QuickHitRecord

Wow. Are you always this charming? Or did you just spend a chunk of change on a Sony A7s and feel the need to justify your purchase by ripping on other cameras and the people who use them? Yes. Except that mine doesn't seem to count because it's not in line with yours.

Huh? THIS doesn't make any sense...

I work with the C100 and 5D3 as well. I rented an A7s for a shoot a month or two ago and found that I didn't care for it (form factor, interface, menus, using Metabones adapters, etc). In fact it gave me a whole new appreciation for my Canons. Definitely rent one before making that jump.

@juanamorphic Do you see the part in the title of this thread where it says "no advertising"?

Are you saying that RawMagic is not able to process your MLVs without the corresponding .R## files? Because that has not been the case in my experience.

It does look pretty good. Better than I would have expected for sure. But at this point in the game, I don't really understand the frustration with the ML workflow and file sizes. Why not just use a program like MLRawViewer to quickly and non-destructively color balance your shots, apply a LUT if desired, and export to ProRes 22 or ProRes LT? Sure, it takes some time to process your files. But at least that way, the massive MLV raw files never even have to touch your hard drive, and you've got a cleaner starting point. Also, media is getting more affordable. I was surprised to see that KomputerBay 256GB 1066x CF cards have come down another $100 and can now be purchased new for $300. Unfortunately, there is no hack for the lack of an opposable LCD screen on the 5D. In my opinion, that is the most frustrating thing about the 5D3.

I can't speak from the photo side but for video we're at the cusp of several new technologies: 4K, h265, IBIS, and ultra high-sensitivity sensors, to name the main ones that I can think of. Buying a camera with one of these new features now would mean buying a company's first implementation of this new technology, and experiencing all of the bugs and quirks that go along with it. The 2nd Gens are always a lot more solid. Also, it shouldn't be long before we start seeing affordably-priced cameras that can offer two or three of the four; maybe another year or so.

Here's a nice entry-level monitor that has a nice de-squeeze for 1.5x lenses (or 2x with Magic Lantern at 4:3):

Have any other options become available since the last posts? I'm still using my AC7 which is great, but it's huge on my 5D3 and goes through my batteries pretty fast. I can also confirm that there is no anamorphic monitoring on the Ninja Blade. I've emailed them to see if they could include this in the next firmware update. EDIT: Atomos just responded:

I did some testing at work (our photographer just got a new D810) and concluded the same thing. The image actually matches raw from the 5D3 pretty closely (until you start trying to grade it) and despite matching all camera and lens settings across both cameras, I was getting a brighter exposure out of the D810. The photographer has used it to shoot video clips a few times and claims that he's seeing some weird stutter in the motion, but I haven't seen it myself yet.

From one of comments on the Facebook page: I'm assuming that the "rings for mounting" are what you are looking for.

I second the FS7, as long as the motion cadence is more like a BM camera and less like the FS100 or GH4.

For those who are curious, here's my 16mm B&H footage. It has been stretched and graded slightly. No sharpening or window treatments whatsoever. The panning is to show distortion and falloff: Granted, I had to cut some corners to get here. I added a wide angle converter to the mix to get close to an S35 35mm equivalent while cropping in ML raw to 1344x1008 (I usually work with this crop). And this isn't a 50mm f/1.4 taking lens either. I find that the best taking lens for the B&H is the Olympus Zuiko 100mm on my 5D3 because it's so small and manageable. This combination gives me a neat 47.6mm S35 field of view (close enough to 50mm for me). Adding my new Sony VCL-HG0758 Wide Angle Converter brings me down to 33.33mm (S35). To answer Rich's questions as best I can: Can they deliver this field of view/dof combination? Yes, but only with a Wide Angle Converter. Can they deliver the above without adding CA or softening at f1.4? I haven't tried it at f1.4, but it's pleasantly soft at f2.8. Can they do this on a full frame sensor? See above. Can they do this without adding vignette? See above. Can they provide this without the need for additional support? I would recommend using a support. As a former Iscorama owner, I am still pleased as punch with this lens. I love the 2x stretch and with the modification I did, it rack focuses easily. There's no additional glass elements in front of the lens to worry about unless I need to attach the the wide angle converter. It's a pretty nice lens.

I think that this is a good idea, Rich. I'll throw my B&H into the ring if I can get the math right (and the appropriate wide angle adapter).

What is the mAh capacity of the batteries? How long will they last while recording video? Is the camera outputting 10-bit 4:2:2 via HDMI?

Incidentally, I just watched an in-depth presentation on camera ergonomics (presented by Sony about a year ago) that is worth a look: As a former FS100 owner and frequent C100 user, I think that Sony got it right with the FS7. Not only does the spec sheet check all of the boxes, but the ergonomics looks just about right.

I'd love to see a photo of this setup if you can swing it. Nice results so far.

Well, the full frame part isn't possible. But I'm squeezing >1080P raw out of a 2-year-old 5D right now, and whoever thought that would happen? Olympus has no premium video-oriented camera sales to cannibalize, so we'll see what they can offer.

Link?

I am not discrediting you, John. I am trying to remind you that it was not all take and no give from me. If you want to get into semantics, I did not discover the 16mm B&H. In fact, I would not be surprised if some of the people who designed the lens are still alive today. Certainly some of the old-school projectionists and collectors of such things are aware of its properties as well. I merely followed up on a one-off comment from a casual poster (in my book, an unreliable source), confirmed his findings, and then developed it into something that works for me. To my knowledge, mine is the first of its kind and I was excited to share it with the community. If you remember, >I gave credit to the original poster. Why "Top Secret"? Because it was not a widely-known fact to the anamorphic community, and I thought that with the right planning I could manufacture a rack-focusable 2x anamorphic and offer it for less than the price of a Kowa, but I needed a head start to make it happen. I shared it with forum members that I respected, and you were one of them. Turns out that I couldn't get my manufacturer on board in a way that was agreeable to me, so that dream died on the vine. Look, I really don't care if any information that I shared with you influenced your design. Private messages are private for a reason. And I don't appreciate having my wrist slapped for being curious about a competing product. That's all that I have to say.

John, It's true. You did make a great discovery (based upon my lesser but prior discovery, it would seem), and I appreciated your sharing it with me. You have created a marketable product which is more than I can say. Now, it seems that we were not the only people charting these waters. But while I applaud the Anamorphic Shop offerings and look forward to trying them out, you seem eager to "take him down a notch", which is exactly what I have experienced in my dealings with you -- and why you haven't been getting any emails from me lately. If you read back on this thread, you have now had several people express concern about your conduct. You can either write us all off as outliers, or you can take a look in the mirror and ask yourself some questions. I know what I would do. Nick

This is quite clever!

John, I don't appreciate content from our private offline conversations being referenced here, and I feel the need to state that I am in no way affiliated with John's Rectilux. We were merely comparing exploratory notes. Respectfully, I suggest that the moderation of this forum be handled by a neutral party who has no commercial aspirations. Nick

How the heck is he doing this? I can't wait to learn more.

Grading footage in raw is always best, but having a color-balanced, exposure-tweaked ProRes 4444 as a starting point is really, really good. That's how I've been doing it. It's a good program, as the linked article states. The only reason that I haven't been using it extensively is because BMDFilm color space has become a part of my regular workflow. But if you're not using that, then I can't see a reason not to use MLRawViewer. It's free!