Leaderboard

The author of this article does not understand perspective. It's the kind of thing I used to think until I took the time to understand that for instance a 50mm has no magic powers to change the way light works over for instance a 25mm. "...specifically a shallower depth of field and more compressed rendering of space. In other words, the large format allows you to see wider, without going wider, as you can see in the example below." ? This is false. It's 100% false. There is no such thing as lens compression, only perspective. If you're standing in the same place, perspective will be the same, and as @kye is pointing out, within reason, you can mimic the look of any size sensor by matching the FOV and using an equivalent aperture (and then compensating the ISO). Having said that, there are certain things that are hard to do, like super shallow depth of field on wider lenses on MFT, or mimicking the look of a 50mm 1.2 FF on MFT, etc. You can just get a wider lens though... for instance a 12mm on MFT is the same as a 24 on FF in FOV

It's all good. Even if information is wrong (or incomplete) then it's worth talking about. There's a chance we might learn something, which is basically the only thing that is actually worth anything in the long run Super-shallow DoF is an interesting one, as the forums are full of conversations that go: "I've got to get that FF look... BOKEH!!!" "You're an idiot, real cinematographers rarely shoot wider than F2.8 - lots of cine lenses are only that fast, go get an education you moron" "Yeah, but....... BOKEH!!!!!" "I'm done with you... <block>" but in reading a lot about cine lenses for my cine lens deep-dive thread I found quite a lot of references of people using the Zeiss Super Speeds (T1.3) or Master Anamorphics (T1.9) wide open for one reason or another. Think about that - S35 sensors being used with 50mm or 85mm lenses at T1.3!! And people make snide remarks at me for wanting a Voigtlander f0.95 lens - that's only f2 equivalent. DOF falloff is a very interesting topic and I found references to that on my cine lens deep-dive. Apparently people like it when the falloff is more gradual. In terms of what is going on here, I'm at a loss to understand it. The way that a lens works is this: the light coming into the lens is projected onto the sensor for any (sensible) setting of focus on the lens there will be a place you can put something in the FOV of the lens that will be "in focus" on the sensor "in focus" has to do with the Circle of Confusion Circle of Confusion essentially says that any point in front of the lens will either be a perfect point of light on the sensor (ie, perfectly in focus) or it will be out of focus and in the shape of a circle (which is actually the shape of the aperture blades, but circle works well enough as an analogy). Therefore, in theory, the DoF of what is in focus is infinitely shallow. This isn't true in reality though, because pixel size matters. Let's imagine that we have a sensor with pixels that are 1um across (for ease of maths). If you get an object with an infinitely sharp edge and put that edge at the exact focal distance then the circle of confusion will be 0um across, and therefore will only hit one pixel, and in the final (RAW) file that point of light will be in-focus as it's only putting its light onto one pixel. Now let's imagine that we get that object and move it towards (or away) from the camera such that the circle of confusion is 10um across, that will be 10 pixels wide, and will probably hit 11 pixels. Obviously this is going to be seen as out-of-focus in the output files. The interesting part is where we position the object such that its circle of confusion is 0.3um across. It's technically out-of-focus, but 0.3um will probably only hit one pixel and so in the output file it will still be perfectly in focus. What this means is that we have a DoF greater than zero because the size of the pixels is a limitation. This means that the larger the pixels, the deeper the DoF for any given lens. Which is why the DoF calculators ask you for the sensor size and resolution. A 500MP MFT sensor will have a lot shallower a DoF than a 12MP S35 sensor, even with the same lens. The maths of this really doesn't care about what sensor you're using - for a given FOV and the same number of MP on the sensor the fall-off should be identical. The tricky part is where we position the object such that its circle of confusion is 0.99um across. It's technically out-of-focus, and if that 0.99um happens to like up perfectly with one pixel then it will still appear perfectly in-focus, but all probability suggests that it will fall across 2 or more pixels, making it a bit of-of-focus. This will also be true for the detail with 0.3um circles of confusion. What we're getting into here is maybe the gaps between the pixels (larger gaps will mean that more stuff looks in-focus) and maybe it's also the sharpness of the lens as in just the same way that the sensor has a maximum sharpness (it can't tell the difference between 0.001um circles and 0.01 or 0.1 circles) so do lenses. A lens with lower resolution will have a deeper DoF despite having the same FOV and aperture as another higher resolution lens. I guess this ponders the question, does a lower-resolution optical path or a higher resolution optical path have a gentler roll-off? A higher resolution optical path will have a shallower DoF and therefore have a deeper area that is almost in focus, and a lower-resolution optical path will have a deeper DoF and a shallower area where the transition occurs. Can anyone confirm this? It would require having two lenses with different resolutions that are the same focal length and can do the same aperture. @BTM_Pix has a bunch of lenses but might be too busy working on his 127 projects.. I'll have a look through my lens collection. Certainly if you have a larger sensor camera then the gaps between the pixels are likely to be smaller and the glass you're using is likely to be more modern and higher resolution, so both of those would mean a deeper area of things almost in focus, so the logic fits.

