Leaderboard

Available to buy now - click here for details Cameras and displays have come a long way since the old standard definition Rec.709 standard came to be. From today, Sony's colour science now gets EOSHD's cinematic overhaul on the A7 III and A7R III. Read the full article

I neither want to derail this thread, nor I agree with everything jcs has said over the years, but for anyone feeling depressed, the above steps can be a good alternative to medication. He shouldn't be banned though. He was never offensive to anyone, he just often expressed his opinions as facts like everyone else in any forum ever existed. Oops.

Go to dvxuser and find jcs. Banned here for too much new age alien drug speak. Super rich coder dude from the hills of beverly. Not sure if he will have time, but he knows the ins and outs of the c300ii and is very amicable.

Yeah, he heard little voices in his head we don't LoL. I liked him. But he did ramble on about some strange shit. Smart guy though.

I actually liked shooting m43 because I had more DoF -- even now with my C100mk2 my go to lens for completely uncontrolled run and gun is the 18-135, I'd set that thing to 5.6 and let the AF take care of the rest. Sometimes it's more important to get the subject in focus than to worry about separation. Plus I think it's weird to blur the background so much that you completely remove the subject from its context.

Then the focus or object distance is not the same. The APD filter will decrease the apparent aperture and "smooth" it out, and increase DoF somewhat while changing it's character. That is why it's there and what it does. Darkening the edge of the lens is the same thing as stopping it down but smoother. In fact you can do exactly that, stop down by a small amount and take multiple exposures decreasing aperture slightly and then combine them for the the same effect. Did you have to grab the one shot he managed to screw up. If you look at the wide open and 1.4 shot you see the bokeh being slightly smaller due to the filter which is 100% expected. You could put it at front element and at aperture blades. Front element would not work as well if you use it for FF but probably decent enough for 1.5 or 2x crop. The problem would be finding a filter to begin with.

Only if its on their wedding list though. Otherwise a toaster or some cutlery would be more appropriate.

I suggest you change your expectations about speed, shallow dof, and m43, unless you like using manual focus. M43 cams currently have unreliable af-c in video, so any shallow DOF shot while you are running around needs to have the subject camera distance locked in. M43 is also 2 stops over FF, so take your aperture and x2. The "fast" 2.8 zooms are F5.6 equiv for DOF, which is pretty trash for shallow DOF. I've used the GH5 since release with the 12-35 and 35-100 (and prior to that the G6 and G7). Without af-c, getting useable shallow DOF shots during run and gun is too frustrating for me, you are limited to certain types of shots where you either maintain your distance, or lock your focus and move into or away from your subject to get them in focus. I've owned many primes and hardly ever use them because zooms are so much more convenient, but to each their own. A cheap option is the Panasonic 25mm F1.7, which is like a 50mm F3.5. I ended up hardly using it because of no af-c, and using zooms was just way faster. If you are a whiz at manually focusing your lenses while running around then no problem there, but it's something I found impossible to do. That is probably an unpopular opinion around here but in my experience the tech isn't there if you need the speed. If you have a very relaxed pace then sure you can setup your shots, but it's nowhere close to have the flexibility of F2.8 full frame. Not saying you can't get great footage, it's just the shallow DOF takes more effort to achieve for run and gun on m43. Best of luck and safe travels!

I'd suggest working backwards from what you're trying to do. 1) Work out what types of shots you are likely to want for your style of film-making - it can be useful to look at your previous work and look at what ended up in the final cut 2) Work out what you need to get those shots - there's no point having all the primes in the world if the situation requires being able to quickly change between a wide and tele shot to capture a moment, but also if your look is more important than getting every shot then a slow/bad lens may never make the final cut 3) Then work out what is the nicest / lightest / sharpest / fastest lenses you can afford You might have the nicest lens in the world but if you miss the shot then the lens is worth less than a bad kit zoom that would have at least framed it right.

Used a D850 i think i also used a Tamron 24-70 with VC and its perfect for shooting handheld, just get used to holding your breath. This was the first video we did, it lacks movement so i don't like that much. But in this setup he brought his mic which we plugged to the recorder, same with the guitar. The thing is, we prefer to do it without the mic to look even more acoustic than it already is. Also it was my second day with the Mavic Pro and flew it between some trees and didnt crash it so i got that going for me

I have 2 of the Lexar UHS-II 1000x Speed cards gathering dust in a draw for the same reason, though not from a GH5. One failed in a Nikon D500 and the other in a Fuji XT-2 both after limited use, both corrupted the data and both refuse to format in anything.

