webrunner5

This is a pretty awesome video on a iPhone X. Edited with Adobe Premiere CC and a MacBook Pro. No color correction whatsoever. Only for the macro shots they used one macro lens.

He is a comparison of the iPhone X and the GH5. Other than low light and lenses, at the super wide and telephoto length I doubt like he said, on YT, I doubt the average person will notice which camera did what, but I am sure if you push the editing Banding will happen pretty big time. I am not saying it replaces a GH5. But phones have come a Long ways lately.

Well I just got my Apple iPhone 10, 256 GB back from my son for good. I have not taken anything yet, but the spec on it are pretty amazing to be honest. Now that they have dual camera, and hell 4K 60p, stabilization, DoF defocus, I don't see why with a good 3rd party App, why you can't make something worth happening. Maybe not a Blockbuster movie, but a pretty damn good output surely is possible with the skill a lot of people on here have. It has to be more fun than dragging out a Arri Alexa setup LoL. That new DJI phone Gimbal for 199 bucks looks damn good. I am going to look into it in a few days. Like they say you always have it with you. Would make at least a hell of a good B Roll camera. This was shot in Jerome, Arizona with my iPhone 6s Plus.

I follow this family and am a Patreon supporter of them. This video is about them being videoed. Looks like the crew is using a BMCC and some sort of Sony camera. Maybe a person can pick up a few pointers from the video. I found the crews gear trailer pretty interesting.

I have been there. It is beautiful just like the video.

Well I can understand why it is not easy, and I doubt I will be doing crash zooms with them LoL. But i can't afford to buy a whole bunch of Cine Lenses and the camera to boot. So I will need to use them as is. I am a tripod guy in no hurry so I doubt it will effect me much. I used to have a bunch of MF old lenses, but it got to be a GAS attack from hell and I got rid off Everyone of them. There is no end to that habit. So I will use what I gots as they say. One push AF ought to work. I know on my AF100A I had it worked well enough on it.

I know this video is Terrible for movement, my son's first ever use of a video camera I guess, but he is using my 14-140mm on my G7. I think it is plenty sharp enough and the focus is pretty damn good. I rest my case on using it. And it is a good example of how good of video you can take with a cheap 350 buck camera and a cheap 275 buck lens. Now yeah it needed to be on a tripod pretty badly LoL. But yeah it is unknown how it will look on the 4K BMPCC without software corrections. But it is not as bad as I think a lot of people may think. I used it on my Panny AF100A and it seemed fine on it. Now did it do corrections on it, not sure. So you may be right about your assumptions. We will find out. https://vimeo.com/273507992

"sub optima" IS the reason I will use them. ? I don't want sharp as hell lenses like I said. And clumsy AF, hell the 4K BMPCC doesn't even Have AF in a sense. I am glad they don't resolve 4K LoL. I really doubt I will ever output in 4K. Maybe down sample at times to 1080p but I doubt even that often. You are stating the complete Opposite of what I want in a lens. If I wanted sharp I would buy a Sony A7r mk III. I think the magic of a BMPCC is that they are not razor sharp. Not like ML 5D mk III. I don't want to really have to knock down sharpness on every shot I take. But sure nice if you want that option thought Like I guess you want. Now if you want a smooth look, which I like, I think those lenses can do that, buttery smooth, I doubt we can get that other than using real film with Cooke lenses, we will never be able to afford. Cut your face, well no either. But I don't like cut your face stuff. Seems you do. I like to get a lot of the look I like in camera, not spending 6 hours on a NLE doing it. So I think cheap lenses on it will do fine for me. Plenty of old Nikon, Canon MF stuff around for peanuts for my needs. Plus I am a cheap slate, eh poor, and don't have all that money to spend on 1000 + dollars lenses, when I can buy what I want on Amazon for 60 bucks each and get my result. But that is the beauty of video, photography, we all get to make it look like we want it to look like if we have the skill. But yeah if you are going to try to make a living with the BM sure you will Need the lenses you are talking about and more of them. I am just in this as a hobby. At 71 I am too old to worry about deadlines, spending money left and right I don't have, on and on. You guys are funny as hell. I doubt ANYBODY has even made anything worth a shit with a 14.-140mm or the kit lens. Oh the vanity to throw tons of peoples stuff under the bus LoL. I did BIF stuff for years photography wise and video wise, and gee, they seemed to work fairly well doing it. Super duper ideal, no, but crap lenses nah.