Had an interesting afternoon of working on a development that means that functionality will be coming to a right camera near you in the near future.

I forgive them as its their cheapest model drone. Canon gimps their flagships/high end products which is idiotic.

Was that shot on a 4 bit Cinema camera? We need more 4 bit Cinema cameras. BM please give us 4 bit Cinema Cameras?

That’s what I was thinking too, that it’s basically false. I didn’t want to say so straight out because of two reasons, the first is that I don’t think I understand this stuff well enough to say things like that (and i’ve been wrong before!) and secondly that although I can’t find any tangible reason that a larger sensor should be better I have seen enough videos shot with larger sensors (FF and also larger) that had some kind of X-Factor that I just couldn’t place, so they always left me wondering if there was something to these urban legends.... It may well be colour science though, that’s entirely possible.

I found that article to be very confusing. We all know that different crop factors can be compensated for in some ways (eg, FOV) but that other things don’t scale (eg exposure) so for example on MFT you put on a lens that’s 25mm T2.8 and get a certain exposure and a certain DoF, but when you put a 50mm onto a FF lens then you can set the lens to be T5.6 and get less exposure but the same DoF, or you can set it to T2.8 and get the same exposure but a shallower DoF. Tha article seems to be indicating that something changes when you use the larger sensor and then put on a lens to give the same FOV, but it doesn’t say what it is. It seemed to indicate that you can get closer and still see the same things on the edges of the frame, but that would mean a wider FOV, which is something you can do with any sensor size - just go wider and closer. Does anyone actually know what they’re talking about?

Hello everyone,, The spamming on this forum has been yaluhack mobdro.org kodi ridiculous lately. Helsinki and Samop keep obviously spamming, but they haven’t been banned yet. Please Andrew, ban these spammers. ———————————————————— I did not find the right solution on the internet: http://www.advertising-case-study.org/1376.html http://kodi.info/4452/

I've heard... that the best kind of labour is child labour. They need a healthy break from Minecraft anyways. ? To learn about something wholesome, like pulling focus.

This is a creative art form we take on as filmmakers - I see nothing wrong with the approach by the filmmaker or the grade, if that was their vision.

We're nearing towards the end of the year... many of us are on the sprint towards the finish line, it's a busy period. That and certain constraints... means not everyone is able or willing to participate. Instead of a contest... it should perhaps be... as per the title of the thread a 'challenge'. Like with all social media challenges and memes, there's no real contest with winners and losers (which is btw another reason people might not enter, afraid of the judging, plain bad comments (opposed to constructive criticism) and coming in last (perhaps unfounded fear, but existent nontheless)), it's just... a challenge, meant to challenge oneself. Be it the cinnamon challenge... bottle flipping... or ones to bring awareness to good causes such as the ice bucket challenge. It's about getting out of your comfort zone, experiencing something new, pushing yourself and most of all: to participate... not to be 'init to win it', but just for fun, to have a certain commonality with other individuals that enjoy doing something different and perhaps a bit random. Instead of something being cleverly thought out as a contest... maybe indeed just let people run with it as they please as a challenge, the only rule being 'shot on a Soviet prime', keep it year round for all I'm concerned, until with any challenge it sorta settles itself and a new thing comes along... say the 'FD lens challenge' or what have you. All that said. I do appreciate putting in the time and effort that went into organizing this to strengthen the community around here. ☺️?

