Leaderboard

Just the fact that you're on full frame means any bespoke cinema lenses are going to be pretty obscenely expensive. Established DPs will shoot with Rokinon or Nikon but there is a bias against Rokinon being cheap, I think. They're not even bad, but it's no one's top choice. Whereas Top Gun 2 is Sigma Art, which is kind of crazy. And Joker has some Nikkor. But no one's top choice is Rokinon. I'd try to avoid that kind of client in the first place but that's not always an option. Not all of this is personal experience: The Nikkors offer the best price/performance I think. They've been used for years for Vistavision and Joker had at least one Nikkor used pretty extensively I've read. Focus direction is backward, if it matters to you. The f2 versions of 28 f2, 50 f2, 85 f2 are all 52mm fronts. Make sure to match vintages approximately if consistency is your goal, coatings changed over time, likely not too much in recent years. The Contax lenses do feel bigger and the mechanics are really high end, they feel a lot nicer than many "true" cinema lenses. But focus rings are a bit stiff in some cases. The 28mm and 50mm f1.4 have 55mm fronts, I suspect the 85mm f2.8 does, too. Again, I never had issues with Nikon focus rings being too small but these are bigger. More room for fingers. Better grip. Again you could just get follow focus gears. https://followfocusgears.com/ And have wider diameters and a better grip and look more "pro" but a bit silly to get those without a follow focus? Canon SSC Aspherical is rumored to share the same designs with K35s, the most desirable set of vintage super speed lenses you can get. The 24mm and 85mm are 72mm fronts, 55mm is a 58mm front, but is still enormous and the build quality is outstanding. A set has recently gone from like $2000 on eBay to $8500 or something ridiculous so good luck. This is sort of the ultimate, though. The next generation (nFD L) has the same designs but different coatings and the 55mm has been replaced with a 50mm f1.2 with a different design. By all accounts that one is tiny and has 52mm front threads but the others remain large. I think these correlate with second generation K35s, a bit less desirable. Build quality and mechanics have been downgraded a bit. Coatings are updated and a bit less vintage but a tenth of a t-stop faster. You could probably still get a set for $2500 or less. The 50mm might be a little small and you'd want to buy a 72mm step up ring I guess. I've also read the bearings in these can degrade over time and will eventually need repair. If you don't need hard stops, Sigma Art is an option. If that's too clinical, first generation Canon EF L are the basis of the CN-Es, I think, at least some of them, and you get the pro red ring. I think Blue Ruin was shot on these, looked good to me. Mix of 77mm and 72mm fronts, easy to add some step up rings. If you don't need hard stops this might be the best option with that Sigma to L adapter. Never tried it. Some of the ZEs I think are updated Contax designs and less desirable. I think the 25mm f2, 50mm Makro Planar, and 35mm f2 I think are new and excellent but the line was recently discontinued so not too expensive. Milvus is pretty high end, never used it, but excellent performance and big. Maybe a bit clinical. Sort of a Sigma Art/Otus type deal. Rent one? Can't speak for the build quality, but the image from SLR Magic MicroPrimes is stunning. Apo designs so bokeh is smooth with pure colors. You could get a 25, 50, 85 for 3500 euro I think. 82mm threads and 2 pounds each despite being "micro." I think these are bespoke "cinema" designs but miniaturized, but it remains to be seen how the construction holds up. Optically from what I understand they are excellent. Not so sure about the mechanics.

Both were affected, but 6K was much worse even. Now both 4K and 6K modes are working as expected. Just make sure to turn NR down to -1. Also, no more banding using the 6K modes.

Yes. So many people forget or dismiss the pre-production and then lament any surprise on the job. Scouting and preparation are so important. That way you can plan for a better execution. Time of day, sun position, shitty lighting, ugly decorations, the lenses and lighting that can improve your approach. Even the aspect ratio choice can be impacted by just scouting the places you're going to film.

When you join the company Zoom meeting with a £10K webcam and wonder if anyone will notice.

