Leaderboard

I am Syrian. I am Antiochian Orthodox Christian. I come from a place in Syria called Wadi al Nasara (known in English as the "Valley of the Christians"). I come from a village called "Safita" - about two-hours north of Damascus. I currently reside in Sydney Australia. 99% of my family remains in Syria. If you are not Syrian, if you have not lived in Syria, if you don't have all your family and friends in Syria, please do not pretend to know about Syria, or talk on behalf of Syria. I have lost many family and friends in the past few years. All at the hands of the US and NATO's so-called "moderate rebels". The youngest was two-years old - killed, along with her mother, whom was attempting to rock her to sleep, by a "moderate rebel" sniper. Why? Because she was unfortunate enough to be punished and killed for no other reason other than for being born a Syrian Christian. The Western-backed "democracy loving rebels" destroyed our towns. They desecrated and burnt our churches. They beheaded our priests (two from the village next to mine). I am doing my absolute best to control myself as I write this. I keep telling myself to back-track. Delete the post entirely. In all serious, what is it going to change? What is going to happen other than having myself, my background, my history, exposed? It will most likely be in vain - most people have been manipulated by Western media for years. My hope is that perhaps one mind could be changed. If that. Regardless, I am absolutely fed up with this diatribe and propaganda that is purported and spurred on by Western exceptionalism at the behest of US/NATO hegemony. Obama. Clinton. Merkel. Erdogan. All these NATO war-mongers, and their partners in the Gulf, namely Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have armed, trained, and funded these Salafi and Wahhabi proxies militias against us. I blame them personally for this. I blame them for all the family and friends that I have lost. What's worse, Western media would have you believe that was is happening in Syria is all in the name of "democracy" - that it was some "popular uprising" - when anyone that is Syrian, or has lived in Syria, especially during the war, knows that that is complete rubbish. Regardless, the idea that the West wants democracy anywhere is a joke. Only political romantics that do not understand geo-politics, Western hegemony and realpolitik fall for this. The West wants democracy in Syria, huh? Even though they partner, arm and train the two most undermocratic governments and armies on Earth - Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Give me a f**king break. I don't care for Trump. I don't like Trump. I don't have hope for his administration. Personally, I supported Jill Stien. Regardless, anyone that thinks Clinton would have been any better is deluded and ill-educated on her neo-con and neo-liberal history and agenda. You know what - I'll tell you the real "cruel irony" - the one BBC, CNN, and the rest of the faux news wont tell you - that people who support LGBT rights and women's rights, the people that are against crony capitalism and corruption, the people that are against war, are the same people supporting and protesting for Hillary Clinton - a woman funded by Saudi Arabia and Wall St cronies - whom are the absolute antithesis of everything those people stand for - that is the f**king cruel irony. And this whole anti-Russian sentiment has reached ridiculous proportions. You know, I got off the phone with my Dad in Syria the other day. He said to me; "If Russia dies, we all die." If you were a Syrian Christian, or a Syrian that supports secularism, you would know what that means without even needing explanation. Russia is the only reason Syria hasn't fallen to the proxy armies and militias of NATO and Saudi Arabia. If if wasn't for Russia, there wouldn't be a single Syrian Christian/secular Syrian, left alive. People want to keep playing this anti-Russia card, fine. Keep believing the same bulls**t media and governments that sold you the Iraq WMD lie. Or the photo-op phony NGO groups like "White Helmets", et al. Real Syrians know the truth.

Nobody is happy. As per usual. If people can't make a film with the A6500, they couldn't make it with anything.

Damn so close to the end of the article. One day you will bother to read the last 1%. Had you done that, you'd have read that I described Canon as "boring", that they will in future struggle to sell us the next improvements, that their approach to apps and Magic Lantern was complete wrong, and that it "pains me" to see the enthusiast market moving to higher-end longer release cycles as pioneered by Canon with the 5D line. Actually I am spending 90% of my time right now with a Panasonic costing under $800. Alas you were not to realise that, because you just seem to make assumptions without knowing very much and never ask or bother to find out what the person who writes EOSHD is really doing behind the scenes. Geeez. What an idiot and a troll. Carry on and you will be banned. Final warning. **************** Exactly, and good riddence to them. It's GREAT for the people who are actually interested in photography and picking up the skills necessary. No longer do we have the masses convincing the manufacturers that there is money to be made in crappy low-end DSLRs with food and baby modes. Look how much more they have concentrated on enthusiasts since the consumer market shrank. Look how many great enthusiast cameras we've got now and how many mid-range models have stepped up to be better featured. This is also a good illustration of why pros have a bright future. Before, everyone and his cat was shooting photos like the one on the left with their own Rebel DSLRs. Now they are stuck with the crap on the right and have to pay someone to do better. They have all sold their old cameras on eBay!

