dahlfors

Both are projection lenses with double focus and both will require some kind of rig to setup. To adjust focus on the Schneider you need to turn a screw - and that's something I certainly wouldn't want to hassle with if I used it on a camera rig. The Ultra Star focuses by rotating the outer part, just like a normal camera lens. 2x bokeh looks nice, but I'd still save my money for an 1.3x slr magic anamorphic instead of spending too much money on these; the setup and workflow with that one will be so much better. Hence I'd suggest trying to find some affordable setup for rigging Schneider/Ultra Star up to you camera.

However silly it might seem to you, H.265 does 4444, at 8-bit, 10-bit or 12-bit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding#Profiles Prores is a lossy compression method, so is H.265. The difference is that H.265 is a recent codec with a lot more focus on compressing filesizes, for the cost of requiring more computing power to encode/decode. This means, for the very same level of quality as with Prores, you'll have far lower bitrate, 4444 included. Also: "and much better quality than H.264". Yes, a Prores 4444 will be higher quality than the H.264 4:2:0 at 8-bit we see implemented in most cameras. However, did you know that there are also H.264 profiles for 4:4:4 at 10-bit color (the specs even support up to 14-bit)? With proper encoding chips, there's nothing stopping cameras from having 10-bit H.265 4444 (or even H.264) that compress far better and has same quality as Prores 4444.

Try reading again. "New H.265 codec on test - ProRes 4444 quality for 1% of the file size". Prores 4444 is quite a lot larger than H.264...

Yes, that's one of the singlecoated original Iscoramas, one of the first four in the specs here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iscorama#Specifications Mount for taking lens is either: Nikon F, M42, Minolta SR or Exakta.

Both had been inside the shop all day, so both should have had the same room temperature since they were placed next to each other. Good tip though, I will surely try to move mine around a bit more before using it.

Vitaly found out what the guys at nikonhackers forum had discovered. Here's the post about that: http://simeonpilgrim.com/blog/2013/06/30/live-view-silent-raw-on-d7000/ It seems like Nikon has locked down their firmware very well. I really wish they'd open up a bit more about it, but I doubt that will happen...

Yes. You'll need dedicated hardware encoding/decoding chips for cameras and mobiles. Maybe we'll have gpus that can do hardware decoding on phones and tablets soon enough, but until then you'll have to rely on dedicated chips. For getting H.265 in cameras, dedicated encode/decode chips are the way to go (unless you have an external recorder with powerful cpu or dedicated encode/decode chips).

Earlier when I've seen rumors (note that it is rumors - not any official announcement from Metabones that has been floating around on the web) about speed boosters, it has taken a while longer until final product has appeared. According to an updated post at 43rumors.com the EF to m4/3 speed booster has been delayed, but might still appear this year: http://www.43rumors.com/speed-booster-ef-to-mft-adapter-release-delayed/

Most shops around here in Sweden don't sell Sachtler, so I have no idea about how those perform. However, when I got my Manfrotto 503HDV head, I tried panning and tilting both 501 and 503 heads in the shop. The 503 felt much smoother and concise compared to the 501, which made my choice easy. So, my advice is to try to find a shop where you can actually try them out. Then you can probably figure out if the difference is large enough for you to want to save a bit of money from your budget or not.

Crazy landscape, beautiful shots. Where is that?

Unfortunate. Guess I'll have to keep on saving for an AC7 then :)

Dave Dugdale wasn't too impressed about the colors of the AC7 I see, but it's still a very tempting monitor. I fear the affordable Ikan that seemed to fare a lot better colorwise in Daves test lack anamorphic scaling? http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/field-monitor-shootout/

  D800 and D800E seem to have sold nicely, probably around expected sales. The major drop in sales have been in the compact and entry-level DSLR segment (according to nikonrumors earlier research on the subject) - the two areas which have been Nikon's bread & butter. Partly due to better camera phones. Another reason is probably that the common entry-level camera buyer is still satisfied with the image quality they get in a DSLR that is a few years old.   I can't help but wonder what the D5200/D5300 sensors could do if they managed to get 10-bit 4:2:2 Prores out of those cameras. That and no crippling of live view in a video-centric D5xxx series camera would be something I'd be interesting in getting as a secondary camera. I'm afraid I don't have much expectations that Nikon would make a fully videocentric camera in the coming 1-3 years, neither mirror-less nor DSLR.

Ultra stars are anamorphic projection lenses needing double focusing. These lenses are made for projection, so they don't focus very close, usually in the range of around 1.5 to 2 meters or so. First you mount them to a taking lens (with rear part of anamorphic as close as possible to taking lens as possible) using a clamp or a rail mount. When mounting, you need to rotate and align the anamorphic so that vertical and horisontal lines are really vertical and horisontal. People often shine a light into the lens to see a flare for that alignment. It can work to align it with camera pointed at truly vertical wall too (like a wall, door or something else you know will be aligned). When focusing an object at around 5 meter or so - first adjust your taking lens to 5 meters and then the anamorphic to 5 meters. If you nail the focal distance on both lenses your image should be in focus. If the focus is wrong on one of the lenses, you won't have anything in focus. Search in the forums a bit as well and you'll find more threads about: - aligning different anamorphics - using double focusing - Isco Ultra Stars.

I've used both Cokin P-series and a Lightcraft Fader ND Mk2. I wrote a summary of that in another thread: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/3289-which-nd-filter-should-i-buy/?p=40951   In short: - Lightcraft Fader ND Mk2 softens the image a bit. - With a system like Cokin P-series you'll have a small solution without softening - and you can stack two ND's to suit the conditions.

