Jean-Marc Plante

Well Thank you for clarifying, i've had nothing but bad experiences with it so far, all of them having been thrown this camera upon me on-set, without any prep, with slow panasonic zooms, no reference monitor whatsoever, and no trial of the actual product fo any sorts. I guess I will give it another try when the opportunity comes, and will take the time to test it out.

I've had very bad experiences with it. Loved the F3 though! Very stable camera with great specs when used properly. I guess it's the same with the Pocket.

Haha of course Not! It's from 28 Days later, directed by Danny Boyle, cinematography by Anthony Dod Mantle.

Thank Freya! :)

I discussed this with the director, As to wether this would respect the Dogme or not... Might as well shoot it as it is, a in-bed discussion, without all the 'On set' stuff.

And for the love of God...Stay away from the BMPC... Horrible video features, horrible noise patterns, useless camera monitor (Not accurate AT ALL), huge DNG files, 15 mins running time batteries. Cost of lens (But you might find some nice16mm like Angenieux zooms lens online or local vintage photo/video shops), 2.7-8x crop factor makes it impossible to get wide shots if not using super16 lens, and you'll have to rig the whole thing anyways, it's gonna cost you 2-3k to have a working setup with all the accessories. It really is NOT worth it IMO.

I'll go ahead and say you will never get this kind of look with a digital camera. Chroma, noise, patterns, It juste doesnt work...nothing digital looks quite like film. I know it, my roommate has a Red Dragon and anything he tries won't recreate that organic look cinema had with tape-based cameras. And that is why I bought a Canon XL2. For about 700-800$, you can find a mint one. The XL1 used to be the warHorse of video cameras, and Canon implemented a cine look into the completely revamped version of it. It does have 3 1/3'' CCD sensors, you'll have to zoom in and shoot wide open using NDs if you want short depth of field, but it largely pays off in the unique look and harsh contrasts/feel of the image...

Well, the title sells it! I am new to this website, and learning my way by myself through cinematography. I have come to buy a Canon XL2 as I especially love the grittiness and dirty look of MiniDV, as well as the highlight clips and (Yes, I do) the intense chromatic aberration occuring in hard clipping, all of these shown by Dod Mantle in 28 days later. I have taken on the challenge of filming a short Dogme95 movie for a monthly challenge in a cinematography group here in Montreal, And I'd like to hear about your experiences with those conditions. Is there any way to enhance a Dogme95 without falling into the drama the genre actually tries to eliminate? Basically, The short is about a black woman and a white man (opposite skin tones, very dark woman, pink-skinned man) discussing as Lovers do in a bed, charming each other, giving the impression it is about a Love scene. As you pull back though, you realize it is part of a Pornographic set shooting, as you see techs, a camera, the director and the lights behind installed. My Director thought it is a wise way of going around the genre, without desecrating it (As it would be normal to be using lights, a camera, and props, on an actual set) I intend on shooting 24P cine gamma 2:3:3:2 in the academic 4:3 format, using the 20x fluorite kit lens, upscaled to HD afterwards. What do you guys think? Anyone here ever worked with the XL2?