Ryan De Franco

There's a key difference between mixing color temperatures and squeezing strong orange and teal tones in every frame. Mixing daylight and tungsten, candlelight and practicals, blue and green fluorescents, sodium vapour at dawn, that's artistry. Obscene, unexplained blue and teal all over the place is the gimmick.

The GH-1 might not be a "true" DSLR, but it's mirrorless design allows it to mount cinema lenses without permanently converting to PL-mount. That smaller sensor is about the size of Super 35mm film but much bigger than traditional 2/3 video, providing a shallow depth of field that's much easier to focus with compared to the VistaVision-sized 5D. (It also handles texture better than Canon due to Panasonic's superior line skipping, and it's codec issues recede with the "tester 13" hack.) Yes, c-mount lenses will work, but unless you find a great deal you're probably better off buying 35mm lenses that will cover the full frame of any future camera. If you want contrast, old zeiss for contax lenses are excellent; for a softer look, nikkor primes. And if a budget comes along, rent that PL adapter!

Shoot35: High quality British company, superior to redrock but in the same price range. DFocus: Very affordable follow focus with zero play. Stiff and simple but never fails. Camera Motion Research: makers of a stabilizer that outperforms the Steadicam merlin in every way. Easy setup and flawless motion stabilization for running up stairs, chase sequences etc. Video Innovators: very cheap, very well made shoulder rest with firm thick pad that makes Zacuto look laughably inadequate. Make sure you get the bigger one with the foldable handle; without the handle to lock into your chest, it's worthless scrap. CPM Film Tools: strong, lightweight, affordable rail systems. There you have it. Oh, and the LCD VF is excellent as well.

The biggest issue with DSLR projection is artifacts. Our 5Ds ignore most of the light infrormation gathered by the sensor when recording motion. This line skipping--combined with a relatively weak codec that doesn't record individual frames--means any rapid or complex motion will turn to mud (messy pixels, loss of detail, etc). Then there's the moire that pops up with fine textures like wood or fabric. What might not be noticable on a computer might become garish on a massive cinema screen. Waves, for example, look just fine in camera but look awful on larger displays. By contrast, Red footage is mostly free of such artifacts. When you downconvert your 4k footage for 1080 projection, 4 pixels are combined into one, further reducing digital errors and improving color rendition. Or so they say. On the other hand, the average audience might not even notice DSLR artifacts. A strong story, and all the minor issues don't even catch the eye. One thing i'd be careful with is bright flashes that dominate the frame (like photo strobes). The rolling shutter will reproduce a flash that only shows up in 1/3 or 2/3 of the frame. I've seen 5D footage on a 25' screen that looks amazing, and I've seen footage shot with the same camera that shows all the hallmarks of poor digital acquisition. If you're aware of the limitations, you should get away with it. Good luck!