For my own needs, biggest limitations on most cameras is aliasing/moire and 8-bit color. Shooting raw is amazing quality - but I'd already be a lot happier with a slightly compressed format, better resampling down to 1080p as well as 10-bit 4:2:2 & 4:4:4. Had the Blackmagic cameras been as useful for stills as a DSLR - a BM camera would have been the perfect allround camera for me.   I hope Nikon can make it through the times, and I hope that they will try to make some effort into some mirrorless video camera.   One thing that has struck me many times over: why are the camera manufacturers so anxious about not releasing specs about camera processors & proper firmware SDK:s?   I'm pretty certain the open source world could get the most out of the hardware, given the chance. I really doubt the companies would risk anything by doing so. They could let their own software teams pick up features and integrate into their official firmware - without having to put down much own development effort into it. Their hardware could get unofficially support through open source firmwares for a long time after their own official firmware development has stopped (If you look into the world of Linux - Linux just dropped support for old Intel 386 machines last year ;)).   I mean, if you look at a smartphone today - the hardware is just half of it. Without their operating systems they are nothing. If you look at the state of cameras these days - they're basically a portable lightweight computer with a sensor, a few instruments and an interface. The more the cameras evolve, the more it makes sense to open up the firmware - just like with smart phones or as with wifi accesspoints / routers, NAS:es (which almost all run some form of Linux these days).   I'm certain that the day will come when we have open firmware cameras - but I doubt that the ones taking the first step in that direction will be a Japanese company - they seem too protective about their IP and traditional business model.

Cheap/affordable is different for different budgets, so I list a few of the more affordable alternatives here:   At around the budget of the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 there's also a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 that might be worth checking out. These are your cheapest alternatives. They're not up to the performance of Nikon's own Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8, but they're not far behind - at a fraction of the price.   A bit more expensive but excellent: the new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. It has shorter range of focal length, but impressive performance and the best lowlight performance you'll find in a zoom.   Depending on how wide of a lens you need, there is also Sigma 24-70 f/2.8.   I recommend to google for reviews on these lenses as well as checking youtube for reviews. If you run&gun, image stabilisation in lens might help you a lot.   I can also tell you that for Nikon DX cameras the 35mm f/1.8 is a good performer and an excellent lens for its budget, which you might have noticed. However, when compared to other lenses: 1) sharpness isn't bad wide open, but there are sharper lenses. 2) bokeh isn't too bad, but again - better can be had. 3) there's a bit of distortion. What this means, is that the 35mm f/1.8 is a good allround performer, but not without its weaknesses - and that there are other primes that have far better performance. This also means that a well built allround zoom lens can come close to it in performance, and perhaps even beating it. From what I've picked up from the test shots I've seen with the 18-35mm f/1.8 Sigma - I in fact expect that one to beat it.   For an affordable budget of allround zooms for a D5200, I don't think there are any worthy additions to this list - high performance zooms tend to get pricy.

  Andrew of EOSHD has done quite a few tests with D5200. Check the blog: http://www.eoshd.com/content/tag/nikon-d5200

  Wohooo! China remake of Panasonic anamorphic, perhaps with even softer edges this time!

  Just so you know. Expeed is NOT the sensor (which in D5200 was made by Toshiba). It is a processor that processes images and videos. Expeed 4 seems to be the main reason to why D5300 is powerful enough to process 1080p60 while older cameras with Expeed 3 are not capable of that. Expeed processors are manufactured by Fujitsu for Nikon. How they work in detail is not very well known outside Nikon/Fujitsu.   We won't know about the performance and if there's moiré and aliasing until someone does some proper tests. Hopefully it will perform just as good as D5200, but it's too early to tell.

That lens really is impressive. Already f/1.8 for a zoom is impressive, the sharpness and bokeh makes it just the more impressive. Amazing performance at that price level.

  Before rehousing I'd check up that recent thread about vignetting and Iscorama 36, where he has issues using wider lenses (which are fine on a normal Iscorama) due to him not being able to mount lenses as close after his rehousing. Might suit you, but that would certainly be a dealbreaker for me.   Edit: this thread: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/3474-great-taking-lenses-for-fffx-iscorama/

The early unfinished prototype seems good already, and I certainly think Rich is onto something with oval bokeh + vintage lens for this one.   I see a lot of creative choices with this anamorphic: - Want a sharp, more digital look with a lot of contrast? Go for some modern lenses. - Want a look with less contrast? Go with vintage lenses. - Is 1.33 bokeh not enough for the look? Go for a solution like the DSO Trump with its oval aperture. - Also, no need to waste any pixels to achieve 2.35:1 (which ought to be great for dslr/mirrorless which do not always have the best resolution).   An anamorphic with options like these for a price of $799 seems like a great deal to me. Especially in addition with the two achromats that you can order without some major hunting on the Internet.   I really love my Iscorama - but the paranoia when traveling with it is no fun. I'd rather travel with an item that I know I can order a replacement for if stolen or damaged. At $799 for the SLR Magic Anamorphic it's not super cheap to pay up for if you waste it - but it sure beats crying a river if you'd ever trash an Iscorama!   Andrew, how do you align this anamorphic? Does it have some similar rotating mechanism to Iscorama?

  If you consider to get more Nikkors, I can highly recommend the AI-S 85mm f/2 as well, both as-is and paired with an Iscorama.

Yes, I usually find f/2 plenty enough myself!   A few notes:   The Pre-AI/non-AI lenses works as-is with adapters on m4/3 cameras. For Nikon DSLR's you need to modify them, otherwise a piece of protruding metal can destroy the lenst mount on camera.   The AI/AI-S lenses work as-is on any F-mount camera or adapter (no metering on lower-end Nikons, but that really doesn't matter when filming).   I've been considering quite a few of these old Nikkors as well, but so far I've been happy enough with the 16-35mm f/4G VR lens. The 28mm f/2.8 in particular is interesting, since it is one of the sharpest wide-angle Nikkors ever.