mercer

I thinks it's under the gear setting, under display or LCD... but I'm going completely from memory.

Btw, @Dustin what types of filmmaking do you do? Narrative, Documentary, Commercial/Industrial, Real Estate, Travel, Event? The reason I ask is because all of my decisions are based upon low budget... no budget narrative filmmaking and then my own personal situation and skill set (which isn't a lot) so like everybody's advice to you or others... YMMV.

I think it depends on what your needs are. I take everything from a writing standpoint and how I envision the project. If you're writing an action film, you may just need the 120fps. I'm a cabinet maker by trade and like carpentry you need the right tool for the right job. A lot of people can make due with what they have, but the proper tool makes the job easier. This is why I have resigned myself to having 2 or 3 cheaper cameras with a couple lenses for each one... different tools for different jobs. But do I really need 2 or 3 cheaper cameras... of course not... it's just the projects I am planning require different features that not every camera in this price bracket has. So need and want is subjective.

Yeah, that's an awesome price for that camera and it's a very capable tool. The Panny AF100 can be found pretty cheap now too... I almost bought one for $600 last month, but for only a little more you can get the a6300 and have slog2 and 3 and a temperamental 4K. Or a G85 with 4K and IBIS. I am actually pretty content with good 1080p, but 4K is a nice option to have, even if I rarely use it.

To add, spend a few minutes on Amazon Prime under the horror category... the production value of some of these movies look like they were shot on a Flip cam and the stories are even worse... you will be hard pressed to find a story that doesn't involve "a paranormal investigation team" or "after the loss of their child... they moved to an old country farmhouse." Sometimes the two are combined. So my point being is that sometimes you don't need good production value, image quality or a good story, you just need the balls to go out and make something. It reminds me of the line from Ed Wood... when speaking to a producer about his latest film, the producer told Ed that his movie was horrible, maybe the worst he ever saw, Ed Wood went on to proudly say... "The next one's even better."

Yup, for the money, the G7 cannot be beat. Well, I actually like the image from my D5500 moreso than from the G7, but that's irrelevant to this discussion, the point is that when using this level of equipment you're never going to get the best of everything. The $400-$1000 camera market is a confusing beast. I've been searching for the best camera, for me, in that price range, and everything is a compromise. I've settled on the idea that I want a couple cameras for different jobs, because none of them will do everything you need or want. But in the end, story is king as they say.

Sometimes, when you shoot wide and you want to nail exposure on your subject, you decide to let the sky, or something else, run a little hot.

Maybe a company will kickstart a 480p raw camera.

Nice work!

It doesn't even have a meter?

Btw, I originally had the camera set to record 24p 4K, but while navigating the menus for about 5 minutes, without once pressing record, the overheat symbol popped on... lol... even the heat sinks could not handle the convoluted Sony menus.

My first attempt with slog2 and 120p... It's a little long and boring...

Well, it's an aps-c sensor, so your 10 and 15mm will be like looking through a peephole, even with the 1.75x crop. You may get away with a 1" C-Mount 25mm if the flange distance even works for the XT-2 and c-mounts? Edit: after looking at some c-mount adapters for the X line of cameras, it does seem that c-mount lenses will focus to infinity with the X-T2. But you will still have sensor coverage issues. With the EOS-M, which has a 1.6x crop, a 25mm wouldn't cover enough for a 2:35 crop, but it was close. So, the Kern 26mm may work.

@Cinegain "...it's not poopy." Haha! You say some funny poop sometimes.

With an adapter with corrective glass you can reach infinity focus with an MD lens on a Canon EF DSLR... the problem is the glass the cheap adapter manufacturers use is so piss poor that you take an iq loss. I assume if Metabones were to use high quality glass, like they do in their speedboosters, they could make a glass adapter that is of good quality.

Metabones should make an MD to EF adapter with glass.

Yes, so I won't, but I am still curious. ?

I've also read you can stack MD lenses to an ef speedbooster and get infinity focus if you buy one of those slim md to ef adapters. Apparently on ef camera you can only use them for macro photography but when used in conjunction with an ef speed booster, you can get infinity... don't know if it's true though.

Actually, it looks better than I thought, and I am kinda surprised it held up so well at ISO 6400... but I looked at that video on my phone... so... Either way, it's soft canon video with nice canon colors... it isn't worth a thousand dollars. Next year when I can get one for less than $500, I may give it a try.

Yeah, honestly if I didn't get a metabones BMPCC Nikon speedbooster so cheap recently, I would have gone with the Lens Turbo ii.

I just won one pretty cheap and was wondering the same thing. It should be here tomorrow, but I'm a little afraid to test it. I believe it worked with the GH4, but with the floating sensor, the entire sensor carriage may be pushed out a little further...

What Cinegain said... but I will add that you could get a leitax mount to change your Contax Zeiss lenses to Nikon F Mount lenses and then they would natively mount to your Nikon speedbooster, but it would probably be easier and more cost effective to go the Mitakon Lens Turbo route as Cinegain suggested... then you will have two speedboosters that will serve all of your lenses well. At vintage lenses for video, the guy did a comparison between metabones and the lens turbo and saw zero difference in visual quality.

I really liked this. The footage looks good and I like the simplistic title which shows the protagonists main character strength... probably the same thing that will save her in the end. I understand you were in charge of visuals and not the edit, but obviously the piece can only be critiqued as a whole... overall I think the edit was good. There was good tension and build, my only real critique of the edit is that we saw the protagonist react to the danger before we saw the physical danger. All in all I liked and I am really liking what you have done.

Looks good. Great job. The slog, g-film, settings you cooked up matched perfectly with the Ursa.

I don't think mine does that. Now I need to check because I have not noticed any loud quack.