Danny Grizzle
Forum Replies Created
-
I didn’t realize the 5D Mk II was 30i vs. 24p.
-
Of all the visual cues differentiating film and video, 24fps frame rate has got to be the most subtle. In fact, minor in comparison to monitor calibration issues such as contrast and ambient light surrounding the presentation display.
I’m having a hard time buying the assertions everyone makes about viewer conditioning and suspension of disbelief being keyed to 24 fps.
I’d be interested to hear from true believers in 24 fps about how they reached this conclusion. How has 24 fps been demonstrated to be superior to you? What empirical tests did you conduct?
I’m skeptical, not antagonistic. Part of my problem is my first exposure to all these 24 fps arguments came from a crowd of wannabe filmmakers, posers really — kids with camcorders and no real journeyman skills either art or craft.
I recognize the persistent interest in 24 fps indicates my first impression may have been tainted by the source. But I’ve still not seen anything to make me come down on one side or the other 24 fps vs. 30 fps.
-
Richard, have you experienced the iris twitching problem that is being reported with 2.0.4? This was initially thought to be an irregularity with Canon’s 100mm IS macro, but now fear is spreading that 2.0.4 is trouble with other lenses.
-
These handgrips look interesting and inexpensive. Inside diameter is 15mm:
https://www.componentforce.co.uk/en/category/148/foam-handle-grip—style-9
Of course, you can buy other brands given standard size rods.
-
Looking at your short film shot in Dealey Plaza. What type dolly are you using for tracking shots?
-
https://shop.ebay.com.au/gini.1980/m.html
Just curious – your seller seems to no longer support auctions, only direct sales.
How does the shoulder pad change the config? Does it will come with the aluminum shoulder rest, only add a pad?
You’d think he would have a solution for the hand holds.
Also concerned about geometry — I’ve already bought a Zacuto viewfinder, want to either add a matte box and follow focus, or else adapt a Chrosziel matte box I already own.
-
Interested to see your comments on recommendation on the Gini. I’m looking for ways to get my 5D MK II into shooting shape with no budget left. The Gini looks interesting. Two questions: 1) does it come with hand grips, or just bare rods as shown on the eBay link. 2) are these 15mm rods at standard spacings? Can the Gini system be mixed and matched with other components? In other words, what about matte box and follow focus?
-
I’m reading the reviews on B&H A couple of curious things: 1) both the 50mm and the 85mm have high reviews, with exceptions. The exceptions uniformly take issue with image quality at large apertures — the precise reason we’re interested. Not too encouraging. 2) The Nikon variants look to be a physically different design than the Canon ZE. The Nikon mount versions look to have a larger front element because the lens barrel has a distinct enlargement in front of the focus ring.
-
I love the Canon super speeds. But the Zeiss look to be the better choice for video, especially where the lenses might be used with a geared follow-focus system.
Truth be known, I don’t really like auto focus, even for stills work. Especially with extremely fast primes being used wide open. This is simply a faulty design assumption. Auto focus, at best, is a convenience feature. It only results in better pictures in specific circumstances where spontaneity may be a factor. But this argument is mitigated by slow auto focus speed and shutter latency in most digital cameras.
On the other hand, the short throw focus rotation on auto-focus lenses, combined with poor optical view finders and depreciated manual focus aids (focus screens optimized for autofocus, not manual focus) — I really believe all these new wiz-bang features actually diminish the capability of cameras for high-end critical users, even if they do add convenience for beginners and perhaps elevate average results.
-
I owned the original Zoom H4. Very good sound, but cheesy build quality.
The Zoom H4n looks to be much better, but I have never seen or used one.
I am now using a Tascam DR-100. Same general form factor as the Zoom recorders, and it also accepts XLR inputs. What I like most are the excellent build quality, dual battery (NiMH plus AA), and great control layout. You can operate this thing with gloves on. Manual setting of VU, display quality, dedicated switches for critical functions — all a vast improvement over the Zoom H4 (which had tiny, poor quality pots for VU setting, and too many functions buried in menus). $305 seems to be the going price.
Sorry I can’t contrast with the Zoom H4n. I have actually owned 2 different Zoom recorders, and there were quality issues with both. Frankly, the Zoom H4 sounded great, but design and build quality was appalling. My Zoom H2 was a standby / backup. The day I finally reached for it, it recorded about 4 minutes, then died forever – out of warranty.
I’ve never been disappointed with Tascam gear. They’ve been around pro / semi-pro audio for 40+ years. I particularly like their newly announced field recorders.
My next audio recorder will likely be the Tascam DR-680, because lots of times I need more input channels than a simple stereo pair. The DR-680 is an 8 channel recorder with 6 mic inputs. At about $1,000, this looks like a very nice recorder.
The Tascam HS-P82 looks to be a superb professional time code field recorder, but $5,500.
As others here have mentioned, I also admire Sound Devices. Hey, I also admire RED and Panavision. For me, the Tascam gear produces professional caliber results, and is well matched to DSLR video economics.