Відео

Just the Canon L 24-105mm ii and the Sigma 18-35mm

we used a combo of a few cameras on this. Alexa, c500 and the c70 I think.

@@kendrickgray2873 dats high grade cameras bro but all in all nice brudda

thanks

@@kendrickgray2873 anytime

it gives the best DR at those. You wont notice noise in daylight at those isos. Indoors I shoot 1250 always

thanks! I used the Canon 24-105mm ii for this. I sold the Sigma 24-105mm because the image stabilization on it sucked for video. But the sigma is sharper for sure.

@@kendrickgray2873 thanks bro I appreciate that and one more question wad was your settings on this or u Normally use I have the same equipment

@@majorkeyfilmz For the lighting I used a red gel inside the space light on the aputure 300d ii. I used the space light attachment for the living rooms shots too without the red gel. Outside was the lights on the building. I think the iso was 3200 outside behind the building. Davinci Resolves Noise reduction is crazy. Literally did one take outside because it was raining. As for the camera settings I shot this 8:1 BRAW. I shot half the video in 48p just so I could get a performance and some slow motion from the same shot. Saves me all the time. The rest 24p. All frame rates have a 180 shutter angle. Btw, Even if I had shot them Prores it would have looked exactly the same. The biggest factor here for me was the lighting. It brings out the quality even on the Canon lens. The sigma is probably the sharpest lens I ever used. Oh I forgot to mention... I edit and monitor with the buttery Lut. I usually color, clean up noise and make the footage look as good as possible in DR. Render in UHD or 4k DCI to edit in premiere. If its a simple job that does not require a ton of effects I just edit in DR. Hell I wish I never had to leave it.

anytime :D

400 and 3200 aren't comparable when it comes to noise.

@@kendrickgray2873 You're missing my point. 400 and 3200 are base. Comparing 1250, which is way below base on the dual iso circuitry, and 400, which is base iso on the lower curcitry is not comparable. Of course 1250 is going to have less noise than 400.

​@@JamesAllred-Parasauce This test is a ISO noise test. That is all you should have taken from this. That's the entire point of the test. Its for people who are having noise issues to compare ISO noise levels. I compared 200, 400 and 1250 to the other ISOs because these are what most people would be shooting with. 3200 iso is not recommended in my opinion. With that said 100 iso is the lower tier for the first iso set... Its pointless for me to test that vs 1250 because I'd never use that. People seem to believe the myth that 400 and 3200 have no noise because they are native. Showing people how to have less noise.

@@kendrickgray2873 I know. You’re just missing some fundamentals of iso. No biggie.

@@JamesAllred-Parasauce -_- I'll do a highlight test next through different Isos

Thanks my man! I did it so people can understand you don't always need to use the native ISOs. Crazy that 1250 is clean like that.

Thanks bro, I love concepts like this.

Hey thanks man. It was all internal using cine 4 with Impulz lutz. Mainly the lut called Tetrachrome 400. All shot using 1080p 10 bit 422

@@kendrickgray2873 VERY NICE! I just picked up this rig and I am also feeling like Cine4 is the way to go with this camera, can't wait to try slog as well. Beautiful video.

@@aalonso55 Its a good cameras man enjoy! If u ever use slog2 or 3 I would recommend phantom luts

@@kendrickgray2873 How funny I actually had already purchased phantom luts for use with a different sony camera and now I'm seeing the particular version of the luts I bought also work with the FS5/FS7! Thanks for the tip!

It's only selectable in Davinci Resolve Beta at the moment.

I heard the crane 3s has issues. There are videos discussing that topic on youtube you should look for them. I have the Crane 3 lab not the 3s. The BMPCC is shaped weird so it took a while to get it to work the way I wanted it to. Overall I think gimbals are overpriced junk. If I knew what I know now I wouldn't have got it lol.

Idk I prefer the brighter look. When I tried to make it darker I didn't like it much. I've been using the phantom luts since he released the ones for the Sony cameras. Completely transformed my fs5 a while back. If you don't like grading much you'll like them because they get you to the end faster. Overall the luts are very good.

Nope. Knees bend moving forward and backwards.

Thanks. I pretty much used one Boltzen B-30 to light most of it. The scene in the kitchen was just a smoke machine and natural light from the window. .

Yeah first short film ever. I learned a lot from this. Mistakes were made, but not bad for my first shot.

Im sure it does but it all depends on the camera. The auto focus on the FS5 sucks in general so luckily I don't use auto focus anyway. Maybe on something like the a6300 or 6500.

wow so upgrading to a cinema camera really means no more use of autofocus for professional work. hmm. Im thinking of either the ursa mini pro or sony fs5.. Ursa mini gives more of a cinematic look but its way heavier </3

Well, it depends on the cinema camera. The C200 has great autofocus. The FS5 just doesn't. You just have to pick the right camera for the job. Both the fs5 and ursa mini pro can give you a cinematic look if you know what you are doing.

Thank you!