Joe Taylor

Again, it's whatever's in your budget. You can get a decent 100mm-300mm zoom from Canon or even Sigma for around $200-$300. With a lens like that and the EOS adapter on your XL2 you will be able to pick out named craters on the moon and read a license from a mile away. But you're into wildlife videography, so you'll have fun that way too. I've never bought anything greymarket. Usually all you're really getting is the same product for a few dollars less minus the factory warranty. You would have no problems in India. Simply check out sellers policies. B&H is safe bet too. I'd avoid eBay for international trading. However you buy it, you're gonna love it. It's a very impressive system. Enjoy!

Name a video camera that comes close to having the extensive lens range abilities that the XL2 has, especially for wildlife... DV, HDV, BETASP, Hi8, 2k, 4K. It doesn't matter because I said NOTHING about the DV format's abilities. My post was very specific about the low cost lens adapter that makes the XL2 ideal for his needs. Surely you read enough into my post to know what I was saying. Why would you go out of your way to try and put me down? Just to embarrass me? I recall having another of my posts pissed on by you in the past. You said nothing constructive or helpful then either. It's elitist know-it-alls like you that make this otherwise great place sort of a bummer.

The Canon XL2 is probably the BEST video cameras for wildlife -- even if $$$'s are not an issue, simply because of the best $500 tool money can buy-- Canon's EOS adapter. The XL2's already powerful zoom is merely a toy compared to the EOS adapter coupled with a decent telephoto lens. I just bought a Canon 100-400L and a 1.4x adapter and my humble camera is a full-on telescope. In fact it may be overkill for wildlife. It?s so powerful that I need to devise some sort of spotting scope. If you?re in a hurry to zero on something, forget it?unless you?re lucky. For astonomy work, you'll have to wipe eye-goo off your viewfinder because it'll pop out of the socket and smear you're finder when you first see the lunar features of the moon. With a solar filter, you'll swear you booked time with the Hubbell. With this full setup, the XL2 is still a lightweight system and the picture quality is astonishing. Nothing even comes close.

I shot this film with my trusty Arri 2C, a nice set of Zeiss Standards, an Angenieux 25-250, a 9.8 Kinoptik, an amazing 600mm Astro-Berlin Lens and a Norris Intervelometer. I filmed Dead Lonesome over the course of two years. Nearly froze to death in Animas Forks one night, and died of thirst and heat exhaustion in Death Valley. Ended up drinking the blue stuff you freeze for your coolers. At 10:00pm, my film mag was still hot to the touch. (That mag, by the way, was at one time in the Universal Studios inventory and its stenciled number corresponds with a mag that worked on Jaws.) The film stock from my Death Valley adventured was so badly cooked that it turned ultra grainy with a sort of amber hue. The folks at my stock agency liked it and you can see bits of it in that new Hillary Swank film, ?The Reaping.?

Thanks Adrian I need to find a way to make them highr rez. They look really ratty on the web. On DVD the images absolutely pop ith nice smooth movement.

Looks very nice... very appropriate for the setting and it set the mood perfectly. I was expecting something "hilarious" at the end but I'm kind of glad it ended the way it did. Seems these days everything has to be mean spirited or ironic in some tired way. You guys did a great job though. I really liked the splash of red you threw on the side of the building. Didn't really look like no quicky setup from where I'm sitting. Excellent work.

Sorry. My uploads i wanted to attach are too big. If you like, i can email them to you.

Do you mean just pics of the adapter or actual through the lens imagery? I use it quite often for birding and lunar shot. With cheap Canon 100-300 you can get some amazing shots. I'm going to buy the Canon 100-400L series. Bofore I do, I'd like to test it to see if there is indeed a noticeable difference in quality. But with what I have it's a great buy as long as you use it. I did some interesting work doing to extreme maco work using the EF adapter along with a 24-80L and a extension tube. Super detail. Here are examples. These are actual frame grabs. These details were about the size of dime if not smaller. Civil war era newspapers. No way you could do this with a normal lens. Even those $50,000 beasts lack the tools to do this. The Canon XL2 rocks.

I think I've what now must be countless claims that RED is "not" trying to replace film. What the RED team is is in fact a small group of forward thinking types who have a damn good idea of where the industy is heading and they want to make sure they have the most progressive, ground-breaking machine on the market when those days soon arrive. We all know as of now that time has not yet arrived, but they are still out there busting their asses and sweating bullets to make sure they're ready when it does. Some half-decade ago Roger Ebert said that "film is not dead, in fact it doesn't even have a cold." That maxim still hold true today. In 2000 I was the biggest film snob one could possibly be. "I'll NEVER shoot any digital" I'd often hollar when drinking beer and shooting pool. But over the past couple years I've had to stop acting so bullheaded and face the music, and today it's sounding pretty good. I shoot primarily time-lapse and 90% of what I shoot is 35mm. (I've just worn out my second Canon 20D for digital time-lapse work. As far as not putting their system out when people are snapping their fingers on demand--- WHY THE HELL SHOULD THEY?! It's simply not ready. Think of Microsoft... now, if they'd just done a bit more testing.... But very soon it will be out that there (hopefully intervelomenter ready) and I'll have a new debt and one hell of a new camera. Be patient guys and gals. For some, the waiting is the hardest, but most fullfilling part. Seems a few are wringing their hands hoping for failure (so sad) but I put my $5 on RED.

