Leaderboard

Reading the actual DPreview interview.. I feel OP may have focused on the negative. The last bit being: 'I think that line between movie photographer and stills photographers has gone. The client wants to you to shoot the both of them at the same time to reduce the costs.' Kitaoka then expanded on the demands they're hearing from customers: 'First of all, quality of the movie is a basic demand so we have to answer that, second frame rate, then lens quality and autofocus, also, [the challenges of] movie AF and still AF totally different.' 'Movie autofocus needs to be smooth, sometimes fast, sometimes slower, depends on the situation. Movie shooters want to [be able to] choose high speed autofocus or natural speed autofocus.' 'Actually we equip the autofocus system fit for the movie but a lot of people [are finding it difficult to use] autofocus between still photo and movie. But we keep trying to [provide the] best movie autofocus in [our] DSLRs and across every single category.’ https://***URL removed***/interviews/6091205488/nikon-interview-photokina-2016 Sounds to me like next generation bodies will have much improved video AF enhancement, +60 FPS, 4K possibly 10-bit / 422 / better codec (IQ seems to come first).. I see this as Nikon is listening and will provide very interesting video solutions on their upcoming DSLRs..

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso. Resulting in for instance the properties below. Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise. Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info. CinemaFile.zip

There have been some updates after that version. 3x3 Grid (thick lines): with camera-ui not freezing (turn on/off from the menu) note: overlay.png is still available as an option, just add your file and it will work (but the rest of the ui will freeze until you unload), if you want to use the non-freezing 3x3, simply remove the overlay.png from your sdcard. 2.35 filmgate: with camera-ui not freezing ( turn on/off with EV+OK) note: if you are on NX1 you need to sacrifice another shortcut to use this one, and simply rename EV_OK.sh to the one you like to use, before installing. note2: it is possible to adjust the filmgate, just add the desired proportion as a parameter, but you need to modify the bash command. ex (for 16/9): /opt/usr/nx-ks/onscreen_235 1.77

I needed quickly a boom pole for a project but I had no time to order it so I made it myself :D looks a bit ridiculous, but worked very well It is made from an extendable pole (for painters), something like this, one T tube, one reduction tube and some rubber bands, costs me around 7 euros :D works like a charm with the NTG-2 :D

last new topic for the day, I promise. Sometimes I’m just a sucker for a small sensor and oversharpening... I think Shameless (UK) looks amazing (no idea what it’s filmed on). Same with It’s Always Sunny (dvx100). Any suggestions for cameras with this charm? Just out of curiosity? Possibly some mini-dv... Or are there other flavors of charming digital you want to make me or anyone aware of? Maybe just workflow tips - digital noise overlays, low DR curves, etc? If anyone else even shares the opinion that crappy digital can be sexy

3 is the highest I'd go with the UltraCon. Personally I think 2 is the best balance but what's right depends on focal length quite a bit and the XC10 has quite a range to choose from! Note that the HDTVFX filter is simply an UltraCon and Digital Diffusion added together. The UltraCon doesn't diffuse at all so if you want to take a little of the digital look off the XC10 the HDTVFX is a good choice as you get the contrast reduction too.

Mini DV can look awesome these days - as an aesthetic choice for an appropriate subject. I was recently digging through some old rushes from my Pd-170 and VX-1000, and it actually dawned on me that the 4x3 footage looked 'fresh' in a strange kind of way. I'm surprised hipster kids have not used them more for tone-poem video projects. Think the secret would be to use these older cameras on full-auto settings, to get the crappiest image possible - then to completely embrace that. It's very cheap now to buy an old hi-8 / minidv/ s-vhs camera for a suitable project (and a cheap capture card to ingest into computer). No overlays, post treatment will get higher quality footage degraded in quite the same way...it all looks fake. I'd say if you want a good looking low-fi video look...shoot it on low-fi video. Some of my favourite music videos and documentaries were shot on DV....back in the day when creativity and originality still existed.

