kye

Totally agree @kaylee I think this is a go. Now to find a nice clip to kick things off. Unless anyone has one they're happy to share?

You may do things that are great just because you're not seeing them in the same way. It's not a critiquing session where we talk about what doesn't work, it's about gathering the bits that do Resolve is wonderful, and I'm probably much more guilty than the next guy of making fun of the other platforms for not having as extensive a toolset, however the secret is that a great colourist will be able to make very good colour grades with only a few tools. Think about photo editing when photoshop only had the basic adjustment tools like curves - magazines were still full of stunning images. A good grade should be useful to everyone as a reference. Knowing that the person applied a conversion LUT, then custom contrast curves, then desaturated the shadows, etc etc should be useful information to everyone. Sure, if someone goes nuts in Resolve it might be difficult to replicate in PP/FCPX but I don't think that killer grades rely on these fancy tools very often. The point is to replicate the grade and figure out how it works so you understand it. Otherwise it just becomes another preset and you may as well have just bought a LUT pack. In terms of who participates, it's whoever has time and energy

Nice stills. I'm confused as to why in the first place anyone would have thought that RAW 12MP stills wouldn't be any good. I mean, we regularly see great looking compressed 4K stills, or even 1080 stills.

The big review I posted yesterday had the Revuenon 55/1.4 in it and it was sharp across the frame, but the bokeh was very hard and kind of distracting for me, so I'm curious to see how you find the 1.2. Of course, I have read that Chinon, Revuenon, Rikenon, Mamiya-Sekor may all be the same lens or had some kind of rebranding going on, so they might have completely different heritages

In case anyone wants to DIY their own lens.... This channel is great - he does all kinds of fun things. It's also a great example of content vs cameras - who cares what he shoots with, it's interesting

Here's my idea for a free perr-to-peer colour grading course for all of us. We have a bunch of people with skills here, so I imagine we can learn a lot from each other. Idea: Someone films one or two short clips and uploads the files SOOC People have a go at grading them and upload results We comment on what we like about people's work (someone might be good at tone, others at colour, others at something else) The people who did the grading share what they did so the rest of us can learn from it Repeat I'm happy to record some nice clips to get it started. It would need people to actively participate though. If only a couple of people actually grade anything then it won't work because they won't have other work to learn anything from. Who would be interested in actively participating by grading and sharing their results?

I have travelled with the XC10 which was 24-240mm equivalent and also the APS-C Canon 18-55 and 55-250 but found that I don't do a lot of long zoom shots, or if I do they don't tend to make it to the final edit. My films are really about where we are and what we're doing, rather than the people waaaaay over there Just an individual style thing I guess. All those lenses are normal adapters, so 2x equivalent. I saw that Zeiss 35-70mm 3.4 and tried to work out how I'd use it but it's just too slow for me. I film in natural / environmental lighting and a lot at night so need all the light-gathering I can get. People are critical of having super-fast lenses because shallow DOF is so yesterday and Hollywood only uses 2.8 and they're difficult to focus and blah blah blah, but I've been really happy that my 17.5 goes to F0.95 because it takes the ISO down and reduces noise and brings the colours to life. I also understand that there's an aperture dial and I can set it to something other than wide open ? If I could afford it I'd probably have all 0.95 MFT lenses, or go 1.4 FF + 0.64x SB for the same effect. Yeah, my 40/1.8 Konica Hexanon is 80mm equivalent so I'm looking forward to that. I previously only travelled with 35mm and 116mm equivalents, so I haven't used an 80mm equivalent in real life yet. TBH I'll be happy to get past thinking about lenses and actually learning the ones I have decided on. All your contributions of 28mm lenses has kind of put 'learning a focal length' onto my radar - I think I knew it was a thing but hadn't really thought about it seriously.

I haven't really tested it, but there was a comparison pic here by @jase: The 5K isn't All-I, but if you're shooting anamorphic there's a 3.3K 4:3 10-bit 422 10-bit 400Mbps All-I mode that might be of interest, and it supports HLG too, and remember that it's 400mbps h265 so may be better than h264. Long-GOP h265 gets about 2x efficiency compared to h264 but I'm not sure about All-I. 3.3K might even match the Alexa better than the normal 4K mode. I should do a comparison video.

I agree. I have two sets of lenses: Travel and general stuff: 8mm f4 // 17.5mm f0.95 // 40mm f1.8, which gives equivalents of 16mm f8 // 35mm f1.4 // 80mm f3.6 Sports and wildlife stuff: 135mm f2.8 // 200mm f3.5, which gives equivalents of 270mm f5.6 // 400mm f7 I'm missing a 80mm lens which would sit in-between the 40 and 135, but I haven't really had the need for one yet. Maybe for sports, but I'll only consider getting one if that happens. If I am travelling I don't think I'd take either of the longer lenses, just the main three lenses.

