3 or has experience with one. I do however own and use one :-) Used mine most recently just last Sunday on a feature as their DoP. 444 would be 12bit not 10bit. You'd be thinking of the more common 10bit 422 S-log's history on the F3 is thus: Originally the F3 shipped without, then later a *VERY* expensive firmware upgrade was announced (thousands of dollars! But when the launch price of the camera was some fourteen thousand dollars or so, perhaps not really that much extra.... relatively speaking), but then the Canon C300 got announced... Sony responded to this announcement in a couple of ways. Two of which was to drop hugely the price of the s-log update (under a thousand bucks) and to announce a free firmware upgrade for the F3 which gave slog as an option but missed some parts of the of the paid upgrade (such as 444).

G7 is a totally natural progression from the G6 , it does all the G6 does plus more - so sell your g6 and buy a G7

The alligations are not just alligations Henry. These are violations of new york state law that your company acknowledges and wanted to settle for cash that new york state refushed. Your company is getting sued by new york state. Your company was written up in the new york times and you declined to comment in that paper. Also a photo of some sales clerks who are women. Thats great. But how many executives are women? And im not asking you to reform...I have taken 70 percent of my business already away from you. I dont expect you to reform. And thats fine. There is adorama, film tools, barn door outfitters, omega broadcast, and so many more camera and grip stores that seem to not violate labor right practices with its latino employees.

over the past 2 years I have bought and used every make of speedbooster that has come out , and without a doubt the KING DADDY of them all for shooting on a 4K Panasonic camera is the Metabones XL - that x.64 glass is amazing , giving you a Super 35 field of view back to your lenses and gets rid of the 2.3 crop factor totally - the Metabones XL turns the 4k Pannys into a very serious piece of film making kit - so much so Im uing 4 Metabones XLs on 4 Panasonics G7s to shoot the feature film I'm DOP on - its that good!!

Precisely. I have a D800 with 24 Mbps bitrate as well as the hacked 54 Mbps bitrate. In majority of scenes there isn't any difference. Close-ups of really fast moving water or certain types of night scenes is where I've found the differences. I haven't seen any other camera reaching anywhere as high quality output as Nikon does at 24 Mbps H.264. With good tweaking of x264 encoding on a desktop computer you can reach same quality levels, but other camera manufacturers 1) haven't either tweaked their encoders as much, or 2) aren't throwing as much encoding power / using dedicated chips for the encoding - hence they aren't anywhere near the same quality levels when you compare bitrate for bitrate. How you implement an encoder matters, even though you use the same codec. It was the same story with MP3 encoding in the early days. XING, Fraunhofer and the others weren't anywhere near the quality that the open source LAME encoder could output, bitrate for bitrate.

Nope, it differs from camera to camera. Depends on how efficient it uses its bitrate. A 50mbit Sony will in my experience break apart before Nikon 25mbit.

Some good news for us E-Mount owners, DPReview's Rishi Sanyal says (in a comment!) that the new Sigma MC-11 adapter allows Sigma lenses to function natively on the A7R2 in terms of auto-focus, including phase-detect AF in video! http://***URL removed***/news/7911235445/cp-2016-sony-stand-report-and-g-master-action?comment=7786652921 "Given our recent finding that Sigma's new adapter can confer full AF functionality to a Sigma lens attached to an a7R II, including continuous Eye AF, Lock-on AF, and phase-detect AF in video, I'm having a hard time understanding why Sony can't do it with their own lenses on their own adapter on their own camera!" Hopefully this will be true of all the E-Mount cameras it supports (which currently includes the A6000, so the A6300 seems likely). Here's the current lens compatbility list for launch. According to a video they released updates will be coming and the adapter has a USB port for firmware updates. I'm hoping they add some more of their APS-C lenses.. I'd love to use the Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS HSM on the A6300. Video explaining in layman's terms how it works (sounds like instead of converting E-mount signals to EF / SA-mount it overrides the firmware on the lens to use E-Mount directly. "Now the lens is no longer using its original firmware. Instead it uses the MC-11's control application."

I think the video shows that Nikon doesn't need as high bitrate as Panasony. Same with the D750. Its 25mbit is cleaner than most 100mbit.