If the film industry is anything like the rest of the world (which it has to be), it's all about knowing and meeting the right people. Maybe you will have to move, or find a way to get closer to people who can help you achieve your dreams. Unfortunetly it's super rare that you will just be "discovered" in whatever thing you are into and make it work from that. All we hear about is the 0.05% of people in life who do make that happen somehow so it gives us unrealistic aspirations I think. I'm not saying don't try, I'm just saying you need to be realistic and do what you can outside of being a great director to reach the point you want to be at some day.

True. The thing is who shoots a 50 2.8 on FF? Most people would have a 1.4 as a standard. I also see this discussion working both ways, for example the "S16 aesthetic". You can't use say a 50mm on FF and have as deep DOF as on S16. If you tried you would be stopping down the lens to the point that diffraction is simply destroying the image. It's also true in reverse for M4/3 S16 vs FF, if you want that shallow depth assosiated with FF, using super fast lenses at their wide open apertures on these smaller sensors (to get anything close) usually gives you pretty crappy results (Bad CA, Bad sharpness, Bad MTF etc.). That's without even getting into the benefits a larger sensor can give.

Small sensor camcorders can look great. So can point and shoot cameras. The canon s100 is a sweet little camera with a very generic look. With AF and AE Lock, you really can control your footage more so than you would think.

I never used the Flat profile but love the Flaat 11 profile, im not a video guy my thing is photography but im more and more into video, just finished this little makeup tutorial for my girlfriend, let me know what you guys think about it!

Was he arguing that? I took it as he wasn't, but I don't really know haha. I think I made this whole thing worse earlier by using the word "compression" which wasn't the right word. I mean if there's no difference between FF vs smaller sensors, why don't we all just have s16 sensors? Or even an Iphone? I thought that was what this whole thread was really about, camera "aesthetics" not whether or not your equiv framing/aperture is the same.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15efDoJJEaew-7WdoCDim5anYvbdSXnVjOH-RRD656Ws/edit?usp=sharing Created a spreadsheet for calculating fullframe equivalents based on F-stop and sensor, it's a little messy I apologize. I'm not sure how to properly setup a google sheet document for public sharing (individual values) - if you do know please tell me so. I'm not a math guy so it might be off some.... I'm not sure if this is actually useful, I'm tired and didn't really read the whole thread With this you can calculate specs on FF equivalent lenses for different sensors for the same result. Please correct me if the maths wrong

Hey Merce! You had em all, them cams:) So, how do you like the Nikon 28mm? By the way, as Andy Lee stated, the Canon FD 28mm 2.8 speedboosted is something like the Contax Zeiss is something like the Hollywood 28mm F2.0 Zeiss. That way I can sleep well without nighmares about how many cool lenses I would have to buy:)

Haha... Now I'm obsessed with Nikon but I still love the XC10. So you shot that screengrab? IT LOOKS AMAZING!!! Seriously, I hope you are writing a screenplay, because you need to shoot a narrative if you're getting that image from a G6!!!

Okay, you boys are bad, i mean bad! Because off you I bought a GX85. Though one of its biggest supporters is now in awe of the beautiful canon xc10. Talking about you here, merce!:) Well, that Canon beauty is too expensive for me, will have to rent that one, but couldn´t resist that GX85. So done it and will test it. Maybe I should have waited longer. But couldn´t resist it like i said. So for all you G6 lovers out here, a screenshot of the most recent footage I did with my G6. @John Matthews, Hey John, i think I remember that you tested HDMI out and stated that internal recording and at the same time Liveview with an external monitor was possible. Do I remember that right? Anybody else to chime in on that? cheers and regards and hoping the GX will be a worthy addition to my G6! Woulndt dare to say successor:) G6 has mic in

Another lazy Sunday messing with some footage, so I thought I'd share a couple more screengrabs shot with the 28mm f2...

The C100 mkii has a larger dual pixel focus area than mki. Worth the added cost

Ah, what a shame...the video test is well done and clearly shows the issue. As the author from the video states in the comments, it looks like a 'tuning' problem on the IS...something that hopefully/probably? is fixable with a firmware update. @Hanriverprod sorry to hear your bad experience man, I had a 14-140 in the kit with my G7...toyish build and you could hear moving parts around when slightly shaking it. It did work fine though, so I attributed it to the plastic build. Great travel lens, but sold it because of the slow aperture and because I mainly use vintage glass for video. Hope your refund or switch for another model works out.

