Andrew Reid

  I tried it and the image at 18mm is somewhat outside the comfort zone of the APS-C image circle the lens was designed for. Quite murky corners. Either that or something funky is going on with the adapter.   Nice and wide though!

  Amazing 90's fashion sense as well. Superdry should do a Ghost In The Shell themed collection of high collared bright orange jackets. Oh they already do!   Japan is such an amazing place, why are they so uncreative when it comes to cameras?

AVCHD was well implemented on the FS100 compared to a DSLR (even is OK on the GH3), as the H.264 encoder was good, but the wrapper itself is just so unnecessary.   It gives you zero benefit in image quality. What DOES it offer? Oh yeah - a stupid folder structure and inability to play nicely with some editing software or preview clips easily.   Just...get...rid.   What is wrong with Quicktime MOV?

  The wobble is from Warp Stabiliser. Twixtor causes a morphing effect.   The night time tripod mounted shots give you an idea of what the camera looks like with no post trickery.

  Thanks! There's a loupe coming from Kinotehnik for the Pocket. I have their HDMI EVF and loupe. Very well thought out design and good performance. I'm using it on my 5D Mark III rig for raw shooting.   http://www.kinotehnik.com/products/electronic-viewfinder/overview   Hopefully I will be able to get the BMPCC loupe to try out as well!

The clamps are great, much better quality than any others I've used. I use two, one on my Iscorama and one on my Centa Vision. The guy is a fountain of knowledge. As for the forums you have to get his humour I suppose ;)

  Straight from the card into Premiere and Film Convert. No need for anything in between, no LUT.

  Not unless you really really need AF on a Canon body. Nikon one adapts to a Canon DSLR just fine. The EF-MFT Speed Booster has no ETA. It is lost in space!

I don't use the multiplier on the F-stop when it comes to speaking about low light ability. F1.8 is F1.8! And it is easier just to take it as given that with a smaller sensor you won't get as shallow depth of field as you will on full frame.   Crop factors are only useful in terms of describing the field of view. Everyone in the DSLR video world thinks in terms of full frame. A 28 is a wide, etc.   People in the movie industry don't think like that, they go in terms of Super 35mm and a 18mm is wide on a movie camera.

Yes Warp isn't perfect but the great thing about the Pocket camera is having no rig.   I'll reluctantly dive into adding bits too it later.   It just needs a loupe maybe, and a stock.   Of course you can go crazy and rig it up insanely, the image quality makes it an 'A' camera for a lot of people.   By the way... few more facts about the lens.   - Made in Japan at Sigma's main factory. They are a 100% Japanese family owned company. Not South Korean as with Samyang. - 4 aspherical elements (most lenses have none, some have 1... but FOUR!!?) - Back ordered in the US currently (none at B&H or Adorama). Price will be $799. - I paid 829 euros for my Nikon mount version, the Canon version is usually cheaper in Europe and the UK (on Amazon). - Ultrasonic AF motors - All internally focussing and zooming. Front element never moves an inch.

  Crop factor is just a way of understanding focal lengths, using photographic full frame as the standard.   We think of wide as 28mm, portrait 50mm, and telephoto 135mm+ on full frame.   The crop of the sensor narrows the field of view, so a 28mm x 3 crop = 84mm. It is like taking a photo with a full frame camera and cropping it in Photoshop.   Super 16mm lenses have a smaller image circle but the field of view is the same as a normal lens, so if it is a 50mm on a Super 16mm sensor the 3x crop applies when thinking in terms of full frame field of views. 50mm is telephoto on Super 16mm not portrait.

http://vimeo.com/76881206 I would really love to see how this lens does against a $47,000 + tax cinema lens like the Optimo 15-40mm T2.6 because I honestly think it would come close. Blackmagic must share a similar philosophy, because the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera gives an image that in many ways exceeds the $15,000 Canon C300 especially when paired with the Metabones Speed Booster. Read the full article here

Yeah, would be good to see some pancakes. But probably hard to get good corners with the front element so close to the sensor, not to mention the rear one. For me this is all about adapting stuff. Canon FD on full frame. Yum.

