What do you think about colour grading?

[HockeyFan12]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

@HockeyFan12 obviously you have a lot more experience with different cameras than I have. Even my experience with LogC is based on Log conversions in different MLV apps but since LogC to Rec709 LUTS respond properly to the converted files, I must assume they’re fairly accurate.

Have you ever used the FS5? The small form factor, internal 10bit 1080p and external Raw seems very appealing. The used prices seem pretty nice as well.

OT - I just bought a Nikkor 85mm 1.4 to go along with my 35mm 1.4. Did you say you have the 85mm?

I've only shot a bit with the Alexa, but I doubt simple Log C conversions do it justice. The tonality is so good. It's so smooth. It's noisy, but it's nice looking noise. Highlight detail forever. Its big flaw is it's a little boring.

Never used the FS5. Just the F5 and some post work with F55 raw. I wrote poorly of the C200's 8 bit image earlier but I do like the raw footage on it, just not the lack of timecode sync and proper monitoring options. If you're only after image quality and like C100 ergonomics and are mostly doing your own post and can put up with its limitations it's worth considering once the price drops. It's just... expensive. And as I mentioned I find Canon Log 2 frustrating to work with. I can send some over if you're curious. Just shot a bit with one.

I wish I had an 85mm f1.4. How is it?

1 hour ago, kye said:

I think this is why when we spend ages doing complicated grades we often just make matters worse, instead of approaching the end result - it's because we're just not good enough at each adjustment.

I can totally see having like a million little secondaries to relight an ugly shot, but generally this rings true to me.

[mercer]

2 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

The other interesting yet seldom mentioned function it does is having the option to shoot in 1080p

I was dragged along to watch Aquaman last week (pro tip, always go and see the 4dX versions of films you'll hate as at least you can enjoy the ride).

I watched the credits to the bitter end because I was fascinated by how many people were involved in making it. I've tried without joy to find the figure online but I doubt a guess of 600-700 would be too far off.

Sobering in one way but inspirational in another as just getting a 2 minute piece together as a one man band is a big achievement !

Yeah, I know the 1080p out of the P4K is probably pretty darn good but to be frank... I hate adapters now. The idea of using a speedbooster with that camera gives me angina. I’m even switching the mounts on all my lenses to EF via Leitax or Simmod mounts.

[mercer]

1 hour ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I've only shot a bit with the Alexa, but I doubt simple Log C conversions do it justice. The tonality is so good. It's so smooth. It's noisy, but it's nice looking noise. Highlight detail forever. Its big flaw is it's a little boring.

Never used the FS5. Just the F5 and some post work with F55 raw. I wrote poorly of the C200's 8 bit image earlier but I do like the raw footage on it, just not the lack of timecode sync and proper monitoring options. If you're only after image quality and are mostly doing your own post and can put up with its limitations it's worth considering once the price drops. It's just... expensive. And as I mentioned I find Canon Log 2 frustrating to work with. I can send some over if you're curious.

I wish I had an 85mm f1.4. How is it?

I didn’t mean to suggest it was the same, I just felt the LogC curve was easy to work with. One of these days, I’ll have to find some authentic LogC footage online and give it a go.

I do like the Raw image from the C200. I’m hoping the C200B has a significant price drop in the next year or so.

I ordered the 85mm yesterday, I was wondering if you knew what I should expect. 

[HockeyFan12]

1 hour ago, mercer said:

I didn’t mean to suggest it was the same, I just felt the LogC curve was easy to work with. One of these days, I’ll have to find some authentic LogC footage online and give it a go.

I do like the Raw image from the C200. I’m hoping the C200B has a significant price drop in the next year or so.

I ordered the 85mm yesterday, I was wondering if you knew what I should expect. 

I've heard really good things, but I haven't used it. 

[kye]

3 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

I can totally see having like a million little secondaries to relight an ugly shot, but generally this rings true to me.

Having a million secondaries is totally fine as long as each of them gets you closer to where you want to be.

Unfortunately, for people like me, after a certain point I'm really just making things worse!

[thebrothersthre3]

On 1/18/2019 at 10:53 PM, mercer said:

Yeah, I know the 1080p out of the P4K is probably pretty darn good but to be frank... I hate adapters now. The idea of using a speedbooster with that camera gives me angina. I’m even switching the mounts on all my lenses to EF via Leitax or Simmod mounts.

Why so?

[mercer]

18 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Why so?

When I bought my first camera, I couldn’t afford any good native lenses and since I wanted shallow depth of field, I bought adapters and vintage lenses. When I moved to mirrorless, I did the same thing except the adapters got larger. I followed the advice to get an adapter for every lens so I was swimming in adapters. One of the great things about still lenses are their small size, but once you add the adapters the lens is unbalanced and huge on mirrorless cameras.

