Ed_David

I think the F3 feels pretty good - but still I haven't done a side-by-side but I think the BMCPC feels better. The F3 is good but lacks in perceived resolution.

I bought an old Panasonic SDX900, it's the dvx100's big brother. I thought maybe SD had something interesting about it - lacking resolution and dynamic range. I tested it quickly against my Sony F65 going to 8mm or 16mm, and it seems to have its own weird unique feel that's kind of interesting. Anyway let me know what you think - post workflow I can post as well how I kind of "destroyed" the image too.

The interpoliation of frames - how it combines them and yes, sensor readout - but the smoothness of a frame into the next. That to me seperates cameras just as much as other things such as skintones. The C300 has a blockiness and harshness to it, to me that doesn't feel organic. Cameras I feel are organic in motion is the Canon 1dx, digital bolex, and blackmagic micro camera. The FS7 and the Ursa Mini 4.6k also feels blocky and unnatural. There is a science behind it all that I don't understand, I just know what I like unfortuately. Not to discredit these cameras - I have seen amazing things out of them. I just have a particular aethestic.

Great article, Andrew! Yes no one should be able to patent a compressed raw codec. I think that's why Red sued Sony over the f65 compressed raw format. But I think BMCC has compressed raw now - so maybe just the way they compress raw. Anyway, I wish more companies tackle this issue. Can't help but remind me of Silicon Valley and their compression scheme - middle-out.

here's a side by side grade I did of the c300 and f55 (no fs7 was available) I think blue is the warmest color looks good - but the motion cadence of the c300 is choppy - not as smooth as an alexa. I think it's good in the doc world, but not so much for narrative work. FS7 also has that choppy motion cadence feel. But, hey, these are cheaper cameras compared to an alexa or red The first image is the C300 ii, the second is the F55. They don't look that much different.

I am curious to see a shootout between the fs7 and c300 ii. are there any? I'm going to do some tests myself as well.

Agreed with Jimmy Trying to have a discussion on facebook is not as easy as a forum such as this one. The internet has really changed. I don't go on vimeo really that much anymore - it is mostly facebook And if I was younger, snapchat - god I hate facebook. Instagram bores me. I just read news sites. I think you have a great spirit Andrew as others have said to promote creativity over pure tech stuff - also finding value in equipment from the past. But, damn, if its wasting your time, move on man. If the costs are too high, just ask people to donate via paypal if they use the site. And yes, buying and selling gear constantly is hard, and it depreciates in value so quickly. I still think there can be a lot of interesting articles on new lighting and lenses and older stuff as well to achieve results. I'm about to post some 16mm style film I did with a panasonic sdx900 hooked up to a pix 240 - yes the dslr revolution is over - that was an exciting and scary time and people turned to you and Mr Bloomy to see what they could do with the transition. anyway, if its not fun for you anymore, just burn it down. Hit that button like Batman does to blow up his factory and go shoot some film or direct or do other stuff. Don't become a fossilized zombie like dvxuser or reduser. God those forums are pathetic.

I hate the af100 with a passion I sold it about 2 months after buying it. It is sad, cause the DVX100 then the HVX200 were on fire for Panasonic. And then they missed the boat, and at this point, the Canon 5d started to build up steam, and later the fs100 and fs700 and f3 from sony, and then the Canon C300 and that pretty much knocked panasonic out of the indie filmmaker game.

Yea, with raw compressed you can tweak the Whitebalance and tint later and also tweak exposure in post if you mess up. Whenever I have the choice, I always choose raw, especially in mixed lighting conditions and when I'm shooting exteriors.

There is no reason to think now that there is a new "Gear for Sale" subforum will start moving people away from the general discussion. EOSHD runs I feel more like reddit - one super active forum - and not like DVXUser - which makes it more interesting. Also the mods, thank you guys, are more lenient when things get heated here. I don't think EOSHD is going to go anywhere. There's always a new Canon camera to make fun of.

EOSHD has more views per month than dvxuser - and also trying to find and respond to gear for sale in a thread was incredibly difficult. This makes it much more organized. Also it is more searchable now.

it's done - thanks Andrew!

Instead of just a thread, how about a subforum?

thanks man I just use basically cine4 and pro color gamut . And then filmconvert in post -and go from there. Or impulz luts. whatever floats your boat - all in coloring stuff

I agree - Canon colors with the A7S features - why can't they do that? Plus flip screen is nice on a7s and weight being a lot less. Canon color science I love. I need to experiment again with my Nikon cameras as well. Getting the sony chip there is possible, but I feel like the native Canon chip maybe nicer - I don't know - I haven't done any test. here's some photos I did this week on the a7s ii.

CCD technology is definitely quite interesting, but I wish the camera was able to do raw as well. Raw would have let me use more than slog1, to take advantage of its beautiful sensor. This is the beauty of the digital bolex and ikonscope cameras - that combination I find perfect. I think, when history shines back on our industry, (not that it really will) - it will kind of show how the weird looking red one, once it shifted to the MX, did actually change the high-end camera market and made Sony eat humble pie on their 250,000 dollar F35.

I like the red one mx a lot more now. I really finally appreciate a nice high-resolution sensor, thanks to now having the Sony F65. Seeing the difference. I still like the sony f35, but I think I was overdoing it on the kool aid over at dvxuser. If anyone wants to buy my last, f35, let me know. Will get you a really good deal. It works great.

Like that Chinese viagra line a lot

haha - porn drives industries. I think you are right, but maybe if you want to look out the window or maybe there is a tv on or something if you get bored. Again, let's fight for 270 degree porn. Let's make a petition. nevermind - in porn they only use 180 degrees!!! brilliant - uses less data too maybe - now to take what we learn in porn and apply it to filmmaking: http://mashable.com/2016/01/08/naughty-america-vr-porn-experience/#PBkfdT0XCmqf

I think HFR 3d is just more crap because the headsets hurt your eyes. VR is an entirely new artform. I just shot a commercial in VR using the Nokia OZO - I'm a believing in VR technology as long as it doesn't cause eye strain. It feels like the early days of film. I just wish it was only 270 degrees - having to look behind you is awkward. But all this 3d stuff - just seems like the cinema trying to compete. I saw Avatar in 3d and it blew me away, but I also saw a bunch of other films in 3d and was less than impressed. It's the same old argument - it's content that matters and finding directors who can utilize this to an advantage, vs the gimmick of it all.

i think making it just 270 degree view up and down is the answer - then it will take off for cinema. It's so much more interesting of an experience to me than anything I have seen. But people do like completely idiots wearing them. Love that first photo too, Jonesy thanks for this

probably the nicest thing ever made using that name

Anything new on the VR front? I'm shooting a commercial on the Nokia Ozo this week.

Where are all the surprises? The fireworks? The blackmagic cameras that take 2 years to come out, then don't work as well as we thought they would in our minds? The 6k global shutter CCD 5000 ISO camera for $2k? Has NAB gone back to just being another techy dork-fest that introduces a bunch of side-handles or a recorder that can do 4k? It hasn't been this boring since 2007, the year before the Red One was introduced, and later took 5 years to release in a useable form with a new sensor.

Sure you can make fun of people using a lut as a starting point, those same people make fun of me when I light something with a light from the home depot but whatever gets you to the end goal, who cares what they think. And I like instagram filters - for some projects, it works. For others, more naturalistic ones are good. The biggest thing for me is skintones - get this right. Once that's right, then everything else you can play around with. But if skintones are off, the whole thing won't be believable. Also Aaron Chicago and kidzareevil - your delut work is really, really, nice! what lut names are they? I like Baxter a lot. I used that to color a commercial I just shot.