Although it's yet to be officially announced, the A7 and A7r have been heavily leaked. All along I have been saying mirrorless is the future, not the low end consumer proposition the manufacturers seem to think it is. Canon and Nikon ignored the high end mirrorless technology and now it is pay back time. Sony, already ahead of Canon on full frame sensor performance, looks set to steal a huge chunk of the enthusiast DSLR market away from the 6D and 5D Mark III with these new E-mount Alpha cameras. [url=http://www.eoshd.com/content/11296/sony-a7-a7r-promise-improved-full-frame-video]Read the full article here[/url]

The story is:   The production sensors to go in the final shipped units differed from the samples, so they had to start again with calibration.   They are using this time to squeeze out a better image rather than rush it out.   It isn't in development hell, just delayed.   In my opinion I'd take dynamic range over resolution so this camera is not for me. Prefer the form factor of a DSLR or Pocket camera as well. However global shutter would be useful and you're getting a 4K Super 35mm sensor, for not much money.

It depends what you're shooting and how, so there's no really any one particular ideal shutter angle.   If you shoot handheld with a lot of movement, 90 will cut a lot of the blur. I sometimes find handheld work at 180 too soft.   If you plan to use Twixtor for a slow-mo sequence, you ideally need 45 degrees at 30fps. Motion blur hurts Twixtor.   If you're filming sports or action go for the higher shutter speed / narrower angle like 45 or 90.   If you're doing a locked down sequence on a tripod with little movement, especially in low light, select 180.   If you're really desperate for light and nothing is moving very fast at all, choose 360.

Gain can be applied in an analogue way to the sensor A/D converters or it can be applied digitally after the data leaves the sensor at the native ISO.   So this guy araucaria is increasing the gain digitally.   And gets annoyed at the noise.   That is really this argument in a nutshell. Utter time wasting.

How it was made   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carousel_(advertisement)

Here's the actual exposure at ISO 200.   Now you see how far this anonymous forum guy 'araucaria' has lifted the shadows in his example, only to complain about the noise!  

  Firstly, don't need the attitude problem in my backyard so quit it or be quitted.   You don't get how a raw image works.   With a DSLR, the sensor and image processor are 'gained up' to a set ISO. The ISO is baked into the image.   With raw, all the image is data is present and you can apply any ISO in post, to any part of the image. When you play with the levels in a raw file it is like playing with ISO on the camera.   Like shown in Zacuto Shootout, a DP uses a light meter to measure the ISO of different objects in a scene. This signpost would be rated for ISO 3200 and the bright sky for ISO 200. Then they can choose the appropriate film stock.   With John's raw DNG frame the default ACR exposure when dropping it straight into Photoshop does not go off the metadata of the file, it is a guess. It has already lifted the exposure considerably as you can see by dropping some of the other shots into Photoshop which immediately appear too bright and need bringing down.   By not crushing back the shaded red signpost in the shadows you're pushing the limits of the sensor in terms of high ISO noise.   If you'd tried to shoot this same frame on the GH2 and exposed it the same, that signpost would be unrecoverable and the noise would be far blockier and more compressed.   What you're suggesting is just incorrect. You're suggesting the sensor is noisy at ISO 200 in good light. It isn't. Check your facts with another source before posting more misleading comments.

Everybody can break an image, much harder to make one.   This amount of luma noise is pretty normal and you can get rid of it without smearing fine detail. Try that instead of just breaking stuff. See if you can fix it. If I have time I will fix it and show you.   These are silhouetted areas of the image and under exposed. I have opened the DNG in Photoshop and that's what they are.   Also with raw you need to apply any noise reduction in post as the camera doesn't do any. You have not applied any NR and you've blown the area up 400% or something to magnify the grain. The grain is a nice fine texture on the BMPCC and nothing like what you're representing.   Fine grain is actually quite a lot like film, and people often add it voluntarily in Film Convert so a bit of texture to the image isn't actually always a bad thing.

  http://www.specsavers.co.uk

Don't think the mids are noisy, I think the shadows when pushed into the mids are noisy. John has exposed for the sky I think. These shots are beautiful looking, and really push the boundaries of 13 stops dynamic range. This is a 10x better image than what we're used to from the GH2 and GH3.

The rear glass size is 50mm, the attachment thread size is of course larger. Was 52mm on the prototype. Likely will be same on the one in LA.   I expect Andrew will bring some stepping rings.   But if you are bringing a lens to try it on, make sure it has a small front element and is a prime not a zoom.

Yes it has a rotational mechanism where you loosen a collar and rotate the lens block. This part of the design is finalised and improved on the pre-production lens compared to the V3 prototype I tried.   Iscorama paranoia haha. Yes. When I am shooting with one, I look around on the street to see if there's any shadowy figures watching!