Leaderboard

I don't think that's what people are saying. I think it's sort of the opposite. If you're working professionally you want to make sure you can justify the cost of the gear or else it's bad business. So there's no reason to buy an Alexa unless you can afford the crew to support it (and the roughly $100k investment up front)... and your revenue warrants it. Whereas if you're buying a camera as a hobbyist, your bank account (and credit) is the limit. I'd say spend more on other areas of the production, but if you have the money for a camera package and the rest of the production, go for it! I do think a bigger problem is that a dSLR or C300 or FS7 is a camera you can operate comfortably with a crew of one or two, whereas in my experience it's harder to shoot on Red on Alexa without a bigger camera department and a much bigger G&E department (the sensors are light-hungry). Particularly if you want to introduce more camera movement. And so that can add many thousands a day getting the additional crew and support gear, unless you have the ability to get people to work for free and have access to cheap rentals G&E and camera support. Frankly I find the Red MX and Epic to be a nightmare on fast-moving sets and very difficult to use as owner/op cameras, though to be fair I was using both of them a month or two after they first came out and they are a lot better now. This isn't meant as an anti-Red screed. The Alexa is just as bulky and requires a lot of battery swapping, too. It's also pretty slow, but the Amira is faster. I love the image from the Mini but not the ergonomics. They're all built for a bigger crew. So I think the hidden expense is the added cost in workflow and crew and time with some of those cameras, and that can add an additional five figures to the budget of a short easily... that is, if you're paying your crew and post team. But if you have that worked out, you've got it worked out. That's my only argument against getting a big expensive camera, but if you have that part worked out, go for it. On the basis of image quality I'd put the 4.6k BM well above the MX well above the original 4k BM, which has a significantly worse image than the 2.5k. The 4k has the thinnest dynamic range and most fixed pattern noise I've seen in a cinema camera. But if you're used to shooting on film and lighting for film, you won't need any more light than that with any of these cameras, though you will need to be very careful managing your highlights on the 4k BM and to some extent on the MX. What lens set do you own? Some lenses have strange corner performance with some cameras (I believe the Cooke Speed S2/S3s do with some Reds). I would rent all three cameras before buying anything. Anything with very oblique light rays in the corners can perform dramatically differently on different sensors and that won't be as apparent on a 2.5k converted to PL because of the smaller sensor only receiving the more direct rays. But as for spending money on your hobby, do it! 99% of Porsche owners aren't professional race car drivers. Just get whatever is gonna make you happy. They're all nice cameras. You sound like you know what you want and to that extent can't really go wrong. I might envy you for having gobs of disposable money, but I think any of us would spend it just as irresponsibly if we had it.

That's a wonderful beast, you can just tell from the shear amount of glass compared to some of the other Veydras. It's the same vibe you get when you see the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 in person and that one doesn't disappoint either. @ Rinad Amir: nice trio... or well, quattro! How are you finding the 12-60mm? Haven't found any time to play around with it yet, want to see if it actually blows the Lumix one out of the water or if I should sell it off... definitely keeping my eyes open for a bargain 42.5mm f/1.2, I do love the new style primes!

With iOS 11 Apple opened up the dual camera depth data API to developers. I’ve been using the built in portrait mode on my iPhone 7 Plus for a while now and love it. However, today I downloaded a new app that takes full advantage of the depth sensing technology and it’s blowing my mind!! The app is called Anamorphic and it was $2.99 and it may be the best app I’ve ever purchased. The app allows you to take an image, and then adjust where you want the blur to happen in 3D space. You can then feather the blur in the same way you would feather a Luma Key, but it feathers it in Z space. It then applies the most realistic and gorgeous anamorphic bokeh and aberration. Export it out and put VSCO Cam on it and it looks like you took an image with a film camera with a T1.4 vintage Cooke anamorphic lens on it!!! Just testing this app out today has made me giddy and it really feels like magic when you use it. I’m so excited to experiment more with this and even more excited about getting an iPhone X with the faster telephoto lens and OIS! This excites me about the future of cinematography. It’s going to be computational! Imagine shooting on a $100,000 cinema lens that has been profiled that you can simulate in post. Lytro is working on it on the high end, but the fact that my tiny cheap iPhone can do it blows my mind Below you’ll see the normal image that was taken and then the “Anamorphic” with VSCO one. Download the app here: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/anamorphic/id1247287369?mt=8 I would love for this thread to become a place where we all can share our shots taken with computational photography methods if the admins allow it. If you have an iPhone 7 Plus or 8 now, get the anamorphic app and start shooting!!

