Germy1979

Gawddamn Canon. There's moire in the damn brownies. DONE.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1353964298' post='22359'] The 'real' cinematographers are all off shooting Alexa ;)/> [/quote] lol. yeah, maybe with the proper incentive, we'll see Roger Deakins shoot on a C500. The Red One MX still looks better.

I'm not sure, but seeing as the Canons already take a sub-1080 image and upscale it to 1080, does this filter cut down more resolution?

There's a newer 1.0 firmware that came out recently correct? I don't know the details, but regarding low light, the guys that shot those videos are happier...so it seems that it addressed some issues in the image department.. I was a little concerned about it. it looked like a much better stills camera with a GH2 thrown in for video, & some moire.. lol. I'd like to know how "log" style you can get with it. (I know Cinestyle is supposedly the devil on 8bit footage, but i still dial back a better image with it than without it.) My personal taste though.. I like to shoot flat as a runway model.

that sucks. I really wanted to see it! Alas, they have a huge short film junket on it on the 28th don't they? Probably pounced on this like a hate crime when they saw it.

ZERO motion blur. I blame Private Ryan... But that's personal taste. I really have to dig to find any footage of any camera that has a smooth motion blur to it. They all have the "stuttery" look. ..and some people just manage to take $15,000 cinema cameras and make them look as video as possible, lol.

Meh, I certainly wouldn't turn one down if they offered it too me. It's a killer tool for just about anything, but if they feel that it's worth $13,000 friggin dollars... Let 'em do it. By next year, the competition will be undeniably more cost effective, and more attainable than a 1DC. A cinema camera in a small "dslr" form factor already came out this year at a fraction of that cost, so the idea is not so fresh.. And we can talk about the BMC all day in its monopolization of that market, but the truth is, how many of these little guys are watching this unfold this year? What's gonna come out of the woodwork next year from somebody we didn't expect? The BMC was probably just the beginning, and somebody somewhere knows it needs some competition as well. Supply and demand:)

This footage looks great. I don't know much about this camera aside from the fact that it has a 35mm sensor opposed to BMC's M43(ish) sensor. From this short, i almost like its image better than the BMC's... I emailed Kinefinity about it. I'm hoping it won't be Kinemag Proprietary, and you can use third party ssd's like the bmc. It's also only 2k, and cost $3000 more than the Bmc.

That's hilarious... I had a similar incident about 2 months ago with a Red One MX before the price drops. (Ironically it was $4000, lol..) I've found, usually the lack of proper writing skills is a bad sign... "Firstly, I want tell you I am man of integrity!" Followed by some bullshit reason for the low price... "My wife of many years cheat on me with friend, this must go as settlement soon."

[quote name='tony wilson' timestamp='1353039993' post='21746'] the adjustments done on panasonic,optex and century where all configured for small sensor [/quote] That's funny... I always look at LA7200, or the Optex adapter footage and think, "why are the edges so blurry all the time? These things look almost useless on anything under an 50mm on the gh2.." ...and then i remember they were designed for the old 1/3 inch sensors and such.. Lol. Seems like those 2 should be excellent choices for anamorphic, since you simply focus through... I usually only bring 2 lenses with me which are a wide and a long. So if i were requesting here, that's what i'd like.. I love a 35mm on any sensor.. Don't ask me why, no matter the crop factor, it just looks like it hits the sweet spot. The other would be an 85mm, just simply for tight shots or dialogue... like a dialogue scene at night, locked down with a city backdrop where the oval bokeh can be pulled closer. Those 2 focal lengths are pretty universal..

Oh yeah? ....with magic lantern.

...lol. I sound like a real dick when you pull it out of the whole comment like that.. Hey, i'm not aiming for Oscars when I shoot a corn field, but i did. And i can tell you that using Sedna AQ1 on a Gh2 with a Nikon AIS 85mm f/2, looks fantastic on Film Convert!...and yields incredibly cinematic results when shooting corn:) I'm not saying these videos have to be content worthy to be posted, but it sounded funny.

I cannot wait to get my hands on this bastard. Question is, what if you did want to use an evf on it? Do any evf's have sdi inputs? Because i'm thinking it's a converter box at that point.. (Another blackmagic purchase ironically, lol.)

