dahlfors

Seems like the T4 comparison is not made equally if I'm not mistaken. Check '> vs '> Look out the window at the tree and look at the plant to the right. This does not look like focus is "slightly off" as stated in the article. It rather looks like you are comparing them with the lens set at different apertures. If aperture actually was the same in your setup, there's some serious softness in the Lens Turbo. No wonder the sharpness seems to be the same in the 400% closeups either - they both link to the same photo. Also: I'd turn down the digital sharpening in camera when comparing sharpness of focal reducers, I can see that it's still on, producing halos. Edit: I noticed that the 400% file for the lens turbo is actually uploaded to your site if I change the URL manually... It's just your page that links the same image twice. Interesting test. I was in the same boat and didn't want to skimp out on optics, so I went for the speedbooster when I got mine. Looks like the Lens Turbo holds up nicely for 4K resolution and is a viable affordable alternative.

There's a lot of dual focus lenses that look good. But to me it was too much extra in the workflow for alignment, dual focusing. Not the kind of fast workflow that suits me. 1) The cheap solution: Get some affordable 2x anamorphic adapter like the above-mentioned Sankor, Schneider Cinelux or Isco Ultrastar. The FM lens module that comes out soon should make these a bit easier to handle thanks to rail mount system and single focusing. 2) Expensive and rare/hard-to-get solution: The Iscorama 36 is wonderful. 1.5x anamorphic adapter. Very hard to find a replacement if you'd damage it. 3) Solution if you're patient: If you can wait for a while, there's also the SLR Magic 2x anamorphic coming in the near future. Andrew had an article with test footage from an early prototype if you check the archive on EOSHD. Personally I really love the look that you get out of 2x anamorphics. Nothing bad about the 1.5x image out of the Iscorama - it's lovely as well, but the 2x look is something I tend to prefer. Hence I'm considering getting the FM lens module as well... And I really recommend finding some way of buying the anamorphic guide. The guide + this whole forum + the anamorphic lens-yclopedia that this forum put together are the best resources I've found on anamorphic lenses. Here's a link to the anamorphic lens-yclopedia: https://drive.google.com/a/bambuser.com/folderview?id=0BzVcUB-5ReiZajVncE9rYU9heDQ&usp=sharing#

What's important to remember is that dynamic range declines fairly quickly as you go up in ISO. I've shot a lot with D800, and I know that the 14+ EV steps that Dxomark has measured is real at ISO100 when I shoot raw stills - it's just miles better than what I've been able to pull out of other cameras. However, on the D800, not all of that DR translates to useful DR in compressed H.264. The D750 probably does a whole lot better than the old D800. But, since DR goes down when you go higher up in ISO, what's interesting with A7S is if you check the following graph from Dxomark: For stills, D800 and D750 has an advantage as long as you're around ISO100 to ISO400, and the A7S catches up at ISO800. What is amazing with the A7S is how it can keep a high DR as the ISO increases. Almost 9 EV steps at ISO 25600 is pretty impressive. That's where the A7S really shines in comparison to other cameras - it can keep a very high DR at a large ISO range. Dxomark measures DR for still photos, so it's hard to say how this translates to video since a lot happens to the image frames when they get processed and encoded into a lossy video format.

How harsh the compression is and the compression methods being used will matter the most when it comes to sharpening compressed imagery. To understand how to tweak sharpening and on which footage it works: open up differently compressed frames in Photoshop and inspect separate color channels. Don't just look at the RGB color channels, but inspect it in LAB color space with separate chroma channel as well to visualize how the compression has changed the image. Then get back to RGB mode and play with either Smart Sharpen or Unsharp Mask - where you can choose different values for the sharpening radius. Try this on differently compressed video frames, highly compressed JPEG's etc. Lossy codecs like JPEG or H.264 also compress better when you blur the image a bit (in the save for web dialog in Photoshop there is actually an option to add blur to the photo for better compression). My main digital imaging knowledge comes from still/design area, so I'm not entirely certain on this, but I assume that cameras that produces a softer image by default actually have more bitrate headroom to keep more details in the image without macroblocking and other artefacts of compression - which will be helpful when sharpening. Considering the quality and detail Nikon cameras output by default at their fairly low bitrate, I suspect you'd have better results sharpening Nikon footage if you'd record over HDMI to an Atomos Ninja Star or similar.

