Hoping someone could help me narrow down my choices among the plethora of patches on here.

I mainly need a patch that would help me best with event capturing/running and gunning. (i.e. weddings, commercial events, concerts, etc.)

I'm looking for:

• Clean skin tone

• Low-light performance

• Reasonably sized files

• Fluid motion

• A decent 720p setting (for 60p slow-mo)

• Stability

The lens I'll be using most of the time will be the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95.

Also, just to put it out there. I am also interested in a patch that would work great for footage with a lot of action for a music video project.

These are the patches I've tried out and tested so far:

@cbrandin 44M/32M(spanning) GOP12 AQ4

@bkmcwd 66M/50M GOP3 AQ3

@balazer Cake 2.0

I appreciate any help/advice from anyone. Thank you.

I'm really interested in a rectilinear Ultra Wide Angle lens for my GH2 but can't decide between these two. I intend to do video and long exposures with it in all conditions (including bright daylight), that's why I'm interested in the ability to fit filters. On the other hand, the idea of going for a wide angle lens is to get that massive perspective, I'm really fond of it for architectural shots.

These two lens seem to be those that offer the widest rectilinear perspectives for the M4/3. I'm not interested in a fish-eye because I would like to shoot 1080p/i without loosing quality after de-fishing. If you aren't already familiar with these two lenses, I would sum up the plus and cons that really matter to me like so:

Panasonic 7-14mm (+ widest reach) (- can't fit filters)

Olympus 9-18mm (+ can fit filters) (- doesn't go as wide)

Price, constant aperture, small quality differences don't really matter to me.

In summary, as far as it goes in terms of what matters to me, what one has the other doesn't. That's why it's so hard to choose for me. Yes, I already researched this comparison thoroughly but never saw it applied particularly to video. Perhaps someone here faced the same dillema and managed to make a decision or could provide a recommendation based on something I'm unable to see here.

Care to comment?

P.S. I'm really focusing on the graphical representation thing alone, apart from the narrative or the facts illustration in broadcast news thing, but discussion of it would also be welcome.

Thanks!!

The only thing negative is the price, isnt cheap, but its price is not bad either, the other problem is that the transmitter costs almost 80% than the Neo2 costs: Neo2 U$325-400, transmitter HSS U$250, total U$ 550-625 too much.

I'm not sure if any other transmitter will allow synchronization in flash mode for high speed, at that point one could save money because the price of the transmitter is very very very excessive.

The othe question is if there a similar light with good CRI, portable what dont need electrical connection and at the same time be a flash and continuous light. The only thing I know so efficient but only as a high power flash and portability is the Godox AD200.

I have a $1000 cap. I'm outside U.S. so, Dell would be better because of support here. Also need to buy on Amazon. So, find those two computers:

Dell G3 - 8th gen i7 six-cores, GTX 1050ti 4GB, two fan slim chassis; or Dell 7000 - 7th gen i7 quad-core, GTX 1060 6GB, better cooling and chassis.

Both have thunderbolt and have same price. Other things are identical or not relevant.

Application will be primary Adobe CC and Davinci, but plans use it to learn Nuke, Flame, Vegas and game development things (Godox, Unity, Unreal, Maya).

What do you think?

My needs is lightness, quality and look, I do not like that look digital lenses.

• At first I thought the Nokton 25mm 0.95 seems a superb lens, but I think it would have to last much saving, keep in mind that no cinema live, my investment is to make my short films that also costing my pocket and projects future.

• The PanaLeica 25mm 1.4 lens seems interesting, but almost all the references I find are still photo and price does not seem so high. Does anyone have references to the?

• The other option was the SLR Magic 35mm T1.4, but I read of problems for autofocus.

• While I have read that the Samyang is not recommended.

• I think SLR Magic comes with a 35mm and a 25mm both t0.95, but I think his price will be close to Nokton.

Thanks in advance!

We can argue whether it’s easier or harder for the young cinematographers today to display their work to the wide audience. No matter which point of view each of us takes, we can agree over one thing – it’s definitely very different today than it was 20 or 30 years ago. In a video by Cooke OpticsTV, some of the world’s most renowned cinematographers discuss the advantages and disadvantages of being a young cinematographer today.

Cooke Optics interviewed Paul Cameron (Westworld, Collateral), Roberto Schaefer (The Kite Runner, Monster’s Ball), Michael Seresin (Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Angela’s Ashes) and Anthony Dod Mantle (Slumdog Millionaire, Snowden), asking them about the opportunities and drawbacks young cinematographers have today. Considering that they have been in the industry for several decades, it’s very interesting to hear their opinions.

ADVANTAGES

• You’re young: according to Paul Cameron, the advantage of being young is simply that – you’re young. I believe this means you simply have more energy to make an effort to rise to the top and succeed.

• Editing tools are more available: another advantage young cinematographers have today is that everything is available. You can make a 4K video directly on your cell phone, transfer it to the computer immediately and do all the necessary editing right after the shooting. A few years ago, Nokia even ran a competition for short movies made by cell phones.

• Video equipment is more available: the choice of the equipment is also much larger today, and video recording devices are simply available to more people. This means that it’s easier for those with an idea to create something and share it with the world.

• It’s easier to reach people: if you are cinematographer today, it’s much more probable that you’ll get the message out than it used to be. Even if you don’t reach the wider audience straight away, there are so many channels you can use to display your work, reach people and gain audience. This is one more thing veteran cinematographers didn’t have.

DISADVANTAGES

The main disadvantage is in a way connected to the advantages, and it’s the matter of availability: availability increases competition. While the availability of video equipment and editing tools can be a good thing, at the same time, it can also be a disadvantage. Wider availability means more people can and want to be cinematographers. As Roberto Schaefer points out, everyone thinks they are a cinematographer (photographers, does this sound familiar?). This means that the competition is much bigger, and it may be more difficult to get attention, showcase your work to a wider audience and achieve success.