Fuji released an app that allows to use X-T4 (along with X-H1, X-Pro2, X-Pro3, X-T2, X-T3, GFX100, GFX 50S, GFX 50R) as a webcam with a simple USB cable. No HDMI Cam Link needed. Nice! https://fujifilm-x.com/en-us/support/download/software/x-webcam/

The production company I work for has purchased the new 1.5x Aivascope from the Facebook page. I honestly love it. It’s certainly not perfectly, but it’s given us the flexibility we need to shoot anamorphic without totally breaking the bank. It’s quite easy to use as well. In my tests, I’ve found that the taking lens often gives the characteristics I’m looking to achieve. I feel the Aivascope is quite clinical and sharp. If I put a modern stills lens behind it, the image will be exactly that. However, if I put our Contax Zeiss set behind it, it takes on a totally new look. We shot a few spots with the Aivascope, Contax taking lens, and the S1H. I believe we used the 50mm 1.4 for most, with the 85mm 1.4 and 35-70 3.4 for some pickup shots. We shot mostly at f2.8

I think @IronFilm is right for narrative indie filmmakers. I can't speak for wedding/corporate/doc people, who may need more mobility, AF, and less rigging. I think even music videos tend to require more mobility than narrative. In my experience, even the worst Blackmagic camera, the 2.5k EF mount, was preferable over the Panasonic and Sony mirrorless that I also used back in ~2015. The only thing comparable was 5d3 raw, which was unreliable and an even bigger PITA to use (and also more expensive, incidentally). That said, obviously photo/video hybrids are a different class which does exclude things like the Pocket, or GoPros, etc, so it's a useful categorization.

I think it would be usefull to separate the several areas of filmaking and not generalize. I did a few weddings during one summer and I hated it. People are unconfortable around cameras and just want to enjoy the wedding. As for photography, people have an instant gratification and can later post the pictures on social media, so the attittude is different towards photographers. For commercials you have to deal with the client. Most of the times you have to compromise or do what your client wants, even when you know it's shit. There's less chance of creating "your" own commercial, as you're getting paid for a specific purpose. My stuff is low budget, so the hability to do something great is more difficult. What I've gotten from it is that I don't mind to get a little less money for more time. It's less stressfull and more enjoyable. But it's not always possible. For corporate, my experience is that I had less people watching over my shoulder but people rely a lot on interviews. There's a formula that the client wants and that's it. Normal people don't do so well on camera under pressure. So It's always a huge amount of time for people to be able to speak full sentences for the camera. I think I would behave the same way. And then you deal with terrible lighting and ugly ass interiors. I watch this forum for a while now and it's mostly about gear talk. That's great but it's only a small part of the conversation. Some people work on the industry and some don't. There's a lot of cynicism towards the industry and some is valid. My recommendation is for people to lose the gear addiction and think of a theme that they would like to explore. In photography or video. Some ideas don't need a lot of money. Just time and dedication.

I'd say: forget about green screen. Not only is proper lighting - and postproduction - for grey screen complex/difficult, but the Sony isn't really the right camera for that task because of its 8bit 4:2:0 codec. (Greenscreen work is one of the reasons for using raw cameras...) For a good and inexpensive mic, I'd first go for a lavalier, especially if you speak to students. The Audio Technica ATR3350 is a really good low-cost solution. - And I wouldn't use an on-camera mic 10 feet away...

NEW BLOG POST https://www.eoshd.com/anamorphic/preview-of-coming-attractions-anamorphic-goes-medium-format-with-fuji-gfx-100-and-a-look-at-the-leica-sl2-5k-43-mode/