Good Evening. I'm in searching for money needed for 4x anamorphic project of mine. And here i am selling my most valuable lens in collection: LOMO NAS4-10 2/75mm (2x squeeze factor), with rails mount and OCT18/e-mount adapter - 4500 USD It covers full-frame (not much of lomo anamorphic does this) and that's where its shining in my opinion. Its a nice universal prime for most cases: in terms of hFOV its like 40mm and still have a nice perspective and properties of 2/75. Which it have) I love to use taking lens by itself for photography (girl portrait in attachment), its great unique lens for FF and i had modified anamorphic attachment so it can be quicker to attach and easier to colibrate. Taking lens have 15 bladed aperture (no hard stops). I shot a lot of lifestyles reportages/promo videos with a7s, some examples shot in 1080p: https://vimeo.com/13376337 https://vimeo.com/132940435 (some backstage: https://pp.vk.me/c625420/v625420382/165a8/rPYJsQDX0VE.jpg ) also here some videos without web compression (see vid_gentlemen_life.mp4 for most actual footage - it was shot in 4K with Shogun): http://dropmefiles.com/jvXQ1 80-90% of these materials was shot with that lomo, as i said its very universal. Housing have some scratches from screws, one of glasses have mark on it (maybe MC mark, dont know for sure, it doesn't affect the image so i dont touch it). Everything else is in great condition. Will give more photos of gear on request if needed. Payment through paypal. Dont have an ebay account, the only international deal i had done - buying of rectilux cdna from Louis (he's on this forum to) And here's some interesting fact about Lomo NAS and BAS: NAS have mechanical sync single focus and BAS - singlefocus based on diopter; that's why NAS have some breathing, but way better sharpness. Thats why f2 BAS even dont have that f2: it have lock on f2.8 to compensate soft from additional glasses.

Well, as a U.S. citizen I'm not going to poo-poo implementing our system of government elsewhere. The players within my system will range from benevolent to malevolent, but the ideas are noble and can overcome the former. What the U.S. did in the 18th century is a novel modern idea and has worked rather well and remained flexible within the the shifts of the industrial revolution. Granted, the U.S. is not always about implementing our brand of democracy. Most often those Americans involved in international politics just want something that gives U.S. businesses some sort of foothold to exploit things. So, yeah, ulterior motives. Of course, there's an argument I'd make that Western republicanism/democracy as defined by the U.S. constitution and Bill of Rights is a good thing, and those that can adapt to something similar have a real potential for societal advantage. Which I think is true. It allows liberal freedoms within structure; room for innovative enterprise too. That's a key component. I'd submit that certain cultures might even be able to handle it better than the USA. I don't think it fits everywhere, but neither do dictatorships. Basically, I'm saying the ideals of my country are kind of cool, so let's not bash the whole system because some people or elements in it suck.

Nice You've probably got more experience than me, then, I'm 31 X-T2 looks great. Colours are awesome. I'm basically in your position - heavily invested in Sony, but tempted by X-T2 - mainly for photography, actually. I use my Blackmagic Micro setup for more serious shoots/clients - but never for "run and gun" stuff. I am really liking the image from the GX85. Especially the 5-Axis stabilisation performance, and really good rolling-shutter performance. I'm considering the GX85 with a 20mm F1.7, and Metabones SB for the Canon-EF primes I already own. I'm not someone that shoots in "no light", so any camera than can handle ISO800 is plenty for me. I have really high hopes for the GH5. Also hoping to see a Blackmagic Pocket Mark II in 2017

I agree, but what about 3200? How about 1600? Even at 1000 C-Log starts to turn into mush. It's fine at base ISO - I'm looking for ways that I can use it at something higher. So far, so good. Will post more samples in a while.

C-log resolution and standard look noise have been discussed here ... http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/19271-canon-xc10-c-log-resolution/#comment-134321

Yeah. It looks like it has sold out in many places... often a true indicator that this camera is rather popular. Don't give up as something might show up. The same thing happened to me with the GX80 in the French market, but I found a French company that imported them from Germany. Now, they're everywhere.

