Julian

Right now, the GH4 shooting 4K (even if delivering 1080p- downsampled in post it's the sharpest/most-detailed currently available in that price range).

But what is the point of posting all this pro GH4 posts in the A7S topic?
 
Yes, I bought the GH4 myself because for me it's the best value. But maybe other people value the low light capabilities and the full frame sensor of the A7S more. Who are you to judge against them?
 
This is not an A7S vs GH4 topic. It's a topic to show/discuss footage from the A7S. What are you even doing in this topic except for fanboying about the GH4? Why don't you just respect that fact that other people have other priorities and maybe budget isn't a problem for them (and we still don't know the price anyway so discussing about that is pointless).
 
Just cut the GH4 crap. Again, I bought one myself, I think it's perfect. It just doesn't belong in the A7S footage topic.

I think you can start with a smaller budget for your lenses. For filmmaking you don't have to buy brand new high end glass. Old glass is fun! dirt cheap and it has character. If you want to spend the money anyway, you can easily allocate it to your camera.
 
The setup I mentioned will cost like €1500 (GH4) + €720 (18-35mm) + €100 (Speed Booster Clone). You still have money left to buy some vintage glass / adapters.
 
Anyway, if you are serious about your film making, what do you have in mind for audio? You'd probably need a budget for that too.
 
On another note, if you don't want to spend much on the camera, score a Panasonic G6 for CHEAP! (like €400). Image quality is on par with the GH3 and it has focus peaking, the GH3 doesn't. Yes - it is a plastic/cheap camera, but great for the money. Perfect to start with.
 
Actually I think it makes more sense to start with something like that. Of course, if you have the money burning in your pocket, support the economy, that's all fine with me :) But I see you are 19, can't imagine €2500 is peanuts for you.
 
The G6 will be a great tool to start with, image quality won't hold you back in any way (if you think it does, look at the frontpage at the videos of Kendy, shot on a cheap 550D)... Buy some old primes + Speed Booster Clone and you are all set and done for under €1000.

I don't think there are differences between the lenses you mention. Just not all sites mention the full name.
There aren't multiple versions of the 85mm and 35mm T1.5 lenses as far as I know (there is a new 35mm Canon AE f/1.4 though, probably there'll be a Samyang AE 35mm T1.5 soon - this has electronic aperture control on Canon-bodies).
 
http://samyang.co.uk/index.php/vdslr-lenses-cine

Obviously, he sold his soul to Satan to get such amazing work out of such limited resources!   :D
 
From reading more, it appears he's not even using the Magic Lantern hack except to help him handle audio, is this correct?  Wow.

Kendy Ty has 666 Likes, 66 Channels, 66 Groups, and 666 Following.  
 
W. T. F.

Wow Tito, you really are a mine of information, this is better than going to college. :)

Yep, fast-moving shots with a fisheye or ultrawide, mostly. Usually following/next to the skater, or getting right next to an obstacle and doing a fast pan/tilt motion, following the skater as they perform the trick.

Even if the Speed Booster had  big enough an image circle to cover a full frame sensor, what would be the point of having one? Using Mamiya or Pentax 67/645 lenses with a GH4 or A7s wouldn't serve any practical purpose, IMO. Using a focal reducer made for crop sensors sounds like an awkward way of getting a vignette, too.
 
One of the main benefits of getting a camera like the A7s instead of a one like the GH4 or the BMPCC is the fact that you won't need a focal reducer between the body and the lenses made for full frame. If the S35 cine lenses work in APS-C mode, that'll be an added bonus.
I wish someone came up wit a high quality anamorphic focal squeezer of some sort. That would be cool, especially with the mFT bodies, wouldn't it.

The Lens Turbo (.72x Speedbooster clone (.71x)) works with vignetting: 

same day rough edit!
 
password: ana
 
it was shot with a 135mm pentacon as a taking lens that was harder to focus than the anamorphic, and had some jag, so we kept losing the vertical allignment. I need to find a better taking lens..but over 100mm to keep it from vignnetting in the full frame, suggestions welcome!

Nothing wrong with this list so far, but why present it like this?
 
 
Of course I'd love 1080p96 with supersharp images. But it is understandable that Panasonic has to do some tricks to get so many frames of the sensor. Even though not as sharp as normal 1080p, I think it's perfectly usable.
 
Especially with shallow dof shots it looks lovely imo:

 
With deep dof and lots of detail, the resolution doesn't look as good indeed:

 
Is this a 'problem' of the GH4? Don't think so. I still think the 96 fps is a huge PLUS for the GH4. Which other camera has this possibility??
 