My dear erstwhile member can you please stop attacking John Brawley now. I have long since given up on camera forum arguments so might not be completely up on who is right and who is wrong-evil / killed-a-kitten, but can we tone it down a bit. It's JB! We could be learning so much and having such interesting cameras talks with a film industry guy and I am sure one of the only people with a Blackmagic Pocket 2 prototype yet instead a handful of you are just bitching. It's pointless. Even if you disagree with him on certain matters, hold your tongue a bit for the benefit of the rest of us who are interested in what he has to tell.

Articles about creative processes are boring. Because they usually have absolutely nothing to do with creativity at all. If you really want to know how an artist's mind works, look no further than the highly controversial Cannes visits of Lars Von Trier. Read the full article

I recently shot a very short film in Chinatown (Chicago). I decided to use the GH5s for discreet purposes. All natural lighting. Zeiss 50mm Master Anamorphic. 3200 ISO VLog L. https://imgur.com/a/FTy8OtI

Human + Skyline, one of my favorites with this color science (120fps, 8-bit no less)

Hey thanks! Yep, i used your olpf suggestion, loving the effect. I agree, that blue green separation along the skyline is fantastic.

Its looking slick! Is there a little bit of olpf texture in there? I always liked the way foliage and blue sits in with skintone with Alexa

I certainly wouldn’t object to inviting him back (he had interesting and useful stuff to say) but possibly with a request to stay on topic and less of the pseudoscience? Wasn’t there also an issue with him selling stuff (“skin tones”?) for Canon on here?

Shall we ask him back, by popular demand then? I must admit I do miss the guy a bit. But it was a bit like having a spambot around.

Here are a couple quick stills from some current work - shooting Vlog. First still is just with Gha with some grain, second with a film print lut and the gamma converted to Cineon. Loving this GHa lut!!

A couple of days ago I wrote to Metabones: "Will Speed Booster XL 0.64x m4/3 work with the BMPCC 4K or are you developing a new booster especially for the new BMPCC 4K?" Their answer: "Sorry! We still waiting a test with BMPCC 4K …."

The fourth reason is if you are mad enough to be creating a hardware remote control for the infernal thing To be fair, the Sigma EF lenses do act as if they were native on this adapter, I was just trying to be cheap and not buy any real E mount lenses for what will be a short term relationship with it. Of course, this didn't stop me then buying a couple of E mount lenses !!

@BTM_Pix One other option that "seems" to work ok is to pick up the Sony LA-EA1 adapter (about $50 used) and put sony A mount lenses on it. It works OK-ish... Here's the thing though: There are probably only three reasons that you would want / need an a6500 over a GH5 or a G85, and one of those main reasons is the excellent autofocus (the other being an edge in low light and having more detailed 4K). Otherwise, the GH5 / G85 makes a lot more sense than the a6500 (and this is coming from someone who shoots with an a6500). So if you giving up the excellent autofocus advantage by using adapted lenses... well... not a whole lot of reasons left to use the a6500 over the Panasonic cameras...

If you want to contact jcs (John Schultz) you can reach him directly at Brightland.com. Context: “As we enter into the Aquarian age we are waking up to the truth. That we are in control of our thoughts, moods, and success. Many times we get stuck in negative emotion loops. We can break through these loops and find happiness through meditation, hypnotherapy, exercise, detoxification, and optimal nutrition. Our whole planet is going through a shift into higher consciousness: it’s time to flourish and we’ll show you how!” Advertised talk with Jacqui Holland http://www.consciouslifeexpo.com/-2017-lectures/jaque-holland.html But as stated above he also knows more than just a thing or two about the C300!

They both have about the same low light performance with an APS-C crop. Rolling shutter is better on the A7rII and you can use the FF 4K as well for reduced rolling shutter and shallow DoF shots. The FF 1080p from A7rII is very good as well. The stills that you can get from A7rII are amazing. Between the two, get the A7rII. But I would still try to save up for the A7III. You will gain better low light, better AF, better colors, amazing battery life, better slomo, faster to operate. For example as others have said, you can sell your A7II higher at other places like ebay/fredmirranda/craigslist.

I just learnt from this video that the Rode XLR adapter converts the 12v phantom power down to 3-5v Edit: Note it's the VXLR+ not the regular VXLR that does this. Using a regular mic with regular VXLR will likely damage it.