Here are the ones for 16-235. These are all (beta) versions. I tested it out on some older footage and seemed to work good. The brightness isn't standardized/corrected so I would recommend bumping them up the shadows and lowering the highlights. 16_235_R1G95b1-GDR-velvia.cube 16_235_R1G95b1-GDR-astia.cube 16_235_R1G95b1-GDR-1dx.cube 16_235_R1G95b1-GDR-690.cube 16_235_R1G95b1-GDR-chrome.cube 16_235_R1G95b1-GDR-nuetral.cube These are the most recent settings for my recommended settings: NX1-luts-beta.zip

Mine was meant to be humorous too, so if my snarky attitude came across wrong, apologies ? Concerning "resolution" IMO there are two ways to cut it: numerical/objective resolution, and perceived/subjective resolution. One can be defined by calculating how many practical points of information are in your image (in our case, pixels). The other is based on how much detail the human eye perceives, and with anamorphic especially, the two are at odds. Objectively, you may say that by stretching a digital file by a factor of two, you have halved your numerical resolution. It is half as sharp. The catch is, though, top to bottom you have lost no sharpness. The image still has the same number of "lines" (in the case of 4K, 2160 lines). At this point, the temptation is to say, "ok, I may have lost half my resolution, but not half my sharpness. I've probably lost 1/4 of my sharpness." But subjectively, as the eye sees, the loss is even less. Because your vertical lines of resolution are all still there, you still have very near the original sharpness in many parts of the image. The eye picks this up, and the brain is frighteningly good at filling in the rest. Add to this that the images are changing constantly, and (all else being equal), you won't loose much perceived resolution at all over shooting spherical, even at 2X. The by-far most important thing has already been stated though: If you're delivering to web it doesn't matter. Most web watchers are in their phone or tablet, most of which are not 4K, or even 1080p. The minimal loss in sharpness/resolution won't even make it past the compression to be honest, but the stylistic differences in the image will. That's why I prefer 2X, as it can be more pronounced. But 1.5X also looks great, it's just a preference.

Let's have it out!!! Following on from Ed's thread about Trump here are my thoughts: 1. How's this for cruel irony - Both Trump supporters on the far right and Bernie supporters on the socialist left believe the same thing. That Hilary Clinton and Tony Blair are war criminals responsible for massive civilian death tolls in the middle east and the rise of ISIS. Actually the war started because of dictatorships there and were escalated under two US presidents both with the name Bush, furthered by decades of repression and poverty in places like Afghanistan. If anything Obama and Clinton tried to deescalate it from the Bush eras. Much as I love him, Bernie depressed the turn out for Hilary Clinton more than anyone else. His wide support is the primary reason Trump is in power, ready to join forces with Putin and accelerate the bombing of civilians in Syria. Young liberals eat up paranoid conspiracy thoeires and fake news just as much as those on the far right because we're living in a highly partisan post-fact virtual world where the truth is too complicated for a Facebook headline. 2. There is nothing wrong with democracy and here's why. The majority of people are now politically ignorant. They cannot be bothered with it. Therefore it follows they should get a president of the United States who is equally as politically ignorant. Look at this from the New Yorker magazine - "A voter with more knowledge of politics will, on balance, be less eager to go to war, less punitive about crime, more tolerant on social issues, less accepting of government control of the economy, and more willing to accept taxes in order to reduce the federal deficit. Voters ignorant of economics will tend to be more pessimistic, more suspicious of market competition and rises in productivity, and more wary of foreign trade and immigration"... Which camp do you think Trump and his voters fall into? Trump is economically as ignorant as you can get. Despite employing immigrants he sees immigration as bad for the economy and despite making things in foreign countries and importing from them, he sees foreign trade as bad for the economy, and despite being married to one he sees immigrants as bad for the economy and despite being born to one he is in favour of mass deportation. The US economy is going to go to shit. Could it be that Norway has a more politically astute population? They have a good economy, stay out of wars, are more tolerant on social issues, less punitive about crime and accept higher taxes.... It all comes down to how much interest people take in politics, instead of snapchat. 3. All Trump supporters right now -

I got started shooting film and that was all I shot for a while. So when I shoot digital I'm still approaching it how I did when I shot 16mm. And when I shoot stills I'm approaching it how I did when I shot 120 and 4x5. So while I might expose a little differently for a digital camera, same as I'd expose differently for slide film and color negative, I'm always thinking about it that way. And for me (and I think most film guys) "speed" refers to ISO of the film or stop of the lens set. While you're clearly thinking about things in a more complex and advanced way than I am, you'll have to forgive those of us who are old and slow ourselves. I think it's worth respecting some of these old terms if only because the plurality of shooters still abide by them and they do have a definitive and clear meaning. If you ask any DP about a camera's speed, they won't think about ergonomics, which concern the AC and operator more than the DP, anyway. So while most people here are approaching things on a more holistic and aware level and don't need to respect such outdated ways of thinking, I still think respecting some of the old terminology will help with guys like me who still use that outdated approach. The OP seems like an experienced shooter and anyone with any experience on set would use the term "speed" correctly, which confuses me.