I think we're missing something important here. In this area communication is key. I've directed, I've dp'ed, operated, was an ac and done just photography. Some jobs it went well and others not so much. Luckily none was a disaster. When I direct, my main difficulty is explaining to people what and how I want things. I know a little bit of the technical side and that way I don't think I have crazy expectations. The jobs that didn't go so well was when I was on the other side and the director couldn't explain shit to me and was mostly unprepared. Other times I didn't listened properly. It's easy to point the finger but if we're hired to do a job, we need to have the information so we can do it properly. It's a two way street. If your boss isn't explaining correctly, ask better questions or just ask again. What's my point with this? We all have expectations, deadlines and budgets to abide to, so it's crucial that we communicate and make sure our team understands it. When you're directing, the main part of the job is just answering people, so they can do their job properly. And allowing them do to it without being constantly behind their shoulder. Why some things fail comes mostly from lack of preparation, communication and just being human. Somedays we're more confident and can explain easily what we want. Other times we''re going through something in our life and don't want confrontations and let go of certain things. That's why we need to keep asking for information and listen when we're on the other side. Other times the weather just does not cooperate. Fucking weather.👍 It's crucial that we have realistic expectations and that comes from preparation. If you're working with natural light and don't want it to look like shit, don't go out at 2pm. Go in the early morning or late in the day. Easy. But just managing that little detail is a constant struggle.

Not always true though, depending what you're doing. For instance, say you're filming a pottery instructor and you know you'll be cutting her 45 minute presentation down to a 3 minute video. you better stop filming her talking along the way and get plenty of close up shots of the throw wheel, hands, or her students looking on... Its all part of the craft. Knowing what to shoot and when. That said, I've hired plenty of people to shoot stuff for my projects and when I review the footage I'm like, "what the hell man!" That said, I've been the shooter for plenty of my projects and when I review the footage I'm like, "what the hell man!"

Higher standard is NOT expected. People are influenced by youtube and instagram these days, or from the 1 bazillion reality shows they are watching on Mtv and 1000 other networks producing crap. The only thing they want from their photos, is more bokeh. Shoot 5000, crop 200 of them, add some "filters" and you got a job done. 20 even 30 years ago we were going 1-2 or even 3 days per week at the cinemas to catch up with the latest and greatest. Now cinema seems to be based only on technical aspects. Youtube is the big educator of YOLO generations, and all the main professionals are NOT there, there are just young kids, doing a few weddings, and then suddenly are the world's experts about film making! I have worked with some of the previous generation here and abroad, and not one of them is on youtube!

Thank you. I anxiously wait your footage.

ok. sorry

That sounds like the M50's future to me. I hope the M50 will be up and running sometime this year or next...who knows, but I'm hanging on :). Greg has done something really nice for the M50 so far, check it out: https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=23296.msg227504;topicseen#msg227504

They can be which is why when I get asked (a lot! By other photographers and clients) how I do both at the same time the answer is quite simple, - simplicity, ie, not trying to be too ambitious in the first place. My rule of thumb and thought process is that my video work is simply an extension of my photography work. No different angles or compositions or focal lengths or lighting or anything. Instead, one camera captures the video aspect of any scene and a second camera the stills and the only difference is actual lens choice. IMO it’s the only way one person can do both! This way video can be as ‘easy’ as photography but of course there is audio and random people walking in the way and a whole other load of things to consider but it’s all scaleable... Shoot clips + lav mic the talent? Pretty ‘easy’ to capture enough material with intent to tell the story you want. Anything more than that, the ‘harder’ (or at least more inconsistent) it gets to capture it without disruption. For instance I say the same thing to all my clients and that is: If photography is 1 and video (ie, the static capture of ceremony & speeches) is 10, then your ‘Wedding Film’ (ie, the 9-12 minute highlight production) capture process is a 2. Ie: in the 1-10 scale, the filming /clips are not so different to photography but that static and lengthy duration stuff such as the ceremony is the equivalent of 1 single stills picture and the speeches the same, ie, the total opposite and other end of the scale. Every single; cough, stutter, mic drop out, serving staff that walks in the way, child that knocks the tripod, the light levels changing, - all have to be considered and the reality is at a wedding you can try and alter the tilt of the playing field as much as possible in your favour, but you can never truly level it. It ain’t a Hollywood or Netflix closed set!

Curious does anyone know why none of Blackmagic's cameras besides the URSA can do Prores 444 Would be nice to have on the P6K to shoot in HD 444 and get an image that is similar to RAW without shooting cropped HD RAW. I am also aware how counterproductive it sounds to get a 6k camera and shoot in HD 😅 but what can I say 6k and even 4k is overkill for most of the stuff I do.