Regarding AF: I haven't seen any proper tests in video mode. Have seen an example where the GH3 gets it focus faster in AF-S mode, but is that a big deal? In AF-S you are shooting something static anyway, it's just to get the focus point right for the beginning of your shot. How about continious AF compared? GH4 should be better with the new focus system indeed, although I'm not sure if that works for video.
 
Anyway, I don't have a problem with a list of points that are worth mention, but don't present it like things that are wrong with the camera.
 
Also Panasonic is pretty open about things like the extra crop. You can see it as a downside, but also as a upside, because it gives you 1:1 pixel readout so no ugly artefacts from scaling.
 
Do you have a GH4? Or are you looking for reasons not to buy one? :)

Please not this topic is from a year and a half ago..
 
So how did it go Nicogw? Would love to see the result :)

Yep. If you are shooting ML raw, I'd go for 4:3. That'd give you a resolution of ~1706x1280.
Stretch 2x and you'll get a resolution 3413x1280, aspect ratio 2,66:1

Nothing wrong with this list so far, but why present it like this?
 
 
Of course I'd love 1080p96 with supersharp images. But it is understandable that Panasonic has to do some tricks to get so many frames of the sensor. Even though not as sharp as normal 1080p, I think it's perfectly usable.
 
Especially with shallow dof shots it looks lovely imo:

 
With deep dof and lots of detail, the resolution doesn't look as good indeed:

 
Is this a 'problem' of the GH4? Don't think so. I still think the 96 fps is a huge PLUS for the GH4. Which other camera has this possibility??
 
Regarding AF: I haven't seen any proper tests in video mode. Have seen an example where the GH3 gets it focus faster in AF-S mode, but is that a big deal? In AF-S you are shooting something static anyway, it's just to get the focus point right for the beginning of your shot. How about continious AF compared? GH4 should be better with the new focus system indeed, although I'm not sure if that works for video.
 
Anyway, I don't have a problem with a list of points that are worth mention, but don't present it like things that are wrong with the camera.
 
Also Panasonic is pretty open about things like the extra crop. You can see it as a downside, but also as a upside, because it gives you 1:1 pixel readout so no ugly artefacts from scaling.
 
Do you have a GH4? Or are you looking for reasons not to buy one? :)

GH4 shoots also 'just' H.264. With a higher bitrate than Sony though.
 
I can understand you point regarding the Speed Booster. But it might be a nice excuse to try out some (cheap) vintage glass for the GH4 ;) No need to re-shuffle your whole collection yet.

I'd wait for proper raw support before making any conclusions.
 
Did you try with GH3/GX7 files? I'm curious if it shows the same. Might be a software problem.
 
Maybe send Iridient an email, they might have a clue why this shows up.

Ok, bought a Pancolar 50/1.8 and Yashica ML 35- 70mm and waiting now for the friggin adapters to come from timbuktoo in a couple of weeks. Better be good Andy or I'll come looking for ya!! :angry:

Nothing wrong with this list so far, but why present it like this?
 
 
Of course I'd love 1080p96 with supersharp images. But it is understandable that Panasonic has to do some tricks to get so many frames of the sensor. Even though not as sharp as normal 1080p, I think it's perfectly usable.
 
Especially with shallow dof shots it looks lovely imo:

 
With deep dof and lots of detail, the resolution doesn't look as good indeed:

 
Is this a 'problem' of the GH4? Don't think so. I still think the 96 fps is a huge PLUS for the GH4. Which other camera has this possibility??
 
Regarding AF: I haven't seen any proper tests in video mode. Have seen an example where the GH3 gets it focus faster in AF-S mode, but is that a big deal? In AF-S you are shooting something static anyway, it's just to get the focus point right for the beginning of your shot. How about continious AF compared? GH4 should be better with the new focus system indeed, although I'm not sure if that works for video.
 
Anyway, I don't have a problem with a list of points that are worth mention, but don't present it like things that are wrong with the camera.
 
Also Panasonic is pretty open about things like the extra crop. You can see it as a downside, but also as a upside, because it gives you 1:1 pixel readout so no ugly artefacts from scaling.
 
Do you have a GH4? Or are you looking for reasons not to buy one? :)

Curious! Just downloaded the same file. In Iridient, all the black spots are still there.

Hmm. Maybe it's an Iridient thing, as I've been thoroughly mocked elsewhere for not assuming from the get-go.

Thanks for your help, Julian!