Dude, if your budget is that tight then I’d suggest not buying anything, because you already have the gear you need. With the Ex Tele mode you basically have a range between 24-160, which is about all you need. Since you’re travelling I’m assuming you’re looking for work when you get to wherever you’re going right? I’m guessing from the advice you’re after you don’t have a deep portfolio behind you to be able to pre-book work before you leave. So really, the work you should be looking for is as a second shooter for someone who is already established where you’re headed to, in which case what you want is to provide a specific utility. You have a gimbal and a lightweight and versatile camera/lens combo, so be a gimbal/second shooter for event and wedding videographers. That way you leverage the gear you have, and you get a foot in the door of that market, and you start building a network of other creatives who you can lean on for work. If you’re really itching to buy something get a decent lav mic (I have a cheap Rode one that sounds fine) and a Zoom H1, and a Rode VideoMicro for your camera. Oh, background separation is a function of camera / subject / background distance, don’t buy anything until you get a handle on that. Trust me, you can spend a lot of money and still be disappointed if you don’t know how to achieve what you want. And you can achieve separation through other means, like colour/costume, and composition, and lighting. And stop worrying about bokeh — concentrate on the parts of the frame you want people to pay attention to, not how pretty the blurry background is.

So true, I bought this set a while back and use the cardioids for indoor interviews almost daily. https://www.bax-shop.nl/kleinmembraan-condensatormicrofoons/cad-audio-gxl-3000ssp-stereo-studio-pack They're great and cheap €89 each https://www.bax-shop.nl/kleinmembraan-condensatormicrofoons/cad-audio-gxl1200-kleinmembraan-condensatormicrofoon I also use the set for live music. This video was me on sound, lights, cameras and editing/mixing etc. 1 take with a handheld GX80 Sigma 30mm 1.4 and LS300 Canon 50mm 1.8 on a tripod (then fake handheld movements)

Yes and no. On one hand very cheap, and are "ok", but on the other hand you can certainly do a lot better as well! Probably because a shotgun has a potential market which is massively smaller than a cardioid SDC has. And there are already lots of people making cheap shotguns already. (could Samson do cheaper/better than an Audio-Technica AT875R / RODE NTG1 / Azden SGM-1X / Senal MC24 / Aputure Deity?! Maybe, maybe not, probably not? It is a very competitive market place out there)

Last year I did an entire month long feature film with just the Samson C02! Well, for indoors at least. Outdoors I use a Sanken CS3e or an Aputure Deity shotgun.

Keep that fast mid range zoom lens! You will find it very useful for event / wedding videography when speed is of the essence. Also for most of these shoots you really do not want to be shooting with just a single camera! I'd recommend 3 or 4 cameras (or even more....). So thus at a minimum you should buy yourself a second camera, even if it is just a secondhand Panasonic GH2. (but a secondhand G7 is also very cheap, and would be nice) Put what little money you have after this into say a Panasonic 25mm f1.7 plus a Nikon 50mm f1.8 with a cheap focal reducer. Oh and into buying a Tascam DR10L for the groom.

No. Brian from Metabones said he is NOT making another speedbooster. The normal ones work fine for this camera unless Blackmagic did something unusual. Everything looks to be standard with this camera. In terms of quality, maybe it's a better future investment to get full-frame lenses and the XL speedbooster for future proofing. Otherwise, if you already own lenses, super35 speedbooster might be better.

I originally got one of these to use with my RX100 but I've just been having a play with it with the A6500. All I wanted it for really was to replace the ludicrous video record button as I was getting tired of carrying cocktail sticks round with me to operate it with. However, another huge bonus that I didn't realise it could do is that the zoom rocker on it (which I use to control the optical zoom on the RX100) actually operates the Clear Image Zoom function on the A6500 (and the other A series cameras) Being able to power the camera on and off from it as well is also very neat. For £21.99 it's certainly a lot cheaper than the official Sony one that it, erm, 'resembles quite closely' too

+1 for that formatter tool. I've had to use it looong in the past, of course probably an older version, but, as I remember it worked great. Oh, and I don't remember ever having a Lexar card of any type crapping out, I still use several of different types.

Sandisk ship with full 1 year version of their rescue software. Sure sounds like your DIT person managed to corrupt the cards for you.

ProGrade Digital started shipping their V90 cards this month. https://shop.progradedigital.com/products/prograde-digital-sdxc™-uhs-ii-v90-memory-card The company is run primarily by the old Lexar execs. From their social media, seems that the WRC (World Rally Championship) uses their cards for broadcast purposes. Hopefully that means they're reliable. They seem good value... on paper. - btw, as a tip, try the SD Association's formatting tool: https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/formatter_4/ , that might get them cards back in shape.