Thanks @Cinegain you wont regret for sec i promisse you its razer sharp plus has ibis its light also and best lens for me! to run&gun (5axis) tho ND is a must ?In day time and in lowlight u u wont go above 800iso with it if thats makes sense? I also had 18-35(utra) and if had to choose between them two it would defiantly be Leica 12-60.

Yeah focus only works with Canons and i doubt it will come to other cameras since manufacturers have to support it over USB.. Also the size is quite large so it can work with C100mk2 or FS5 but for smaller cameras crane 1 v2 might be a better (lighter & cheaper) solution.

I could maybe post the fusion file if anyone wants it. The method is pretty simple, start by making a saturation map, detect edges on that so sharp change in saturation make up the bright parts and no change becomes black. Blur that slightly and convert to apha channel.. Use that to blend a desaturated version with the original. That way any sharp color transisions (like fringes) gets dialed down while the overall color remains unchanged. Slow change also remains unaffected, but depends on edge size. The same technique can also be used to bring a busy area down a notch

I'd suggest around 3 minutes (no more than double that! MAX), and around three to six episodes. If you were to stretch my suggestion to the max, but still stay within my limits, that is 6x 6 minute episodes. That is THIRTY SIX MINUTES of content created. That takes an awful lot of time/money to do, for what purpose? Have a web series you created credited to your name, is a worthwhile trophy to have. But does the effort match the rewards? And what if you make an hour's worth of content? Seriously, by that point in time you are much better off to have put your efforts/goodwill/monies into making a feature film instead! Which gets greater recognition, and has more commercial potential. Here is a web series I did sound for, that just got uploaded a few days ago: Each episode is only around 4 minutes long, and there are only three episodes in total.

Mais Doido Ainda, Still Further... ; ) you mean, Panasonic?

I have an analogy for all this situation of cameras: which is the best selling car in the world? which cheap Indian car company got land rover? the pros who use Canon for years will not change, but their children will not use Canon. It is not the D5 or the 1DX that determines the direction of sales, but the opposite: we all start from the bottom, buying cameras that cost a thousand dollars at most. Who is innovating in cameras up to 2000 dollars? Sony is paving the way for the future, the result will come in a few years.

Only lately I was tempted to buy the GH5 (after I had sold my Pocket), but decided to give the A6500 a try. Reluctantly, because ... > I had seen the awful menu of the A7S and A7rii The menu is a mess. Fortunately, you have the FN-button and can dial M1-M4 for quick access and your preferred shooting modes. > I'd never liked the Sony "color science" There is S-Log2. Within the last 2 months, I learned to expose it properly and (almost, with the help of the histogram) intuitively for every situation except night shots, where Cine1 seems to work better. The DR preserved within S-Log2 is very good, the GH5, 10-bit or not, has less. The colors? I tried a few things and found the Omeneo primers (20 bucks) to be to my taste. Not much headroom left for extreme grading, but I'm not good at that anyway. > I was sceptic about the usability of AF Yes, I always focused manually. I still do, with very shallow DoF or in dark, low contrast places. But for most situations, the AFC is better than me. Fast, spot-on, reliable, no hunting. > I did not like any of the lowlight demos ... but nobody forces me to shoot like this. What's wrong with being able to shoot at ISO 6400 without needing Neat? > I heard terrible things about the rolling shutter I found this to be true. The solution to this is IBIS. Problem solved.