Volker Schmidt

Yes, as Ebrahim said; when shooting raw, internal sharpening is useless. You make it in the post. Back to the question Ty: I´ve had the same question, a few years ago (VAF-5d or newer version) and also don´t found informations or reviews about it. My advice: If you can get a VAF used, regardless of the version - buy it! It´s worth the money! I think, the overall image quality of both versions are the same but if you like to use wider lenses then 24mm here the b-version is the better one. I have the original version and when I shoot 24mm with my Canon 24-70 the corners are less sharp, but no problem for me: looks a bit like anamorphic shooting:). My Minolta 24mm on the other hand is sharp even in the corners. In short: regardless of the version - the VAF is worth the money. it eliminated the 5dmk2 issues very well! if you want to shoot wider then 24mm - the b-version should be your choice. I have a lot of tests on my vimeo site. Here is one for example:

Sorry there was a glitch in the video from vimeo. Here it is. ​ supernice!

It´s all about the story, the talent and the mood which have been created by the makers - not the technique! Well done, Compliment!

I´am not a native english speaker, but I try to formulate my thoughts understandable:) I think the opinions about this topic are diverse as people are. Here on the forum, some people earn their money with shooting commercials, documentaries, feature films... some shooting weddings on a high or lower professionell level... some shooting their own film ideas with low or no budget... and so on... and some just testing their cameras (like me:). momentarily. All that is ok. Even the simply passion for camera gear. But it seems to me, that it´s simply important to know what you want! For upcoming filmmakers - their interest in camera gear could lead to procrastination, but not necessarily, when they are focused in what they want. For example, I had a deep aversion to Video Cameras (before the 5d is coming out). (I start with S-8, become more and more passionate for film over 16mm to 35mm and made my first short with own 35mm Camera and Lomo anamorphic lenses:). That says nothing about the overall quality of the film, but it looks great and of course; much better as when I shot it with Mini DV:) - thanks to my passion for film gear. And then came the 5d. Since then, I´am very clear in my vision: create images exactly to my liking. With a low budget... I´am very thankful to Andrew and his Blog here - for give me an overview what happens on the market! Therefore I discovered the GH2 as a much better camera than the 5d (with H264) and bought it. A big deal! It´s perfectly ok, to search for a tool which fits exactly to my needs. But as I said, it´s just as important to focussing what I want - and do it!:) So, thanks Ed, for the keyword `procrastination`, it is the right one in this context:) And thanks Oliver for the interesting topic... there would be so much more to say about... PS: since 2 years I´am back to the 5dmkII - with ML raw (thanks EOSHD for the informations). A 6 years old camera and I would like to stay with it, for a longer time...:)

here is an interesting article about cine standard size & mount: http://www.fdtimes.com/2015/06/01/new-cine-standard-size-mount/

Yes, E is the best...! And congratulations to nougat, you nailed it ( I have the same results, but have transposed digits).

Scene 1-3: Cameras A + C looks organic, but not really impressive:) B + D looks more electronic (D looks terrible plastic:) C with the best 3d feeling Scene 4: Cameras A + D more organic B + C more electronic, but C is ok (B looks terrible:) A = C (from the first clip) B = D C = B D = A

I prefer to use cheap ones - for every lens an own adapter. If it´s a bit wobbly, it´s easy to make it tight.

All Blackmagics are really, very nice cameras - in this case too! - The NX1 is the big surprise of the last months... - A exceptionally cinematic (4k) Camera out of the box... (in my opinion). I´ am filming with 5d MLraw and the NX1 is the only camera I would like to use in addition... if I would have the money:)

By the way: this is a beautiful website to search for your personal preferences in view of film images: http://film-grab.com A giant archive of filmstills. Almost every day the author uploads new stills, sorted by Cinematographers, directors, years, aspect ratio, country, etc. If I´am uncertain what kind of "look" I like the most - respectively what is the most desired look for my own filmmaking - this is really a helpful site!

​Absolute! But I thought he is filming with a hacked GH2...

I think your test is not so instructive (because of the one-sidedness of your subject), but filming with a anamorphic lens is the best to overcome the video-look of the GH4! Look at the vimeo-clips from Seb Farges - very good examples! By the way, the Bolex-Moller 16/32 1,5 is really one of the best anamorphic lens! Gratulations!

I agree, anamorphic is the unbeatable film look! But I think, regardless of anamorphic recording, the "look of film" is still the benchmark for what many of us love in receiving and making films. In my opinion, the aesthetic quality of film is still unmatched! There is still a difference regarding the aesthetic rendering of the "depth of the filmed space"! (sorry; english is not my native language:). But, just to prevent any misunderstandings: For me as an Low Budget film enthusiast, the "digital revolution" is the best thing that could have happened to me! I filmed with S-8, 16mm and 35mm, but nothing was as good as my present raw process with my magic lantern Canon 5D! To achieve a good result, with film it was and is - a very expensive business! But I like the idea, that Film still exists on a high Budget level, visible to all of us, as a beacon for what we love!:) Regarding the principle "live and let live".

