Leaderboard

Working on a long documentary in Resolve and previously did a 25 minute doc in Resolve. Really all about organizing the footage and tagging as you shoot in the media page. I've gone all in on resolve at this point for projects. Just got the editor keyboard and it is awesome.

I recently watched this film, and thought it was fantastic. Story really is everything. It's the writer/director's debut, he saved up $700k from doing commercial work to self-fund it. Filmed in just 4 weeks with only 5 characters. The cinematography is excellent and I've never seen some of the techniques before. I'm usually a 'show don't tell' kind of guy, but with this, I was so happy it's more like a story in realtime. The characters are interesting and engaging and it takes you far beyond the 1950s small town backdrop. Interview with DOP: https://variety.com/2020/artisans/news/vast-of-night-amazon-prime-tracking-shot-1234620232/

I'm starting to build my my Contax Zeiss MM set. I started with the 35mm F2.8 and have since added the 28mm F2.8. They actually match very closely despite being quite far apart in serial numbers 35mm (79xxxx) 28mm (69xxxx). To my eye, there's no difference in sharpness. The 28mm was slightly brighter at 2.8. I had to adjust exposure offset wheel -0.2 in resolve, a very minor change. This might be because the lens is older and has a bit more dust in the optics bringing the lift up a bit? They handle colour very similar, I didn't need to make any adjustments to temp or tint. They would be very easy to cut together. When I matched the frame size they were almost indistinguishable in an AB test. I was planning on getting lenses with similar serial numbers but I found the 28mm at crazy good price. I'm not so bothered about that anymore after seeing how closely they match. I will say the 28mm's aperture ring isn't quite as satisfying as the 35mm. The focus rings are both very smooth and similar though. I temporarily had the 50mm F1.4 MM (82xxxx) but had to send it back because it had significant separation and fog in the lens. It really messed up the lens when there was a light pointing down it. Even though the copy had severe optical issues, it was razer sharp at F2.8 and very good at 1.4. I didn't measure it in depth against the 35mm but the colour and contrast seemed to match very closely at 2.8. I will be looking for another copy. When I can build enough funds, i'll also be adding the 85mm F2.8 to the kit. The 25mm F2.8 also looks to be a very interesting lens but i'm not sure I can justify something so close to the 28mm I've already got Tilta seamless Focus rings (£2 each!) and front and rear caps for 4 lenses. 3 Leitax EFmounts have been shipped and are on their way here now. Im not bothering with step up rings, im going to take advantage of cheap 55mm filters. If you can get a good deal or two a set of these can be quite cheap to put together. The 28 & 35 have cost about £250 each (including Leitax adapters) and I predict the 50mm and 85mm to cost about £300-330 each to fully kit out. Fingers crossed I don't mess up this mount conversion when they arrive.

Considering our (polish) median income it'd take me over 60 years to EARN 700K, let alone save that amount of cash. Thanks for sharing, @Anaconda_. This looks really good, actually!

700k would take me 50 years to save up though.

well if you keep covering them in clay i can understand why nobody wants to participate.🙄 i also think a little digital zooming is ok. Maybe some purists would have heart palpitations with that statement. But think done in moderation or discreetly, its a usable effect.

Cinelux front glass/ Moller 32 rear glass 1.6X with Lomo block 75mm on FF sensor.

Metabones recently announced the long-awaited Canon EF mount Speed Booster Ultra for Fuji X, which will be one of the must-have accessories for X-T4 owners. This will have support for phase-detect AF and incorporates Caldwell Optics advanced 5-element ultra-high index tantalum optics. The Caldwell Optics focal reducer remains the best you can get. In this New blog post: https://www.eoshd.com/news/the-big-eoshd-interview-metabones-lens-adapters/