You may have struck gold with your Iscorama. There are a few former Eastern Bloc eBay camera dealers who are very keen to hoover up limited production run and prototype lenses. And if they bid against each other, who knows... Well, what we definitely do know is that they'd put your lens straight back on eBay with a mark up of at least 100%. But that wouldn't be your problem. And if you keep the lens, Alan Doyle at redstan will definitely come up with a really solid mounting solution.

Please accept my apologies for the slow response to Tito Ferradans’ message. Deadlines are always chasing me down, so I’m unlikely to be the most prolific poster… I am aware of the amazingly generous work Tito has done with his Lens Encyclopaedia and wonderful YouTube videos. And time permitting, I’d be happy to provide any information which might help his work. However… There is someone who can supply much, much more information than I ever could. His name is Tony Shapps, erstwhile proprietor of The Widescreen Centre in London. This establishment was the largest consumer anamorphics dealer in the world from the 70s through to the 90s, and Mr Shapps was a personal friend of the CEO and owner of ISCO. He also provided most of the information for the Iscorama Wikipedia page, and is an absolutely top fellow by all accounts. So perhaps someone on the forum should try and open communication channels with him via his Facebook page: https://en-gb.facebook.com/tshapps And to Barney909, I’d consider putting the lens back on eBay, but running the sale as an auction. It’s a very rare piece of glass, and if a real ding-dong bidding battle got going, you might even make enough money to buy an Iscorama 42; and a 54. With enough left over for a baby Iscomorphot on the side. I’d also be a bit wary of hanging what is potentially a $2000 - $4000 lens off my camera with some cheap filter bodies, so you might want to enquire at redstan.com about a custom clamp. Good luck…

Simon Sasha, again, you seem to thrive and make dreams, because you are living in a western world country, not in Russia, not in Azerbaijan, not in Nigeria. There are people protesting everywhere in the US because they afraid that their elected president will not respect minorities and communities, the other day Pence (the vice president) went to the theater, and the actors declared their fears on stage, and audienced boo=ed the vice president. Could you do that in Syria 10 years ago? Can you do that outside Kremlin? Also, Australia has the strictest immigration policy right now in the whole world. Have you not notice that tiny islands a lot of hundreds of miles away from the whole Oceania continent have thousands of people living in terrible conditions? Who is going to make a documentary about them? See, your dream is someone's else nightmare. I hope you can go back to your city soon, and do your documentary.

You presume too much, because many citizens in the US that pay half a mind to whats going on in the world are well aware of all that. In fact, I grew up 15 miles from one of the chemical plants that made Agent Orange and remember numerous and continuous protests at the plant throughout the years as a result of that notoriety. Moreover, AgentOrange was so widely known and understood it was integrated into numerous popular culture narratives throughout the years. The reason citizens can find out about this stuff is because U.S. media is free to disseminate that information. Never mind that over half the people in the country opposed the Iraq war - during the Iraq war. You might have an antagonistic itch to scratch regarding U.S. Americans, but we're not all idiots walking lockstep in some homogenous ideological blob. We're a blob, but we seldom agree about anything and are willing to let our government know it. In fact, that's exactly what our government supposedly is: a bunch of disagreeable people sharing the responsibility of making it up as we go along.

Excellent article, Andrew and I find myself agreeing with you rather than Tony Northrup. Then again, I'm not sure how much Tony Northrup really agrees with Tony Northrup: his video smacks of being one to pull in an audience with a headline-grabbing title... Sure, I'm all for improving usability wherever possible but proper photography and "hey, look at my friends having lolz tonite" pictures on social media are two different things. There really is no point trying to make cameras operate exactly like mobile phones because for the vast majority of people, it wouldn't make any difference: they'd always opt for the phone and the phone-alone because it's 'good enough' and the extra performance of the dedicated camera just doesn't warrant the cost/size etc. Ultimately, if people are genuinely interested in photography they'll move up to a 'proper camera' and learn to use it. I don't subscribe to this dumb-down/ race-to-the-bottom mindset that says we should gear everything toward the people that have grown up in the smartphone/iPad era.

Personally I think this looks pretty awful. I haven't seen much from my XC10 that looks that bad, but if I did I'd be loathe to use it.

