josdr

They were definitely designed with video in mind, focus groups, the focus motors etc. What you are describing is operation of the lens and they definitely need to mature there. Then again that is then problems with Canon corporate , they are behind the times in dealing with problems that most of the people using their gear will face ( R5). RF is ridiculously expensive at the moment. They were making fun of Sony for not having enough lenses when it started out and now there is a plethora of such lenses that can do stellar work.

The RF lenses have been designed very video centric, I think you will get great AF one you use them. thanks for the heads up!

your best bet is definitely the A7Siii. I would not hold by breath in improving Panasonic's AF. It is not easy and it is not cheap. Even Canon cannot quite catch up to Sony, no matter what the payed shills write and say. Estate agents are idiots. Lighting sets the mood and sells.

Fuji colour science is great and since I recently got the Emotive colour luts, I concur that a Gaussian blur between 0.18-0.20 seems best. The camera's colour science and sensor has to help you of course. Fuji has very organic footage . People talk about BM raw and its highlight retention etc but I find it plasticky next to Fuji colour science and motion cadence . Then again youtubers like sliders and everything bathed in bright light...... PS Try some night footage at 3200 iso...

Hi guys , I am thinking of getting my first cine lens from Meike, either the 25mm or the 35mm one from my Fuji X-T3. Leaving aside the length choice, is there a technical reason that I should choose either one of them? I have only seen proper tests on them for the Blackmagic 4k cameras and the 25 supposedly has more purple fringing while the 35 is more prone to flaring? Can anybody that has actually used them give his opinion? I am actually thinking of going for the 35mm one but I would appreciate all input before pressing the button. I will make them a set eventually , but I want to start on the right foot. Thank you

You have hit upon the crux of the matter, lighting. We would all like a magic sensor (me included) that would lift shadows for 6 stops and lower highlights for 8 stops but really if you are in that situation, you should either light your main point of focus (not the whole scene if you do not have the means to do it) or you are possibly going for artistic, high contrast effect . Don't get me wrong I have had similar thoughts but at the end of the day I think that the FF argument is a bit animal-farmish (FF good, aps bad). Masterpieces have been filmed with way lesser sensors than we have. It is in the nature of the age to rush through things I suppose. Sony has the best sensors for low light ( I have had them in my Fuji's for years now) and I bet that my X-t3 at 3200 iso is cleaner or as clean than the C70 with its ridiculous price tag. Day By day I am getting disillusioned by the frankestein rigs surrounding a DSLR in order to shoot. the c70 is the right idea at a very wrong price 🙂

The Mac M1 will run all over the above. Nothing can beat dedicated hardware acceleration. Nvidia cards from the 1660's and 20xx forward have a form of hardware nvenc encode decode , but you will probably buy an M1 for the price of a decent gpu. Graphics card are ridiculously overpriced and the costs to build a decent rig this way amount to too much instantly. I suppose the budget option for you would be to get a 1660s gpu with the best cpu you can afford ,or go for any of the 20xx series card if you can afford them. There is of course the newer generation of gpus from Nvidia if you are that flash with cash. I would buy the Mac M1, it costs as much as a top end gpu these days....

That was great footage and editing. Is the band's name stone deaf? Shazam did not come up with a result Trying to leave buyer's bias aside, do you think the C70 is worth its price tag now that you have shot with it? Would a form of raw recording from it, help you in the editing and the overall look/feel or do you think it is just right? How would you describe the performance of the aF and its general handling? P.S The A7siii / c70 footage seems to cut together very well

Not in cinematography. Photographers are conditioned (especially the older ones) to think that FF=better because of stupid bokeh photography but in cinematography colour science will always be king. Along with framing and staging your pieces of course... Regards

You are correct. The x-t3 sensor is Sony derived and that has been the case for models

Great news. Well you know what to do 🙂. footage!!!!!

Merry Christmas to the Eoshd massive!

Thank you for your help and your advice . Merry Christmas!!

