jgharding

It sounds brilliant! id love C300 ii but I'll probably hire for now. also, JCS, I hold up my hands and say you were right in the other thread FS5 vs C300 ii when you said ease of use would trump spec for me despite what I thought. As much as I want Slog to be the best, I just find Canon much less work to get a nice result. Canon are like some dude you're jealous of because of his success and want to hate, but can't because he's a nice guy too! Or something... I think this report serves to back up the idea that 5D Mk iv will not have the crazy video specs everyone wants. No 4K, as that's reserved for their video offerings. no high frame rates at decent quality, since even their flagship won't do this. yeah I could be proved wrong, but I'd put a pound down on what I say above. The exception to the pattern was the 550D and successors. at the time the 550D gave the same video as the 7D for far less cash. But even as everyone else moved on Canon smelled the dollar in maintaining the split between C line video and D line stills. until someone challenges 1. Their colour and 2. Their ease of use and menu design, this will remain the case. conpetition forces the hand in free market, no one has quite caught up yet and managed to gain market traction too.

I'm not sure it'll even have 422 HD! could be wrong, but not surprised if it didn't and was 420 8-bit again

I'm gonna say it won't have 4K cynical I know, but once bitten... the 5D is a still camera. The XC10 is a video camera. Canon have decided this separation will stay for the moment, so it won't have equal video specs. they have a separate video offering now. The 5D chapter has closed...

I'm a PC Premiere user and yes it's fast and better and I'm glad it's here! I can still admit FCP X is much better and quicker for colour though. It's actually real-time all the time. Premiere can be really clunky still unless you have spectacular specs. Sometime you have to wait 10 seconds for the image to update when you move a still overlay or change some colour. thats just not what happens in FCP X

If in doubt expose Log with view assist. As mentioned, using 100% of the waveform in log exposure is an emergency trick to use for reducing noise, not for everyday exposure. It's a bad practice that's spreading because most don't read how and why Log does what it does. its not how it's designed to used. It forces mid tones into the upper bend of the log curve. you don't want your midtones squished into the part that's only designed for extending highlight range, especially in an 8-bit codec. youre fine going a bit over if you like, but banging it over by a bunch of stops every shot is wasting the point of using log in the first place. Just use view assist if in doubt.

I use wide dr 90% of the time. Clog only with Ninja 2. wide DRis usually enough and grades very well. if you think it's rubbish I'm gonna have to assume all your shots involve exposing both the filament of a lightbulb and a face in shadow at the same time there are some settings knocking around to remove the green cast from Clog. be wary of the whole "fill the waveform In log" thing. It's not how it's designed to be used. You will reduce noise by pushing down in post, but you seriously cramp the skin tones on to the upper tip of the log curve and can end up with skin banding which sucks.

I think what you're describing is what happens when a tool gets in the way of your creativity. It's a unique form of frustration. I forgot my biggest complaint of all... Operation! It's quite slow... when you stop recording it spends time writing to the card making you wait to record again... the buffering mode on HFR is irritating and slow to react... And the menus are grotesque. Changing between frame rates requires the main menu. The quick menu controls illogically so one ends up pressing the wrong thing all the time. In short it's a chore to use, but provides a good feature set at a low price. It's a necessary evil for me

It's quite a 90s style edit with flinchy jump cuts, but these cuts are often facilitated her by modern things, such as stabilised timelapse and so on. So modern retro. a very up to date post-modern classical soundtrack (like Einaudi, Max Richter, Clint Mansell etc, the music is almost interchangeable with them) As a matter of personal taste this kind of thing gives me a bit of a headache as most of the images don't get time to breathe, but that's just me. Like most such films the music does most of the work, if you put a different track on it wouldn't work so well, so to make your own start with a similar arpeggio or ostinato based track by Einaudi, Clint Mansell or Max Richter and cut away! EDIT: Yes it is Einaudi i checked on Vimeo. PS not a criticism of their music, more an observation of a genre style. I've seen Richter in concert twice!

Locking due to sale

Locking due to sale.

I just got a set of old Russian nuclear lenses for this exact reason. You can actually find them NEW on ebay because millions were made, and for 30-50 £ The only downside is I've grown a few extra fingers, but it makes focus pulling easier.