Mattias compression is only about distance from the subject. It has nothing whatsoever to do with lens choice OR sensor size. You can test this without a camera using your eyes and your feet. Wider lenses have the ability to get more FOV in the frame but they can't magically see around or behind objects. Just as longer lenses can't magically make background objects larger. This discussion/disagreement is about equivalent focal lengths and whether or not the same image characteristics can be recreated regardless of sensor size if the correct lens spec is used. Depth of field doesn't have to be part of that discussion but it can be and has been (I think you talked about bokeh for example). So yes a 50mm lens at 2m from a subject creates the compression as it does on a small or big sensor. But so does a 25mm lens kept at that same distance. And therefore the only variables that influence image character are FOV, sensor size and aperture size. These variables however can't magically make background and foreground objects move in 3D space! Or to put it another way ...

Hope it's a defective unit. thank you for sharing.

I'm not a troll .

I love stuff like this. Made my own bridge superzoom rain cover using a dense plastic bag and a Saxo salt container that just happened to be a sliding push fit on the housing around the lens. Looked ridiculous but got me shots that the broadcast cameras couldn't get at a number of events where it was smashing it down. Just finished making one for my a7sii and 55mm that sits on the lens hood and protrudes four inches from the glass without any vignetting. Used a Bisto gravy container and stepped down the diameter by using insulation tape (needed three millimetres packing to get a push fit). At the screen end I have a semicircular canopy that allows some latitude beyond keeping the camera horizontal and I can get in to see the EVF if need be. Rain covers are £10-£40 but are poorly designed and don't keep the glass free of spots. Mine cost £1 for the insulation tape. Will be using it in London next weekend where the weather is notoriously wet during November, though I am now hoping we have a load of snow

I guess the missing part is actually the sensor equiv., as lens equiv. means nothing when the sensor is never actually equiv.

True, i am only shooting 1080p, but again only because I need the slowmo. I didnt do any bulletproof tests but I think the 4k is superior. Yet, 1080p is good enough for me.

Great article.. and amazing film project. People gotta understand the film budget is peanuts compared to the rest of the mission.. A couple lost cameras/lenses is no big deal whatsoever in the grand scheme of things.. Also what an advertising for Canon lol... their cameras were chosen to go outer space because of: A. simpler menu systems then Sony/Phantom B. less bulky then Arri C. their gear is NASA certified D. test audience chose Canon colors over RED !

I'm a bit rusty myself, but if the Isco can only go to about 80mm wide before vignetting is introduced it doesn't bode well for other anamorphics. On full frame, I remember that the Isco could do 50mm and the Kowas and Sankors of this world would do about 85 - but you have to remember they have differing crop factors, ostensibly 1.5x and 2x respectively although this open to interpretation (my isco is probably more like 1.4x). I'm not familiar with the two models you mention. Today I did a quick test regarding exposure methods for WideDR. I fed a +1, 0 and -1 exposure (using the camera's metering and an eye on the zebras for reference) into FilmConvert. When overexposed shots are brought back into range they become more contrasty. The opposite is true for underexposure. Nevertheless, I was able to match all three: Looks similar right? Now look at the lower midtones / shadows: It's clear to me how I'm going to go about exposing WideDR.

Thats something i'd like to ask you guys, what do you guys think its a fair value for a small 10-15 lut package? This is something i'd like to keep doing, so depending on the sucess of this first pack, I will continue to improve and release a pack 2, 3 and so on. The pack will include black and white, as well as color. My current settings are (I didnt share them earlier because I really havent had much time to come home and sit down) : Gamma Norm | Master Black level 7 | Luminance 16-237 | Smart Range+ ON | Saturation - 4 | Contrast -4 | Sharpness - 10 As you can see, they arent as different as the others I was using, but the difference is quite big when grading. I am not a pro colorist, or anything of that sort, but these work great for me.