@arourke please, make a new thread on the NX sub forum, something like "LUT" to post everything you have done so far, and for whoever wants to add their own! Thank you!

OK, this might be a minor breakthrough in image quality. See you if you can swallow this load: Don't shoot in C-Log, shoot in EOS Standard instead! Am I insane? Hopefully not! I was messing about with picture styles as we all know that ghosting is dreadful in CLog but not as bad in the other styles. The problem is, many luts are designed to work with C-Log and it's just so nice in terms of delivering a range of tonality. And while the other profiles may be less mushy and have less ghosting they tend to be too contrasty with nasty highlight roll offs and the colours are different to C-Log. But, I think I've found a way to fairly closely match EOS Standard with C-Log by shooting 5 clicks down in ISO and dialling down contrast and saturation and sharpness (remember that?). Then, by messing around with the contrast a bit in post you get an image with similar colours and tonality to C-Log but it has LESS GHOSTING and a SHARPER IMAGE. First of all here's a wide shot so you can see how they look similar: C-Log, 1/25s, f4, ISO5000, Canon LUT..... EOS Standard, (-4, -4, -4) 1/25s, f4, ISO1600, contrast and saturation adjustment, Canon LUT..... Now, let's look at 100% views, C-Log on left EOS Standard on right: Amazing right? Much more detail in the EOS Standard at 5 ISO clicks down (1.66 stops), as you'd expect. And the noise looks roughly similar (except for the subtle emergence of those fuckers, the little black dots) But the real advantage is in the effect on ghosting. We all know that the contrasty profiles have substantially better ghosting than C-Log even at the same ISO. Imagine how much better the ghosting is at a much lower ISO. Example: According to my theory if I'm shooting an interview in a dimly lit interior and the meter tells me that C-Log wants to expose at ISO 5000 I would throw my hands up in despair as I know that the person's face will turn to mush and when they move I'll get lots of ghosting. However, I should be able to switch over to EOS Standard with sharpness, saturation and contrast turned down, knock the ISO back down to 1600 and, using my contrast adjustment, still get a comparable image to the C-Log but much sharper and much, much less ghosting. I'm heading out now to get some more comparisons of the two picture styles. If you want to try this for yourself in the meantime, here's a work in progress LUT to get EOS Standard close-ish to C-Log. Just shoot EOS Standard 5 ISO clicks down, and bring down your superwhites before this lut: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B1exEpCRAfgFNGF0dUUtb2NjSTA

@kidzrevil As said in this thread, in my eyes you need much more marketing skills (nowadays social media, YT- / Vimeo marketing, etc.) than filmmaking skills to be successful as filmmaker. It's all about hype and publicity, not all about quality or artistic aspects...Mostly...Though sometimes, there are serious filmmakers expressing emotion,, beauty, joy, sadness or even some interesting information in their films. The age of (low budget) artistic filmmaking is - in my eyes - over. Exceptions prove the rule... There are many "iPhone Tarantinos" nowadays and some of them spread very successful their "content" - aka films. Millions of clicks and views in Social Media, sometimes some weeks or months of fame...These guys are the new sheriffs in the town...Quick and dirty - and sometimes very successful....

I think I mostly agree. A well mannered discussion about a particular issue of government policy isn't of any harm. Its when people start spewing highly opinionated views on partisan politics like elections and referendums that things get messy. Particularly if the views are demeaning and incendiary like the cartoon in the opening post. Like many people I think that if I spent an hour talking face to face with any reasonable person that I could convince them that any opinion I have on politics is well reasoned and well thought out. But it is clearly impossible to do this with everybody, so I have to accept that there are millions of people whose opinions are different to mine and whose opinions I cannot change. The most prudent way of avoiding conflict with such people is to refrain from talking about such things in situations where they aren't relevant. Unfortunately but perhaps fittingly it seems to be the less thoughtful and the less prudent that are the most vocal. The issue is that when people feel the discussion from such people begin to snowball into a back patting session they feel more compelled to reveal their hand. People are free to do what they want of course, but I'd rather leave that stuff for youtube comments.

I use this one from Smallrig and think I paid 30 usd for it. Haven't used anything else so can't really compare it to others but it's seems solid and sturdy.

You really should separate your business and your politics. It is a very foolish business decision to actively alienate up to half your audience/client base. Especially when you are mistaken, your judgement will be questioned. For the record, Britain is still in the EU, so no present economic situation can possibly be blamed on Britain having left the EU, because it hasn't happened yet.

Who doesn't love orange people?