Some footage I took tonight with the Ursa in 2k 444. Really doesn't perform bad in low light. 1600 iso would actually be nice if it didn't have that damn fixed noise pattern. Switched to Arri color space, threw on the Log C REC709 lut in Resolve, and tweaked skintones slightly.

GFX 100 to get ProRes Raw https://www.fujirumors.com/fujifilm-gfx100-will-get-prores-raw-via-firmware-update-soon-and-unclear-if-x-t4-will-get-it-too/

It is, no more banding as it seems, will do a blue sky test tomorrow. Also HDMI monitoring works now with 6K recording. Loving the aspect ratio as well. 😄

Lenses have resolution and contrast, which can always be degraded by filters on set or by processing in post. Things like barrel distortion (which some love and says it gives a very cinematic look) can also be added in post. There is always an argument to be made for having the lenses with the most resolution and contrast and then using filters to degrade them, because you can always take those filters off and get a cleaner more modern look, whereas with vintage lenses you can't put a 'modern' filter on to increase resolution and contrast. Building the look with filters instead of with the lenses themselves also allows a more consistent overall look if you want to shoot at different apertures, as lenses are often softer wide-open and then have radically increased resolution when stopped down, and can also have significant differences between the centre of the frame and the edges. If this is the case then putting on a filter acts like a unifying force to make the whole frame more uniform. Of course, if you're shooting the whole film at a given f-stop then this doesn't matter as much, but then you have to contend with radically different DoF from shot to shot as the subject distance varies giving different amounts of background defocus. Apart from the look of a Black Pro Mist filter to reduce contrast and a Black Soft FX to reduce resolution, what are the parts of the cinematic look that you're chasing? You mentioned vintage Nikkor AI lenses would fit the bill, but then said that Samyang wouldn't as they're not expensive enough. If you're concerned about being judged on set wouldn't the Nikkor lenses also be perceived as cheap? After all, they are.

Yeah the complete lack of 4:4:4 is frustrating. Even if it was just in 1080p. I adore the 4:4:4 from the Ursa.

I can now shoot without having to worry about ghosting, smearing in V-Log. NR has to be set to -1 though. TNR seems to be entirely off though and motion cadence is great now.

Some frustrations come when you change your gear constantly and you get mixed results. If you take the time and effort to know your camera, exposure and post workflow, your luts and how much can you change your image after, you might be surprised how good an old camera can be. That's one of the reasons why professionals stick with certain gear. They get to know it and push it as they go on the next job. If you keep changing your gear, you might be surprised when it doesn't get you the results you wanted. You can argue about his films and whatnot but I think this director is a great example for this post:

Also the image - especially after the update - blows the competition out of the water. Codecs are improved now - so is the color gamut/mapping and (temporal) NR can be turned off now.

Sensors in a box that need rigging will always remain niche. Everything in consumer technology grows and heavily favors convenience and ease of use. Sony's news ZV1 vlogging camera is an excellent example of this trend. It fakes bokeh, it smoothes skin, it handles the AF, and sound issues. Putting aside wether it looks good, it's still very easy to use. The way I want to use my camera requires it to have an EVF, a decent image (vast majority of cameras do), internal recording, an articulating screen, some kind of AF, and weather sealing. I want to pack it in a bag and pull it out and have it ready to go. I don't want to rig a monitor and an external hard drive to get the best out of it. That shit gets annoying fast, no matter how good the image is. I prefer easy and good enough. I like to take pictures, even though I don't consider myself a photographer, and don't want a separate device to do it! So far modern mirrorless cameras are the best balance of all those requirements, for me. Would @MrSMW shoot weddings on a RED or ARRI if price wasn't a consideration? My guess is he probably wouldn't because he would need a focus puller, external EVF, and an EasyRig to get through his day instead of his trusty X-T3/4 and a monopod!

