Tim McC Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 So, I have an Iscorama and a collection of vintage lenses (including the DSO Flare Factory). I've been shooting on the GH2, but would like to upgrade. Of the latest crop of affordable cameras (GH4, BMCC, A7s) which would make the best pairing with my set up? Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvertonesx24 Posted June 15, 2014 Share Posted June 15, 2014 If full frame or larger frame isn't going to be a problem (depending on your current lens set), I'd strongly consider a Magic Lantern running Canon camera, probably 5DIII or II. The ability to set custom aspect ratios like 4:3, is a great tool to use when shooting with anamorphic, especially 2X lenses. And considering that matte 2.35:1 is almost becoming standard at this point, filming 1600x1200 means my 2X lenses come out at a nice 2.66:1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebastien Farges Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 So, I have an Iscorama and a collection of vintage lenses (including the DSO Flare Factory). I've been shooting on the GH2, but would like to upgrade. Of the latest crop of affordable cameras (GH4, BMCC, A7s) which would make the best pairing with my set up? Thoughts? GH4, of course ! ;) Julian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McC Posted June 16, 2014 Author Share Posted June 16, 2014 If full frame or larger frame isn't going to be a problem (depending on your current lens set), I'd strongly consider a Magic Lantern running Canon camera, probably 5DIII or II. The ability to set custom aspect ratios like 4:3, is a great tool to use when shooting with anamorphic, especially 2X lenses. And considering that matte 2.35:1 is almost becoming standard at this point, filming 1600x1200 means my 2X lenses come out at a nice 2.66:1. I definitely like the look of full frame, especially on the Canons, but I don't need to worry about the 4:3, since the Iscorama is only a 1.5x squeeze. Since the minimum focusing distance (without diopters) is roughly 6ft./2meters, I wonder if a smaller sensor might be better since I need to be farther away from my subject anyways... Some of that mark iii raw footage is quite nice, though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raf702 Posted June 17, 2014 Share Posted June 17, 2014 If you can afford full frame you should look into the 6D or 5D-3 or new A7S. If not GH3, GH4, BMCC, etc. would be good options. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nikkor Posted June 18, 2014 Share Posted June 18, 2014 I guess GH4 with a speedbooster, because you have so much resolution to play with you won't miss the 4:3 ratio you can get in ML. Julian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McC Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 I guess GH4 with a speedbooster, because you have so much resolution to play with you won't miss the 4:3 ratio you can get in ML. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McC Posted June 18, 2014 Author Share Posted June 18, 2014 Well, going from the GH2 to GH4 would be a pretty painless transition... Something about the footage just seems very "video-y" to my eyes, compared to the BMCC... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itimjim Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 100% GH4. Using 4k acquisition for 2k delivery using anamorphic allows you to trim and conform the 2.66 (1.5x) or 3.55 (2x) to 2.39 with very little resolution loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuickHitRecord Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 For 2x anamorphics, I still say that it's the 5Diii with ML raw. The 4:3 acquisition means that you can get by without a monitor if you need to (which you can anyway with 1.5x anamorphics). Cosimo murgolo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McC Posted July 1, 2014 Author Share Posted July 1, 2014 For 2x anamorphics, I would heartily agree, QuickHitRecord. But with 1.5x, I'm on the fence between BMCC and GH4. I prefer the look of the BMCC, but the ease of use of the GH4 can't be ignored either... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McC Posted July 1, 2014 Author Share Posted July 1, 2014 And there's that 96fps HD feature (on the GH4). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosimo murgolo Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 and there's that raw feature on 5D mark iii thanks to ML which is great IMO. I was in the same shoe than you are now a month ago. I chose the 5D paired with a Sankor 16D and I am absolutely happy. But don't let the other people choose your camera, you have to decide what is the best option for you. good luck!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnBarlow Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 The 5D2/3 are the only 'affordable' cameras which will give you genuine full height CinemaScope using MLRaw. Its the real deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell Anway Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 I'm making a similar decision. Based purely on specs... My thinking is that the A7s makes the most sense. I've been shooting my anamorphics on a Gh1 for a while. My widest lens is a 35mm. And I can say with confidence that it would be nice to go a little wider than the gh1 sensor allows. The A7s is full frame but it offers a crop sensor mode. That is some best-of-both-worlds-shit! Togglin' willy-nilly between FF and super35. That means that I can shoot aps-c mode using my ana's (which won't cover FF), then switch it to full frame and shoot my zeiss zf's. Awesome. The larger sensor also means its going to be easier to soften up the background and make the most of that beautiful bokeh. Lastly, to me it comes down to 4k vs. low-light. This is definitely subjective and depends on what you shoot/what you need. But to me, because shooting the anamorphics is important, low-light takes precedence. Having that type of low-light performance means I can pop on my 80mm ana, stop it down to T5.6 and shoot at night. This camera means there are scripts I'm not re-writing. That is so amazingly great. I've always been a canon shooter (there's an XL2 bangin' around here somewhere...) but for my purposes the 5DIII is not a contender. It is technologically dwarfed by the GH4, sensor size means it doesn't work with proper cinema glass, and doesn't have anywhere near the flexibility of the A7s in terms of glass options or low-light performance. I'm sure the ML software brings it's picture quality back into the ballpark with these other cameras (haven't used it, don't really know, only shot MKII's) but when there are affordable, warranty-supported alternatives I just don't see the point. Plus dealing with wonky home-brewed workflows? Sounds like a headache. Then throw in sLog... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 GH4 + SLR Magic Anamorphot with Sigma 30mm 1.4 on a Speedbooster. Quite the combo, but looks really nice: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njthomps65 Posted July 29, 2014 Share Posted July 29, 2014 So far I've had a few focus issues when adapting M42 lenses to an EOS mount. Are M42 lenses easy to adapt the the Sony NEX mount? The Sony mount is one thing that is making me a little apprehensive about the A7s. Everything else looks incredible. I know the metabones is a great adapter out there compatible with the A7s. So in order to get an old Pentax M42 lens on the Sony, would you have to go A7s > Metabones > M42 Adapter > M42 Lens. So many adapters... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.