Very nicely done!

i nearly bought the mir 37mm but i think i went looking for something cheaper and i might have also been hoping the lomo triplet might get some bubble bokeh happening lots of experimenting yet to do with it. The helios is popular for the swirly bokeh however i'm not much of a fan of swirly so i passed on the helios. The industar i looked at too i think. You got some nice results from the industar might have too add one at some time

AKA "I'm a spammer who has lifted a post from ages ago off another site to waste everybody's time with.." https://reddup.co/r/Anamorphic/comments/beuj89/century_optics_169_focus_issues

@kye, to my eyes, this Industar looks even better than Helios. It's contrasty, but subtle at the same time. Firstly: hats off to all participants. You did a really great job. Not only finding a use for many (unfairly) forgotten lenses [I'm a fan of recycling, hahaha] but also showing that in experienced hands they are as good as many of their modern counterparts. As to why I didn't enter: It's partly due to me being me - an introvert person who does not feel right pointing a camera at strangers unless: a) I'm on holiday and try to capture overall ambience (but then, I'm just a simple tourist - not really harmful), b) they (strangers) take part in an event I wanted to document (usually things connected with street art or photography). And partly because of our Polish law: we can take photos / videos of people in public places, but if we were to publish them, then all the hell breaks loose and problems start to arise. You can't publish pictures without the consent of the people shown in them, in case they can be easily recognised. Sure, Germany has almost identical laws (or is it us copying Germany), but what is totally different is people's attitude to it. Most Germans I met were self-aware, but trusting and open-minded. They weren't afraid about what you might think of them, of your judgement. They seemed authentic and proud of it. That's why I think they are more likely to appreciate you photographing them, since they don't feel offended by any means. Whereas here, in Poland, I feel that a photographer is usually considered as some kind of an intruder. Our nation is kind of insecure and we pay a big attention to how we are perceived. If you just take snaps of buildings, walls, etc, you may be spared, but God forbid if you point your camera at actual people. I just can't forget my first attempt to street photography. I set out quite early (~9 AM on a peaceful November Saturday morning) and after strolling a little I managed to find a quite interesting composition. I leaned against a wall and waited for the perfect moment, for the perfect passerby. Not more than two minutes passed, when some lady approached me and accused me of taking photos of her home. She demanded I show her all of my photos or she calls the cops. I couldn't show her anything because I didn't even press the shutter once, yet. I tried talking my way out of this situation, but she thought I was a making a fool of her and somehow hid the images in a secret folder. Very unpleasant experience. That's why you didn't see any entry coming from me - I just had no proper occasion (well, at least to me) to take the camera out. I'll definitely post something, but can't really say when.

OK.. My first film was with the Mir 37mm f2.8 - I think it might have been on a speed booster but can't quite recall: Second film was the Helios 58mm F2, also can't recall if it was on the speed booster or not: I shot the Helios at F4 where it has sharpened up significantly, but still has some subject isolation. I was hoping for "wow that's a great modern looking lens look how sharp it is what could it be" type reactions, but you know, everyone is off talking about 6K and completely missing the point of... well... everything Third film is uploading....

for what its worth, The LOMO TRIPLET T-43 4/40 LOMOGRAPHY LTM L39 LENS *MINT* I think i paid about Aus $60 delivered. all in all not a bad investment i think. Since i upgraded the p4k to 6.6 this morning i'll have to shoot something this afternoon. I really lucked out with the m39 to m4/3 mount that was a mount i accidentally bought some months ago.