It also lowers (disables?) the sharpening, enables h265 200mbps codec which reduced file sizes and SD card costs (the 400mbps codec for 4K requires UHS-II cards that cost a fortune), so there are tradeoffs in both directions. I'm not convinced I'll swap over permanently, but folks who do anamorphic shooting may be very interested in the GHa LUTs combined with that anamorphic look. The GH5 is great value for money, but if you want to shoot 10-bit anamorphic with de-squeeze and without an external monitor it becomes the bargain of the century, and the Alexa colour combined with the big-screen aesthetic would be a spectacular match.

Those are some very impressive looking stills indeed! Beautiful tones, and the motion blur of those birds is just great

I remember something from my stills photography days that went something like "An image should only be in colour if the colour ads something to the shot. Colour is like everything else in an image - if it's not helping the image then remove it".

Yeah, I've seen some interesting attempts at 360 video, 3D video, and VR (which can be either of those, or interactive) and we're kind of yet to really crack the basics. I've seen a few VR 3D films where they're attempted to move the camera, to varying effect. The main challenge for content creators is that we can't make sure the person is pointing the direction we want them to be, or noticing what we want them to notice.

Just found this huge and very thorough comparison of 50mm lenses... http://hispan.hu/50mm-lens-test/ It's in Hungarian, but is well worth translating different sections. There are test charts, sharpness tests, bokeh tests, flare tests, etc for every lens at every aperture. Very impressive and useful

I'll pick a few lenses and go out and shoot something, so I'll try and get some lights into the lenses when I do. I was going to have a light in the background for bokeh but ended up with the specular highlights on the plastic bag in the background instead.

That looks cool, I like it being on that line, it integrates it in a funny-sort of way. I'd move it to the left so it's not crowding the guy, although it does have a bit of that person-looking-straight-at-edge-of-frame kind of trapped vibe. I really like it as the frame for the poster too. @mercer is really getting good with those 28mm lenses!! (I'm assuming that's a 28 shot?)

My thoughts: The Takumars have a distinct look to them. The colours are kind of like adding an instagram filter over them, but they also add a kind of filter over the 3-dimensionality of the lens too, kind of giving it a 'look'. I think this might be quite cinematic for some people but to me it removes some of the vibrancy of the real world. I've eliminated them from my options, partly because their focus rings work backwards, but also I want that 3D pop. This is evident even when you compare all the lenses at 5.6 and all of them (except the kit lens) should be in their best aperture range I am eliminating the Mir too. Looking at all of them, the Mir at 2.8 seems to be more stopped down than the others at 2.8. I checked against a few lenses and it appears that the other lenses are consistent with each-other so it doesn't look like I've made a mistake, but rather that the Mir isn't as fast as other lenses at 2.8 (notably, the Konica 40mm with its very similar focal length). Even just looking through the Konica and Mir side-by-side when wide open, the Konica looks closer to double the diameter rather than the 1.4x it should be, so I think the Russians might have been bending the truth a little The Mir is really soft at 2.8, especially compared to other lenses that are stopped-down by a full stop already. The Mir at 2.8 is a lot slower than the Konica or Helios / SB combinations. A normal exposure with the Helios / SB combination at ISO 100, requires ISO 160 from the Konica and ISO 400 from the Mir. Combined with the GH5's ok-but-not-great low-light performance and my shooting in natural light even at night, it's not a good combination. I read that the Mir is Apochromatic and it may well be, but the other lenses are fine on the 2x crop of the GH5 so I don't really see that as being that critical. It's also worse in the corners at 2.8 than the Konica is at 1.8, and also less halation too, so that's more reasons. The m42 speed booster I have seems fine. The Helios SB combo is very smeared in the corners, but the Takumar 55/1.8 doesn't have that problem, so it's the Helios lenses not the SB. Unfortunately if I want the extra performance of the SB I'll need a 50-60mm lens that isn't the Helios or the Takumar. The Konica is an absolutely stunning performer. It has great contrast and sharpness wide open, corners are still sharp (on MFT) The Voigtlander is my main lens and the purpose of these tests are to choose the lens to go with it and my 8mm lens for traveling. Out of the other lenses I have here, the Konica looks like the best overall performer, the Helios+SB combo is one-stop faster but soft in corners, and the Takumar+SB combo leaves me cold and focuses the wrong way. I think it's really a choice between the Konica, buying a fast 50-60mm m42 lens for the m42 SB, or buying a fast 50-60mm lens and a SB for that lens mount. No. Fixed WB on all shots. I just did a little test and you can see the colour shift on the LCD as you adjust the aperture back and forwards.