If budget is low, I'd go for as cheap camera as possible and invest the rest in the lenses, filters, audio equipment and other gear you might need. So, something like Nikon D5200/D5300, Sony A5100 or Panasonic G6. When it comes to Sony, I've learnt to hate that bad AVCHD codec... If you film almost anything else except a shallow depth of field shot, or a shot with motion in it - the codec tends to break apart and make your footage look like crap. And usually you don't see how bad it is until you view it on the computer later. So, for a Sony camera, go with one where you can get the new XAVC-S codec. Personally I've bought mainly used prime lenses (Nikon AI-S lenses) from online auctions. I've saved a lot of money buying the lenses like that - and if I'd sell some of those prime lenses, I'd get roughly the same sale price again. (Keep in mind that you might need to spend money on an adapter for your specific lens mount, depending on lenses you get and the camera mount your camera has)

Andy, sometimes I got a feeling there isn't a lens you haven't tried... :) Inazuma: Beautiful video. The shots with shorter depth of field around 1.26 to 1.35 shows a lovely out of focus character from whatever lens he used. I'm also stuck with H.264, no RAW or LOG. I recommend experimenting with filters to create new looks and get the most out of a H.264 camera. I wonder if you couldn't get similar look to that video with the combination of either a vintage lens or Dog Schidt Optiks lens + ND filter and perhaps a polarizer - and maybe nylon stocking like previously suggested. I've used Cokin square ND filters in harsh sunlight, and I have noticed that they also seem to squeeze down the dynamic range a little bit so that the camera manages to get better results in H.264. Besides the original Cokin filters that seem to have better quality - I've also bought these cheap chinese copies of the ND filters that fit for the Cokin P filter system. Although they are fairly neutral, they aren't entirely. But unlike variable ND filters you don't loose sharpness or get any vignetting since they are fairly large filters. This would be a clone of the kind of the original Cokin P filter system I have, with a set of ND filters for a low sum: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Complete-ND-2-4-8-16-Filter-Kit-for-Cokin-P-Square-Holder-Adapter-Hood-LF292-/201040029698?pt=ES_C%C3%A1maras_de_v%C3%ADdeo&hash=item2eceeb6802 Add a vintage lens and a polarizer (when it suits) with those and you won't have such a digital look. I haven't really minded that the filters aren't neutral and that the color changes a bit - I can either adjust the white balance a bit for that while shooting or adjust it in post if I want to and still achieve a result I'm happy with. My cheap ND's tend to turn colors a bit towards the yellow/orange/brown spectrum which I often tend to like. Stacking 2 ND filters in the filter system adds more color tint. Personally I'm also inclined to enjoy a real diffusion filter better than to deal with the hassle of stocking at the front/rear of a lens (if secured with tape, I bet it can easily become unevenly attached, tape can loosen up etc - not like a filter with thread that you just screw in). I've been considering getting some Tiffen diffusion filters, but haven't bitten the bullet yet. Guess I should get some stockings and at least experiment a bit to see if I want a real Tiffen filter or not :)

I have a 5R too, and would like to upgrade it. My main requirement for upgrading that one is XAVC-S (and preferrably 720p 120fps). Even though the aliasing & moire could be noticeable on shots from the 5R, what really killed the video quality of 5R was the codec. No way I'm upgrading to an A6000 or any other alternatives unless they have XAVC-S - it's such a huge improvement codec-wise. It's really sad that the A6000 hasn't gotten a firmware update with XAVC-S yet, only the A5100 has it. Hopefully A6000 will get the codec it ought to have soon enough.

Got a vid-atlantic clamp for my ultra star too. Probably needless to say - but the ultra star is pretty scratched after using that clamp.

Gold Schneiders - do you mean the same Cinelux ones discussed in this thread? If so, I might be interested if the glass is in good condition and the price is low enough.