I have come to love using Sony Clear image zoom for both jpeg stills and video. Very little loss of quality and more so if you only use a little zoom but works well as variable zoom to 2x (using digital zoom from 2x to 4x though gets noticeable). I have not used it a lot for video because my video use is mostly just shooting live bands/soloists/duos but I do want to give it a go and should be a bit easier for video with a remote control (I got a very cheap remote recently but I need a better one). I accept that all things being equal optical zoom SHOULD be better but then again all things being equal a high quality prime is better than even a good optical zoom. In any case if you start with a good lens you still have a good lens. For example I would MUCH rather use a lens like my Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 with clear zoom than many of the old optical zooms i have had at 100mm It also means I can zoom lenses like my 17mm tilt shift lens while shifted/tilted and other lenses that have no zooms. Having recently got a wonderful old Tokina 60-120 2.8 manual focus lens I thought i would give it a try with both 120mm optically and 60mm with 2x clearzoom. This is an ancient zoom but is actually quite sharp and probably the sharpest zoom I have owned and better than many old primes but obviously not as sharp as a modern prime (there is a sharpness test somewhere online where someone compared about 50 lenses with this and two other zooms and the rest primes and this actually beat many of the primes...I do not disagree). Like many zooms, this lens is supposed to be better at the short end too which means it may well be BETTER to use it at 60mm and 2x. My Takeaway is the lens is clearly either not 60mm really or not 120mm really or both as there is a difference between 60mm at 2x and 120mm and even though I see little difference between these really, i guess i will keep using it mostly at 120mm optically (and then can zoom digitally to 240mm). Given it was designed and sold as a portrait lens, it does not need to be the absolute sharpest. I need to use it more and especially for portraits (I just am having trouble finding "victims"). I did not mind Panasonic ETC either when I had a GX7 but just wish it was variable too.

Someone raised again the problem in the facebook group : https://m.facebook.com/groups/330013897545969?view=permalink&id=681491229064899&anchor_composer=false There are already many answers... Something is really wrong with Pana S serie and batteries !

I think this is gradually happening, from those I know.

KEH has one for a grand. Anyway excellent interview Andrew, great to get insight into their process. Excited to see the results of this new booster for FUJI and the sigma CINE info was fascinating.

I am wondering how serious the A7 series IBIS fractures are. Whether these are a result of extreme mishandling and falls or just general wear and tear?

@Cosimo, beautiful rendering of light. Now show us some moving images please, if you have a chance to. cheers

"One Touch Zoom" was the term when I was a nipper although I have seen people refer to them as "Trombone" Yeah, its not ideal for that type of lens although, looking at it, the wheels look narrow enough to support if just behind the aperture ring on your lens. Alternatively, if you don't mind losing a few mm at the short end of the zoom it could sit just ahead of the aperture ring.

If you don't want to put rails on your rig then Andoer have a pretty effective adjustable lens support that attaches to the tripod mount of your cage. Its about £30-40 so not exactly free but cheaper than a new lens mount and will stand you in good stead if you end up buying even heavier long primes in the future.

@Geoff CB, thanks, Geoff. The BMD VA just looks so handy and perfect for the F3. Afaik, the F3 itselfs outputs 10bit 444 at the max? Here is a photo from Bens setup. The Video Assist also fits the width of the F3 very well at 5 inches diagonal.

It's of course a lot of money, but barely the catering budget of the summer blockbusters we see all too often. And self funded. Whether he's a hedgefund kid or worked really hard and ate nothing but restaurant leftovers for 10 years, I think it's admirable that the guy put his own money into his idea. He had a story that he had to tell, did it on a shoestring budget and pulled it off. Easily one of my favourite films of the year so far.

nice colours, quite vibrant i think. i guess some of it comes from the grading but the lenses still have some input into the outcome. I do like this combination however i'm not sure about the multiple horizontal flares on your earlier post.What sort of flaring do you get with this combination ? I hope your not paying full price for these lenses to break apart ?

And here is my entry for most ridiculous Micro rig, the competition that no-one asked for and no-one will find useful. Micro, FD-MFT adapter, Canon 2x TC, Canon FD 70-210 f4. Might be one of the cheapest ways to get 1210mm 60p RAW that exists. Beyond that, not so useful!

Make sure to consider the PiX-E5 to get 12-bit 4:4:4

Good video by Rob Ellis on super scale for the micro and other 1080p cameras

Some more awesome footage from our friend Ben Ericson. Too bad he sold it a few days ago. Great for the buyer though, I can say on the other side. Happy that I bought that camera. With the 1080p 5inch version of the Blackmagic video assist it is a beautiful looking and practical setup with even 60p. Took that inspiration from Bens setup. Now I will wait for a video assist for little money, so I dont have to lugg around my big Atomos Shogun.

