Jump to content

Travis Gray

Basic Member
  • Posts

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Travis Gray

  1. I was originally looking at the AJA Ki Pro Mini, looked like it'd be great for sticking on the back of rigs to help balance, but read some not great reviews on operating it. But the input variety was nice and the HDMI-through would be good to have. Looking at the Atomos Ninja now. I've heard some good things about it, it's a little cheaper (can get the unit and three SSDs for less/about the same as just the AJA unit), and looks like it'll be easy to mount to a camera with support arms and what-not. HDMI-through not so much a big deal since it can be a monitor too. And I think a lot of the EVFs out there have HDMI-through as well, so, depending on signal degradation if there is any, the ninja could be the last in the chain. It's just a bit disappointing that they don't have higher frame rate capture yet, but, not really a deal breaker for me.
  2. I'm a Nikon guy, so I'm going to be partial. Canon disappointed me. I love the picture that comes out of my D7000 over when I was shooting video with the 1D MkIV. But now I hate DSLRs all together. I've seen some good stuff coming out of the D4, but not sure how the extra pixels affect the video out of the D800. Haven't seen any tests yet. Figure out what you want to do with photo and video and that'll help. If you want to focus on portrait or commercial work for your stills, the D800's extra MP will probably come in handy. Not sure how much more improved the MkIII focus is, but I've been very happy with the D7000's focusing, so can't imagine D800 is going to be bad at all. Then look at video samples coming out of each as they surface. Read reviews. The one reason I decided to never shoot video with the old MkII was I heard it was notorious for overheating. I liked shooting with the MkIV because of the better processing and it was a workhorse. No overheating issues. And I also didn't want to shoot video on a full frame sensor. I think it all depends on what your preference is. Also think about investment in glass. If you think about going the C300 route at some point, investing in EF glass would be helpful. But, then if you really move on and get into PL mounts, then it doesn't matter anyway.
  3. Have you tried doing something similar yet? Think about how you counteract haze... now just do the opposite. I think lifting shadows/gamma will get you started in the right direction. Play with picture profiles in camera. Just do a bunch of tests. Rent a haze machine.
  4. Lighting, grading, maybe a little bit of the lens... I don't see too much that can't be attempted to achieve I don't think. You'd only have the issues that Phil mentioned with moire and compression (especially if pushing the grade too much). Lower saturation, push gamma, add a little yellow maybe? (I'm still working on exacting color skills...)
  5. I was planning on getting the CPs in f-mount, and then being able to switch out on the D7000 as well, because the one PL mount I originally looked at (because my first thought was PL mounts too) said there was an additional crop of 1.11. Kinda scared me off of the idea a bit. Part of my reasoning with the Nikon glass too was that I'd be able to build up my still arsenal as well. And no need to say to get with the digital times, next on my list is to pick up an F5 haha. And I'm dying to have some client book me to shoot all in 16mm. But I doubt they'd want to pay for that hahaha
  6. So, low participation in this forum and now I'm coming with an annoying question (need to make a point of being more active here), but, I'm in the process of buying new glass and looking to either get opinions or figure out what questions I'm not asking myself to make the best decision. I'm moving more into doing small budget projects and commercial work, and while I'm ramping things up, doing weddings (been doing them for a while now so, gotta do what I know haha). And right now I'm shooting on the Sony FS100 and a D7000 for when I need a second camera/something small. I've been looking at the Zeiss Compact Primes for a while now and they look like they're a pretty good set for the price and I've read some pretty good things about them, and I definitely like the low weight. Haven't specifically used them with the camera, but have handled them and liked them as far as that's concerned. But, given the price, I could definitely save/get more if I just went with Nikon glass. While I'm sure wedding clients (and I've found a lot of times for the most part, other people) don't notice weird little differences and things like breathing, I do like to shoot for the best quality I can pull off. So does anyone know if the difference between the two is such a huge difference where it'd be obvious to go with one over the other? I'm using the Novoflex f-mount adapter, so the Zeiss having the iris ring is awesome so I actually know what I'm shooting at (also fixed by getting the D Nikon lenses), as well as the standard sizes so when I do have it on a rig I can easily switch things out, and there's the obvious difference in focus rings. Maybe there's also something that I'm just not thinking of asking myself to see what would work best for me that someone may be able to point out. It'd probably be nice to have a set of cine primes on hand to shoot things that come up, and then rent better glass/cameras for bigger projects, but I also want to make sure that I'm not just after the CP.2 because I like the look of them haha I dunno. Sorry for the long post, but hopefully I can gain some insight into things. Thanks!
×
×
  • Create New...