mercer

I have a set of Cosmicar TV lenses at f/1.9, a couple Kern Paillard, a couple Fujinon TV lenses, a Meopta Openar 20mm and I have two Angenieux but the ones I have won't cover the G85 sensor. C-mounts are tricky for coverage. With the GX85 and G85 and GH4 opens up a little more usability due to the extra 4K crop, but to be safe you will want to keep your c-mounts at 25mm focal length or more so they won't vignette. Canon makes an old TV-16 25mm f1.4 originally used for their Scoopic 16mm cameras. 1" Television or TV c-mount lenses will usually just cover the sensor with a 12.5mm lens, but every c-mount is different. I did extensive research and trial and error to know what will work or not. The other issue with TV lenses is that a lot of them will not fit into a c-mount to micro 4/3reds adapter so some will need a little modification. Others won't have that issue. If you stick with lenses made for S16mm or 16mm cameras at 25mm or above they usually will fit in the adapter. There's also a cheap made in China lens called the Fujian that sells brand new for 20 or 30 bucks with a c-mount adapter that is a pretty cool little lens. But it's an effect lens at best. If you want quality look for either Zeiss Jena Tevidon lenses (Matthias has a great review of them) Fujinon, Kern or one of those canon. Vintage lenses for video has a review of the 13mm Canon on a BMPCC... I don't think that lens will cover the G85 but it will give you an idea of IQ of the 25mm.

I know there's plenty of GX85 footage floating around, but here are a couple videos I shot handheld a while back... This was shot with a Minolta 28mm and a Cosmicar 25mm TV lens. I colored it with FilmConvert but it ended up a little more saturated than I had planned... And here is another one I shot using the Monochrome L setting. I used a Rokinon 12mm cine lens.

@markr041 OT question... do you have the ZS100? And if so can you tell me anything about it's quality. Does the hybrid 5-axis work in 4K? How is the CineLikeD? I have been searching for a small p&s for a while now and other than the slow lens, the ZS100 seems to tick most of the boxes.

Wait a minute, stop the presses... Canon 1080p is considered soft now...

Then again everyone and their mother are going to sell off their 1DCs and C100s and BMPCCs to buy the new GH5, so your work may be more differentiated by keeping the 1DC.

I thought there was a test performed somewhere that showed no benefit using a Ninja Star over the internal codec?

Are you creating user names so you can answer your own questions? I was gonna say it was a canon in B&W to prove a point that without the color you get a soft image? But since you're a Panasonic man, I would say it's a GM1?

I see your point and respect it. I enjoy testing cameras and attempting to find one that fits perfectly with my style and plans. So far, I have not found the perfect match. But I really hope people do not listen to a word I say about anything, even if I knew everything... which I obviously don't. Look at specs, look at samples and then if they are still unsure, rent one or purchase from somewhere that has a good return policy. All I can say about the XC10 is that I really enjoyed the camera and had to push it to a high ISO to see the ghosting. Or it's very possible you guys have better eyes and standards than I do. For what it is, a native ISO point and shoot cinema camera, I think a lot of filmmakers could do worse.

Yeah... that Helium footage looks pretty stellar to me. The reflection of the flashlight of the mirror illuminates her face pretty nicely and then when she shuts the compact and the little poof of dust hits the flashlight beam... really nice. With that being said, the G85 may not be Helium level, but I have been very impressed with what you guys have been getting out of her. Really nice work all around.

Haha, now you're just being argumentative. Plenty of people, yourself included, got amazing results with the XC10. @Lintelfilm and @BenEricson were both getting consistently great results with the XC10. I think both sides of the coin are valid arguments and Canon should have to answer for the pitfalls and the unreasonable high cost of the camera, but we also got a lot of goodness in that camera as well. If I was a wealthier man, or if the camera was priced at a grand, I would still own mine or buy another.

I will probably give pro color a try, your samples look great. But conversely, isn't the point of Pro Color to give Sony a more Canon-like palette? Idk, I find Sony colors to be kinda interesting, they almost have a 16mm film-like color to them. But in the absence of a capable Canon camera at that price point, I guess a Canon-esque color palette makes sense and well worth the price of admission.