They really lost a lot of sales there. An F4n would have been a very easy choice. The zoom F6 is a mess ergonomically and at that price point you will buy a mixpre. Just came back after test recording external sounds.. Unbelievable. I recorded birds chirping like they were next to me (with negligible ancillary noise), waves from about 10 meters away and a stream about 5 meters away like I was next to it. Unbelievable clarity in all recordings. I tried to use the 32 bit float function just to have an idea (starting my car with full gain ), but you know what? The 24 bit mode plus analogue limiters is so good that you must be a total dick in getting an unusable recording. Cant say you are wrong there. "Cheap" redefines itself quite a lot as you progress with your film making lol. So how would a tentacle be used with a mixpre and an X-T3 or any other mirrorless for that matter, if I cannot jam them together? The camera cannot be synced to the mixpre (no timecode input), so do you sync the tentacle to the mixpre output timecode and then jack the tentacle into the camera?

Merry Christmas and Happy new year ! The Tentacles are 200 euros plus vat and unavailable for months. I think you can jam sync with a camera and then use the jammed tentacle with a recorder that has timecode but don't quote me on that. If you need two that's 400 plus vat, you might as well save up to get a cine camera. They may be "cheap" fro professionals but not that cheap for indy film making

Yes they are! although I could not find a zoom f4 no matter how hard I tried. But I am every happy with the mixer and I have barely scratched the surface yet. Thank you for all your advice . I will not answer piecemeal since I ingested all your various answers in the different posts 🙂 . Thank you and Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

It is VERY annoying giving money away when you have the primary function available and one part of the chain is not cooperative. The day has 24 hours, and we all try avoiding wrestling in post. Waveform matching has been good for me but when it lets you down it takes too much time to get a decent result. The mixpre II is unbelievable after owning a tascam 60d ii. The sound is so clean you cannot believe it. In a somewhat controlled environment the 24bit mode is all you need really, Its limiters are analogue as well and they work great. I will test the 32 bit mode during the holidays.For run and gun and small crews that do not necessarily have great sound skills the 32 bit could be useful. I got it a couple of days ago so all my tests have been rudimentary . I believe it is well worth its money although I initially was very mindful of its price . I do not really think an independent film maker needs more and if he does need it, he will have the budget to hire a professional sound engineer anyways.. It is a great bit of kit. Very clean sound . The mke 600 sounds great and it made even the ntg2 sound better than I was used to. Before that, with the Tascam, izotope was my friend..

I presume I would need a Y splitter of sorts for that. The hdmi tc angel seems inetersting if it indeed works You are spot on, there is no information at all. All I could find was tidbits by people that called the X-T3-4 a DSLR and it was bad advice at that as well. I wish my camera could at least jam with teh timecode from the mixpre but Fuji has left this option out from both the X-T3/4. Probably wiring issues rather than a software one. I suppose it is one of those instances that you are very near in accomplishing something but cant get over the last hurdle. The mixpre was a good investment for an amateur (thanks to no social life because of the lock downs) and I am reluctant to buy a tentacle or whatever gizmo as well 🙂 . It is funny because I though that the Fuji cameras and the mixpre recorders are a very logical and punching above its weight combination for cinematography on a "normal" budget and that there would be relevant info on this. Moreover the sound devices manual is not well written and leaves much to be desired in explaining things to someone that actually reads it but is not a sound professional.

@KnightsFan thank you very much for a very detailed and thoughtful answer. From your writings I gather that the mini hdmi jamming test is worth a try, although it is unfortunate that the master timecode will come from the camera rather than the sound recorder . But that is a limitation that only fuji could bypass Any way if that is feasible I can send much cleaner audio from the mixpre to the camera to use as scratch and also have proper timecode to use. I will definitely try that. Populating the movie audio with a timecode signal seemed the wrong way of going about things from the beginning,even to an amateur like me