I know this is probably not anywhere close to the real quality, but if anyone wants to watch the video on a phone i shared it on instagram. Feel free to have a look or if you want high quality screengrabs tell me or alternatively I can upload it to vimeo.

Experimental filmmaker legend Maya Deren had an excellent take on this, in 1959! Her text "Amateur versus Professional" is worth quoting in its entirety: The major obstacle for amateur film-makers is their own sense of inferiority vis-a-vis professional productions. The very classification “amateur” has an apologetic ring. But that very word – from the Latin “amateur” – “lover” means one who does something for the love of the thing rather than for economic reasons or necessity. And this is the meaning from which the amateur film-maker should take his clue. Instead of envying the script and dialogue writers, the trained actors, the elaborate staffs and sets, the enormous production budgets of the professional film, the amateur should make use of the one great advantage which all professionals envy him, namely, freedom – both artistic and physical. Artistic freedom means that the amateur film-maker is never forced to sacrifice visual drama and beauty to a stream of words, words, words, words, to the relentless activity and explanations of a plot, or to the display of a star or a sponsor’s product; nor is the amateur production expected to return profit on a huge investment by holding the attention of a massive and motley audience for 90 minutes.Like the amateur still-photographer, the amateur film-maker can devote himself to capturing the poetry and beauty of places and events and, since he is using a motion picture camera, he can explore the vast world of the beauty of movement. (One of the films winning Honorable Mention in the 1958 Creative Film Awards was ROUND AND SQUARE, a poetic, rhythmic treatment of the dancing lights of cars as they streamed down highways, under bridges, etc.) Instead of trying to invent a plot that moves, use the movement of wind, or water, children, people, elevators, balls, etc. as a poem might celebrate these. And use your freedom to experiment with visual ideas; your mistakes will not get you fired. Physical freedom includes time freedom – a freedom from budget imposed deadlines. But above all, the amateur film-maker, with his small, light-weight equipment, has an inconspicuousness (for candid shooting) and a physical mobility which is well the envy of most professionals, burdened as they are by their many-ton monsters, cables and crews. Don’t forget that no tripod has yet been built which is as miraculously versatile in movement as the complex system of supports, joints, muscles, and nerves which is the human body, which, with a bit of practice, makes possible the enormous variety of camera angles and visual action. You have all this, and a brain too, in one neat, compact, mobile package. Cameras do not make films; film-makers make films. Improve your films not by adding more equipment and personnel but by using what you have to its fullest capacity. The most important part of your equipment is yourself: your mobile body, your imaginative mind, and your freedom to use both. Make sure you do use them. https://hambrecine.com/2013/12/10/amateur-versus-professional/ (also includes a PDF of this text.) - She shot all her films on a 16mm Bolex H16 btw.

Completely agree. I think it just comes down to people don't want to talk about the difficult things. Gear is fun and stress free(mostly lol). I also agree on weddings. They can be a lot of fun (depending on the couple). The best wedding I did was where the family was just super comfortable with each other. They interacted so genuinely all the time, I was just capturing who they are. But like you said a lot of people freeze up in front of a camera. It is an odd thing though. A big thing now is filming couple's reading the letters they wrote to each other prior to the wedding. Its such a private moment to film, kind of odd. If I get married I'll want the ceremony filmed but that is it. And I want the videographers to be all the way in the back and stay there haha. The whole flashy wedding video montages are bizarre to me. This is my life we are talking about not some social media event.

