Leaderboard

Well... I don't know if I can blame you. It's a little hard to get excited about the whole L Mount system because the lenses are pretty expensive and can't be mounted on other cameras (heck, you can now mount Sony E-Mount on to Nikon Z Mount cameras). I don't mind paying a lot for a lens, but I expect it to autofocus. And the L Mount ultrawides don't have lens stabilization, so using five-axis IBIS leads to some pretty nasty corner warping when shooting ultra wide. In the meantime, i gotta keep work on improving my manual focusing skills when either shooting hand held or on a gimbal... without shaking the camera all over the place.

I've been binging editing videos lately and have discovered that the good stuff doesn't even have the words "editing" in the title of the video. Often the titles are just "<person> at <venue>" and have no references to film-making or anything. This might be of interest to someone - Walter Murch actually doing some live editing: My approach now is to just pick a production, find out who worked on it, and googling their names. It's hit and miss but sometimes you get good stuff.

Some Voigtlander 40mm f1.4 M mount stuff on the Sigma fp from a recent trip to the frozen-ish north to see the in laws. The vignette and slight softness when shooting wide open makes it quite suitable for festive stuff ! Didn't shoot RAW so these are grabs from 4K all-i mov files.

Yeah, You're good to go with that speed booster. Nikon G adapters like that are just Nikon F adapters that have an aperture control mechanism built in for nikon G lenses without external aperture rings.

Walter Murch is a legend : ) He was one of our heroes and a bible for the whole 3 years (+ 1 of professional internship) full-time graduation program at the Lisbon Film School and we had there some other masters even personally such as Carol Littleton only to mention another one :- )

Ok so i lied about the watering. Got some good news today and instead went for a drive up to the big smoke (Toowoomba). I mean how can one go to a big city and not go into a camera store 🤔. Which invariably led to an impulse buy, an okko variable nd filter 2-400. fairly pricey, A quick generic google search for okko nd brings up about a 99 reviews in some language that could be russian and the one nd filter review was for a freewell nd filter, not exactly inspiring. I may have early onset of buyers remorse at this point. A similar search with the nd 2 - 400 added brings up pages of K & F nd filters. Either K&F are really good filters or someone's handing them out like candy. Never heard of okko before and it was pretty much the only one in 77mm diameter. Apparently its a kiwi brand thats made in china. they use either Japanese agc glass or German Schott glass. Sounds promising so far Tomorrow i plan on doing a series of test shots. It may even lead to a warts and all utube review to address the obvious disparity between filter brands. It will either be tears of joy or i might be cracking the seal on that bottle of rum i haven't opened yet.

It really depends on what style you're shooting. If you're shooting for a more cinematic image then you can manually focus vintage or third-party lenses and the diffusion characteristics will offset the overly-sharpened codecs. Considering there is no perfect camera, the first thing I'd sacrifice is AF because the alternative is lenses that have reliable focusing (ie, me), are cheaper, and create a nicer image. I understand this isn't the case for videographers, as that's another whole thing with different goals, methods, economics, target audience and aesthetic. So many people are out there saying they're trying to get more cinematic images, and then they turn around and want lenses to be as sharp as possible wide-open and want AF, which almost completely contradicts the previous statement, as almost every theatre-bound production I've read about deliberately uses softer-rending vintage lenses despite having the budget for basically whatever lenses they'd care to use.

But kye, it would indeed be dull to me personally if this site started catering to the average tech review taste. Apologies accepted big time of course!:) If smartphone reviews help me to pull something off like Tangerine, that would have to be "one charming motherxxx smartphone review".

for how much i like the lumix s1 image quality im going to sell it to get an A7IV and just go all sony because sony has all the good lenses good autofocus all there cameras use same battey they aint playing around like panasonic.

It was priced for Hollywood to use as a crash cam, and for rental houses to buy a handful to rent out. Never intended to be a mass market product. These odd things always end up being the special ones, I forecast 1DC prices will be back up in the $12,000 range come another 20 years as they'll be collectors items (at least the ones still in a good condition).

Wild. The images are so nice. 4K upload on Vimeo holds up in 2022 easily. Really nice. I always loved how clean and balanced the Canon baked in images look. (assuming it is based on the contrast levels.) We've gone through years and years of poorly graded LOG footage... I own the Canon C70. They removed a lot of the nice baked in profiles that existed on the Canon C300 Mkii. I'm convinced the OG C-LOG on these older cameras was better. There's something lacking with the C70. A lot of brown / red images rather than yellow / golden.

BM just dropped a bunch of Resolve 17 tutorials on their YT page. Their in house stuff is much better than pretty much any other how to video IMO. Chris

The new RF lenses deserved a better housing, they've got the finish of an office printer.

Your response doesn't really make much sense... I agree that only catering to a YouTube audience would be dull, and I think would miss the majority of smartphone users too. That's why I specified influencers (many of whom don't use YT at all), parents, and amateur photographers. Cinema has little overlap with smartphones, and despite things like Tangerine being released, this isn't likely to change. Tangerine was a raw and verite style film that benefitted from being shot on a phone because that supported the aesthetic of the creative vision of the project. This will not be true for the vast majority of films and will probably never be. Yes, I'm aware of the "5MP is all you need" argument, but it doesn't reflect the way that this market segment thinks (they're technically based) and also doesn't reflect high-end printing technology. Have you ever seen a high-resolution metal print in real-life? They are absolutely stunning! The eye is quite capable of seeing the increased contrast and retina-level detail of a print like this. I remember seeing one landscape print that was perhaps 2m/6ft square hanging in a friends home, and they installed a dedicated down-light for it (how galleries do) and it was hugely impressive standing 2m/6ft away from it but if you stood arms-length from it the experience was immersive and drew you in to it. Everyone who saw it was taken back by it and was drawn in to walk right up to it and examine the textures and details of the image - to explore it by literally walking left-and-right looking at it. People don't print 8x10s and hang them on their wall much anymore, or not the people I know, but they do print large canvas prints (which can have good DR and colour) and they sometimes print metal prints, which have huge DR and very high resolutions. People also print 5x7s and make large collages of images of their family, and make videos of their family members for relatives and friends on social media. These are the target audiences that aren't being covered by EOSHD but might be interested in smartphone cameras.