I shot this for a company that owns the footage so unfortunately I can't share files with you but I'll post some screen grabs from it on Monday. The camera was so slow. All the old C cameras are slow. But the image from the C500 is undeniably great. We only shot to 4K ProRes HQ as the editors at the company I worked for aren't ready for raw and the turn around needs to be quick. From the dailys I've seen the footage from the C500 with Odyssey looks better than any Epic MX footage I've shot in the past. Idk why we never rented this camera before on RED shoots. I think the RED name holds a lot of value to producers. Idk. But this forum really encouraged me to branch out and try these old slow cameras. I recommend you guys do too!

@sanveer, that's a real bummer. You've got a faulty one for sure. Please report to us on how long it takes Panasonic to fix it so we can compare with other camera manufacturers.

I don't think it takes much pixel peeping to see the obvious resolution advantage of 6k oversampling in the a6500/a6300 over the crop 1:1 pixel 4k options out there: https://***URL removed***/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=sony_a7sii&attr29_1=canon_eos1dxii&attr29_2=panasonic_dmcg85&attr29_3=sony_a6300&attr72_0=4k&attr72_1=c4k&attr72_2=4k&attr72_3=4k&normalization=full&widget=378&x=0.4307963787018565&y=-0.174296745725317 And once you put a Metabones Speed Booster on with some sharp fast Canon/Sigma primes, the stabilized full-frame look and detail/resolution is hard to beat, especially for the price. Yes I think it's easier to get good skin tone color out of Canons, but with a little practice one can get similar results with Sony. I think a lot of people are just fed up with Canon holding back so much in every camera they put out anywhere close to this price range.

Good thing they added IBIS since the LCD still darkens when you record 4k, at least you know things are relatively stable when you can't see what you're shooting.

Ah yes, that single focus Panatar...wouldn't that be a nice subject for @Tito Ferradans to tear apart in one of his chop-shop video's? ;-)

I just wish the people who organised these PR events could think of more original subjects than live action sports, animals and bands. As for the A6500, the overheating, poor ergonomics, bad colour, bad white balance and terrible rolling shutter would be acceptable had it not been priced at $1500. Also the 5 axis stabilisation is way better on the Panasonic GX85. I encourage people to get that instead. OK I get that Sony want to drag the AXXX series out of the dying consumer market but this is not the way to do it. The body should have been redesigned to resemble the X-Pro 2 if it is going to cost this much.

If you saw 90% of liberal MSM was hoaxing, shamelessly make up stories, obviously lie, constantly fear mongering, and silencing any opposition with racist and sexist labels, and you realized we need to revolution just after seeing one single wrong headline in an alt-right website, you're part of the problem. Btw, did you know even Scandinavian industries are supporting Saudia Arabia military? seems not much less-ignorant nations to me.

Andrew, thank you for explaining why we don't see any commercial work from you here. You don't need to justify your choices and this doesn't make your opinions any less interesting. I'm still a little confused as why anyone who doesn't have to would spend quite so much money on cameras, though. Outside of what I might need for jobs, what excites me most at the moment is what can be done using very simple equipment... My ambition is to own as little as possible. As far as your test goes, it looks to me as if the portraits were made in direct, late in the day, autumn sunlight. In my experience, this kind of light is treacherous : it's attractive to the eye but I've never managed to use it for a flattering picture of a human being. At the least, you would really need to put a big silk between the subject and the light source. Even then, colour correction is hard because the light is so very orange. Whatever camera is used, it would be difficult to make an attractive "normal" image in this situation. When I test cameras, my first concern, before creating any "look" is whether I can get an image that reproduces the scene as I (or my client) have seen it. This is my starting point. I pay careful attention to not losing information in the shadows and highlights because clipping of either does not correspond to normal vision. Being able to film in lower light than I can actually see in doesn't interest me much in most cases ; below a certain level of illumination we just have to accept that we're in the dark. Often I find myself looking from the camera to the scene, asking myself "Does it really look like that?". Similarly, I want a camera that lets me get my picture sharp before I worry about "filmic" shallow depth of field. Once I establish a "normal", baseline image, then I can think about tweaking it towards a particular effect. This is why the images you posted to accompany your article made me react so strongly ; because they weren't the best to show the relative capabilities of the cameras concerned. As an example, wedding videos are generally not very interesting, but they can be informative in the sense that we have critical skin tones, important blacks and whites, low light, some action. You can learn a lot about how a camera behaves from watching them. Holiday movies, less so. Finally, with a budget of 6000 €, I would think (more than) twice about buying just one camera (for my purposes). However good, one camera will only give you one point of view. I would rather have several cheaper cameras with, perhaps, a slightly less good image and have more angles to edit from that one single point of view. My Sonys are useful here because it's easy to match cheaper and more expensive models. As to the projected life of the Canon, I suspect that within the next couple of years we're going to see more and more 4K delivery. This means that the possibility of reframing in post (my main use for 4K) will be reduced. Higher resolution cameras will be introduced and lower prices to compensate for this, limiting somewhat the resale value of 4K cameras. That's just my prediction. But what's really got me thinking this week, far beyond high-end camera tests and choices, was being on a job with Canon and Sony shooters and also a young reporter from a French TV station that has equipped its journalists with iPhones . His broadcast piece was maybe not "filmic" but he could work with a speed and discretion that no one else could match, Canon or Sony...