Lighting, grading, and lenses make a huge difference (often in that order). I think most cinematographers when surveyed cite lighting as the biggest factor in cinematography, rather than the camera. As far as complaints about Sony color, a lot of Hollywood thrillers/horrors intentionally have that "Sony" look, graded more towards green and yellow. None of their skin tones look "rich" or "beautiful." David Fincher's films look pretty Sony. Even House of Cards looks Sony. And Fincher has shot a lot of RED, or exclusively RED for the past decade. Roger Deakins shot Prisoners, which is somewhat similar, and that was shot on the Alexa. When I saw Lone Survivor, I honestly thought it was shot on Canon dslrs or C-series. It looked cheap, and way punchy, like Act of Valor, and I hated the look for the dark material/story...and it was shot on RED too. So if the color is an intentional decision, then Sony's colors may not necessarily be less cinematic. Sure, many people do like Canon's out-of-the-box color. Even if you're grading C-log, it certainly takes less effort if the punchy vibrant color is the look you're going for. But subject matters too. If we're talking doing as little as possible beyond image capture, then there are more cinematic cameras depending on the project. Romantic comedy? Canon would work. Thriller? Why not Sony. To be fair, motion cadence is harder to cover up. The dslrs/h brid cams struggle with this. I think smooth camera movements help alleviate the motion cadence issue. Slow-motion almost always has better motion cadence - and I think this is because it eliminates the micro jitters in real time that look video (unnatural). Aliasing is another. So soften the image a little (lenses or desharp) and limit shaky cam, and I think that would help motion cadence. Just a theory. But really, almost everything is a compromise, isn't it? Including the Alexa, which is price. You have to find what works for you or your project. But we all have our hierarchy of preferences. I sold my Red when I saw how noisy it was in low light... compared to the blackmagic cinema camera 2.5K, which looked a lot more cinematic at 1600 ISO. And blackmagic has a nice cinematic image, but if your focus puller isn't very good, maybe you're missing focus, hunting, or having to stop down. And then maybe that dual pixel Canon is nailing rack focusing and shallow depth of focus, is starting to look far more cinematic. And then, maybe your lighting budget is cut, and you have to shoot fast, in very low light. None of those will look more cinematic than the A7Sii in that context. Lastly, "Cinematic" is a complex, fluid term with a lot of variables and different contexts, but when you say cinematic, you mean what's shown in movie theaters historically and culturally. Which has been film, until recently. Cinematic has evolved over the years. Black and white was cinematic until technicolor. Which looked cinematic until film color improved and improved. Until it peaked, then you have all these disruptive looks and fragmentation, 16mm in the 60s, grittier exploitation films in the 70s, home video's influence in the 90s, with blair witch project and paranormal activity. I think Alexa is popular for being that transition (digital emulation of film), but the reality is that film is no longer the capture medium. When it was revealed Skyfall was being shot in 35mm, nobody really noticed or cared. But with HDR, 3D and future technologies, and even more fragmentation, cinematic is changing. And in the end, what's the point? Serve the story, in an appropriate (and hopefully creative) way. As great as the cinematography was for Revenant (reminiscent of the New World, also shot by Lubezki), it wasn't as fresh and exciting to me as the cinematography for Victoria. Shot on a C300 with a single lens. The best cinematic look is the result of the right tool, not the perfect one, and skills, experience, and hard work. And a good team. I think that's a factor too. No camera can deliver cinema. Roger Deakins claims he could care less about the camera, he'd shoot on anything, he'd make an iPhone image look cinematic. And I believe him, because he's mastered lighting, framing, lensing, movement. He almost always works with good directors and postproduction teams too, which helps cohere all the elements of filmmaking.

I don't get all this time wasting rant about the X-PRO2 not having 4K. Who cares if they put it via FW some people praise their Kaizen? Let them be, that doesn't change anything in real life, such a pitiful thing to whine about. I'm confused by this actually, I don't see videorgaphers buying the X-PRO2 for its 4K even if it had it, so why should Fuji please video people with a clear niche camera in the X-PRO2 when the X-T line is much more suited and expected for video? Sure they want to expand their customer base, but they clearly are not going to do that with the X-PRO2 and they don't need to do it with the X-PRO2, this camera is aimed at those that liked the original X100 and the X-PRO1, this is a niche camera in its core, they have other line ups for other needs, it's not like they are simply ignoring video or 4K. They just said that the X-T2 will have 4K, so it's implied that that' the line up that will be more aimed at videographers and the X-T2 is more suited for that anyway, why bother so much with what the X-PRO2 doesn't have if you were not going to buy it even if it had it? I don't get it. I prefer to look at it differently, as I see it, Fuji gave videographers a teaser of what is to come, they improved the video, that's already a good sign, X-Trans can actually make good video and with this interview, they are saying that the X-T2 will be the line up that videographers should take a look when it comes. I don't have high expectations for their first go for video though. I think that the Fuji colours will be there and the quality might even be there too, but I wonder if Fuji will get the little quirks right. The peaking disappearing in video mode, using a better codec, having better menus, audio feats, etc. I don't think they will get most of it right, I wished they were already talking with videographers to make it right, but I do think that part of it might be solved via Kaizen. Will it have a log-like profile? Will the button placement have video in mind? With Samsung - apparently - pulling out of the market, with Sony having a camera like A6300 - but with no APS-C support in term of lenses -, Fuji could take advantage of the APS-C mirrorless video market. I'm just not sure if it's going to be the X-T2 or it's already a bit too late. But it's good for consumers to see they trying.

Fuji claimed when the Xpro2 was released the new processor can do full readout with 4k, but as we see from this they say people shooting with the ancient Xpro1 don't want video, so they didn't include it. Stupid strategy to segment (sell) the XT2.

And then 6 months after the XT2 is released the Fuji cult will be singing the praises of that Kaizen bullshit when they add it via a FW update. It will be interesting to see what they can do with that goofy Xtrans array in 4k, one of the clips posted on DPR shows a lot of moire. If their claim of being able to do full sensor readout is true, there's hope. Love Fujis lenses, love the colors and I really dig little things like the joystick to move the AF point - if Fuji can get its video on par with the A7rII, I'd happily shift away from Sony and it ever bloated lens lineup. Fuji has all the primes and zooms I'd like to see in E-mount, but the insane focus on what's essentially a stills only body in 2016 is not doing them any favors. And I agree with moving beyond your existing customer base, what the point of building the same shit for people that are already in the X-mount ecosystem, new models should try to reach out to people that don't shoot Fuji, otherwise they run the risk of becoming Pentax.

X-Pro 2 4K - 80% said they don't need it, so Fuji didn't flick the switch in firmware. They ask a bunch of hardcore stills people if they want video and surprise surprise most of them don't. How are Fujifilm supposed to expand their customer base with new people if the keep asking their existing ones what they want? This is why camera companies keep serving up the same-old same-old every year... they never reach out new markets, because they only listen to the needs of their existing one.

It has sony colors, I will stick to my eos rebel t1.

There has to be a catch...

What do you think about this? There is nothing irreversible done to the lens at all, but now infinity is kinda there. My follow focus is a little stiff so it's slightly shaky at times. It is hard to understand if I did hit infinity or not though, or maybe I'm already paranoid.