dwijip

All camera reviewers/bloggers are no longer impartial, not even eoshd. It has been that way for a while now. It's become a whole marketing/advertising system in itself. Even when bloggers/reviewers aren't bending under capitalism they will still have some kind of personal views on different cameras and brands based very much on their own experience alone. It's become meaningless to call out on bias, exaggeration or disagreeable information. I've taught myself to take any information on gear with a grain of salt. I've experienced burns on hasty purchases based on early reviews that said all the things I wanted to believe was true.

Thanks Michael! Yeah I think there are some benefits to it even in 8bit internal recording. I found overexposing by quite a lot to be key. I found myself increasing the brightness in post even when the original footage was overexposed. So in a way, this doesn't quite increase lowlight performance at all, but rather increases dynamic range in contrasty situations.

Tried this test with a harsh backlight, mainly iso1000, 1250. See any noise people? I can't assess the image properly at the moment, my eyes are going funny with all the pixel peeping today

I heard this music somewhere

Log profiles generally retain way more noise in shadows than other gammas. If you prefer other profiles that's totally fine. It's all up to your workflow and personal preference anyway. In terms of this being not the actual version of the V log gamma, I hardly think that will be the case because its from their official firmware and Panasonic has already admitted that this was a mess up on their part

false alarm, that's the 4K version apparently. Same sensor as the original ursa. Although curious to see how the ursa mini camera is in general, aside from the image quality from the sensor.

Stuff Vlog, I need HDMI out for Anamorphic mode

The title says BMPCC PRORES HQ? wtf

Nice work! Although there were bits I didn't quite understand, I enjoyed the tension and dialogue. Production wise really good, images went well with the story.

Been doing these little film exercises with an actress and a composer. Collaboration to practice camera work, acting, sound design, anamorphic workflow etc. Great way to build relationships with new people with similar interests who can mutually benefit from eachother. Doesn't cost any money and not too time consuming either. Thinking of using these exercises as a tool to build teams, ideas and work ethics before diving into bigger, more costly projects like shortfilms.

Looks amazing! Which contaxes did you use in the video?

As Nahua says above, all three options are viable if you know how to use it. To my knowledge from reading some past forum posts, Mr.Reid had some beef with the guys who made FM and didn't want to post anything on it. I have some issues with the guy who makes Rectilux and I know I would never buy it no matter how good the product is(Goes against my ethics, not like he would care though). They are just different price, form factor etc. They all use the same principle of variable diopters. One thing to keep in mind though FM is made by a very small company, Rectilux is essentially one guy trying to do everything and Rangefinder is a bigger company than the other two.

First time actually utilising the Anamorphic option on the GH4 as there is no HDMI out in this mode. This was a just a little sketch I did in my room, by myself using the ImgApp. It is really great that the anamorphic mode can produce a 4:3 ratio image but it comes with some catchlines like no 1080p, no HFR, no HDMI out etc. For me it kind of gets pointless trying to use a tiny LCD screen for monitoring when you've got your camera heavily rigged up for shooting with other gear. So I guess I will stick with just 16:9 and cropping and hope for a firmware update. Speaking of firmware updates, jesus christ are they going to ferment V log before they release it.

In my experience FM works well with most lenses and doesn't work well with some. I couldn't get a sharp image using some really fast lenses wide open in some instances, but in most cases, especially when using a slower lens or using lenses stopped down, or using vintage primes with simple element designs produced very sharp images and it didn't add or subtract from the image that you would get from the anamorphic attachment alone. I guess in that respect the performance is pretty much the same with the Rectilux, although not speaking with any scientific comparative knowledge. However both the Rectilux and Focus Module has significant lens breathing and both are quite cumbersome in size as well. It really depends on your style of shooting but FM was a bit too big and heavy for the type of work I mostly do thesedays. Which is why I really like the idea of the Rangefinder.