With a background from stills, and not any real education in filmmaking - I found this a quick analysis of the Silence of the Lambs scene very interesting from a storytelling point of view. Maybe it is obvious for some of you, but I bet some others like me can learn a bit from this:

Yes. It will be single focus, just like the 1.33x SLR Magic adapter. Personally, if I'd have the time to wait for it, I'd say go for the SLR Magic. There is a serious company making it, they have a proven track record with the 1.33x single focusing anamorphic adapter. I've seen some really good footage come out from that one, and I expect that they won't release this one unless it performs up to par with the 1.33x. There is not much information available for the maker of the FM lens adapter. It's not a proven lens company behind it, it rather seems to be a small startup shop selling it. Which means no track record of previous products, not even a website yet - just a Facebook page with a tiny bit of info. The FM lens adapter will need a rail system setup to be usable, while already the prototype of the SLR Magic can be attached directly to a taking lens, which means that the finalized product will most likely be the same. That's pretty useful for usability, if you want a lightweight / smaller rig. Also, it has not verified yet, but looking at the released footage - it seems like the FM lens adapter single focusing has a long focus throw, which might make rack focus more difficult. Timeframe: it seems like the FM lens and opening of the anamorphic shop website isn't too far away. I guess the FM lens module will be ready before the SLR Magic 2x is out. I'm interested in getting the FM lens module - because I have an Isco Ultrastar already. I'm not expecting wonders with that combination though. I know what sharpness my Ultrastar can achieve, and the test footage shot with that one looked weirdly soft - like it almost reached infinity focus but not entirely. Not as sharp as when I've been using Ultra star + normal taking lenses. This could be an issue due to the test setup or not, hard to tell. Judging by the tests by anamorphic shop themselves, it seems like the Schneider is a good choice for pairing with the fm lens module at least. If you can find a cheap Schneider to pair with the fm lens module, total cost will most likely be cheaper than the finalized SLR Magic. If you have the time to wait, I think the SLR Magic will be worth the added cost - mainly for usability, but probably for image quality as well.

Thanks, but I already have Gopro for helmet camera/action use. I'm looking at other cameras than action cameras to be able to shoot proper handheld footage of friends or friends shooting my riding. In addition to having manual control, less distortion and preferably lenses of my choice. Sony RX100 Mk3 would still fit the bill sizewise and featurewise, XAVC-S and 720p 120fps, but I'd be stuck with that lens... I had big hopes for A5100 (and possibly A6000 via upgrade) unfortunately.

I've been looking for an upgrade to my NEX-5. Thought the Sony A5100 would be perfect for shooting my snowboarding trips - since it has the 720p 120fps mode that would open up awesome possibilities for slowing down the snowboarding. Another camera I had in mind was the A6000, if only it would get a similar firmware update that the RX10 got with XAVC-S and 720p@120fps. Then I noticed that Sony has removed all mentions of 720p@120fps from their specification pages, although all the early reviews mention the 720p@120fps, like DPReview: http://***URL removed***/previews/sony-alpha-a5100/2 Got me suspicious, which lead me into this post: http://community.sony.com/t5/Alpha-SLT-DSLR-Cameras/Can-t-find-a-720p-120fps-mode-on-my-new-a5100/td-p/445276 Quote: "Just purchased the Alpha 5100 (a5100) today and, to my surprise, there's no 720p 120 fps mode. Missing in action. I based my purchasing decision on this mode being supported by this camera. Looking at the latest official specifications on Sony's site, the 720p/120fps mode is no longer listed." I know Sony has been bad at updating firmwares and add features to older models earlier... But this time it seems like they've stripped a feature at release - a feature that had already been announced! I must say I'm not happy with a camera manufacturer just stripping announced features from a camera - without doing any communication what so ever about it. And if the issue is that the feature couldn't be finalized in time for release, I think the least they should do is to communicate if it will come in a later firmware or not. I'm happy I didn't order this camera already, but I really think it's about time that certain camera companies straighten up their communications if they want to keep their customers.

Aouch. On the lighter side, it's probably a great offering to Neptune!

Material & production cost is not everything. You really have to count the time and effort needed to manufacture a unique product. I wouldn't spend countless of hours making something custom as this. I'd rather pay a price premium for the time and effort someone else has put into making the product, since I don't have the time to do such customizations myself. Same thing with the Dog Schidt Optiks lenses I bought. I could probably spend a lot of time trying to figure out how to mount Helios lenses to my Nikon camera and find some really cheap Helioses in auctions. But DSO lenses were affordable enough that I rather pay for someone else having spent time to figure out a solution ready-made for me (besides the other custom options provided by DSO). When it comes to my Ultrastar, it's pretty much lying in the shelf, useless since I can't be arsed with the alignment and dual focusing. This product would finally make it useful. Of course, I'd rather see that the price is as low enough as possible, but I can still understand that for a custom unique product like this - there has to be some kind of price premium for the effort that went into making this.