Also, as a quick aside - any harm in running pixel refresh more than once? I've done it a couple times and while I can't see any harm in it (or imagine there being any), the thought just crossed my mind that maybe it shouldn't have been done.

Nothing wrong with this list so far, but why present it like this?
 
 
Of course I'd love 1080p96 with supersharp images. But it is understandable that Panasonic has to do some tricks to get so many frames of the sensor. Even though not as sharp as normal 1080p, I think it's perfectly usable.
 
Especially with shallow dof shots it looks lovely imo:

 
With deep dof and lots of detail, the resolution doesn't look as good indeed:

 
Is this a 'problem' of the GH4? Don't think so. I still think the 96 fps is a huge PLUS for the GH4. Which other camera has this possibility??
 
Regarding AF: I haven't seen any proper tests in video mode. Have seen an example where the GH3 gets it focus faster in AF-S mode, but is that a big deal? In AF-S you are shooting something static anyway, it's just to get the focus point right for the beginning of your shot. How about continious AF compared? GH4 should be better with the new focus system indeed, although I'm not sure if that works for video.
 
Anyway, I don't have a problem with a list of points that are worth mention, but don't present it like things that are wrong with the camera.
 
Also Panasonic is pretty open about things like the extra crop. You can see it as a downside, but also as a upside, because it gives you 1:1 pixel readout so no ugly artefacts from scaling.
 
Do you have a GH4? Or are you looking for reasons not to buy one? :)

im not surprised by this result at all. it would have been my first guess that 100mbps ipb is better than 200mbps all i on the GH4 and any other camera to begin with. especially in a comparison like the one you made. let me explain:
 
most of you know what i, p and b frames are and how they work, so i wont get into it. for the 200mbps option to be better in image quality than the 100mbps one, all B and P frames from the lower setting need to be larger (in file size) than half the size of an i frame. lets talk numbers: an i frame in the 200mbps is pretty much exactly 1MB in file size, that means the b and p frames from the 100mbps setting need to be between 500kB and 1MB, so the 200mbps option is superior in picture quality. but thats just rarely the case. b and p frames are usually smaller than half the size of an i frame.
 
in an example like yours with a locked camera the b and p frames will probably around 10 to 20% the size of an i frame, because you have very little change from one frame to the other. if the camera uses 100% of its available bandwidth, which my theory is based upon, the 100mbps will bring you much better quality, because the i frames in the 100mbps setting are "allowed" to be larger than in the 200mbps option.
 
the only advantage of shooting only i frames is that your computer has to work and calculate less. meaning it works better and its response is faster. if however youre on a very fast machine anyway, theres not a legitimate reason to use 200mbps all i.

Sony don't think that way:(  They will impart the same old consumer way of thinking to this -leaving the good stuff out and save 10bit for the next model, or the next model, or the next model..  Wish they'd just slow down and release products that last 2-3 years instead of releasing a new model every year with only marginal improvements.
 
here is how the A7S should be released and aimed at the pro market:-
 
Marketed as a specialist low light camera as well as a 'c cam' / 'stills + movie' camera for those using F65, F55 and F5
X-AVC 10 Bit 1080p up to 50p internal
X-AVCs 4k internal
body shape bigger and bulkier (as the A7 + battery grip) to fit proper connectors, better processing and space for one of their bigger batteries
architecture to accommodate updated firmware over a 3 year period
£3500 price tag
 
Instead they're releasing a camera perfect for consumers which will be ooo'd and ahh'd over by the dumb sony alpha rumours readers for the first month then forgotten by them and the support team in 8 months time.

Yep. If you are shooting ML raw, I'd go for 4:3. That'd give you a resolution of ~1706x1280.
Stretch 2x and you'll get a resolution 3413x1280, aspect ratio 2,66:1

Yes very helpful friendly members there, frequented the site for many years.
 
Here's a SMC Tak breakdown, scroll down below the Canon FD bit:
 
http://k10dpentax.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Repair
 
And a short list ;-) of links to repair breakdowns and such:
 
http://www.4photos.de/camera-diy/index-en.html
 
Have you also tried pentaxforums?
 
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/54-pentax-lens-articles/179912-pentax-k-28mm-f3-5-disassembly-cleaning.html
 
Biggest contention I've found over the years has been what sort of lubrication to use for smooth focus and I settled on this, which has worked well:
 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/HELIMAX-XP-Camera-Telescope-Optical-Instrument-Focusing-Helicoid-Grease-w-PTFE-/271052175856?clk_rvr_id=631740458361&afsrc=1