Alan Rencher

David, That is the best, concise answer to this question that I've seen. Every time I try to explain this, I end up writing an opus.

It could still be dust that is lodged in the nooks and crannies, or some cleaning agent or lubricant that is near the bulb.

First off, this is a real names forum, so please update your screen name. If you notice, all of these nice people who are answering your questions are using their real names, and we will appreciate if you will do the same. As much as I find that DSLR's are a hassle to shoot with, DOF adapters were even worse. When the 5D mkII came out, I never looked back. Those adapters always had back-focus issues, there cumbersome, you have to keep replacing the batteries in them, you loose a good deal of light with them, the image shifts from time to time, and the list goes on. Granted, the EX1 hase a much better codec and audio options, but it's not enough for me to switch back. Hell, you can record to a Hyperdeck in ProRes from a D800 now anyway. On Dexter, they don't even use the external recorder. If you're wondering if you can shoot on two or more different formats in one movie and not jar the audience, the quick answer to your question is: yes, they can be made to match in a way that is good enough. It's done in movies all of the time. However, you have to ask yourself a few questions: How good is your colorist? Does your DP know how to set the cameras up to get as close a match as possible? How much money and time do you have for post? Having said that, I would never use two different formats to shoot one scene. They will never cut seamlessly if you are going from face to face. It's not just resolution and colorspace, but you have to deal with contrast, tint, and a plethora of other issues. If you you're working on a low budget, try rehearsing with your actors, and get the good improv stuff flushed out ahead of time. Also, if you get a good improv, you can always have them say that line again.

They probably desaturated and then adjusted the blue curve up, and the other curves down. I apologize for my ineloquent description.

Leo, you're colorist didn't do any photography. Could a graphic designer get photographer credits for just doing his job?

I use tactical gear. It's the best.

No one picks up on sarcasm...

Rokinon are pretty great. Duclos will soon be offering a service that strips coatings from certain elements to give very unique flares. They'll sell them already modified, or modify your existing set. http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/2013/02/26/duclos-lenses-introduces-rokinon%E2%80%A2raw-primes/

I haven't used a collimator before, but I have adjusted flange depth by hand. As you close down the aperture the depth of focus widens, which may be throwing your results off. From my experience, you always keep the aperture wide open when adjusting the flange distance. Which lenses are giving you changing results? Are they wider, or longer lenses? The wider lenses have a much shallower depth of focus, so I would guess that they would be the most affected.

If the colorist did such a great job, then he will be able to put before/after shots on his colorist reel. ... Or maybe you can give the editor a co-director credit since he created such a compelling story out of such raw footage.

You can use some canned diffusion: http://www.filmtools.com/diffusionincan.html Or try using some baby powder, or similar.

I would definitely agree with going for old Moles or B&M's. They may be harder to find if you're not in LA, but you can get some screaming deals. If they need to be refurbished, Mole sells all the parts to repair them at low cost. It's probably going to be way harder to repair some no-name brand from China.

The lighting is very flat. The focus was off in a couple of shots. I think that the composition could have been more creative. Some of the colors are supersaturated to the point that they clip, and the overall look is very "video". Having said all that, I'm sure you learned a lot from this, and next year's submission will probably be amazing.

Adrian is right, the CP.2's are the same glass as the ZF.2's, just in a cine housing.

What are you trying to do? Would it be more practical to get something like a Zoom H4N? Also, if you're interested. I have an M-Box 2 Mini that you can buy for $250.

Look for examples on a 7D. They will look the same.

Bounces!

This is what I based my recommendation on. If I had the choice, I would go Alexa. On a serious note, there is no definitive answer to this question. It gets asked here almost everyday, and what I say to anyone who is asking is: If you have to ask, you shouldn't be buying.

Alexa Plus XT is my vote.

A normal 120V circuit in a US household has a 20A breaker, so that means you could run up to 2000W on a circuit. Using 200 watt bulbs from your local hardware store means you could run 10 bulbs. 200W bulbs do put out more heat than fluorescents, but how many lights do you need for a simple interview anyway? Kids these days are so confused, just sayin'.

You may be better off buying some clamp-light or china-ball fixtures and incandescent bulbs in the wattage range from 100-300W. Those light fixtures may flicker, and who knows what color temperatures you might get.

I agree with Phil. Look into the Rokinon Cine lenses.