Once I moved back to a DSLR, thankfully the size of the adapters are smaller, but there is just too much wiggle for my taste and for not much more I can change out the mount via Leitax or Simmod and have all of my lenses with the same mount.

But now I have a couple of small boxes full of mirrorless adapters taking up valuable real estate in my closet... but I don’t want to throw them away... maybe I’ll list a bunch of them on eBay or include them with some lenses I plan on selling.

As far as speedboosters... it’s just another piece of glass I have to make sure is clean... the lens elements and my NDs are more than enough. Don’t get me wrong, if I have to use one, I will.

[thebrothersthre3]

2 minutes ago, mercer said:

When I bought my first camera, I couldn’t afford any good native lenses and since I wanted shallow depth of field, I bought adapters and vintage lenses. When I moved to mirrorless, I did the same thing except the adapters got larger. I followed the advice to get an adapter for every lens so I was swimming in adapters. One of the great things about still lenses are there small size but once you add the adapters the lens is unbalanced and huge for the camera.

Once I moved back to a DSLR, thankfully the size of the adapters are smaller but there is just too much wiggle for my taste and for not much more I can change out the mount via Leitax or Simmod and have all of my lenses with the same mount. But now I have a couple of small boxes full of mirrorless adapters taking up valuable real estate in my closet... but I don’t want to throw them away... maybe I’ll list a bunch of them on eBay or include them with some lenses I plan on selling.

As far as speedboosters... it’s just another piece of glass I have to make sure is clean... the lens elements and my NDs are more than enough. Don’t get me wrong, if I have to use one, I will.

True. I made it less a hastle by simply only getting one mount of lenses. That way I only need a single adapter. I am pretty notorious with shooting with dirty glass tho?

[mercer]

6 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

True. I made it less a hastle by simply only getting one mount of lenses. That way I only need a single adapter. I am pretty notorious with shooting with dirty glass tho?

Right, which is why I am moving everything to EF. My issue with a single adapter is that they aren’t built to the same quality as the original camera mount, so over time, the metal will wear and the springs will loosen... unless you buy really good adapters like Metabones or Novoflex... but that can get pricey.

I also like the different color looks that different lenses can offer. For instance my Zeiss lenses have a naturally cooler look compared to my Nikkors, so when I plan out some projects, I can help my post color work a little by choosing the right lens for the tone of the piece... so although a lot of folks might prefer the clean, sterile look of modern glass and then find the look in post (which is a valid option) I prefer the character of the glass to help me find the look I am after.

[thebrothersthre3]

5 minutes ago, mercer said:

Right, which is why I am moving everything to EF. My issue with a single adapter is that they aren’t built to the same quality as the original camera mount, so over time, the metal will wear and the springs will loosen... unless you buy really good adapters like Metabones or Novoflex... but that can get pricey.

I also like the different color looks that different lenses can offer. For instance my Zeiss lenses have a naturally cooler look compared to my Nikkors, so when I plan out some projects, I can help my post color work a little by choosing the right lens for the tone of the piece... so although a lot of folks might prefer the clean, sterile look of modern glass and then find the look in post (which is a valid option) I prefer the character of the glass to help me find the look I am after.

I went with Minolta. Canon is cool too but a lot of their popular glass (zooms mostly) aren't really geared for manual focus. I also have a bunch of Fuji glass for auto focus, that'll all have to go if I switch systems tho. 

[mercer]

8 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I went with Minolta. Canon is cool too but a lot of their popular glass (zooms mostly) aren't really geared for manual focus. I also have a bunch of Fuji glass for auto focus, that'll all have to go if I switch systems tho. 

I fricken adore Minolta lenses. If you want to get caught up in some good reading, there’s a Rokkor guide on the REDuser forum that is amazing. One piece of advice for vintage lenses... save the money and buy the better, faster glass. Minolta has some serious legendary glass. The 58mm 1.2 and the 35mm 1.8 and the 28mm f/2 are pieces of mechanical art. On the cheaper end, the 50mm 1.4 PG is also an amazing lens. On the really cheap side, the MD 50mm f/2 is pretty damn good as well.

As far as Canon lenses... I am actually pleasantly surprised by them. The 28mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 are sleeper lenses in my opinion. I could film an entire movie with those two lenses and if I wasn’t obsessed with lenses, I’d be completely content with just those. The manual focus of USM lenses aren’t as bad as I thought they would be either. And once I get a couple of these projects done, I may just sell off most of my lenses and keep the Canon lenses. Right now I have about 3 sets of lenses and a couple odd balls that I really like... this time next year, I’ll whittle away at least one set and it won’t be the Canon glass. 

[thebrothersthre3]

10 minutes ago, mercer said:

I fricken adore Minolta lenses. If you want to get caught up in some good reading, there’s a Rokkor guide on the REDuser forum that is amazing. One piece of advice for vintage lenses... save the money and buy the better, faster glass. Minolta has some serious legendary glass. The 58mm 1.2 and the 35mm 1.8 and the 28mm f/2 are pieces of mechanical art. On the cheaper end, the 50mm 1.4 PG is also an amazing lens. On the really cheap side, the MD 50mm f/2 is pretty damn good as well.

