mercer

Sounds solid. I found the link to the site I was referring to and yes the J prefix does indicate the lens is for a 2/3 sensor. http://www.c-mountlens.com/lenses/c-mount-lens-brands-a-e/canon/

I don't know a lot about these old lenses, but I have a feeling it was originally a c-mount TV lens. I have a couple old Canon TV lenses and they aren't marked TV lenses, but that's exactly what they are. I believe it to be a 2/3rds or 1 inch. The key is in the "J5x" marking on the lens. There is a site that lists what these numbers refer to on old, Canon TV lenses... I just can't find it right now. The other concern is the seller has been attempting to sell this lens for years and the drop in price has been pretty steady. I would assume if it was a viable option, someone over at Red User would have bought it by now. The funny thing is, my interest in the usability of this, for his sake, is irrelevant right now. He's a big boy and he was given information by a lot of people. My interest lies in the mystery of the lens, unfortunately we may never know. I doubt he will come on here and post everybody was right and supply a bunch of pics so we can get a better look at it. With all that being said, I really do hope it works for him, I just have my doubts.

That was actually an old assumption. I assumed he knew it was an original BNCR mount lens, but I think it's pretty safe to say the lens was remounted. So, I highly doubt it will cover the sensor and not a hundred percent sure he'll get infinity focus with the lens.

I think this is the most salient point of any creative endeavor, be it writing, filmmaking, music, painting, sculpting, or whatever. It's the balance between theory, creativity and craft. I understand all of the theory of screenwriting and a lot of filmmaking. I feel I have the creativity for both, but the honing of skills involved with the craft is a lifelong process. In my opinion, craft is the most important part of the equation and with every new script I write or shot I shoot, there is a rethinking or recreating of the craft that is solely unique to that project, or scene, or shot, or character. When the guy you interviewed, I have already forgotten his name, compared his program to Hemingway, I kind of threw up in my mouth a little. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate confidence and pride, without it, nobody would ever succeed in this business, but everything I read about this program seems to guarantee success with a craft that could take two lifetimes to master... That's what I find a bit off putting. And this brings me back around to what I liked about your article, the exploration between marketing and content. But as I said, if one can get one nugget of good information, then it is worth it. Good luck with it and I would love to read an update as you progress with the program.

Firstly, I want to commend you on a well written article/ interview. But, like most information I have read about the Muse program, I found your article to be lacking information that explains exactly what the program consists of. I assume there is some no disclosure element to the pilot program? As a writer first, and a filmmaker third... Or something, I have read almost every book about screenwriting, so I get the gist of what they're selling. The question becomes... Is the program a paint by numbers, formulaic program, or a jelly of the month club that shows real life examples as to how their process works? In the end... If you find it useful, then it is. I don't like plans or programs that promise the world at a hefty price tag when most of the information can be checked out from your local library, or on the World Wide Web. But every book I have ever read about story or screenwriting has had some little nugget that has made my writing a little better, or the process a little easier... For that alone, I have never felt I wasted a penny on a writing book.

Yeah, duh, sorry I read that you used the tamron in your original post. Good to know about the flaat profiles. I saw a video on YouTube and I thought flaat10 looked better than 11.

It has a very organic look. Is this the model that has the flat picture profile? Btw, what lens(es) are you using?

Good stuff... Creatively and technically. The song is funny because it such a mix of... Hardcore... And silliness, that the silly tone in the visuals were spot on.

Looks good, every time I see a Nikon video, I am more and more impressed. Nice shots too. Simple, but effective.

Thanks for taking the time to watch it and commenting on it. I went a little soft on purpose because that video was supposed to be shot in 2004, on SD... But maybe I went a little too soft. Thanks again.

Bump.

You'd think with all the employment we supply for their children, they would be a little more courteous with our websites.

just a heads up to the mods or Andrew that there is a bunch of spam in the creative section and in the screening room.

Here is an impromptu short film a friend and I made on an eos-m. It really was just a scene for something else that never materialized, so I used the footage to create a short and to learn the basics of FCPX.

I love the retro look of your videos. Do raise the midtones to achieve that?

That's what I like about it. That retro look is the aesthetic that I think lower budget digital video does best, or most attainable.

I believe there are a couple options, involving changing the mount on either the t2i, or the canon lens. But it should cover the sensor.

why this one?

I didn't know you had a G7, how do you like it? Do you have videos from it on your YouTube page?

I also have been interested with trying ML Raw. I have an eos-m I may load it on. Obviously the 5D has the 1080 Raw and there is some great looking footage out there for it. You also cannot go wrong with old Nikkors. I have a set of non-ai Nikkors and they are some great lenses. I also have a set of FD lenses I may sell. I have the 50mm 1.4, the 28mm f2, the 17mm f4 and the 35-70 f3.5 zoom. Amazing lenses, I hate to get rid of them, but I may need some extra cash.

That is fair, I remembered it incorrectly but, as you said, how is 10 grand for all? For big productions, I can see how the Raven will be useful as b and c cams, but for lower budget... Why would anyone bother when there are so many other, lower cost, options out there? Is the Red codec and IQ that much better? But, in the end, I can only speak for myself.

Looks great! Very cool!!! Did you shoot this in an actual bar, or was it green screened?

What happened to 4K for 4K?

M2... Are you using the canon eos-m2?

I haven't really been following this, but it seems like they're getting somewhere, but I had a hard time finding any quality videos showing their progress. It seems like it's still a ways away until it's stable continuous raw video. Unless I missed something?