Couple more with the Nikon 24-70 2.8G and Sony F3 Combo

I've owned the Nikkor 20mm 2.8 AIS along with the AIS versions of the 28mm 2.8, 35mm 2.8, 50mm 2.8, 55mm 2.8 micro, 85mm 1.8 and Nikon 135mm 2.8. They are all of the same period and some are still sold new. I think they are generally 7 bladed diaphragms with 52mm front diameters, except for the 20mm which has a 62mm. They all match really well color wise / neutral - warmish and are very sharp. Probably not any sharper than the AI versions but sharper as you go to the 135mm. Distortion is well controlled on all mentioned lenses too. I think maybe only vintage feeling in that they flare and lose contrast wide open towards the sun, they look good doing so. I used them on a Blackmagic Production camera 4k several years ago and now they mostly live on my Nikon F6 for black and white stills.

Thanks very much, In short, what I do is experimenting with anamorphic glass using the 35mm and 16mm projector scopes. Once the glass has been extracted out its original body from different anamorphic lenses I combine and mix them, finding a match with different systems that meet the afocal condition. That is parallel light in/ parallel light out, ending up with a completely different scope in terms of compression ratio, IQ, character, multi-colors in the horizontal artifacts and structure (dimensions). The process is quite tiring and time-consuming. The first photos show 3 Schneider Cinelux-based hybrid prototypes fixed at infinity, without focus ring. These hybrids will fit inside a FVD focusing now is possible from minimum to infinity. I have made other interesting combinations with very large front glasses such as front 35Nap and front HI FI 2 which have been cut to the right diameter matched with the right rear glass re-housed and ready to enter the FVD. There is much more to say but I don't want bore you. I am on full frame sensor 5D3.

Yeah. I've noticed a pattern of cinematographers saying that they got the mini to do a few action shots or whatever and then in doing testing they discovered the mini was really great and ended up using it for the whole production. These comments made me wonder why you wouldn't just do that as kind of a default, and only go for a larger model if there was a specific reason.

Now with a human subject. Everything done by myself - so those screen grabs may be slightly out of focus. Alright, here are the results: No key light, only Neewer CN 176 giving some background. Partially geled with an aqua foil. Power @10% f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000 (can't get any lower when recording HLG video), WB - 3700K Next - adding a key light. Approximately 2.6 m (~8.5 feet) away from me. Yongnuo YN-300 III 5500K @1% power f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000, WB - 3700K No light modifiers in front. I didn't point it straight at myself, it was rather feathering me. YN-300 @10% power f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000, WB - 5700K And @100% f/1.4 , 1/125 s, ISO 1000, WB - 5700K I used an external monitor with false colors to match the exposure on my skin. All walls in my room are white and it's really showing here - the light is bouncing everywhere and the depth is gone. What's more, I think the colors are more yellow-ish? Finally - two of the four LED bulbs I teased you with earlier. Each rated @17W, though in reality they aren't as powerful as one would expect. Key feature: >95 CRI I put them in a reflective umbrella (95 cm diameter), pointing at the back of it, and then hung one layer of a diffusion cloth in front and a grid to make the light more directional. Just like this: Since there is no way to dim them (I can only turn them on or off), they were blasting at their full power. And once again - not pointed directly at me and around 2.5 m away. f/1.4 , 1/60 s, ISO 1000, WB - 3700K I like the color rendition and the quality of light here. I only wish these bulbs were more punchy.. Sure, I realize that the gridded umbrella may cause around 2 stops light loss (I haven't measured it) and that I used 2 bulbs out of 4, but still. Though, if I was a YouTuber, I think a setup like this would be sufficient. No need to overpower the sun when you record in your own room, right? Total costs of the final setup, if that interest you: Neewer CN-160 ~15$ An aqua gel ~2$ Light stand ~20$ Four socket bulb holder (~10$) and 2 bulbs (~4$ for each) 95cm umbrella softbox with grid ~35$ All in all: 90$ Not bad, I guess? Also: I need haircut.