My a6500 arrives today. I had the 6300 back in December and I convinced myself not to like it, so I returned it, but after reevaluating the footage, the image is undeniable. In the long run I am glad I returned it, because it now forced me upgrade to the 6500 with it's touchscreen af and ibis. Now I just need to work out the kinks with the color profile settings. After my brief time with the 6300, I preferred cine2 with cinema color and the usual tweaks, but I still have some more testing to do... and pointers? I assume tweaking the yellow and magenta will help with skin color?

The color looks great. Slog?

Thanks for the link! A lot of good interviews on that podcast.

Yup, I replaced my non-ai/ai lenses with their newer ai-s versions for the shorter focus throws. I know a lot of people prefer the longer throw but I find the ai-s work better handheld especially with peaking. I did the same thing with my Minolta MCs and picked up their MD counterparts.

Looks so cool, man! Do you edit with Premiere and color with the Lumetri Panel?

Why rent when you can just buy one... I finally saw The Revenant and then watched The Witch, both shot with the Alexa and available light and both look so freaking amazing. I think The Witch used Cookes but I'm not a hundred percent sure on that. I know how you feel, if I were a better operator like some of you guys are, I would be drooling over that pro equipment. My new obsession is the 1080p/4K Raw from the FS5... hell even the in camera 4:22 1080p looks great... I'll never afford to be able to shoot with it, but damn is that a nice image. However it did tempt me into buying an a6500... The AF and IBIS on a Super 35mm sensor was just too damn appealing... I couldn't resist. However, I can't even imagine what it would be like to shoot with an Alexa... way too much camera for me. Good luck with it!!!

FS5 with Raw upgrade?

My first proper show was Bob Dylan at the Tower Theatre in Philadelphia... amazing show. Best show... tie between Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band and Tom Petty.

In the end, the a6300 was the better choice. The a6300 is just a vastly better image than the G7. The G7 is good, really good, but if you don't mind the pitfalls of the a6300, then you will get a better image out of her... no question.

Love your work, man. Just a ton of fun and everything is always so well done. I actually tested out an a6300 due to one of your previous videos. I loved it but I was looking for a specific type of cam for a current project I'm working on. I've gone full circle and am picking up an a6500 this week. Back to your video... It looks great, a nice clean image and the af is great. Side by side with the a6300 bts footage, I'm unsure the 5d4 is any better? Both lack that magic quality of the 5d3 raw, but both would do for almost any indie film. I have finally settled on a similar path... the a6500 for 4K, IBIS and PDAF and a BMPCC for that prores or raw goodness. Thanks for posting this, it was a blast to watch!!!

Congrats on finishing your artwork, and good luck with the pitches. I am currently doing the same with a half dozen scripts I rough drafted over the past five years. I bought a 50D a few months back for a couple hundred bucks and the image still astounds me. I took the easy route and process the footage through ML Raw Viewer directly to prores but even with a little less latitude in post, and no sound, it mops the floor with any image in that price category. I hope to get a mark iii at the end of this year or in 2018 when the used prices drop a touch more... beautiful image. Please report back when you have some footage to share. Even a shot similar to that one you posted from the RX a while back... I think it was your dog's head out the car window? Good stuff.

Idk, cameras aren't supposed to look good at 3200 ISO, that's why they make lights. I was getting clean results up to 1600 ISO, which was a first for me with any camera I have owned, but I still never used it... I'd light for native ISO in c-log... but everyone's different with different needs. And I don't know what kind of camera budget you have but I can't afford a camera that loses about 40% of its value less than two months after I bought it.

I have the stand alone and I think the best route is to export an XML from FCPX, import it into FilmConvert, grade, then export the XML and reopen in FCPX. I haven't done it yet, so research the best method. I believe you want to make sure the exported XML from FilmConvert is the same file name as the one FCPX exported, that way when FCPX reopens it, it will recognize the file and conform the changes... but again I have not attempted this yet, so research it to make sure.

I disagree, the XC10 has some issues but it also has some tremendous strengths. I did sell mine, but it had nothing to do with its IQ, it had to do with my lack of time in using it and the amount the camera was losing its value on the second hand market. There were some ghosting issues but I only ever saw it when I stess tested it for this site. In everyday scenarios I never had the issue. If it goes below a thousand dollars, I may buy another.