Yeah if there was a clearer path to education I'd definitely take it. From what I have seen film schools are often kind of a joke. At least that is my opinion after having worked with multiple students from these schools. I will also say everyone of these students have been very talented people. I just don't think the schools have taught them much. I learned more on my own from simply making my own films, working with other people, reading books, and articles/youtube. I did take the time to actually buy books on lighting, cinematography, and sound early on though. I feel like reading is unheard of these days unless its an online article haha. Interestingly I've found that a lot of online information especially mainstream stuff is really poor. It seems to often be written or produced by people who know very little about the actual subject but rather are just good at marketing themselves. Most filmmaking stuff on youtube is so basic and generic. Most experienced people are busy actually working and have no time for YouTube. So rather we get these wannabe filmmakers who are really just youtubers and there experience doesn't really go beyond that. There are exceptions to this of course. As to the "just do it" attitude I think its complicated. A lot of it comes from YouTube guru's, motivators and entrepreneurs. The big thing with YouTube is you just need to convince people you are an expert so they will buy your classes. I just saw a youtube ad the other day and it was a 15 year old kid talking about marketing! The kid was wearing braces haha. He was saying how he learned from the best and wants to tell you what to do with your money. It was completely ridiculous. At least someone like Tai Lopez took the time to get a lambo and huge Cali house to convince people he was a finance genius. Its the idea that to achieve something you just need to jump into it and fail until you succeed. There is of course truth to that but people take it to the extreme. Claiming to be something you are not professionally is fraudulent. I have worked wedding jobs being the sole videographer with very little experience. I feel bad as I often did a not so great job(at least in my opinion). That said my employers never told me I did anything wrong and continued to hire me. They also hired me in the first place despite my inexperience so I blame it on them and actually have since quit working with them. They did give me the opportunity to learn by failing and I think I am decent at doing weddings now. That said I'd much rather have learned under someone's wing rather than the way I went through it. A big thing now is these wedding companies that contract videographers to shoot their weddings. They claim to have award winning weddings(whatever that means?), yet they don't actually have a specific group of videographers. They contract random people from all over the place so the product they deliver has no consistency. Maybe some of their weddings are shot by an industry professional but others are shot by someone who's doing it for the first time. Their means of vetting who they hire is also a joke.

Interesting perspective. The unreasonable client has always existed of course. I believe the "video is easy" mindset comes from the easy and cheap access to fairly high end looking equipment that was never an option before. The entry into the industry is just so easy and cheap. People just don't know any better. Coupled with the new age mindset of "just do it" rather than maybe a traditional work your way up slowly from the bottom approach. I reluctantly call myself a DP or Gaffer, but it depends who I am talking to lol. Its hard to gauge my own experience as I work in the really low end indie level where I am often the most experienced person on set. That said I've seen far less experienced people than me calling themselves a DP. But I am always honest about my experience level. Its a lot easier to buy your way into the industry than it was before as equipment is way easier to use. Before digital being able to get decent wedding photos was so much more difficult. Not because of the price but you actually had to be pretty dang good at getting nice compositions and exposing properly. Now you can take 40 photos every minute and as long as you get 100 decent ones out of 5000 you are not doing so bad. I do sometimes worry about the future of my job security. At the same time I've realized, like this thread points out, even with all the technology we have now, its still very very hard to make something that is watchable.

VIDEO IS EASY that is what they will tell you! Real life facts that I am thinking about a lot the last couple of weeks 1) friend wants to be a youtuber, she wants to learn everything about editing, equipment, lights, sound, and everything in between. Whatever I learned in 20+ experience and a few degrees, she wants in one afternoon. 2) we have a small team, doing internet videos, try to fit 15-20 small ones per day of shooting, the team is a DP with 30+ years of experience at the highest level, me with 20+ years, and our editor 15+ years at the highest level (for our country the highest level, don't get me wrong) and we have a young guy helping building his experience now. At one time, the 25 years old gal doing social media for the client, comes to see. She stayed for an hour, she walked all the time with high heels, played with her phone, and the first thing she said, "I want that to be like this", after half an hour trying to explain her that what she wanted wasn't applicable in this prouction, she left..we lost almost an hour because of her and we missed our brake because we didn't have time for the rest. 3) on another such video, same team, another girl supervising social media for the client, never present on set, send a text "maybe it is better for me to edit the videos, what program do you use so I can watch some tutorials today and do the videos in the weekend?", that was the actual text message... 4) the last, a lot, years, I have met a lot 22-25 year old kids introducing themselves as "DoP" or "director". I have never heard, "I am trying to do camera", or "I would like to be part of a production". 5) In the past, I had a director, that withouht being in the busniness, through social networking, connections, luck, and very low salary has become a director! Knowns nothing about anything, but through youtube videos and director's masterclasses believes he is one of the best in the business! Very proud that became a director without experience and no studies, really having no clue at all. I can't even explain how terrible is to become something you do not deserve, and there is no direction ever, mostly the shooting was happening because of some experienced actors, the DP and me. Crazy stuff..There are others like him coming. 6) wedding video and photography...what a joke..I have met policemen, DJs, wood cutters, military personel, and so many different people, that occasionally, or more professionally are doing weddings. So many of them, are bringing their wives/girlfriends (I have seen that in video mostly), and boyfriends/husbands ( I have seen that in photography mostly) to do second photo camera, or video, or second/third video. So many bad experiences on weddings, I should write a comedy book. 7) we were discussing with an old DoP about instagram recently ( I do not have, I am not familiar at all with it), and he was telling me that 8/10 photos on instagram have a crazy horizon at the back for no particular reason at all..Of course there is a reason, 101 in photography isn't needed anymore. So, video is easy, just press the RED button.