At the end, the interviewed videographers advise the young ones to work, to study from the professionals and from their own experience, and to do their best. As Paul Cameron suggests – good cinematographers do rise to the top.

The color timing is not done, and the voiceover is placeholder, but is the general structure working for you? Do you feel like we should give more technical details about the product on the video? Thanks for your time

Adam

Im open to another options, but under U$700.

Thanks friends.

http://www.came-tv.com/220v-2000w-yellow-head-continuous-studio-video-photo-light-p-315.html

Also the optical has a small stroke about an eighth of an inch over the glass. Unfortunately the photos a little kick fast and the front is out of focus.

Currently I have the GH2 with Sanity and a NEX-5N which use 95% for photo still.

The GH2 has a great performance in video, but the latest Lumix issues have improved considerably as the High ISO, less noise. I also interested in 60fps for slow motion; in the GH2 only available in 720p, the NEX let record 60fps in 1080 but the video from Sony isnt as good as Panasonic.

My major candidates are the G6 is a kind of GH2 improved and the glorious focus peaking is a success whether in stills or video. The GX7 having even higher quality (in the level of GH3), I love the design, still photo quality in the level of OMD and NEX . I could not use a monitor for its HDMI output while recording with G6 and GX7, but can via WIFI. Can the GH3 price drops something from here to there, but after having a NEX consider any camera must have focus peaking mandatorily.

Which of them advised me that they see pros and cons in each, or better invest in some good optics for GH2 as 45mm f1.8 as the Zuiko 25mm f1.4 or PanaLeica?

Thanks!

Lightroom is a dragon that literally eats my computer, when I do any operation as simple as it is, I can not do anything else or is very slow, for example if I have an audio or video is choppy. When I export a photo from LR lasts 1-2 minutes, if I want to export to more than 3 times the memory will not let me. As a second option I like to operate Premiere or Vegas editing videos GH2, although this is much to ask.

Im know that budget I cant find a fast computer, but at least I did not delay much.

This chart is my current laptop. The processor is obsolete, but 4GB of RAM is acceptable but far from ideal today.

PS: My experience with HP is not good, do not think it repeat with this brand.

Thanks!

I'm not a professional, just an amateur/enthusiast obsessed with great video quality. I'm primarily looking for something that has a large sensor and can produce sharp, detailed images with minimal noise. I'd like something good for narrative with the bonus of having something I can run and gun with if I want to. I can hold my own with basic color grading, but I'm by no means highly skilled at it, so I feel I wouldn't lose too much if I no longer had RAW.

I've narrowed my options to either selling the BMCC and buying a C100 or FS100, or sucking it up and keeping the BMCC. As for price I feel they are all somewhat similar. If I keep the BMCC I need to still buy ND's, a battery solution, a better rig for handheld, a wider lens, and probably some type of storage array for all this footage I'm amassing. For the FS100 I'd need to add the Speed Booster and ND's to get it up to the C100 configuration.

For the C100, I'd probably pick up an Atomos recorder at some point in the future. For the FS100 I'd be shooting only with the Speed Booster as I have only EF glass.

From what I've read it seems like the C100 should be an easy choice over the FS100, but I feel like the FS100 looks much more cinematic (maybe it's just that I've stumbled upon videos made by FS100 users with better skills than the C100 users? Or maybe it's just because the FS100 has been out longer?). Honestly all of these very cinematic pieces shot with the FS100 are pretty much the only reason it's on my radar as otherwise I believe the C100 to be superior.

Any advice from people who have shot with either camera would be much appreciated. Is the C100 just as good or better than the FS100 when it comes to image quality?

C100 Concerns: -Possibly not as cinematic as the FS100

FS100 Concerns: -Would only be shooting with the Speed Booster (bugs/issues/etc. with this?) -It's a couple year old camera, so I'd probably be disappointed if Sony released a replacement shortly after I bought one -No ND's -Form factor not as much to my liking as the C100

I'm saving for the Nokton, but its price is a bit prohibitive -at least for my third world economy-, PanaLeica wanted to know if it is a good option and I can get a result close and as cinematic as the Nokton or the step and go straight to the Nokton.

I would like to arguments for and against each.

Thanks.

In April or May I will codirecting and making of DP in a short i wrote with a friend. The story have some common elements with the novel 'The tunel' of Ernesto Sabato. Its a psychological drama, with elements of noir cinema, thriller, etc. its dark. My intentions aesthetic are closer to the tenebrism of the painter Caravaggio, films like The Godfather, Stay, Gattaca, etc. Palette with predominantly brown-ochre, black and some of red.

I have this gear in the Panix with TerraQuake: Two cards SanDisk Extreme 16 GB @ 30MB/S Class 10. Lenses FD: 50mm f1.8, 35mm f2, 28mm f2, 80-210 f3.8 & 135mm 2.8. M4/3 glases: Pancake 14mm f2.5 and kit 14-42. But i think need to acquire the pancake 20mm f1.7 have a soft look.

Thanks by help friends.

PS: I have the first and probably one GH2 in my country. Everyone told me acquired Canon, so I hope show what can this noble camera.

I am very interested in making documentaries on people who do endurance based adventures out in the wilderness.

I wonder, as I wish to make cinematic looking documentaries, what are some good lenses I should be looking for - for use with the GH2?

Also, is the Flowmotion V2.2 hack a good one to use with my subject in mind?

I want to shoot fast action (think rock climbing, kayaking, running, mountaineering) in varying weather conditions.

I have a GO PRO HD Hero 2 also.

I currently have a GH2 and 14-140mm lens kit.

Any advice is welcome! thanks.

Cheers!