Well I think the main reason for ML Raw on the 5D mk III is how sharp it can be. Other than the 1DC most all Canon video footage to me is Way too soft. Now I am not against soft video footage at times at all. I just want to be able to Control how soft it is, not be stuck with it for Everything. I guess the next be thing about Raw is that if you goof up WB you can change it at your will. And I don't know about you but that is one of my hardest areas to really pull of even close let alone perfect. To make it consistent. And there is no noise reduction, no baked in stuff like every manufacturer has. So a clean slate as they say. But if wanted you have killer Canon Color Science, and the AF is not shabby at all. Not DPAF, but.. And there is the 12 bit date rate. Hell that alone is worth the price of admission. Sure it is kind of a data hog but wow what you have the ability to be able to push, and push hard. And I think it is the satisfaction that with Raw the finial output is what you created, your signature, your fingerprints are on all over it if you want to take it that far. You are not trying to Undo what someone else likes, it is what You like if you desire. And with a LuT you can just click on it and grade fast if needed. But it can be totally Your LuT if you want. You can stand out, not just be part of the same crowd as everyone else. And I know I can go on but you are able to buy a camera for not a lot that can look as good or better than a 1DC, Canon C500. No you are not going to get full 4K, even the 1DC is not, not yet, probably Never with the C Fast card data rate, but it can do a easy 2K and more. That is impressive for the money. What the heck FF Cine looking camera can we afford. Eh none. Well the 5D ML can make that happen.

Well I plan on using my old standby Panny14-45mm , and the later G7 kit lens 14-140mm. Both are pretty crazy good copies I will never sell. Both just seem to work when you need something to get the job done. Not the most romantic lenses in the world, but they make stuff happen. But yeah a person needs some fast MF Cine lenses. Wide ones at that. Trouble is all the above lenses are sort of too good for a Cine look. So I have found the cheaper the lens sometimes the better they look. Old Yashica,, Vivitar stuff is interesting, more so than Canon L glass to me. I sort of like to get a lot of character from lenses more than using a LuT, or filters to achieve. Soft edges, distortion, etc. isn't always a bad thing.

Yeah look how good the ML 5D mk III is. Raw is Hard to beat no matter what the resolution.

Was it a DSLR or a Mirrorless? Maybe Gaffer tape over the #? I don't think it is written in stone that a mirrorless camera has to be small. Look at the Panny GH_ line, damn big for a mirrorless. As big as a APSC Rebel.

Yeah that is what is crazy to me about Canon. With their Color Science and DPAF if they made a decent effort they would rule the roost like they say. I mean how hard is that to just pretty much have a C100 mk I in a mirrorless form factor using the FF readout not downsampled. Heck they would sell all they could manufacture. They would Have to make more money selling thousands of those cameras than C100 mk I's. My God it has to be all about the money. What isn't! Just do it. But Like Andrew says I guess they can't scan the sensor fast enough to do it in FF, so it maybe a APSC readout in 4K like he says. Bummer.

I would be amazed if Canon came out with a new Mirrorless that had guns a blazing. I think it will be like the article says, a A7 mk III type camera, not a A9 beater. I believe Nikon might actually come out with a D850 Mirrorless and maybe really have a great product, no holds barred.

Yeah put subtitles in it for sure. That way people at work can watch them and not get caught LoL.

I think it might be a combo of both. Some shots in it seem Way to clean to be 16mm film in my opinion. look at the frame grad on the couch, no way that is 16mm film out of a Bolex I ever used. Or like has been said, parts or all digitally edited. I don't think Any of it was really shot on film to be honest. I shot a lot of 16 in the day with a Bolex and even s16mm was not as clean as that couch shot. But with Digital editing, which I never did with film, I guess anything is possible.

Nikon info that is interesting.. https://petapixel.com/2018/06/02/nikon-trademarks-noct-for-a-new-camera-system/

Yeah I have a 2K 30" sIPS screen,. I went that big at my age I can't see the text in 4K. Yeah a 32" would work. Any wider than that I would want one of those curved ones.

Are you looking at these on a TV or a 4K Monitor??

To be honest the whole design looks clunky, bulky, and heavy as hell to me. But if it can hold a C200, EVA1, FS5 well it will be a hit.

Wow that would be great if true!

Who is to say you Have to put batteries in the handles? That way you don't have to buy new handles, and DJI doesn't have to engineer new ones.

With a ISO range of 320 to 102,400* expanded in 1-step or 1/3 step increments with the C100 mk II compared to 320 to 80,000 in 1-step or 1/3 step increments on the C100 mk I, it looks to me the mk II has gained a stop, maybe 1 1/2 stops in ISO. So 12,800 Ought to be doable with no real penalty.

The paid version of Resolve 15 has a great noise reduction feature in it. But yeah if you are going to buy the 4K BMPCC wait, don't double buy Resolve. And I think Ethan is right, just the data rate alone makes it worth going 2K or more on YT. 1080 at 8Mbps can be pretty Gnarly at times. But I have seen some damn good 1080p on there, but it might have been down sampled from 2K, 4K.

Jesus Christ I had to take a Sea Sick pill after watching that video! Talk about camera movement. He must have taken 4 Black Mollies before he shot it. I think the video sucks ass to be honest. My pointer is delete the damn thing LoL. Some people really Love Fats Chicks. not me, but it seems the skinnier the guy is the fatter the women is he is with in my experience. The old "there is a lid for every pot" thingy.