Leaderboard

Umm that is a hard NO. Why do you hate BMD so much? The guy that filmed it clearly stated he pulled it out of his RX100 mark V to use. He said it was a very slow SD card but that was all that he had. He actually got an email from BMD to remove his download link because they are releasing test footage very soon and review models have already been sent out. So no, this is just the case of poor sd card and not camera performance. 12-bit is not any more difficult than 10-bit beyond the data rate which isn't camera intensive. Higher frame rates aren't difficult as the GH5, GH5s can easily handle those in a smaller body with limited cooling. Blackmagic has lots of cooling. Switching to a new sensor is not easy and it's not like they can do that very easily. You make it sound like its easy to remove/add features in 5 months before the camera is supposed to release and production needs to begin. The only feature blackmagic has announced that has ever been removed from a camera was the Global shutter feature of the 4.6k sensor. They had it working but it had too many problems. The Turret for the larger URSA is also not likely happening due to the costs and issues with manufacturing it, but it totally does work and there are images released.

In my opinion with cameras that have baked-in sharpening & contrast, the sharpest, cleanest, most flare-resistant lenses, usually give the worst results.

Looks like the Micro is already going down in price on the second hand market. I got one for under $700. This is my first test, also my first time shooting Raw. Love this little camera. My Micro and Pocket should compliment each other well.

More than do-able. Recommended if the FF route is absolutely the way you want to go. FF isn't as big of a deal to me anymore, but I do understand why it's nice to have. A used 5dII and 3 primes is more than enough. I had this set-up for years and made tons of stuff. If you can't make it work with that, do something else, like kiosk sales for cell phone covers at your local mall.

I know you didn't say it flat out, but there's often an attitude floating around that the technically sharpest, cleanest, most flare-resistant lenses are the ones you NEED to go for, and that any other choice is based on fanciful ideas or ignorance. Some DPs DO find Master Primes too flat and perfect. Some love their strong, consistent performance. Maybe we could improve the discourse of the forum by trying to recognize more often that there are many effective methods, and they should all be analyzed and appreciated for their unique merits. Mercer, the advantage of knowing a little about the higher end optics is that they have distinct characteristics they're known for, and therefore work as good references against which to compare the lower-end stuff we have a better chance of owning/renting for our personal projects. For example: my Leicas were made in the same company at the same time by the same designers as the Panavision lenses of that era--the C series--and share some similar design goals/aesthetics, though obviously made to meet completely different price points. Contax Zeiss, on the other hand, were made alongside their Super and Standard Speed cinema glass, and have characteristics that hover somewhere between the two, depending which specific lens you're looking at. RedUser is a great place to hear about the higher end stuff, as are articles by people like Art Adams. Shane Hurlbut's tests are useful, but his commentary often isn't imo. John Brawley I find has great insight on optics too; his tests on the SLR Magic APO primes really won me over. Ultimately, our tools are a personal choice that help us define ourselves as artists. All I'm asking is that we keep that in mind, alongside the more vigorous "better or worse" quality debates that regularly dominate the site.

Sure, but Deakins' aesthetic is generally hyper-clean and polished. He's one of the greats, but his way is not the only way. Robert Richardson specifically chose softer lenses for Hateful Eight because he hated how exacting the more modern lenses "draw." Neither is inherently a better or more valuable approach, but rather a very personal choice rooted in the aesthetic tastes if the DP/director and the needs of each specific project. Personally, I'm big on the smooth-yet-detailed look of Cooke and older Panavision, which is why I went for 70's (Mandler era) Leica glass. But even that isn't right for every project; I will often rent or borrow Zeiss Milvus or Contax if I'm looking for something a little harder, slicker, less "emotional," etc. Even then, Mercer is right in that the camera is yet another variable in this whole equation. Some are pickier than others about the glass you use (NX1, anyone?), whereas some work great with everything. Some render crisper, some more forgiving. Your lighting style affects these choices, too. Need to have bright spots roaming around the set and potentially flashing the lens without blinding the camera? Sure, I'll go Master Primes. Trying to do an epic establishing pan shot of a sunlit location, complete with dramatic flare? Not so much with the Master Primes. Got aging talent that needs to look glamorous? Run from Master Primes as fast as your legs will carry you. It is NEVER a hard and fast rule. It ALWAYS depends. Seeing the utility of each available paintbrush is a critical part of advancing in your craft. There is no "correct" way. (Sorry...veered us even further off topic here. Happy to discuss lens aesthetics and other non-camera comparison subjects via private message or in the Lenses topic.)