I will probably end up getting one. I HOPE it will fly my anamorphic rig. And it isn't all about the weight. Geometry plays a GREAT part, I found this out with a gimbal that could handle the weight, but not the length. My anamorphic rig is long, Though, I am guessing no longer than all the other rigs out there. Anyone fly their anamorphic rigs?

If A7ii served you well and you just need better low light performance + no aliasing then look no further than the A7iii.

Same for me most of the time. Sometimes it shits the bed all together and will just never stop "buffering".

May I suggest a wireless version for the folks that want to save even more cash $8: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00BEGFOA0/ref=psdc_14015071_t1_B0097DFRMC

I think that’s the XC10 on the left.

Look, if you flip the terms of the equation the only thing equivalency will tell you is how to get the same diameter lens with different focal lengths. It's simply a number that relates things to each other and make them comparable. You are 100% correct in that I think it's not that relevant and as you have shown lens construction or "features" is more important. However the lenses you showed do NOT have the same aperture which is evident in the upper right corner, I would suspect that f4 is the "mean" aperture of the apodization filter which makes sense as you loose light to the darkened edges of the filter. I do like the idea of such a filter and want to try to make one for my 50mm f1.4 that have aperture to "spare" so to speak. For what the equivalency formula is it holds true, but at the same time you have to understand what it does not do.

Looks like a low megapixel sensor and no 10bit: – Fs series suffer from the success of A7 series (30% of the pro market)S – They can’t implement 10bits 4k in FS5II because this needs to much power consumption, it is not a marketing choice.A – 10 bits 4k will be for the next FS generation R – A7sIII is coming soon, but it’s the most hiden secret, even in internal Sony teams – A7sIII will keep the same “identity”: low resolution sensor and extreme low light capabilities. Usuable High ISO are more important than oversampling.

Looking at the 1* reviews for the card I've got on Amazon shows that this is far from an isolated occurrence either. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lexar-Professional-Class-UHS-II-Memory/product-reviews/B00OD70UHO/ref=cm_cr_othr_d_paging_btm_1?ie=UTF8&filterByStar=one_star&reviewerType=all_reviews&pageNumber=1#reviews-filter-bar

Claiming to be able to tell them apart, with the actual lens and camera data provided is bit easy, no? Everybody agrees there can be subtle differences between different lenses, like in the example of Andrew, and also the one you provided (noting that adding an APO filter is quite the change to a lens!). Let's keep it simple and general: using equivalence math, you can pretty precisely predict and match the results of certain lenses on certain sesnsor-sized camera's. That's the essence. For evidence: see @BTM_Pix above (and countless others). I feel this point gets unnecessarily muddied when focusing on all kinds of specific details of rendering of a specific lens.

This is the test I did for the 2017 edition of this thread Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 on a full frame (Nikon Df), a crop frame (Nikon D500) and an MFT (Panasonic GX80). Shot at 70mm f2.8 on the crop, 100mm f4.0 on the FF and 70mm f2.8 on 0.7x Speedbooster on the MFT. These images show an identical equivalent depth of dirt on my wall.

I still dont understand what you want to prove. Same lens with focal reducer on smaller sensor will give the same look. Different but faster lens will not give you same look but not because of the sensor, but the characteristics of the lens. Focus fall-off is lens dependant. Helios 44m-4 will give more creamy blur than Zeiss 55 1.8. Panasonic 25 F1.4 will never be as creamy as Carl Zeiss Jenna Tessar 2.8/50. But not because of the sensor size... SLR Magic 25 F0.95 will be smoother than Canon 50 1.8 STM... it's all about lens characteristics.

It is absolute. But for some reason lens manufacturers don't seem to follow the theoretical magic lens that was used to make it. And since lenses are made with other aberrations in mind large aperture wide angle lenses will always struggle for small sensors. Try make a lens for a phone sensor with the same DoF as a FF 50mm f1.4. You might argue that it's an extreme example but does show there is a upper limit (or lower) so it has to follow a line or curve of some sort. And when pushing that extreme FF will always win out in that regard. Does it matter when you stay inside the extreme? No, the equivalency is happy to work just fine when not pushed to the edge of oblivion.

Bravissimo brotha', you can tell a difference between a lens manufactured by Sony and a lens manufactured by Voigtlaender. Sick skillZ! If he use the same lens with focal reducer you will not see any difference between the two images. I have tried it.