[quote name='markm' timestamp='1352891554' post='21605'] The camera is the first time non professionals have access to a pro camera. When we were denied access to large sensors we used and invented all kinds of contraceptions to get a dof effect and when we did went crazy. Of course the BMC is overkill for 98% who just want to make films for the net and maybe festivals. The problem is if you're making a feature you would STILL go with the high end stuff where the equipment is a fraction of the budget . If your a consumer It is unlikely you would be making films for the big screen for a start you wouldnt get distribution let alone a budget to pay cast and crew and all the rest of the equipment let alone decent actors. For most consumer uses correctly exposing isn't that big an issue and workarounds employed or even working in 8 bit and even prores will fill up hard drives make colour correction slow and cumbersome. This need for access to high end gear has been fostered by manufacturers with drip drip improvements. Whats so groundbreaking is you can now go out and make a feature with an affordable camera on an uber low budget and to that end this fulfills a creative need that many of us have been denied although ultimately for 99.99% doomed to failure although for a few whose budget is low and whose talent is high with a vast knowledge this icould help. Although you could look to rent an Alexa but would still be 10 times the price of buying a BMC . In practice once people realise the BMC has little value in making net films or even TV, a new understanding will settle in and the BMC will become a popular indie film makers tool. Personally for most uses I will use a GH3 even as a second camera hooked up to an atomos. But pride of place will go to my treasured BMC that will only come out when it can do its Magic. [/quote] I agree to a point on this.. I guess it kind of boils down to the freedom of it all. Renting a high-ender like an Epic or an Alexa would be ideal yes, but it's kind of hard to justify an $8000 weekly rate when you can get a 12bit raw, 13 stop cinema offering for $3000... And own it. I'd rather rent a set of cinema primes. I think a lot of people are broke, but know they need a tool with more space to work around in also.. That's where i think the BMC stands on a positive note. When you're broke, you are constantly studying, researching, and finding the limitations of what you have to work with. To me, this is the next step. This whole dslr revolution gave new guys access to cinematic features to begin the process and say at one point, "alright, these are the limits, this is what i'd like.. But it's too expensive." So now here we are at the next level.. We're only here though, because we can afford it. And people are honestly wondering why it's going to be a while before they get their cameras, lol. On the negative note, this also opens the doors to a new era of random cat videos on youtube. Some guys just like shooting doorknobs, corners, porchlights, etc.. Calling it a low light test and seeing how many comments they can get, lol. Like facebook. Vimeo needs a "like" button.. I look at it this way, if you've got the work ethic & the drive, you'll make a movie. I've got 2 jobs & a family... Renting doesn't work so well on days when you suddenly find yourself unobligated for a change, lol. The BMC opens a door of spontaneity in that sense for guys like me and I can really appreciate what Blackmagic did for that price point. There's just a whole lot of positives regarding the next level of "accessibility" now.. If you can get a Red One MX at $4000, (granted be ready to spring another 2 or 3 thousand to get it "battle ready") - compared to where it was, companies are responding i think. Lots of new offerings this year... Either still out of our budget, or they fall short somewhere else.. I was pretty disappointed to see moire on the gh3..

[quote name='timroz' timestamp='1352849499' post='21569'] Is this possible? I'm looking to undercrank some footage a little but not sure if a 5D is the best way to approach this. Obviously there will have to be a good work done in post to achieve the aesthetic I'm looking for (vignettes, iris-in, iris-out, etc) but in terms of frame rate, I'm a little confused as to what I should do. Any help appreciated! [/quote] Haven't been following the Magic Lantern version on the Mark 3 lately, but there's a frame rate override feature on it that would let you do that.. You might look into that? Good luck!

[quote name='andy lee' timestamp='1352747613' post='21521'] interesting read here on Cronenwerth with the Red One MX with an 80D filter to give more blue so he had more latitude...interesting idea! [url="http://www.icgmagazine.com/wordpress/2011/12/01/1787/"]http://www.icgmagazi...011/12/01/1787/[/url] [/quote] That's pretty awesome....considering if one had four grand laying around, he could own the camera. Accessories are all over the place in the "red stuff for sale" thread at Reduser for great deals. I think the only reason there are still any available on Red is the fact that Redmags are RIDICULOUSLY expensive.

This seriously was my last question regarding the GH3... So thanks Julian for doing this test... Looks like I agree with your consensus that Natural looks to holds the highest DR..? That's pretty flat. You're right.. Not Cinestyle flat, but maybe a little flatter than Smooth on the 2. (I never liked Nostalgic. Too "yellow"..). Honestly if they'd just give us the option of making our own i don't think it would matter, lol.

Jeff Cronenweth uses an 80D with the Red One MX. Schneider has a video from Nab 2011 of their "then" new nd's for matteboxes. They filter IR also, (basically just for true blacks...) - so the selling point was a set of those would be the only filters you would need. All i saw in the video was a Sony EX3 turn a purple hat back into a black one when they stuck it on. I have a Gh2, which sure as hell ain't an Alexa.. Lol.. I don't think i ever saw an issue like that or even thought about it being a problem until i started researching these filters.. Lol.