Fair enough, but he also shoots with an Alexa. In my opinion, all of the cameras we discuss aren’t in the same category or on the same planet as they’re using in Hollywood. Putting a master prime on a GH4 isn’t going to make GH4 footage look like The Revenant. What I think these cameras can do, is mimic older film pretty damn good. So I’ve always looked at it as this... there is no way in hell with my resources that I am going to get an image that even minutely competes with an Alexa... even if I was insanely talented. But I may be able to get an image that looks like a 70s or 80s film. And for me, the mere thought that it’s possible with a $2000, or less camera, is pretty astounding. Your mileage may vary.

Although the foggy haze definitely helped him with that video, so did that Fujian lens and this is one of my favorite GH5 videos... so... thanks for finding it!!! I love crappy lenses. Be it cheap new lenses, or cheap vintage lenses. One of my most watched lens tests, on Vimeo, was from a Sony 3n and one of those aps-c c-mount 25mm lenses. Everybody has different needs and opinions. Some people want the cleanest, and sharpest image. For me, I just want something interesting... sometimes you can get there faster with a clean, sterile image, other times a funky lens will do the job. Hell, sometimes an iPhone and a Moondog Anamorphic may do the trick. Traditionally, I have chosen lenses based on practical reasons... money. And honestly that’s as good a reason as any. Recently, I have found myself in a rough financial patch, so I am revisiting a lot of my old lenses and man there are some unknown gems that cost next to nothing. Will they give you a perfectly sharp image across the frame, no... but they will lend a little character that these modern sensors sometimes need to quell the inherent sterility of 4K sensors. In some ways the P2 is too good, I really hope the final version has some of the funk and edge of the original Pocket and BMCC. If it is too good, maybe it will be popular enough for me to snag a cheap GH5 on the used market. I already own a camera that shoots Raw, so if I’m going to buy a second camera... something with IBIS, or one of the dozens of other things the GH5 does well, could be equally as appealing as a P2.

There is circulating new hack called Enchanted Lamp EL, it enables 4K @ 120 on the 5d mkiii PM me if you are interested, no PayPal accepted

yeah, how do i do 60p?? ? also: guys i got verified on this site by a former member who has been bullied a lot so he doesnt want to reveal himself but pm me if u wanna do it. the western union fees killed me but it was sooo worth it

The lumix 14-42mm mark II was my first lens with the BMPCC, which I used briefly before switching to a speedbooster. The stabilisation worked fine for me too, though there was no way of turning it off as there was no OIS switch on the lens itself. When panning the motion could get a bit jerky, depending on the way you panned. Here's a video I made with it (also using an Olympus 9mm f8 toy lens for wide shots), prores, with some post stabilisation: And this one exclusively with the 14-42mm:

Hey @Rikoshet You'll only need one instance of Lumetri - the 'Basic Correction' section can accept the [PRE] technical conversions, and the 'Creative' section can accept the GHa conversions. Then, in the Basic Correction section, any needed white balance adjustment may be made, which will stack inbetween the [PRE] and GHa conversions. You may then right click on Lumetri, and 'Save Preset' for use later (w/ a title like "8-bit Daylight (Soft)", etc.) This will save the step of having to load two separate files. A lumetri effect may be copied and pasted to multiple clips, and an 'Adjustment Layer' can be stretched over several clips in Premiere to apply a single instance of Lumetri to all underneath it for a one-light grade. I'm about to revisit the PDF. A lot is about to change. I've been revisiting the 8-bit Emotion II, updating it to the new color science: PREVIOUS NEW PREVIOUS NEW PREVIOUS NEW

Why have you settled for dslr full frame given that you accept that you might get “better quality” elsewhere? I’m certainly not trying to persuade you to change your mind - full frame certainly is a valid option - but before you commit I would suggest that you know why you’ve dismissed the BM Pocket 1 (for example - there are plenty of other options. I think older Panasonic’s might work for you too although I have no experience of them). Of course you don’t need to convince me or anyone one else here of your decision but challenge yourself! Once you’ve considered the alternatives and know why you’ve ruled them out then you’ll have the optimum solution for you. Enjoy whatever you end up with!

