Jump to content

richg101

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,828

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by richg101

  1. richg101
     
  2. richg101
    I'm glad the name is arousing discussion...:)  I thought long and hard about a name.  i thought dog shit optics was perfect for the project!     Here is the Century 16:9 converter on the 'Flare Factory 58b'  - 'b' signifies the blue tint on the flares.  the actual blue look it more due to the wb being set for a cool look.  This test is more to show the contrast and general look of the lens used in bright overcast situations.   http://www.vimeo.com/60107970
  3. richg101
    my advice would be to set up your lens and anamorphic to focus to infinity (without the tokina attached), then put the tokina on.  now dont touch the focus but move back and fourth until you see your maximum focus distance with the tokina.  I think I get about 10-12ft maximum focus distance with the tokina on the iscorama.  
  4. richg101
    Very nice!  
  5. richg101
        more info to come.  i'll post some images up of the production models when I have proper photos of them.
  6. richg101
    I have decided to start developing a series of taking lenses for users of anamorphic lenses, in particular they add a rawness to footage shot with the sometimes 'over clinical' Iscorama, Schneider 35mm Projection lenses, and the high performance Kowas. I have always wanted the sharpness from this type of anamorphot, but wanted the feel of an 8mm anamorphot which seems to add a certain raw and natural quality (see Seb Farges 'Baby Hypergonar' stuff for examples of what I mean). The little lenses might struggle in low light, and sometimes dont match the big boys for sharpness, but they add a real lovely overall aesthetic which I think is lost when you upgrade to an Iscorama. Anyway, I have been compiling some sample footage of flare characteristics and will be adding more as i go. I am currently shooting samples with a 8mm anamorphot and a century 16:9 converter. For now please see the footage shot with Iscorama 36, and in non anamorphic too. Iscorama 36= http://www.vimeo.com/60022405 Iscorama 36 Flares= http://www.vimeo.com/59961537 Century 1.33x Flares= http://www.vimeo.com/60036048 Cinevision 8mm 1.5x Flares= http://www.vimeo.com/60038931 The second link has some information about the lenses. I will be selling these to people who want them. And can customise the characteristics to suit your particular style. I'll probably sell them via ebay. Feel free to make suggestions as to what you might want to see... :) Century and 8MM 1.5x anamorphot flare samples coming up!
  7. richg101
    If using premiere avoid using non 32bit effects.  eg. 'curves' being 32bit seem to be better than 'levels' when adjusting contrast.  I am unable to explain why this seems to lower the amount of banding but i am sure people here can explain the reasons it seems to work better.  I used to use rgb curves to grade then levels to adjust the contrast.  Now I use the master curves to adjust the contrast and it seems to be cleaner than 'levels'.   also i find setting up a 4k workspace and upscaling your 1080 footage, then working on it, grading etc, applying a slight blur, then re-sharpening.  overlaying a fine 4k grain over the top, then exporting out as a 1080p file.  seems to create a perception of extra data from nowhere once scaled back down during export.  Again, I don't know why it works, but it looks better to my eyes.  anyone care to explain might be happening with this workflow? 
  8. richg101
    this lens is looking lovely.  i'd be interested to see some tests to see the light loss from this lens.  ie, set the aperture on the 50mm planar to f5.6, then f4, f2.8, f2, etc  and see if the anamorphot allows the planar to make use of its full speed. On another 8mm anamorphot it seems any bigger aperture than f4 and there is no extra light due to the small size of the elements meaning actual light getting to the taking lens is limited to f4.
  9. richg101
    @jeff.  it sounds like you are using a clamp that uses 3 bolts to attach your iscorama.  so the bolts are gripping the rear element housing which needs to be able to rotate.  you need to get a mount that screws to your 49mm thread on your iscorama and then onto your taking lens.  redstan sell these.  
  10. richg101
    that is superb.  great that you went to the effort of doing this in depth testing.  its night and day from this.  
  11. richg101
    Nex5n iso test and dro test   http://vimeo.com/59862894   password is: iso
  12. richg101
    how do I embed a video?
  13. richg101
    these tests have prompted me to do some lens cap tests of the nex5n, which seems to exhibit the same varied noise colour depending on iso setting..  I'm uploading now
  14. richg101
    looks lovely.  the tilt shift is great.  a really interesting look.  I think you need to try this with some backlighting!  I think the flares could look really exciting with the tilt shift being applied during shot.   re. closeups / tokina +0.4 vs +0.5.  It looks like you dont need any additional correction on the close ups.  the results look really nice.  the little hypergonnar seems to apply a 16mm film look to the image.  looks almost edible!  
  15. richg101