As far as Canon lenses... I am actually pleasantly surprised by them. The 28mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 are sleeper lenses in my opinion. I could film an entire movie with those two lenses and if I wasn’t obsessed with lenses, I’d be completely content with just those. The manual focus of USM lenses aren’t as bad as I thought they would be either. And once I get a couple of these projects done, I may just sell off most of my lenses and keep the Canon lenses. Right now I have about 3 sets of lenses and a couple odd balls that I really like... this time next year, I’ll whittle away at least one set and it won’t be the Canon glass. 

I do have the 35mm 1.8, it is exceptional wide open. The 50mm 1.4 is nice too though it doesn't really catch up to the 35 until you get to 2.8. I used to use Nikon AI-s lenses, but I do like Minolta better. I have heard they can be used on medium format cameras, which is also pretty cool. I'll check out that guide on Reduser. 58mm 1.2 sounds cool, though I am sure its quite expensive lol. Waiting to get a deal on a metabones speedbooster for it, though stil debating if I'll stay with Fuji or not. 

Color was another reason I went with one brand as I have noticed a color shift when I formally mixed lenses a lot. Still trying to unload my Sigma 18-35, was debating going all Sigma, but I like the vintage look. The Sigma is amazingly sharp at 1.8 though. 

I was also thinking about switching completely to Canon lenses, easy to find speedboosters for them as well. 

[mercer]

13 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I do have the 35mm 1.8, it is exceptional wide open. The 50mm 1.4 is nice too though it doesn't really catch up to the 35 until you get to 2.8. I used to use Nikon AI-s lenses, but I do like Minolta better. I have heard they can be used on medium format cameras, which is also pretty cool. I'll check out that guide on Reduser. 58mm 1.2 sounds cool, though I am sure its quite expensive lol. Waiting to get a deal on a metabones speedbooster for it, though stil debating if I'll stay with Fuji or not. 

Color was another reason I went with one brand as I have noticed a color shift when I formally mixed lenses a lot. Still trying to unload my Sigma 18-35, was debating going all Sigma, but I like the vintage look. The Sigma is amazingly sharp at 1.8 though. 

I was also thinking about switching completely to Canon lenses, easy to find speedboosters for them as well. 

Along with the Nikkor 35mm 1.4, and Canon 28mm 1.8, the Minolta 35mm 1.8 is one of my favorite lenses I’ve ever used. Obviously when I switched to the 5D3, my Minolta lenses didn’t adapt any more but I luckily found a 35mm 1.8 that was modified to the EF mount.

The Sigma 18-35mm is a legendary modern lens but I find it a little boring, or should I say... a little neutral. But as a zoom lens, it’s like having 3 prime lenses in one, that are sharp as a tack... so I get the appeal. I used to have the Canon 24-70mm f/4 and it was an amazing lens... SHARP wide open with amazing image stabilization... seriously as good as IBIS on the GX85. At f/4, unfortunately the speed was just too slow for my filming style. But the convenience of a zoom is a bonus. I miss it a lot when I am out shooting. Unfortunately for FF, I believe only Sigma makes a fast zoom, the 24-35mm but that is just a bit too limiting, especially since it doesn’t have IS.

[thebrothersthre3]

33 minutes ago, mercer said:

Along with the Nikkor 35mm 1.4, and Canon 28mm 1.8, the Minolta 35mm 1.8 is one of my favorite lenses I’ve ever used. Obviously when I switched to the 5D3, my Minolta lenses didn’t adapt any more but I luckily found a 35mm 1.8 that was modified to the EF mount.

The Sigma 18-35mm is a legendary modern lens but I find it a little boring, or should I say... a little neutral. But as a zoom lens, it’s like having 3 prime lenses in one, that are sharp as a tack... so I get the appeal. I used to have the Canon 24-70mm f/4 and it was an amazing lens... SHARP wide open with amazing image stabilization... seriously as good as IBIS on the GX85. At f/4, unfortunately the speed was just too slow for my filming style. But the convenience of a zoom is a bonus. I miss it a lot when I am out shooting. Unfortunately for FF, I believe only Sigma makes a fast zoom, the 24-35mm but that is just a bit too limiting, especially since it doesn’t have IS.

Yeah the Canon 24-70 plus Canon C100 MK2 would be a damn good combo. Its a tempting setup for me. IS is a big benefit for me if I switched to Canon, most Fuji lenses don't have IS and of course vintage lenses don't either. That said for most projects I don't need IS or IBIS. Gimbals for moving shots or just a good old tripod work for 90% of things. Its that 10% that messes everything up ?