Well, probably I am in another universe, since I learned to shoot with an eClair NPR, and YES, it was film, did you ever hear about it?, and everything was manual, later I got an Super 16 eClair ACL II, a 35mm Konvas-1M and a 35mm Konvas-2M, and I had a lot of fun, YES, the three shoot film, did you ever hear about that little boy?, when you were playing with your little cars in the living room of your daddy I was shooting with these babes, and all was manual, measuring the light, installing those huge light alone and hacking the breaker to get enough energy for the lights, little babies of today with their digital cameras really don't know a crap what was really to shoot in the old days with very limited budget.....did you ever lifted an eClair NPR? or a eClair ACL? or a 35mm camera ever?, URSA?, thats a joke, the only camera similar in weight to my old babes was the Red One, the rest, not even close....and I have a R1 too, and YES, it is all manual!!!!!!......I just used the Konvas two month ago to shoot some interior scenes, still a solid camera.....URSA?, sorry, not even close......so, are you going to teach me how to do things manually?......hahaha, come back little boy to play with your little cards....you really don't know what was to shoot with film, to do the load of the magazines every 12 minutes for 16mm and 4:30 minutes for 35mm, if I want DPAF is because of I needed for some projects, I have a R1 to shoot whatever else.....and YES, I have been shooting manually all these years.....sorry....nothing to learn from you...

I dont mean investment in $ profit. I mean investment in my skillset. I learn something with every camera I buy. I am more about investing in knowledge. I could do wedding, event, corporate video's but then I would loose my passion so fast. I am not in this for the money as most of you are, as I already have a job. Its a hobby where I choose to spend my time and money on. I rather develop my skill up to a certain level, so I could do certain projects where I could work creative but still deliver high quality.

Ugh... why do all of the posts from people asking for opinions on specific cameras turn into discussions why the OP should buy an entirely different camera instead? I get why someone might say, have you thought about a D750 or a7s but to say just get a small sensor mirrorless and a speedbooster... sorry but that is not the same thing as a FF camera. And it’s nowhere near the same thing as shooting FF Raw on a Canon 5D.

Regarding this post... maybe it is worth noting that lens used with GH5 was Zeiss-Contax zoom. Somewhere in other thread I wrote that from my experience (and taste), two zooms significantly stand out between all other - Zeiss-Contax T 28-85 and Leica R 28-70... Actually, for some reason that one Zeiss makes incredible, I think unsurpassed match with Panasonic (often better than its prime counterparts) - providing at the same time fascinating resolution, details and smooth gradient, after very sudden out-of-focus-drops behind focused subject... But it is not so "silky" smooth in operation as Leica R 28-70.

I must confess I'd rather take the smoothness balance without losing the sharp outcome for any one of the 14-42mm versions than the sharpness from the 12-35mm constant f/2.8 glass... Unpredictable stuff from tempered forks over knives (interesting doc title BTW) to gently handle can always end juicy to our side as we wish and our craft takes there. Cinematic milestone is anything but never utmost real details from the subject to shoot. Thanks to Chris for taking the discussion on the table : ) More love for crappy lenses! LOL : )) Here we go -- no reason to be picky with low light shortcoming this time... no excuses hehe Sorry to go deeper (you Glenn @mercer already know it) BTW it even has Fuji in the name all included! LMAO (E :-)

I wasn't a fan of the 12-35 either on the GH4. Though I better not call it crappy or Emanuel will have a stroke.

No dslrs have useable video af from that generation. If you don't need af and raw, Nikon d750 and d5200(apsc) are decent. Nikon flat profile is nice. I think those are better options unless you are using magic lantern for raw. If not it doesn't really give you anything unless you need waveform. Codecs and low detail really suck now though. Good luck!

Wow, the new ones look great!

You probably too young to understand this...ok, here is a liitle bit of history http://www.emfresearch.com/reflex-study/ http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/pdfs/20041222_reflex.pdf http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/

i wanted x-h1 because of ibis (95% of my lenses is manual) and that was the first reason to buy x-h1 but ends up ETERNA is on pair with it in terms of improvement over x-t2. IBIS is good, but have major issue when moving diagonal - ibis making some jerky vertical-horizontal steps instead of diagonal movement. im really hoping fuji gonna fix/optimise this, but for now im just gonna master the way im moving the camera, its capable of doing great smooth shots with it current state. Still there's nothing you can do when rolling shutter showing his ugly face even if ibis is working properly. Battery life doesnt worried me for now and im already bought an original dummy adapter for using with external power bank ( will see how its work ) The only downside i strongly dislike its a moire/antialiasing. x-h1 losing here to every competitors starting from 24fps to 120. You surely dont expect that from 2018 year flagman. its true. it sucks. But still i prefere x-t2/x-h1 faaar more for video in hybrid package for what fuji doing with color in 8bit codec. its just unbeatable ( expecting Canon to deliever something in this category is the same as expecting Kodak to revive : )

On reduser someone has posted that 2001 is going to be released on 4k Blu-ray (Scan of 70mm negative). But I’m only repeating what I’ve just read so no idea if this is good news, old news or simply false... (with apologies if it’s the latter two)

I remember seeing that picnic video, it was one of the reasons I started exploring ML Raw. Sorry to hear about your 1DC sale... eBay buyers suck. But I think that’s a sign from God... keep it!

