Leaderboard

As expected, they were 24mm f3.5, the 35mm f2 and 65mm f2. Good to see them releasing more lenses for L mount at least that are compact and good value for money in the style of the 40mm f2.8. The 35mm f2 is definitely going to find a home on my Fp. Presentation here :

I imagine so.

Definitely a nice image tho doesn’t have the latitude or dynamic range of an Arri.

Well at this point in time, a single S5 body, the 20-60 and the 85mm. I am going to order the ZV1, probably today so I can get familiar (ooh err missus) with it. But that’s it until Spring ‘21 because I have to balance ‘play time’ ahead of the next wedding season with the fact there still may not be a next wedding season. The intent as things stand is either 3x S5 bodies, or 2x S5 bodies + an S1, the ZV1, the 20-60, 35mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8 and then either keep the free Sigma 45mm f2.8 (if it ever turns up) or go with the 50mm f1.8. Bottom line is: 1x body with zoom, static manual focus longer form video on tripod, but doubles as a wide angle prime when not filming ceremony or speeches. 2x bodies with primes for hybrid use all day long, handheld as I am liking the IBIS enough to warrant not using sticks. 1x compact for entrances/exits/walking shots, on freestanding monopod, plus doubles as second angle/backup filming for ceremony & speeches. It is the most compact and least flawed/compromised kit I can come up with for my specific one man band hybrid wedding needs. For commercial, just the pair of S5’s with the primes. For landscape/hiking, single S5 with the kit lens, plus the 70-300 that is due at some point. This is photo only use. Personal/travel that is not work, the ZV1. Good to hear you are enjoying the Fuji. It’s where I would go (gone back to) right now if I had not been able to make the above work, but I would have switched to XT4 for the IBIS and improved battery life.

Ever watch Shark Tank or Dragon's Den? The point of the game, for any company selling any products -> 1 product (cost to make XX amount) but sell for 3 to 4 times XX amount. But, if you are selling it for 3 to 4 times XX amount, that amount has to make sense to the customer. At the beginning the iphone was like $699 (top end model - and yeah times and part prices have changed too over the last decade or so) - nonetheless, its slowly climbed to $1199 and customers deem it worthy to pay that... So, if Nikon isn't selling it for 3 to 4 times the amount to create it... whose fault is that??? May be they feel that if they put in 6K @ 60p into their camera and charged $6K for it, nobody would buy it?

Did you guys see this first rurmor about not one but two potential new cine cameras from panasonic? looks like they're planning some C70 competitor, that would be awesome ! https://www.l-rumors.com/first-wild-rumored-specs-for-a-new-panasonic-l-mount-cine-camera/

It is probable that Nikon will try harder to sell their lithography gear to the Chinese as the demand from Intel fades. China wants to become self sufficient in semiconductors, but their domestic industry still lags the market by several generations. Nikon's equipment is quite good enough to get the Chinese close to the state of the art, allowing them to at least keep the gap from widening. So expect that mutual interest will bring them to a deal, quietly.

@MrSMW I'm with @Thpriest do you really need the entire walk in focus? You can't just set up on a tripod, set it to F8 or higher, focus on a point half way up/down the aisle/walk and throw away the softer parts before and after your focus point? I'm assuming your final wedding videos are far more video than the ones I offer based on the number of cameras alone, but I still would think an entire walk really wouldn't be that interesting. Also I simply use a wider lens like a 24mm which provides even more DOF during things like a walk. It's been my experience that for things like walks clients just like to see themselves performing the action, it doesn't have to be a razor thin DOF or the entire thing. But it also sounds like your wedding clients have a bigger budget than the ones in my area. In my area the budget seems to end up somewhere between are you kidding me and not even close so needless to say I don't film many weddings.

Incorrect. The market that is “shrinking” is the smartphone market. Everybody already has one, and apple has marginal advantages over the competition. Again, apple hasn’t seen growth here, which is why it’s pivoting in other industries - and succeeding. The iPhone wasn’t the first smart phone, nor was the iPod the first MP3 player, nor was AirPods the first Bluetooth headphones, nor the Apple Watch the first smart watch, and so on. But they were the most successful because they reimagined existing products. The pro camera market has been shrinking not only because so much money/innovation has been put into the smartphone race, but also because of the lack of innovation by Sony, canon, Nikon, etc. That’s exactly the kind of good opportunity for Apple. They don’t invent products, they reinvent them. The key issue is you’re stuck in that same mindset...pro cameras haven’t peaked, the existing companies have peaked. See also Tesla and the automobile industry.

And here is the best basis for selecting a computer, the operating system you are happiest with. Most important I think. Mac users have traditionally paid more for Apple hardware than PC users paid for Windows hardware, precisely for the same reason, that they prefer the OS. (I am one of those.) But now for the first time (?) Mac users can pay a little less.

Looks like a higher framerate. 30fps. The motion looks off. But def interested in figuring out why it looks so bad. It doesnt look natural it looks like theatre lighting, some shots have good contrast ratio but still looks cheap. The lenses are prolly too sharp. Some bad framing as well, and digital fx from the 80's.

I suspect that it's the grade, or some part of the image pipeline. Apparently the first one was shot on a Red Epic, which according to wikipedia: "In 2010, Red released the Red Epic which was used to shoot The Amazing Spider-Man, The Hobbit, Prometheus, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides and The Great Gatsby as well as many other feature films." I'm assuming that it was the earlier Epic, instead of later ones, but even then, I didn't think that those other films looked particularly thin. I'd imagine that shooting with a Red you'd either shoot in RAW or Prores, so it would have been at least 10-bit. For me, it was quite a difference between the two in terms of image thickness. In terms of the creative effect, the subject matter of the first one is very digital/cold whereas the second one is more analog and human, so 'thin' and 'brittle' is a relevant and appropriate creative choice for the subject matter.

Alexa>anything else aside from Film of course. Its super odd to me that no one has been able to match the Alexa since the classic came out 10 years ago. I guess 10 years isn't a long time.

To my eye is looks very close. Right off the card, I'd say the C70 has a slight advantage in the shadows and the overall rolloff is a bit smoother and milkier. To match - you need to play with the S-curve on the A7S3 a little to get the same look, and it isn't hard. A7S3 seems a bit sharper. There's no reason why you can't use this cameras together. Matching them is easy. People who say the A7S3 is still bad colour don't know what the are talking about.

But you can change the order, of vst plugins anyway. You just need to know how ... the inspector panel is a hint, as are some arrow like thingies where you can accidentally click on. That is how I found out anyway...

A 16mm Kowa and a HCDNA is known as a "best" combo because it's widely talked about and everyone just wants to shoot instead of wasting time experimenting. I can tell you now, that although it's a good combo, there's many other scopes out there that are as good and better for a fraction of the price. I think the same is true with taking lenses, the most talked about ones have been driven up in price, but there's tons out there that will work as good or better if you do some searching. Hey you might even find a combo that gives you a look different to that of the norm . As said earlier, what camera, sensor and look you're going for all play a huge part, there's no definitive answer to which taking lenses are "cleaner or better" without knowing the other variables.