Here is a NX-1 test including 1080 vs 4k, Isotest, rolling shutter, 120fps and autofocus-test (at the end). In my opinion, the NX-1 outruns its competitors (A7s & GH4) with its cinematic rendering of colors and details. pneus-online.c

very, very nice!!! Compliment!

The Canon FD´s doesn´t impress me, but it´s 2-3 years ago, that I filmed wit them on a hacked GH2. The Contax G Zeiss, especially the 45mm and the 28mm were superb lenses on m43. Not as sharp as the Olympus 45, for example, but way more character. Very good rendering of colour, light, etc. and with a very three-dimensional look. For mirrorless full frame, I can recommend Minolta Rokkor lenses. I have sold all my Canon glass for them and convert them for EOS mount. I have some tests on vimeo, - like them a lot. Especially the 35mm MC Rokkor HH 1,8 and the 50mm MC PG 1,4. http://digitalrokkor.altervista.org/minoltalens.html But for what you want, I can recommend russian LOMO OCT-19 Cinema lenses the most. They were designed for Super-35 and have exactly the quality that you describe. But they are very rare and not cheap. A friend of mine sell a set of spheric LOMOs: 10mm f2,8 18mm f1,6 75mm f1,5 28mm f1,2 35mm f2,3 22mm f2,3 35mm f2,3 100mm f3,5 75mm f2,1 150mm f2,8 50mm f2,3 Here are 2 tests from a polish d.o.p They are also famous for their square and round front anamorphic lenses.

again to my eyes, It's underexposure that creates noise, not high ISOs. - this is my experience also! I have just tested two Minolta-lenses (on my 5dmk2-MLraw) with a external sekonic exposure-meter and I was very surprised by the quality of the pro res 422 Export files! No noise and a film-like grain - with 800/1600 ISO! Precise exposure is definitely a guarantee to avoid Noise - more than ISO Settings! Here´s the test, but the H264 - and Vimeocompression, is a bit disappointing:). -

Birdman - behind the scenes clip - found this link on the ARRI website:

very, very nice! They all looks like "real" film stills.

...people sometimes tend to exaggeration, when they make a statement:)

I don´ t want to annoy A7s users, but I really can´t stand the Colors Science of this Camera. It´s a nice build camera, with a lot of innovations and impressive resolution. But I have so far not found a single good-looking video (color-wise) on the Internet! Color-wise for me, the worst-looking camera "ever". For sure, that is a matter of taste. If you like the images, and 8bit, 4:2:0 is enough for your work, all is well and the A7s is a good choice! :) Resolutionwise, the camera is a stunner!

@andy lee: "I think the actual focal length of each lens used plays a very large part in the image , do I use the 27mm here or the 40mm or the 75mm and how and where you use it relative to the story" .some DPs like Cooke some Leica and some Arri Master primes they all have their little points people like , I dont think the audience really sees or cares which is used at this level of hi end lens .......they just want a good movie!" For sure: the audience just want a good movie! - that is indisputable. But we discuss here about the subtle differences of lenses... and: whether they are exist and relevant? Here we have two lenses with the same focal length: 21mm. (sorry for my low english - english is not my native language:)

jax_rox: "It's all a personal thing, though - there's no right or wrong look, and no right or wrong lens choice." So it is!

Shane Hurlbuts Test shows a a phenomenon that has always interested me: - Some movies cinematography really gives you the feeling, that you can go into the "room" - others not! And for me, the difference in Hurlbuts Test is obviously (even if you only look at the vimeo-still from QuickHitRecords Post). When you switch back and forth between the two frames it seems: - that in the Leica Frame - the whole information from the depth of the scene is squeezed to one plane. - in the Cooke Frame, you really feel the room from foreground to background... The "battle" between leica and cooke here, is not the important thing for me (possibly some other Leicas are looks better in this context than other cookes...). For me it´s important that there really could be a difference, as I´ve always felt! My experience is, that anamorphic lenses gives you the most three-dimensional image. But I sold mine (Iscorama, etc.) because they are too heavy to handle (follow focus, minimal focus, etc.).

Look here fore an interesting camera shootout!: - with high-end cameras like the Alexa, Red Dragon, Epic, Sony F55, Canon C500, Blackmagic Production Camera 4K, Sony FS 700 4k, - and also lower priced rated cams, like the 5dmk3raw, GH4 4k and Blackmagic pocket camera... Guess the camera...:)