Hey Andrew. Sorry if I offended you. Your Spain video is great as well as all your stuff on Vimeo. Please don't invoke Godwin and Trump here. This election is finally over, I just can't stand it anymore. Let's focus on skin tones and filming look here. Enjoy your 1Dxmk2.

The BBC must be feeling a bit silly now. They basically gifted Amazon a trio of their best presenters and one of their top hits due to mishandling the show in the lead up to Clarkson losing his temper with the producer, and mishandling the fallout from that in the worst politically correct way possible. But more of a problem for the BBC is that almost all their 2016 output aside from Planet Earth 2 has been pretty shit.

ISCO only manufactured a couple of examples of this lens. And they were never released commercially. It has a 49mm rear element diameter and a 95mm front filter thread. Which does beg the question as to why it was produced in the first place, given that the size and weight are pretty much identical to the Iscorama 54, and its successors, the ISCO 16:9 Video Attachment (1.33x) and the ISCO 16:9 Video Attachment I (1.42x). I've got a little stash of rare ISCO stuff, including one of the prototypes for the original 1967 Iscorama (all metal construction and a 67mm filter thread). So if you are ever interested in parting with your special find, I'd certainly make you an offer. And treat your lens carefully, because it's a little bit of German optical history...

Nice video. I noted 2 things though: 1. Crazy amounts of purple and green chromatic aberrations. 2. Strange motion cadence... I could see the frames. Possibly due to shutter speed choice? Most notably seen on the first shot of the gondola coming our from a bridge.

OK, people voted for him because they just LOVE racism. Joking aside, I think our western society is verging on having a dangerous love affair with celebrity and consumerism. That's why, when a well known blogger insults your favourite camera brand, people flip out. People need to realise that it's ok to disagree. I was watching the US election closely and know exactly what happened. Trump won due to a depressed voter turn out for Clinton and a wave of popular support in the rust belt states from mainly working class white voters who felt left behind and distrustful of the mainstream media to give them objective information. So they sourced their information from a Facebook echo chamber instead and from fake news articles, all the while believing Clinton was corrupt and Trump as a 'successful' businessman = the answer to the US's economic problems. If anything it is they who are painfully oversimplifying the world and politics, not me. And it is the same with cameras. I can give you my opinions, and the facts, but people already have their own conspiracies of information from the pro-Sony or pro-Canon echo-chambers online, and it is becoming increasingly hard to put good information out there in the face of such indifference. Click-bate and heavily biased camera review sites would not exist if the audience wanted for better, or knew any differently, and it is the same with Trump.

To those critics in this thread - that you see my opinions as unworthy because I'm not inside the film industry doesn't surprise me, because most of the same people just voted for a US president based on how rich he was. It's a bit of a sad situation in 2016 where such a consumerist mindset exists that only pros shooting paid gigs are considered experts. Time and time again in Berlin I have turned down paid work to focus on my own creative projects and self-employment. It's my choice. EOSHD has been a success. I could have been slaving away, climbing the ladder professionally shooting one advert after another and being bossed around by clueless clients. Again, I have chosen a different path. I'd much rather be doing my own thing day in day out. It doesn't take much to click through to Vimeo and see my last 5 years of cinematography and personal work. And even if that isn't to your taste, your taste is not the universal blueprint by which everything film-related is judged. This article comes from the heart. Maybe I didn't get across the capabilities of the 1D X Mark II in one go, maybe I'm rusty. The footage isn't my best. It is 120fps with a heavily stylised grade shot handheld on holiday. It isn't meant to be Citizen Kane. It was just to show the 120fps. The way some people are going on about the image quality of that video as some way indicative of the overall quality from the 1D X Mark II is really stupid. The 4K looks very different. That is coming next in part 2. I also have shot with the X-T2 and G80. Great alternatives for less money. The 1D X Mark II was meant as a replacement for my 1D C and it succeeds in doing that. I paid £5k for the 1D C used back at the start of 2015 and even though it came out in 2012 the image is still better than the A7S II, Sony FS5, etc. No it is not a £500 camera. I never said it was good value for money in that respect. Pretty obvious really. The skintones - I think side by side with the Sony picture, the Canon one looks too extreme and you cannot really judge either image from the web or blog post page. In isolation at full 20MP resolution on a large print or a large 4K monitor, the Canon looks more natural and true to nature, whereas the Sony looks dead. Also the Canon flatters skin, whereas the Sony exaggerates any imperfections even on a very good looking subject. See the following 2.8K JPEGs instead, full screen -

