kye

Sorry to hear that your lens broke - my FD 70-210 is a lovely piece of kit and I'd imagine your FD 35-105 would have been similar. It will be interesting to see how well the Sigma holds up

Great work! What a classic moment! That's hilarious!!

I think it's about outcomes and priorities. If you're a working pro then a lot of it (or maybe almost all of it) is about getting the job done and getting paid and feeding your family, which is just as relevant a goal and perspective as any other, including the pursuit of art. My goals are to have fun, shoot stuff for my family, and learn new things, so I have minimal time while shooting (because I don't want shooting to be too impactful on my experiences) but I have heaps of time in post to play with footage because I have no deadlines or expectations. If you can get what you want SOOC then that's perfect because it's more efficient. Film-making has more aspects to it than anyone can possibly master, which is why it's always best to focus on the things you're good at and only work on the things that you're not good to ensure they're acceptable. Working in post is a pretty narrow aspect of the whole picture, so even though I'm into it as almost my main focus, I can understand why relatively few people overall give it the attention that I try to.

Yep, download links are still beta and main page still has the beta announcement too.

I do, but that's not what I was using. I think the tools I was using weren't precision enough... Lol.. not quite. While strictly not a cinema camera, it has been used in quite a number of Hollywood films, and the lens I was trying to attach to it is a genuine cine lens. Its actually a bit of a pity because I haven't seen anyone do it before and I have been wondering what this combo would be like for some time now, and kind of used this competition as an excuse to break things apart and give it a go.

Hahaha... the mystery of the dead camera!! I tried it again and still no joy, and I don't have the stupid obscure-shaped screwdriver to take it apart. I think I might have cracked a circuit board trying to screw the new lens into the mangled plastic of the old mount.

I was mucking around with camera #3 but now it won't turn on... Turning up my nose at the idea of "fixed lens" I'd almost cut away enough of the lens mount casing to get the right flange distance. I'd even been super careful to plug up the sensor so it didn't get metal filings in it and everything! I think I must have knocked something with the side-cutters.

Not necessarily.... That's camera #1. I'm still yet to shoot with camera #2. Stay tuned.

Nice work! I should have thought of uploading first.. that way my entry would have been winning for a short period before coming in dead last.

Thanks all for your information and ... spirited debate I've ordered the Razer Core X eGPU chassis, and am really tempted by the new Radeon RX 5700 card. For my application it needs to be natively supported as an eGPU under Mac OSX, and Apple don't support any Nvidia cards which is a bummer. Also, apparently Apple are slow to have support for the newer cards so it might be a few months wait I was looking at the Vega 64 until I heard that the 5700 had just been released, and a couple of years does make a difference in tech like this so it's probably the smart move. The 64 has a score of 11880 and the 5700 has a score of 12663 which are way better than cards like the 580. The 580 or Vega 56 are the best bang-for-buck looking at second-hand deals on ebay, but the wife wants a card that has VR capability, and after spending money on the chassis it's not a huge additional cost for the extra performance.

Not until after judging!

Everyone probably knows this, but I've seen people rig up cine-type cameras before they leave for the shoot and just pull out the whole rig and then can start using it. Obviously you need a decent case and it will take up a bit more room, but it's a way to cut out some time and get a bit more flexibility if you need to.

No idea between those two, but the most important thing about doing colour post-production work is calibrating your monitor, rather than the monitor itself.

So, if I make a few assumptions... Assuming it does multiple frames to not clip due to overexposure, ISO 6 requires 16 frames, ISO 12 requires 8, 24 requires 4, 48 requires 2 and 96 can do it in one. Therefore its base ISO for video will be 100, which isn't anything impressive at all. I have an app for my iPhone that does long exposures by doing many short exposures and averaging them, which seems to be a similar logic to the low ISO via multiple exposures.

