nchopp

Rrrrright... My feelings are hurt because you consider yourself a professional photographer. "someone called the Sony PD-170 an ugly camera"? Wow. And here I thought I was the one with the hurt feelings... It's a tool, just like any other camera. If you like it, fine. If someone else doesn't, fine. It's a $4,000 30i prosumer camera - there's nothing ridiculously special about it. It's just a tool. Like any other camera.

Punch them in the face. Particularly someone who is so far removed from the visual cinematography aspect. Just ridiculous.

They used this to very good effect in the opening monologue of Swordfish, along with some really sweet focus work.

A good Steadicam op.

And you have managed to prove yourself quite an ass. If you have to brag to impress us, you don't have much to actually impress us with in the first place. And what in the world does being a "medical professional" have to do with anything? <sigh> Me senses a poser.

A PAL PD-150 or PD-170 can produce a VERY acceptable image for dramatic story-telling. Jacques Thelemaque (MVP of Sundance 2004) produced Dogwalker on a PAL PD-170, and it's being printed to 35 for a theatrical release late this summer. Concentrate on the story, and the rest will follow.

The 4:2:2 is the biggest advantage - as previously stated, it helps a LOT for keying work.

Huh, interesting. Learn something new every day. :-)

Have you actually done this?

Do you get the same problem with the Video Out as well as the monitor?

Actually, I'm rather entertained by this quote coming from you, after a short visit to the espanavision site listed in your profile...

Ok, how about "Let's treat each other with the respect deserved by other adults.". That should be fairly safe, I think.

I think most of the individuals here are professionals - let's treat each other with the respect deserved.

I'm well aware that they didn't. I was stating that if he isn't willing to spend the "dough" on something as (relatively) cheap as the Mini35, he's not going to be spending the money on the things that DO matter.

Looks VERY well shot - I'm looking forward to seeing more as well.

The more you spend on a deck, the better EC you get. (Generally) We've got a set of DSR-80s in our Studio, just PHENOMONAL pieces of hardware. We had a pretty bad infection of that mixed-tape stock problem, and it got to the point where they were the only things that would read the tapes off our 150 (got the most use).

DVCAM = Professional Format MiniDV = Consumer Format That's the simple way of looking at it. :-) However, there are professionals that use MiniDV, too. Use what's suited for the job.

If you don't want to fork out the "dough" for the Mini35, there is NO WAY you'll get close to the same image. Sorry, just won't happen. You're going to need a hella sweet light kit, a very experienced DP (that knows both film and DV), and a lot of money to get it graded, etc. in post.

Put the Detail and V-Detail down to -7. I personally HATE the sharpening you get in DV cameras, and would rather do it in post. Particularly if there's any chance whatsoever of your project getting filmed out.

On BetaSP you're really not going to see much of a difference with the Cine lens and the standard Fujinon or Canon lenses.

AfterEffects. Or you can dump your piece out to an image sequence and setup a Photoshop Droplet to do it.

It's really not a bad lens at all. It certainly doesn't have any image quality problems that I've noticed. I'm not too sure on the focus question, I'm afraid. I've never done any filmmaking work with it, always just A\V Production, and you don't tend to notice such things with that. :)

I just had to laugh at this part. I've got a crystal clear 24x36 hanging on my wall shot on my Canon 10D, a measly $1,500 (at time of purchase) 6.3mp DSLR, with a $400 Sigma lens. I shoot weddings semi-professionally, and I know MANY professionals that are shooting digital. There aren't too many customers that need something bigger than 20x30, which is where MF starts to come into it's own. Other than that, I'll stick with digital. I save money, and that savings is passed on to the customer. (Although I still shoot some B&W 35, just because I still prefer how it looks)

BetacamD or SP could be possibilities as well. Personally, depending on the nature of the project, I'd probably go with the DVX-100. Cheap, looks good if you're good with light, and it'll translate well to both computer distribution (it's progressive) and DVD.

As someone who's spent his fair share of time on Steadicam work - that thing looks like a nightmare and a half. I can just envision the thing wobbling like crazy in ANY kind of wind, or with just about any kind of movement. No thank you. Vi snakkes. :-)