Finally! A thread for the new Blackmagic camera, where we can discuss facts and review's about the camera. Oh wait...

I made this so so long ago on the Canon 50D with ML raw and I remember it had a very cinematic look to it. Also...I know some of you guys saw I was selling my 1DC....well the eBay buyer flaked on me and now I still have it. Im never doing that again. I almost had a heart attack thinking about saying goodbye to it

I’m in the middle of some projects, so I am going to wait until the spring or summer of 2019 to get one. I think this camera is pretty ambitious for BM, so it may not be ready by September anyway. So between my projects and my cautious nature, I’d rather wait to see what kinks the camera has before I throw down the money for one. Those Panasonic kit lenses, although slow, are pretty sharp even wide open. I had the 14-42mm, first version, last year during the second time I briefly had a Pocket cam. At the time I was looking for a get up and go alternative to my 5D3 when I wanted to be incognito, and shoot in ProRes for a quick turnaround in post. I did a test or two and decided to just roll with my 5D3... long story short... I had too much expendable income at the time... wish I had expendable income now. And although I could afford both cameras, my color grading skill set was better suited for the 5D3 and the few little things I would have used the Pocket for didn’t really justify the cost to keep it. Anyway here’s a short and dumb little, handheld test I did with that lens, a Hoya IR filter and a Bower variable ND. Surprisingly, the OIS was pretty decent. And even with the small sensor, on the long end, wide open, I could get some shallow depth of field. Turn down the audio... I should have in post. Lol.

Not getting into the ins and outs of legal responsibilities, but this is such an edge case scenario -- he took it apart and broke it. If you knocked an iMac Pro off a table and took it back to Apple for paid repairs they wouldn't bat an eye (you might, once you see the parts bill!) If the roof of your office leaked water onto your iMac Pro you would be able to claim that on insurance (assuming you had the right insurance). There are just so few occasions where you would be refused insurance or repairs, I don't see how his specific circumstance can be translated across to anyone who doesn't take computers apart for a fun and profit. As an aside, the SSD on my MacBook Pro failed after 2 years and 1 week, and Apple repaired it under warranty. I didn't have Apple Care on it, and I didn't have to fight for it -- the guy just ran diagnostics, saw the failure, booked in the service. So anecdotal evidence goes both ways.

It is highly unlikely for the A7sIII to have any form of 10bit. At least internal. They would need to use a different wrapper other than the XAVC-S for that. Also it would undercut the FS5ii. XAVC-S can support 4K 60p though so I am confident we will see that. If they manage to get the fast readout times of their stacked CMOS sensor with video and offer near global shutter performance, coupled with 4K 60p, excellent low light, battery performance and very good AF that would still be an excellent camera and a worthy update from the A7sII. If the use the 24MP sensor of A9 then that would make it even better since hybrid shooters will appreciate the extra resolution for photos. While I would like 10bit as much as any other member of this forum, Sony does not have that much competition yet in order to potentially sacrifice sales of their professional line. Someone could argue that GH5/s is a good alternative but once you have the 60p with near global shutter and very good AF with a 24mp FF sensor it would distance itself by quite a bit. And I really doubt Nikon/Canon would come up with a FF mirrorless camera and internal 10bit anytime soon. That brings me back to the FS5II. A reason that Sony only updated a firmware might be because the competition is still slow. All C200/EVA1/FS5II have some form of RAW, 4K 60p, low light that is not that different. C200 offers a vastly better AF than the other two, EVA1 has the highest resolution sensor and FS5II has the electronic ND. Maybe color was the only thing Sony needed to address in order to match the competition...

was this shot in 4k60p? slightly noise in some shots... the lens seems fine, how is the AF very disappointing that the new Atomos Ninja V have no SDI input ...

With that much money in glass why cheap on out the adapter? Just get the speed booster XL and be done with it.

Here is another unique use of ML https://petapixel.com/2018/04/10/this-short-film-was-shot-at-2520mm/

I will never buy a video camera with out good AF if you like to film things that move. Assuming one man crew. If you do, you risk static senes and boring videos. That means only Sony and Canon for the moment. All extra you put on the camra is a hassel for field work or if you travel. The best tool contains what you need as part of the camera. I have gone through all these phases and to day I have: A7r3, 1dx2 and C200. So I am not using my Atomos any more..C200 shoots raw to CFast cards..... have the SmallHD, maybe on the Canon if on tripod. Its a good monitor.