This is exactly the kind of bad quality compression that I hated seeing out of my NEX. I found it good at the shallow depth of field shots, but it was so nasty seeing how fast motion shots fell apart... Sony really should update the firmware of A6000 to have equal features to A5100 (XAVC-S at 50 Mbps, 720p at 120fps).

Light leaks can come through camera bodies sometimes as well. Canon 5D Mk III had a light leak that could be fixed by using black tape to cover a part of the camera body. To rule out a light leak on the camera body itself, try shooting with it inside a dark bag. But yes, this is likely sensor-related.

One thing I've noticed with my Ultrastar: the squeeze is less at the center of the image and there's an increase in the squeeze towards the edges of the frame. This is mostly just visible in a panning shot. Would another 2x anamorphic like Schneider, Kowa or such have a more evenly distributed squeeze?

I would assume that "at the end of a maximum length clip" is the key here. Meaning, when recording a clip internally. On Nikon D800 you can configure when the camera should automatically shut off when outputting over HDMI - or set the auto-shutoff to the setting off. When you do so, you can record as long as battery lasts to an external recorder. It would surprise me if the D750 would behave differently over HDMI in this aspect.

I find it rather odd that it does 120fps in 1080p, but you have to go down to 848x480 resolution to get a higher framerate, 240fps. 720p is still at 120fps. Perhaps this can be improved later through firmware? 1080p at 120 fps is not bad, but even more fps could be interesting for slowing down action sports. On the other hand, the 1440p and 2.7k modes at up to 80fps and 50fps sounds great with high fps and headroom for cropping & stabilisation.

"Unfortunately Nikon have chosen to store exposure settings separately for movie mode and stills mode, which is a bit bonkers to be honest." This. I've shot with my D800 for over 2 years. It still happens that I forget this behaviour when switching between the two modes: "ah yes, that's right, the settings I just punched in were for the other mode only..." OK, I can see there are scenarios that makes it a feature for certain users - but for my kind of use, I'd like to have only one set of stored manual settings.

To be fair, if you read the thread: What is being discussed is a checking of interest in the focus module to push prices down, not a reselling by comurit. And so far it's at the early stage for interest-checking, there has not even been a discussion yet for how a possible discount would be given. I can agree on the part that we really need more information about Anamorphic shop before ordering anything from them. No website so far, only a Facebook page. I'd rather know who's behind it all before ordering anything from them, discount code or not. I must agree on what came up in the earlier thread: You as a moderator are biased - you are using the rules for selling on the forum, when the discussion is on the topic of interest-checking and discount - something that could be a nice thing for every user of the anamorphic forum. (Not too different from when Andrew got early-buyers discounts on the SLR Magic for the joy of the forum users). I see these kind of community efforts as something that adds to this community, not subtracts. Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that you have anamorphic business yourself that you want to protect? I'm a longtime reader of this forum and I'd want unbiased moderation on this forum. Threatening to purge a thread sounds like you do it for your own good, to be honest. I have a hard time seeing it any other way, however much I'd like to.

I don't understand your point. But there are many factors involved for higher resolution in a lens. The gold ultra stars were called "HD" while the red ultra stars had the labeling "HD plus" - since the red ones had higher resolution. The ultra star hd plus were more expensive back in the days as well. Anyway, it's quite irrelevant, since both of them resolve very well - resolution is not an issue in 1080p nor 4k.

Rob, LG has an upcoming 31" 4096x2160 display, LG Electronics 31MU97-B, 31": http://geizhals.eu/lg-electronics-31mu97-b-a1162783.html Preorder pricing is from 1300 euro. Resolution: 4096x2160, 4K+60Hz Luminance: 320cd/m² Contrast: 1000:1 (static), 5000000:1 (dynamic) Response time: 5ms (Manufacturer measurement...) Viewing angle: 178°/178° Panel type: AH-IPS Backlight: GB-r-LED-Backlight Color gamut: Wide Color Gamut (99% Adobe RGB, 100% sRGB) Hardware calibration. At that resolution there aren't so far any other options, and this one was just recently announced. Maybe someone else will make displays with 4096x2160 resolution soon enough once that one is out, but 3840x2160 will for sure become the commonly available resolution for highres displays.

I'm interested as well.