It's staying for the continuous 100fps, and simple fixed-lens solution for walkaround stabilised HD. Other than that I find it average: noisy in general, hard to grade, Slog2 is drab and noisy as hell while other profiles have poor dynamic range, battery isn't amazing compared to camcorders I'm used to now, general Sony "look" is quite plastic, poor build makes it feel like it explode if you dropped it, the HFR ultra slow motion has a tiny buffer, is hard to focus and is even noisier If you have lots of light it can be decent. It cut reasonably well with my Canons on the first interview shoot, which was well lit. it was a good B-cam. But the last shoot I did only one RX10 ii shot made it in, and that was slow-motion. The C100 shots just looked much nicer and were more flexible in the grade... that's 24mpbs vs the Sony at 100mbps in HD. Bitrate is not everything, "colour science" is practically unalterable, though it can be tweaked a little, and matters more for me on the whole. Also how bitrate is implemented differs vastly. Try grading Sony FS700 AVCHD next to Canon C100 and you'll see what I mean... I prefer my Canon's because I don't have to struggle to make them look good. TBH it put me off the FS5, which may be unreasonable as it's not an RX10 ii, but Sony now have to convince me it's worth the effort spending twice as long to grade it just for higher "specs". If my Canon's did 100p it'd be gone, but for the price it's a very convenient way to fill that gap, so for now it stays. Since Canon are still milking specs for massive prices I'm stuck without a Canon option for 100p shoot from the hip. If you have nothing else I'm sure you could make great things with it too, I'm just spoiled these days, so take my comments in the context of someone who makes a living with film as well as someone who likes to make their own stuff for fun. Could please anyone share their nice Slog2 settings as I'm struggling to make it look nice?

I think it's "saggital coma" which an artefact in some lenses when used at their widest, though I could be mistaken. if you don't like it you'll have to only use the 85 closed down, or find another 85 that doesn't exhibit this with your particular anamorphic lens. or use it intentionally as a kind of romantic softening for portraits

Of course Leica are known for an "X factor", but that was back when someone else made the film and you could change it every roll. now the "film" is fixed, albeit still made by someone else: it's sensor and associated hardware and firmware. It will become obsolete, while an M1 can still be used with any film. that alone makes it hard to justify the prices.

No NDs is such a bummer... the F5 has the best ND design I've yet seen

Listening is a far rarer skill than shouting, ya get me? Good money after bad does not undo a mistake... Admitting defeat can sometimes lead to a better place than the original goal... fortune cookie sometimes to hard for young teeth...

It's not necessarily but because it's non standard it may be seen as a gimmick a gimmick is fine in something designed to be a promo, sometimes preferable but for narrative many stay traditional so that such deviation from standards doesn't detract from the story so much thats probably why many don't do it

DO YOU EVEN MAC-PRESS BRO?!?!

I managed managed to find most for pretty cheap, and have left getting a Tair for later. We shall see how this goes! Looking forwarding to shooting with the setup, though it'll be some months before I get the time.

Ace, cheers! I already have a Contax Zeiss Set. I'd heard they don't play so well with Iscorama, hence looking for Russian set... any truth in this do you know?

I've notice this with the deepest blacks on my large Dell panel. They suddenly crush... I don't see it on Alienware m14, but there are many different screens, and that one has quite a limited colour gamut. all depends on your muscles and back it's fine for me but yeah I can see it can be annoying compared to those skinny aluminium Macs!

Is that vignette from the lens? It looks great! No shaming, It's what you do with the tools that counts! 2X anamorphics are very sensitive to tilt distortion. Keith Richards: Under the Influence is full of just that kind of distortion. It's not always a huge problem.

Brilliant cheers for the tips! I'll dive into the madness of old Russian lenses then! Hopefully we will get many tips here about these lenses for future searchers.

I find the flare elements very sharp, I'd prefer if they were more diffuse. It'd suit a sci-fi though! It's all about whether you like it...

Indeed, they are good! It didn't suit me personally but i can still see it's good. The pre-36s seem to be a mixed bag. Mine isn't insane shot-ruining gimmick flare, it's a kind of subtle warm orange one, which i like, I find blue is more distracting, but some peoples lenses are totally different! They must've tried different coatings in the early days I assume...