I added this to my above post after you quoted me: I agree about it being invasive. My dad thinks that smartphones are invasive. My daughter told me that she is happy to be born in the best time to be alive for all of human history, both past and future, and when I asked her why she listed a few things, but the first one was having a smartphone and internet. The times, they are a changin'.....

VR is gimmicky. Just think about who would want to sit down in comfort and have images shown to them that make it seem like they're in a different place than where they really are, and doing things that they aren't really doing, and with people that they don't know. I tell you what, you couldn't even make people sit in a big room and watch such fantasy images, let alone make them pay for it! Not to pick on you or anything, but I think this is an example of someone not getting it. People didn't want to be taken into a large room of dubious cleanliness, they came to cinemas to be transported to a world of the writer and directors vision, and be told amazing stories. If you can't see that VR has the potential to do that in an amazing way, then I guess you'll be surprised by the future. VR is escapist entertainment where you stop being where you are and will only be somewhere else. People probably won't be watching VR on the train for example. AR is to take where you are and to also be somewhere else as well, or at least add a layer onto the place where you are. People will absolutely do this everywhere they go. AR will be a Pokemon Go, your phones notification screen, these forums, and a complete heads-up-display for your entire experience. If you have ever wanted to know something or been bored with something then it will be just great. The thing about VR is that we just haven't worked out how to do it well yet, and VR has a limitation because not everyone wants to stop being where they are. VR will come first and AR will come later, but AR will come in a huge way. VR is like having an expensive home theatre - people will like it but not everyone will have one, AR is the future of the smartphone.

Comparison images. These are high-res so be sure to zoom into them. All lenses fully wide open: F2.8: F5.6: If you want the super-high-res versions that wouldn't upload to the forum, they're in the original link.

Added the Super Takumar 55/1.8 lens, both on SB and without. Files are in the original link shared above. Now to do some analysis.

@Sage I have swapped over from the 4K modes to the 6K Open Gate mode on the GH5 as that mode has some great advantages, including less sharpening. Are you planning to update your instructions with new 'softening' parameters to match the sharpness of the Alexa? This mode seems pretty great (h265, 5K 4:3 image for anamorphic or cropping in post, less sharpening) so it would be useful to have those settings as a reference ???

Did a quick test with the Mir, all shot wide-open at 2.8. Mir-1B 37mm f2.8 lens at F2.8 (no SB) GH5 6K 10-bit Open Gate mode with crop in post GHa Alexa LUT pack I don't think I'm a fan of that combination of settings.

There is a way of thinking that I find particularly useful for this stuff: Think of a company / industry / or whatever that is/was big Think of the problem they solved or the value they gave customers Think of how you'd solve that problem with todays (or tomorrows) tech Think about what that means for that company / industry It sounds simple, but you'd be surprised how many Wall St big business folks can't do it. A few examples: Newspapers They curated and delivered content to people The internet now delivers content for free, but doesn't do a great job at curating it (fake news) The result? Newspapers are all screwed. Completely predictable, yet most didn't predict it. Record labels and record shops / motion picture industry and cinemas Curated artists, invested in making big budget productions up front (taking on risk), marketed the results, and distributed them Three scenarios: Don't curate or invest, just distribute = YouTube Curate and invest and distribute via internet = Netflix Curate and invest but attempt to monopolise distribution = illegal file-sharing Perfectly predictable (and the RIAA are basically just making tits of themselves fighting a non-winnable battle). The musicians YT was Mp3.com and the musicians Netflix hasn't been worked out yet, but big companies are fighting over it (apple, amazon, etc) etc etc. In terms of the motion picture industry, the major innovations go like this: invention of motion pictuers Addition of sound Colour Home theatre (no longer only in cinemas) Virtual reality Interactive VR Interactive AR Potentially some kind of direct neurological connection after that, but it's still a kind of VR/AR

YT and cinema are different, but considering that "cinema" doesn't mean "big room" it means "video with your favourite famous people in it" or "video with your favourite stories". Considering that Pewdiepie has 20 billion views on his channel, and many kids watch hours of YT a day, you can't say that this isn't having an impact on what they think. My daughter doesn't care about going to see Rhianna in concert, but she just about turned herself inside-out to see Shawn Mendes (who got his start on social media) and when he came on stage she cried like people did when they saw The Beatles. Source. Peoples music tastes tend to be most heavily influenced by what they're consuming at 13 (for women) and 14 (for men) (source) and the same mechanism is likely to be the same for other content. Source. We don't have TV in our house, and we don't listen to the radio, we have Netflix and YT and that's how the kids consume content. Their heroes are youtubers and YouTubers aren't filming with Alexas in RAW or on film, they're filming with RX100s and GH5s and their phones. Some are doing it with great lighting, nice production design, nice lenses and the rest, but not RAW, not 12-bit colour, and not with filters and careful adjustment of digital sharpening.