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1352734148' post='21510'] Once the BMC gets off the ground, cameras that don't offer RAW will be dead in the water with the indie guys. One could argue that RAW is more important to small budget productions than it is to big budget productions because it can compensate for bad lighting. [/quote] Gotta agree with this.. Adorama has the deal with the Switronix kit for $3095. A crucial SSD for $200. Rock & Roll. There's probably a dozen arguments here somebody could make for the A99, but for me if your concern is video, just stretch a little further and be done with it. No moire, no aliasing, no 8 bit limit, no same old codec, etc.

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1352737418' post='21511'] Everything that is put in front of a lens is potential problem. The Tiffen LCF1 causes reflexes in backlight and will also cause stray light to form brighter puddles in the image. But what it does too is providing a flat image at full range. I think a mattebox would help to avoid the aforementioned issues. As for the allegedly better Wratten or so, I doubt they will perform much better. I have the LCW FaderND. Because of some problems, I searched the net for an alternative and bought the much more expensive Heliopan. The problems remained, and it's really hard (for me) to tell, if there is [i]any[/i] difference in quality. [/quote] Yeah, ya know i actually debated the Heliopan for months... But it was hard for me to justify a $400 filter... I had the same one you do when i first bought my Gh2, then i bought an Opteka vari-nd as a backup because it was $30... I ended up returning the Fader. Later when the Fader Digi-pro HD's came out, i bought one of those thinking it fixed whatever issues i had with the mark ii.... Negative. In all honesty, i totally agree with you.. Because i really don't see a difference large enough to justify the $120 gap between the Opteka and the Fader Digi pro. I believe the Schneider is a mattebox only filter probably for that specific reason you stated addressing light when it hits it.

Awesome! Thanks man! I'd like to see how close to a Log PP it can get?

[quote name='andy lee' timestamp='1352680452' post='21485'] Kodak Wratten filters [url="http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Lab_And_Post_Production/Kodak_filters/wrattten2.htm#s7"]http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Lab_And_Post_Production/Kodak_filters/wrattten2.htm#s7[/url] [/quote] These look cool.. I saw a thing on digital cmos sensors and how most benefit from an IR filter. The Red One MX does apparently.. (Still debating that purchase before they're gone..)

Maybe i should email Schneider and Formatt. Perhaps they don't realize that their $200 + filters have no visible representation anywhere that they do what they say, lol.

[quote name='QuickHitRecord' timestamp='1352667438' post='21475'] What a great opportunity. And for free! Thanks for sharing, Karim. [/quote] Yeah no joke man! Seriously cool opportunity! I don't even think we have an Alexa in Indiana.. Lol. Ditto for taking the time to post up pics and details!

So. I'd seen the Tiffen Ultra Contrast filters before and wrote them off... However, they did win a technical achievement award from the academy of MPAS, so they can't be too bad i assume. Nevertheless, Tiffen have a notorious reputation for color casting, so I forgot about that option. I'd heard they do weird things if light hits them a certain way, which, frankly I don't like composing a shot around my "gear." For me, the GH2 is great. An EVF pro is great for the LCD issue. All i wanted on it was a Log style PP. Though the Tiffen Ultracons are objectionable, I found these as well: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/341407-REG/Schneider_68223444_4x4_Digicon_2_Glass.html Granted they need a matte box, but Schneider makes some killer filters. These are water-white Schott glass with laser treatment. They claim no color cast, or loss of resolution.. No flaring in the highlights as well... Which was apparently an issue on the Tiffens. Formatt makes some low contrast high def filters for this as well: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/709193-REG/Formatt_BF_105_5_LOWCO_105mm_Low_Contrast_5.html I can't find a single sample of footage from either the Schneider or the Formatt. Here is a test of the Tiffen Ultracon filters though: http://youtube.com/watch?v=hmKpXOL6A2U This video doesn't show movement however, or whether there is any weirdness when light hits it in motion.. I'm sure you guys have discussed this at some point, but it seems like there are better options than the Ultracons from Tiffen. If you guys have any experience with these I'd love to get some feedback.. This could be a possible solution for those of us that wanted a log style profile for the Gh2, or the Gh3 if it doesn't have one.. (And it's looking that way.). Another thing, if these work well, wouldn't affecting the contrast of the image before it hits the sensor be FAR better for the 8 bit resources than internal processing with a reverse "S" gamma curve? Granted the Gh2 with a high bitrate, All-I patch would handle it much better, the banding a flat curve produces seems to be the issue most people are having with Cinestyle on the Canons by cutting the tips off of an already low 8 bit range..? (Somebody can fill me in on that one..:). Long post, over.