TwoScoops

I watched that documentary 'Cinematographer Style' last week. It's quite good.

Until BM adds the 2.7K s16 crop in firmware 1.3. I saw a Zeiss s16 set (well 4 of them) go for 2700ish a couple of weeks ago.

Somewhere between 0.95 and 1.4 - definitely no more stopped down than that. The EXIF says ISO 200 and 1/6400th so probably closer to 0.95. I had some video tests I shot with a model a couple of a years ago with the Voigt 17.5 vs the Pana 12-35 at 17ish, both at 2.8. The difference in 3D pop was quite remarkable but I can't find the files now.

The Voigt is much better than it looks in that comparison, it's an incredible lens. One of the few I really regret selling. I posted a still from my portfolio taken with the GH4/Voigt 17.5 here: https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/6396-lenses/?page=162&tab=comments#comment-233871 I felt like the Voigts coupled with the GH4 had the most mojo of any non medium format camera I've used for raw stills, and they made the video look a lot nicer too.

The Shining, Scarface and Terminator got mild reviews when released too. haha

Gotcha.

Have you found any comparison videos? The hire price of the C200 over here is just over half the C300II which is appealing.

How long did you spend trying to learn? Maybe you didn't find the right teaching materials.

^ Pretty sure 37 people have already said that.

Figured as much. Thanks.

How come 5D4 is on that calculator?

Regardless of discussion of whether it's the same sensor or not, how does the GH5s compare in that regard, in the 2500+ mode? Does it drop to 10 also?

100 pages. Maybe by 500 we'll have some new footage.

This is it. I remember when it came out there was talk about the unusual composition used, like all the headroom, etc.

Both shot with the BMOGCC. The first was re-made a few years later by the same director as a feature with a $5m budget. I prefer the 2nd tbh.

The new drug is the attention they get from posting the 'activities' online.

https://www.fxguide.com/featured/boom-times-the-wolf-of-wall-street/ This article says they used a C500 with the Gemini recorder (12-bit) and shot in 4K. Actually worth a read besides that too.

That goes without saying.

I wondered if it'd been mixed with something else, but only BM is listed here. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7018572/technical?ref_=tt_dt_spec He's using the s16 mk2 Zeiss super speeds. I can't even find a place to rent those here.

I agree with not comparing it to a new 4k camera, but this is the best I've seen from that sensor (BMMCC tho)

I for one am glad Jon takes video of teens/20-somethings and not girls his own age. The Nocticron is the best lens above for me. 3D and most high end looking bokeh. The Nikon looks a bit busy to me. But it's comparing a top of the line lens to a cheapo, so that's how it should be.

I've seen all of TWD. Was just re-visiting S1 to see how far it'd fallen. I'm halfway through Fear... season 2 right now and kinda meh towards it. I'll take your word it gets better.

Yeah I know all this. Of course. There was still more of a digital look in the end product of FTWD regardless.

I just watched Walking Dead season 1, followed by Fear the Walking Dead season 1. One is an all time classic, one... isn't. Anyway, it's interesting how digital FTWD (shot on Alexa with vintage anamorphics) looks at times after watching TWD, which is obviously shot Super 16. It also made me realize how over-rated shallow DOF is for narrative. You need some separation yeah but as a viewer I actually preferred the lesser background blur of S16 on medium shots. Sorry for the off topic, the video is fantastic.

Yeah. He has knowledge but you have to make a conscious effort to try and shut his ego out whilst watching. Part of the DVD was reacting scenes from his movies (crazy/beautiful, The Rat Pack) which was definitely quite interesting. The other was more basic stuff, like Rembrandt style book light with frontal fill etc, which could be useful depending on the viewers level.