Hi, I am definitely NOT buying a tentacle sync, they are way overpriced for what they do and they make absolute no sense since the mixpre and the X-T3 can output timecode. Waveform syncing works fine, I have been working it for years , but new toys and all I thought I would give timecode a go. I have no idea if timecode syncing via hdmi that will then be interrupted when I remove the x-t3 end will work or not. If that is the case then the camera will have to provide the timecode since it unfortunately does not having a setting to jam to an external timecode signal (I am unsure whether the x-t4 has such an option) I am eagerly waiting @IronFilm 's response, he is the guru on such matters. I am unsure on lame hdmi's etc, I dislike messes and they seem to let you down when you most need them to work. If you have any external recorder it will work fine with the X-T3. You can either feed it cleaner audio that comes from your recorder and is written on your main movie track , or just use the internal mic audio as a scratch file. I presume that timecode will be a less user intensive solution. The questions really have to do with how timecode is handled through the mixpre and editing software andalso with the hardware combination of the mixpre and the X-T3. The way I managed to do it now is too labour intensive, especially with the timecode being in two different places of the files I hope to use. Stick around, we will hopefully be schooled by more knowledgeable people on this matter. Thanks for the input

After listening to very good advice from @IronFilm (keep the microphone close stoopid) and practicing some more in my amateur film-making endeavors I decided to upgrade to a mixpre-3 ii and run up to some trouble regarding timecode and resolve/premier editing that only the good people in eoshd can understand. I am using the stereo out port of the mix-pre ii to send a timecode signal to the external microphone port of the X-T3 (with a simple small plug). Unfortunately the X-T3 does not seem able to sync (jam?) to the X-T3 , so what I am getting from the x-t3 is a movie file with the audio track filled with the timecode signal only and from the mixpre I get a great sounding sound file. Alas syncing audio and movie/timecode file is not that simple. It appears that there is no timecode track embedded in the mixpre. Originally I seem to have a movie file with audio-tc on channel one and the mix-pre file that does not have a audio-tc portion but rather a File-TC marker. Once I import them into resolve 17, they are not able to sync together although I discovered that through resolve I can right click "Update timecode from audio track" on the movie file , and then both the mixpre and the movie file will sync dependent on the file-tc rather than the audio-tc ( I did not find a similar way to do this in premier pro) My first question is : Can I include an audio timecode channel in the mixpre output along with the recorded dialogue sound? Is it advisable to do so? It only seems to record TC in the sound file header. My second question is : Is this the best way to utilise timecode while using the X-T3 or is there a better way to go about it with what I have? The x-t3 can output timecode using its mini hdmi port (which I presume the mixpre can accept through its cam tc in mini hdmi port ) but I need the mini hdmi port of the X-T3 for my atomos shinobi. Or could I just sync the two devices once by this method and then disconnect the cable beween the two and utilise the X-T3 hdmi for my monitor? Does timecode output have to be constantly connected from camera to recorder? Third question: Is there a way to update timecode from the audio track into a file track header in Premiere pro or am I stuck with Resolve for this. Thanks in advance for every help you can give me and if any of my suppositions are erroneous or there are better ways of doing things with these two pieces of gear feel free to point it out. Thank you!

A late but from the heart thank you to @TomTheDP for his answer!

Hi guys. Does anybody have any footage using this let with an X-T3- X-T4. I wanted to have a look at it and decide on whether it is worth the purchase or not. Thank you

Nolan should first make sure that people that pay for his moves can actually listen to the fucking dialogue. He is deluded in thinking it makes us concentrate harder... I wont even go into him not being able to give a movie a decent ending. Nolan's bleating is uncalled for and it is sheer hypocricy. Streaming is here to stay. The likes of netflix have given the possibility to actors and directors to flesh out and narrate stories in true depth. Something that would not work in two hours with Hollywood exec editing, is given flesh and life in 5 one hour episodes. Nolan's bizzare concoctions such as Tenet will of course suffer because they are bad in the first place not because they were not shown in the cinema. When Pattinson is the best think in that movie (whenever you can hear him speak of course), then you have made a bad movie, period. Villeneuve's Dune will have to be enjoyed in a theatre , if any of his past work is taken into account. That man deserves it. Yes people that are true cinephiles and actually want to watch a movie for its craft rather than its "entertainment" value are best served with the great silver screen. It does take a proper movie to do so. The mistake of the cine industry is not having a decent streaming service available around the globe with fair prices. Once they short that out , Nolan can go direct Tenet 2 - Reading lips in the space time continuum.

Definetely do teh metabones review. There is lots of cheap used EF glass with great quality, so it may be worth the investment.