Thanks Shane. The transition is the "Swish pan" from Red Giant Universe. Lens are the Samyang 85mm, Samsung kit lens 16-50 PZ and Tokina 11-16mm.

I sold a 5D MK III for a Sony A7R II. Despite all that is said, I reckon the Sony has only about 1 stop noise improvement in low light compared with the Canon. To get the most out of it you really need to be good at noise reduction techniques. Sony's low light focusing is very poor and you can't even use a focus assist red light, either on the camera or an external flash. Manual focusing in low light is pretty unreliable too. The build quality is much inferior to Canon and battery life is extremely low. For fast low light stills work, using Canon lenses on the Sony via an adaptor is a waste of time. I intended to do this but ended up having to buy three Sony lenses instead. The Sony is only really good in video in APSC crop mode and has strong rolling shutter. That said, the A7R II offers plenty of video options and the quality can be excellent. The XLR adaptor (if you want to spend the additional money) is useful. The EVF is a wonderful improvement over an optical viewfinder and the main reason I wouldn't return to Canon. But all in all my advice would be not to believe all the hype about the A7RII and to remember that theoretical resolution is not the same as real world sharpness. My Panasonic GX80, far cheaper, focuses better than the Sony in low light and, despite being only 16 mpx, produces files that can be printed very large indeed (like 100 cm on the short side at 300 dpi via Perfect Resize). After nearly a year of A7R II pro work, I'm thinking very hard about abandoning full frame and moving to micro four thirds completely. I've been delivering MFT stills and videos with supposedly more "pro" Sony files and nobody can tell the difference or even cares.

Thank you! I honestly cant remember, its been quite a while, but it wasnt too hard, Ill try have a look and try to get something for you Im currently testing some new settings, heres a few examples, these are all separate projects, so they all have a slightly dif. look. These are all videoframes, and not pictures, as soon as im done testing these settings, ill share with you guys! Im considering creating a specific lutpackage that could be sold at a very affordable price, what do you guys think?

Heartbreaking?! I find it heartwarming knowing that those equipment helped capturing the most breathtaking images from an once-in-a-lifetime perspective. It's a beautiful and fruitful one way trip. It's not the astronauts' decision. Those gears are just tools that had fulfilled their purposes. The return vehicle carried payload of paramount scientific value. That's something a few CMOS sensors, circuit boards or optics can never compare.

Btw, sliding V2 clamp with anamorphic lens on a rail is possible, so changing taking lens can be quickly done. People asked about how solid is the V2 clmap. I tried HIFI-2 (3.48lb), Bauch & Lomb attachment I (3.68lb), Bell & Hewell (6.49lb), See picture of holding them with the clamp on the rail. My tripod mount start titling when mounting the Bell & Hewell, but the clamp is still showing no sign of deflecting. When playing with this clamp, I realize it could be also used as a handheld arm for holding the anamorphic lens & the camera together, just like the director view finder, see the picture below of KOWA 35mm anamorphic lens, Rokinon 85mm and GH4 held together by the V2 clamp. It is coming, it will be a dedicated variable diopter, which is optimized for the modded lens, but it has standard thread size, not 75mm for sure, you can reuse it for other anamorphic lens, but result is not guaranteed.

I have to agree here, it's looks really good! Maybe a few shots are slightly warm but that's ok on a hot day. Great shots, edit and music. @jonpais and @jase. I get that you mean well and are just giving feedback, but your posts can easily be interpreted as negative, especially on the internet. I wouldn't call "skin tones so orange" constructive feedback and creative looks seldom look natural. Besides, isn't this the Canon look that everybody loves

You guys are so silly. Are you seriously opposed to standard cinema colour grade in post? 1) it looks terrific, 2) it matches the central colours 3) try to be positive to new guys Ignore the sad people Cary, really nice work. Would be happy to have most of it in a TV doco (or indeed a movie). I also liked that it wasn't a serious of random shots, but had a logical story flow.

Shot on the GX85