    gh3 got smashed right down. funny thing is, I bet little to no real passion was put into the video mode on the nikon. I imagine it was pure fluke, and a lack of software crippling. whereas the gh3 had video given priority by its r+d guys it would seem. I'm now looking at nikon with a lot more interest.
  16. richg101
      I agree.  400 seems the best noise vs gain ratio.
  17. richg101
    Hey Jeff. No problems there. a lot of them suffer this now due to the age. I bought one with some separation myself. Personally I very rarely see 'non MC' versions without any separation. MC one isnt worth buying IMO -even if it is immaculate. Boring central! I'd rather a fungus'd, scratched, separated non mc over a perfect modern mc version. Being where it is (at the bottom), it wont get near your image circle. Avoid quick hot/cold/cold/hot temperature changes and it shouldnt get any worse. If you are certain you want it fixed it is an easy fix for those who do it, but there is risk so repairers will ask you to sign a non responsibility form just in case the elements break during the job. Speak to Camserve or Van Diemen, they will give better info. Most repairers will just say leave it alone - it probably wont get worse and its not worth worrying about. Others say the opposite.
  18. richg101
    Nice article and some great shots on the video. The REWO rig, bmcc and isco looks like a lovely refined system. good balance looks evident. one of the first images of the bmcc rigged into something that looks usable and comfortable to handle. I didnt know the 54 was less sharp than the 36 and I feel the lack of 36 style barrel glow is a negative point about the 54. Something is quite lovely about the glowing barrel of the 36. re. optimum lens choice, I look forward to sending over a sample to EOSHD of the new custom lenses I am developing specifically for adding some extra character to footage (and primarily anamorphic footage) :) I think they might add a hint of extra rustic glitz to the image from the mighty 54!
  19. richg101
    the 5dmk2/3, 7d, and 550d from canon still fulfill the role of a device more than suitable for 'prosumers' IMO. Prosumer is a sticky and confusing concept though. 'Prosumers' should be labelled as 'enthusiasts', 'picky consumers' or 'wannabe professionals'. I wouldn't want to try catering for this market because no product ever meets the confused perception of what is required by the end user. I don't think Canon want to mess in this hornets nest either.
  20. richg101
    pretty different looking lens.  it looks like a centurt 16:9 converter, but with a bigger squeeze ratio based on the shape of the oval view through the barrel.  it looks quite a shallow body, but the elements suggest it is deeper than the body makes it look.  also looks like there is a focus ring there too..    
  21. richg101
    adding a fine grain over your footage, exporting at h264 25,000kbs (or similarly high bitrate dependent on your upload limit) can help yield clean results.  The big file and sharp detailed grain remains and then is present for vimeo's compression to do its damage.  the grain seems to fool vimeos into less macro blocking and banding.  Sometimes I'll upload and the results will look horrific, I'll then 'replace the video file' with exactly the same file and the results are sometimes better.   I think its very dependent on the sort of footage you are uploading as to whether or not certain export techniques yield good or bad results post vimeo craperization.   
  22. richg101
      without dro there doesnt seem to be a difference in noise between 100 and 200.  it's only when you go to iso100 with dro on that noise seems more prominent than at iso200.  PS.  this is on the nex5n, not rx100.  but since they share so many similarities with processing, etc I imagine these results will be similar on the rx100
  23. richg101
      Menu, settings, high ISO NR, Low.  I'm unsure what is determined as 'high iso' but it seems to affect the noise levels at all iso's
  24. richg101
    I have NR set to minimum and am talking in movie mode terms.     I am just adjusting my aperture to compensate for the difference in ISO.  It is just a lot less grainy in the shadows/darker areas (the areas boosted by DRO) when set to iso200.  Iso100 is significantly more grainy than iso200 in the DRO boosted areas.    
  25. richg101
    on the subject of DRO. it appears to work best at iso200 from some experimentation I have done. assuming you are exposing to avoid clipping of the sky, the shadow noise on darker areas boosted by DRO seems to be more prominent at iso100 than the shadow noise caused by DRO when iso is set to 200 with the lens aperture adjusted to match exposure of the sky. This makes me think that base ISO of nex5n is actually 200 (as it was with the original nex-5 and nex-3), but is having some type of post exposure compensation to allow for the option of iso100. The processing is naturally going to cause some type of image degradation. This is likely the case with the rx100 too. Maybe some one can look into this. If true it might be worth avoiding iso100 and starting at iso200 to avoid banding and other nasties. It is known that this is a main cause of banding/colour issues with the Canon 1DC when used at ISO lower than the actual Base iso of the sensor. Being that the previous nex models were base iso of 200 it seems funny sony would downgrade on the newer model.. rather than just applying some processing to offer a faux lower iso of 100. Thoughts??
×
×
  • Create New...