Yeah, I agree. Although, personally, I separate out the weaknesses / requirements of the camera into things that I could work on and things I can't (or have chosen not to). For example, if people shoot run-n-gun with the GH5 and get great low-noise footage then I'm very interested in how they do that. If they do that by having great lighting then that doesn't apply to me and how I shoot (I shoot exclusively in available light) but if they've achieved that in post then I will absolutely work my butt off to learn how to do that. So in a way, I will use the best examples of what is possible as 'inspiration' for me to push myself and learn more about the craft. The GH5 is a funny one actually, because for me the GH5 produces absolutely glorious images and so (for the most part) I can just look at the camera as being infinitely good, and if there's issues with my films then it's basically my fault. I know it's not true for low-light shooting (for example) but mostly I push myself super-hard to create magic. It means that I'm basically always disappointed with the results, but it makes me learn at the fastest rate I can, so in that sense it's still worthwhile. Every now and then the factors I've chosen not to control will come together and magic will get recorded to the SD card and it makes me really happy and makes everything worthwhile. I also have a big skew in my approach because I completely accept that my shooting will be far from perfect, but then I work super hard in post to get the best results I can. In this sense I think that tests like this are great for reminding everyone that there are many cameras that produce workable images, and my personal opinion is that if you know what you're doing then you can really elevate your work by colour grading and otherwise manipulating images.

Do you know if there is likely to be a gap in-between the exposures when it's stacking the 16 frames? Ie, can it do a full 360degree shutter. If you have a subject with motion blur then you don't want there to be gaps throughout the blur. This would be especially obvious with light-trails of headlights etc. The 3D models thing is super-cool. The problem with modular cameras is that the modules are flexible but sacrifice overall size compared to integrated designs. Being able to 3D-print an accessory and not having to adhere to the standard sizes for mounts, mount adapters, and the like would be great.

I agree. In my mind, you have to judge a camera by: what it can do in the best of situations (and in the best hands) as this tells you what it is capable of what it typically does in the majority of situations in the hands of people around the same skill level as you and where the limits of its performance are, both in technical aspects as well as usability If you employ a Hollywood crew to shoot the demo reel any camera will look great, but some will be much harder to get good results with than others, and we're all closer to the middle rather than the top end, so we have to be realistic in that way. However, @Mattias Burling gives us an excellent opportunity by doing a blind test - which is to get a view of what each of us sees when we're not looking at the images through our own prejudices. For me this is particularly useful as it reinforced some of my beliefs about myself and gave me a bit more confidence in my own judgement. I also learned more about what I care about in an image and why. When I looked at the images and saw one I liked, instead of saying "oh, I like that because that is from <camera X> and that is a great camera" I had to actually evaluate what I was seeing and pick it apart as to what tangible thing I was seeing was causing my reaction. I noted that I really liked the colours of the EOS-R options, and the creamy rendering of the out of focus areas. I disliked the aliasing or oversharpening on many shots, and in the end it was these factors that lead me to make my selections. Now I am armed with more knowledge about what I like in an image. This is useful because the more I know about what I value in an image the more that I can adapt my equipment, shooting styles, and general approach to maximising those things.

Great shots. Anyone who has been to Japan will also realise you did very well to avoid getting more vending machines in each frame!

Considering the fact it levitates, maybe not! and taking into account the fact the levitation is transmitted to the lens, maybe we can all finally get the fast all-in-one zoom setup we've all been waiting for but didn't want to lug around all that weight.....

Interesting camera. If not for purchase, then perhaps as a direction to what others might emulate in future. The low ISO options were very interesting, for example. The video was cool. I liked that the cage said "ARRI" across the top! I'd also point out that it's a concept video, so this thread might reach a couple of hundred pages before we see a real item

Nice pic. Especially nice colours and contrast My impression of the T* (or early versions of it anyway) was that you can simulate it in post, at least to a certain degree, with the methods in the Tiffen Black Pro Mist simulation thread. Namely, selecting the brighter parts of the image, blurring the heck out of them and then adding them on top. People talk about how it softens the texture of skin and various other things, which can be pretty desirable. Curvature might even be partly simulated in post too, depending on what the optical mechanism is. Maybe I should start a thread.....

I, for one, am looking forward to the BMPCC8K. I just hope it has IBIS. ???

FF equivalent I have the Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95, which on my GH5 is equivalent to 35mm f1.9.

I do like a 35mm lens. I have chosen a 35mm prime as my default lens, and don't even own a 28mm. I find it's tight enough to focus on a subject but wide enough to still get the environment in the portrait.