Jump to content

David Hessel

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

David Hessel last won the day on October 25 2018

David Hessel had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About David Hessel

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Other
  • Location
    Denver

Recent Profile Visitors

6594 profile views
  1. Check out Olex services webpage, he services lenses in the Ukraine and specializes in Limo lenses including anamorphic. I believe he has diagrams for just about every lomo anamorphic lens ever made in his site.
  2. First of all the amount of data for 16 bit is 65535 values per channel regardless of whether it is raw or not. Technicallly 16 bit 4:4:4 has more data since it has 3 channels per pixel (RGB) where raw only has 1, making it 3x smaller. I order to grade raw footage it would be debayered into 16 bit 4:4:4 making it identical to uncompressed with everything else being equal. 1.) As stated above they contain the same number of data points. 2.) In a way yes, that is what you do when you grade footage. If your footage has a high dynamic range and you are displaying in on a with dynamic range you can grade the footage to try and fit all the dynamic range in. Camera sensors are designed to only capture what is in the visible spectrum. There really isn't anything in the image that you can't see like the LANSAT system you describe above. I believe the only spectrum most digital cameras can capture a little bit of that we cannot see is infra red.
  3. There is the Red 17-50mm, it is a little over your weight limit at 3.2 lbs but can be found for well under $3k.
  4. I don't know much about 2/3" cameras but I believe the Ursa Mini Pro has an B4 mount option. I have no experience with it and don't now much about it but the Mini can shoot at 3200 is if I am not mistaken.
  5. Probably possible with some medium/large format lenses. The focal distance of the lens has to be larger that the flange distance of the camera for a focal reduced to work which is why mirrorless cameras have them. They have a very short flange distance and can adapt to many more lenses.
  6. I would like to add to this that while these will work they are optical adapters like teleconverters and could degrade image quality of the lenses. I would recommend as others have stated as well to decide what lens mount you want to go with either by choosing lenses first, choosing a camera body first or both (Mirrorless Sony's for example can be full frame and adapated to a wide range of lens mounts). I wouldn't recommend having mixed lenses from lots of different mounts and trying to adapt them all individually.
  7. The D5600 has a Nikon F mount, which is one of the longest flange depth mounts out there. The flange depth is the distance from the mount to the sensor/film plane. Adapters are needed for cameras not only for allowing the lens to attach but also the put the lens the proper distance away from the sensor. If the lens is not the right distance then your focus marks will be way off and the lens may not focus to infinity or reach the min focus distance marked on the lens. I am not sure what mount all of those lenses have but the Canon FD and maybe the others if they are not Nikon mount will most likely have a flange focal distance that is much less than the F mount on the D5600 and will not focus to infinity. Not all lenses can be adapted to any camera system. The GH4 has a very short flange focal distance and can be adapted to many more lenses than a Nikon as a result but as noted above there is no speedbooster in existance that can give you full frame from a M43 camera.
  8. I purchased a Cinematics 28-70mm nikon in PL mount a while back. I liked the lens and seemed to be pretty well made and sturdy. It contacted the PL mount the F35 I was using it on so I was not able to ever test it and ended up returning it.
  9. The thing is you have to face facts. While film may be beautiful it is also, costly, wasteful and hazardous. Technology is improving all the time and soon enough it will surpass film and in the areas where it does not the audience won't care as they are growing up in a digital world anyway. Film is amazing and I hope there is always a place for it to be capured and projected but in Mass film as presentation is dead and is probably never coming back.
  10. As far as digital cinema goes, dolby cinema is my preference by far. Deep blacks and bright whites. The only issue I have with is at my local theater they have red lighting which is close enough to spill on the screen and is noticable in really dark scenes. I am not sure if that is common or not.
  11. I am not in the market for a PC so I am not up to speed on the latest but what I would recommend is a large SSD 200GB or more for running the OS. The top of the line or runner up Nvidia graphics card from last year, not current as it will be half the price. 16GB of ram is probably enough but I would go with 32GB just in case. An I7 processor and a raid of 7200 rp disc drives, at least 4. These can be added internally using a software raid. Generally what I do is build a custom PC that would have been top of the line a year or two ago. Normally spending around $1500 or so.
  12. Maybe try Vaseline on the lens? I never tried it but it believe I have heard it has some interesting effects.
  13. There used to be Davinci Resolve and Davinci Resolve lite where lite was the free version. Now it's Davinci Resolve Studio which is the paid version and Davinci Resolve which is free. You can just download it directly from their website and use it legitimately for whatever.
  14. Seconded but it is no longer called light, just Davinci Resolve, the paid version is now call Davinci Resolve Studio.
  15. It has a learning curve for sure but its not that much if you just want to do a quick edit and color correction. I don't work with 4K only HD, I have a GeForce 680 gtx and never had any issues at all, $130 card now days. Thanks for the correction about UHD in free Resolve, I was not aware of that.
×
×
  • Create New...