We've had heated discussions in this forum on the DOF equivalency principle and on the difference in the looks of different size formats. I am on the side that there is definitely a difference in the general look of different size formats. I also maintain that the DOF equivalency principle does not account for the rate that the focus "falls off" outside of the mathematical DOF range and that this DOF falloff rate differs between different formats. Keep in mind, that the assertions above apply not to the size of a sensor nor emulsion, but to the optics made for a particular size of sensor/emulsion. If one compares the images from a 16mm camera to those from, say, an 8"x10" camera, the difference in look and DOF falloff is striking. Here is footage from a recent 8"x10" camera:

Indeed @leslie - being a bit more sceptical on who is posting is definitely an up-side. Plus I always look forward to @BTM_Pix somehow working in a can of processed ham into the thread. That mans creativity knows no bounds!

So, the competition is now officially meant to be closed, and judging to commence. My prize winners! Considering the low participation rate, everyone who posted anything is a winner and receives the I BEAT ALMOST EVERYONE SIMPLY BY ENTERING prize! and a special mention to @BTM_Pix who wins the I PUT EFFORT INTO EVERYTHING EXCEPT READING THE RULES prize! What’s next Anyone else that wants to award any prizes is now free to do so... the more creative the better. I’m willing to award a prize for best prize, so have at it. I’m curious to hear why more people didn’t enter... I suspect it might be the requirement to have close-ups of people, and I must admit that I had a third lens ready to shoot with and just didn’t find an opportunity to film anyone at such close quarters. So, all rules are now suspended except the Soviet Prime Lens rule, and let’s keep posting things shot with those lenses. I’m keen to see what anyone is filming (or has filmed) with Soviet Primes. I’ll definitely be filming and posting some stuff I’ve shot with the Soviet primes I have owned for some time and bought for this challenge.

How about this for the GH5S: 1. ProRes RAW or BRAW via HDMI to external recorder ? 2. Internal C4K 60p 10-bit 150Mbps IPB 3. Internal 10-bit or 12-bit uncompressed cDNG 1080p for shits and giggles. ? 4. Ability to have custom LUT .VLT loaded for HLG profiles 5. Linear focus and custom focus throw support for 10-25 f/1.7 when manual clutch mode 6. That nice big red recording indicator box that you have on the S1H. Would be nice. Highly unlikely. HLG kinda does it now anyway. I second this.

No way. Bar Iakwe! ? I always said I wanted to retire and start a diving school at Bikini Atoll. Bikini (of which its existence I found out by randomly placing a finger on a spinning globe as a little kid), of course known for a couple of things, like the two-piece bathing suit, Godzilla and Spongebob Squarepants. The latter two of course greatly affected by nuclear bomb tests (by now the radiation ain't too bad). There's also sunken boats and planes which has made a great home to marine wildlife and made it a great spot for diving.

Last summer film, favourite of our family. X-T3 with Bolex Moller 16/32/1.5x.

Seeing The Hateful Eight as Ultra Panavision 70mm Roadshow was quite epic. For us mere mortals though... I don't even want dedicate myself to an APS-C let alone FF ecosystem. For me MFT hits the sweetspot. Panasonic, Olympus, Blackmagic, Kinefinity etc are doing great things. You keep the option of frankenrigging it and adapting any sort of lens. At the same time... there's class leading IBIS, best features in the game (Panasonic with internal 10-bit as well as offering 60p in 4K), great ergonomics & reliability and the option of having really small and light lenses to go with it when that's what the situation calls or allows for that day. People can keep their LF. But... if someone is willing to go through all the trouble of acquiring in LF... hey, have at it! I'm sure I will thoroughly enjoy it!

HAHAHAHA.... all these people going FF and re-buying all their lenses are already behind the curve! I've always said that if you're not shooting Medium or Large format then you might as well be using a 1/3" chip camera - you're not going to be getting those luscious immersive images! Sell all your FF lenses now - the format is dead! Get out while you still can!!

Yep, just need to sort out the overheating issues.