Haha I'm always arguing with that guy on a FB group. He's almost too naive to be a businessman to be honest. A more cunning, calculating person wouldn't even expose his thoughts that much online. BTW I just saw the price on the Rangefinder page. Says £549.00, thought it was a mistake and went into the european version and it says €769.00 there. Did they increase the price since the initial release? If this is the updated price, this really puts me off. Probably won't sell my other stuff to buy this if so. http://www.slrmagic.co.uk/slr-magic-rangefinder-cine-adapter.html

Hi Julian, thanks for the feedback. I agree with you 100% but the thing is this was a favor for a friend so naturally I had to include all the shots of his daughter's team to full extent haha. Thats why those odd long shots are there. I would say he's some sort of a client even though he's not paying me or anything. I also agree about the engine sounds but I just couldn't get a consistent track together because half the time I was too far away from the riders to capture any decent volume sound and the slomo mode doesn't capture any sound on the GH4. If I had enough time to edit I would've sort of faked it with sounds from other shots but had to edit in a day. Anyways really appreciate the comment and your honest opinion. It's really something I value as most people don't care enough to be honest about my work. Thank you.

Been shooting out in the forest last sunday with the Contax Zeiss 35-70 f3.4 and 80-200 f4. The 100-300 which is supposed to be better has yet to arrive. I find that 80-200 is much better without a teleconverter attached to it, much more crisp images. Graded using filmconvert and loving it. I think the contax glass lineup compliments what filmconvert tries to do. On a sidenote, I got lost during filming couple of times in the bush. I think I got disoriented while trying to avoid the race tracks. There was no signal and phone battery was on 5%. I hated myself for walking into the forest so unprepared. Almost went to the point of panic until I eventually found my way back. Never knew I would need orienteering skills for filming. Thank god I took minimal gear that day. Below is the video.

I do a lot of sports and surf videos and this is a recent one I did in the westcoast of Auckland. GH4 really help you in this fast paced run and gun situation where you need to change things fast and adapt to the environment. The small sensor size is actually a positive factor in sports as well because of the crop factor and deeper focus plane. Landscape shots were shot in 4K then scaled. Vintage Contax, Pentax lenses were used.

If this really works as advertised, and has a reasonable optical quality, FM will be dud. Not to mention rectilux out of business before even starting out. At least FM guys made it into the market early.

Anyone have a contax 100-300mm f4.5-5.6 they might want to sell? Any help on this would be very much appreciated

Well, with how things are looking now, it will be another year until Canon realizes the sales drops and find that the dslr video market has moved. That, or they don't even want to acknowledge such a market as their target consumers.

Wow so much drama people, chillout. Everyone has different views, getting angry at each other won't help anyone. Well I had much scepticism with the FM before I bought it because it was only a prototype product and the company wasn't being exactly clear on how to use it etc. However, the important thing is, it is of some use for budget end filmmakers like me who can't afford single focusing anamorphics. I find it definitely helps me quickly get shots when I'm out shooting because of the single focus. It's still got a lot of quirks but to the right people it is valuable. Anyway back on track, did a little test, getting shots have become much quicker since I can single focus with the FM now. This is a relevantly cheap setup as I got the takumar for about $70(US), Isco Ultra star for about $400, FM was about $750. Pentax Super Takumar 50mm 1.4, Isco Ultra Star Anamorphic Lens, Focus Module Lens, Panasonic GH4, Natural Picture Profile with all settings dialed down, Simple color grade in Premiere, BGM : Bic Runga 'Listening for the Weather'

I was always interested in how different taking lenses with work with anamorphic lenses and how much character would come through even behind the anamorphic optics. I figured I will do a little test of the cheaper manual lenses I currently own. The test was for image quality and flaring. All lenses used with Isco ultra star anamorphic lens with Focus Module. All shot on the GH4 using the 4K photo mode. Some shots may not have critical focus as it was a single man job. Graded shots at the end. All graded shots share the same setting and not ideal but just to give a basic idea. Would appreciate any comment on which image you prefer. Lens list #01 Pentax Super Takumar 28mm F3.5 #02 Pentax Super Takumar 50mm F1.4 #03 Pentax Super Takumar 50mm F1.4 with cheap focal reducer #04 Contax Zeiss 50mm F1.7 AEJ #05 Contax Zeiss 35mm F2.8 MMJ #06 Mamiya Sekor C 80mm F1.9 Medium format

Here's a few more options for the vintage manual lenses. This is a test I did with some vintage glass with GH4. Out of the 6, which image do you guys like? (I know you won't like the model lol, sorry I couldn't get another one)