That's very encouraging, Stephen. This system seems like it could have endless possibilities through its life span. Truly revolutionary? the way all things great prove to be. (Will it have word processor thing-a-ma-jiggy with a spell checker so I don't have to cut-and-paste to Word?)

Hello Just getting ready to have this film conformed for Release Print(s). The link are from youtube. The film is split into two parts. Hope they work. Hope you enjoy. If anybody can suggest a better way to show them this web site, feel free to suggest. Thank You Joe Taylor PART 1 PART 2

I've been visitng the RED web sight anxiously for months for new developments and I am blown away by it's current looks and specs. (Please give it an intervelometer so tht I can buy one.) At first, to me, in it's early stages it resembled an Erktor set of sort. But it was a protype. (Anybody sen the Mustang protoypes from the early '60s?) What I see now impresses me beyond words. The stills from Peter Jackson's short are incredible, and not just because Peter Jackson shot them. They're the first real world footage that I've yet seen and my eyes see gold. What disturbs me, and maybe I've been out of the loop on this subject (so flame away, but be civilized-- I've read enough negative garbage and it bores me) is why there is so much pent-up hostility about this camera. This is cutting edge tecnhology that could change everything. It's the perfect size, it's afforable when you consider all the variables. Somebody please, explain in a nice, reasonable way: what could possibly be wrong with this camera? (Some of us run and gun types might have a storage issue, but that point is moot at the moment)

Any chance that the future RED system will be have fully equiped time-lapse abilities? I'm especially interested in being able to time-exposures... a true intervelometer. I currently do my time-lapse work with 35IIC and a Norris intervelometer. For TV work I've done some with a digital SLR. However, if the RED could fullfill my needs... I'd sign up.. some day.

Stephen Lack, "Scanners" C. Thomas Howell, "Tank" "The Hitcher" Burt Rynolds, "Hooper"

As far as Toland's great depth of field (I don't think I saw it mentioned here) they also did some amazing double-exposure work that put foreground subjects very close to the camera so that prominent background subjects would also be razor sharp. Shot when the nurse enters room comes to mind. Lately I've been really impressed with what John Alcott did with "Barry Lyndon." Good old fashioned work when cinematographers got their hands dirty instead of relying on computers. Sure, modern films look great-- in fact they all look great. But films done 15 and more years ago before computers took over you know you're seeing the work. Take a look at Barry Lyndon, you'll see a cinematographers fingerprints. Right-handed.

:rolleyes: Somebody just emailed me a list of great smart ass replies. Hope it's not too late to add that one. Oh, one great recent shot that really stands out is the the slow-mo speed boat passing by in "Miami Vice." First shot in what I guess was only in the directors cut. Great shot, kind of bad movie.

Looking for the best books written about Audio Field Recording, particularly Sound Effects. Can anybody recommend some of the best? Thank You

Hello John A friend of mine went through the same illness as you about a year ago. They caught it in the middle stages, but because of the advances in medical care in this era, he still has over 90% full recovery chances. I can't imagine the stress and fear you must feel now, but your chances to recover and still live a very full life are very good.

How adorable. I think it's time for someone's mum to dress them in their jam-jams and read them a story before bedtime.

There are plenty of deals on ebay for used 35mm cameras. Most are MOS but you can sometimes come across an Arri BL. Buyer beware on ebay, though. There are several good dealers out there that specialize in used film cameras. Visual Products sells good merchandise, but they can be pricey. I bought my first Arri 2c from James Higgens Films. Just Google and you'll find plenty of deals.

Van Gogh.

Will older Arri 35mm bayonet mounted lens' work on the RED if they have a bayonet -> PL adapter? What I have are old Zeiss Primes and a Angenieux 25-250. I have read that the RED will take certain PL mounted lens', but I'm wondering why it would not take all PL mounts (if that is the case), including PL adapter mounted lens'.

Does anybody know specifically what shot were filmed in 65mm for "The New World?"

Seriously... I did not EVEN see this coming. I was only joking about contacting these folks and meant no disrespect to Jim Jannard or anybody. It is not often when a household name actually talks with everybody else. A very classy and wonderful thing.

Okay, I'm going to PM Jim Jannard about this right away, I'll also ask him about single-frame capability. B) Then while I'm at it I'll be sure to PM Steve Jobs about Mac compatability with the RED. Okay, I'm on it. :P