Amazing kitchen, err, I mean can't wait to see the finished product.

Nice. I would love to play with a DNG pulled from the Odyssey. I have no idea what to expect from Canon raw. (I see you capture this in ProRes, but anyway..)

Hey guys, here is a new music video I directed/shot/edited. I used a sun anamorphic with a Helios 58 and rectilux core DNA. Let me know your thoughts!

I think this is the situation for most people today.

Still from Bali series... and etc... a low light sample: 2.7K acquisition mixed with iPhone 7 Plus + FilmicPro app coupled to a slider for non-aerial shots: and another shootout:

I have the D750 and the D500 (and a D3s and D800), and they're both excellent. The difference between the two are mostly to do with features rather than image quality -- both images are pretty much the same, you have to push pretty hard to see the difference. One place where you can see differences is at high ISO -- the D500 might have a 1.5 million ISO headline, but it's pure BS. It's just acceptable for certain applications* at 12,800 ISO in RAW, the D750 is definitely better at 12,800 (not a massive difference a la A7s, but noticeable.) The D750 and D500 has the same colour, they mix and match perfectly. Not sure if that will be the case for any new cameras, since I've noticed that Nikons do change in look from generation to generation (as you would expect). It changes enough so that I keep slightly different Lightroom presets for each of my cameras to get a consistent look, even in RAW stills. Another thing I'll note is that while each new Nikon I've bought have feature differences, they're not hugely different. Nikon is at a place where they're happy to do 4K in crop mode -- I wouldn't expect a new upcoming Nikon to do 4K without a crop. Nikon is incredibly conservative when it comes to adding new features, it would not surprise me that it would take a D6 (probably 4 years from now) before you see un-cropped 4K. No one buys Nikon for bleeding edge tech, they buy Nikon because it always works, under any circumstances, all the time. (That said, the 4K crop is about the same as the GH4 with native lenses at 2.3x, and I never had a problem with either camera. I do have a Tokina 11-16, which is a lovely looking lens) For what it's worth, if I absolutely had to only go with one camera I would pick the D750 with the 24-70. But only just, since I also have a D500 with the Sigma 17-50 2.8 with OS, and that is a pretty sweet combo. * I'll go right up to 12,800 for events in a dark room, but in any situation where I have some control over lighting/set/talent, I'd keep it no higher than 6400.

I've said something similar in another post: I've switched to Nikon after being a Lumix (GH2/4) user for 5 years (and having tested as well Canon, Olympus and Blackmagic cameras along the road). I've had the D750 for less than a year and I couldn't be happier with the image I can get with it, specially thanks to the delightful colors, wide dynamic range, reduced RS and unique DOF. Of course I miss some resolution, focus peaking (easily fixable with an external monitor), anamorphic modes, HFR and some other cool features but in the end, for the types of projects that I do (mostly low budget short films & web series), nice and clean 1080p, beautiful colors without to much hassle and that subject separation that FF easily provides is what ends up being most appreciated. With so many camera announcements it's easy to be tempted to switch systems every 6 months, but even when I consider the Fuji XT2, Oly EM1 II and Sony A6500 very desirable pieces of tech, I think that I'll stick to my D750 at least until Nikon releases its successor and/or 4k delivery becomes standard. And amen to that. I've been suffering from this disease for years and it's been my most unproductive season ever. Too much time spent on looking how gorgeous my footage could be if I had this new cool camera instead of learning how to get the most out of the one I currently have.

Shot this on my GH4 in one night. Used some color foils on my cheap Yongnuo YN300 LEDs and my Panasonic 20mm 1.7 lens. Recording was done internally in 4K DCI VLOG 8 bit, so some artifacts are definitely there. Tried to create a dark, gritty but colorful look. Still in love with this small, little and reliable camera. Director, writor and main actor: Uche Aguh

Got it! thank you very much, I will try it. (although In ebu document says that there is less resolution in c-log)