CORRECT!! I have made EOSHD Pro Color for it.

Nope Nope Nope! Nope I'll give you a clue... 8bit codec.

Hi, it is an realy interesting look in the medium format anamorphic images. I am looking forward to see it in motion. But I think using the Panasonic S1 in ~6K Photo Mode and 4:3 ratio is a big competitor and not so expensiv. Ok, you can only record 10 minutes, but I dont want to make interview movies. Here an example image and here the final How-To-Corona-Clip: Used: S1 + VLog, 58mm Helios, Isco Ultrastar Red and the great FVD-16A from Rapido Technology. Best regards Ingo

Still very restricted here about how far we can go from home but managed to use some of our allotted exercise slot this evening to take a bit more footage with the FP/45mm/Anamorphot. And yes, that is a snake in the bottom left of the top picture. And yes, I did shit myself when I saw it.

Some shots from the Baby Hypergonar on GFX 100 The trick here is apparently to use a lens with a rear element as small as your thumb. On a sensor the size of the albert hall. Light works in mysterious ways.

Funnily enough, it actually does give off a nice light but it being solar does make it a little impractical I think I've nailed it. With a bonus for using Comic Sans.

Ah...so maybe breaking it and covering it in barrel grease is the secret. I need to do a YouTube video about it immediately with a thumbnail of me holding it at arms length in front of the camera whilst doing an open mouthed shocked face

Certainly is worth persevering with judging by the atmosphere in those shots. I think the Sigma 45mm is really well suited to anamorphic. I tried it on my Fp with the Bolex Moller and it's almost as if Rachel herself comes climbing out the picture. Another one of these lenses where the entrance pupil is very close to the anamorphic elements. It's got a lot more contrast than the Nikon E-series 50mm pancake I was using as well. I just wish for the dual focus lenses, that the front variable diopters were a bit smaller and lighter. They are all 72mm+ monsters!

Well, inspired by your post, I thought I might sort out a setup today. Nowhere on the same level as your ones but here is my very compact L mount full frame RAW anamorphic setup. Taking lens is the Sigma 45mm and the (currently) less than ideal anamorphic element is provided courtesy of a pretty fucked SLR Magic Anamorphot-40 1.33x Compact. I got the Anamorphot-40 very cheap used about 18 months ago and it literally fell apart like a clown car the second time I tried to use it and as you can see it hasn't fully been re-constructed as yet ! Obviously, when picking up the separate parts of it I managed to get barrel grease all over the elements (front and back of both of them no less) so it needs a proper clean as well as a few more screws. I think I might persevere with that though as I think it will be worth the effort as even in its current smeary condition its got some promise from the couple of quick tests I did.

Not possible : Apple Prores raw is a raw pattern bayer image. GFX is a normal bayer sensor , not the case of XT serie with an Xtrans sensor.

The MagicLantern project is pretty much dead - the last nightly builds are from July 2018: https://builds.magiclantern.fm/ There are only some (or just one?) individual developers who keep hacking individual camera ports and offering their own builds off-site.