Are you ready for Marvel’s phase 2? The Avengers was the last movie in the initial and ambitious plans from Marvel to incorporate epic superheroes into a unified fight. The onscreen culmination did not disappoint and from the looks of this trailer phase 2 will be off to a good start. Cue Tony Stark.
I normally disregard awards. (well, unless I win them). I like Seth McFarlane. He led me to the show and kept me watching, I thought he did great. I knew Ang Lee from his varied work from Crouching Tiger to the underrated Incredible Hulk. So he wins Best Director for Life of Pi. So I watch Life of Pi. I couldn’t take my eyes off the screen. I’m hypnotized by the world he created and I sit in silence five minutes after the movie ends, reliving what I just saw. Reliving how I felt when I watched it just moments earlier. That doesn’t happen often with me.
It just so happens that the other most recent time a film had that effect was another Oscar winner. It’s a short film called Curfew. Everything was great down to the use of anamorphic lenses.
Two highly recommended movies.
I’ve been working for the Be You Campaign over the past few months. So let’s get this out of the way, it’s so much nicer when work leads to good things for others. I believe that the founder, Tisa, is genuine in her drive to help others that are struggling. Whether it be from rape, cutting, or bullying. I recently saw the Bully documentary and it was dumbfounding. It’s sad and I’m glad that there are forums for this type of thing. I’m glad that I can be a part of such a forum.
Down to the nitty gritty. I shot this piece on a couple Canon cameras. For those that follow my blog, I’ve been an avid Sony supporter. From the a300 to the a57 to the a77. The natural progression would have been the a99. I was in the market for a full frame camera and the video results just didn’t cut it for me. Sorry Sony. The moire and aliasing, the lack of deep depth of field and responsiveness to sharpening made me look elsewhere. I had a GH2 and though it is superior to the 5d mark iii in resolved lines, I wanted the full frame look (to make shallow shots easier to achieve at more angles and distances) and good low-light. I’m able to shoot at 6400 with minimal noise, get shallow below 30mm and sharpen to ridiculous amounts in post.
The set-up I used was dual. I had a 7d on a monopod with a 50mm and ND. On sticks I had the 5d with the 17-40mm at f11. I captured audio through a lav attached to a Zoom H2 (forgot to hide the wire!!!!!) and had back-up with the Rode Video Mic Pro set to +20db connected to the 5d at a little past 0. Everything was shot with the CineStyle picture profile and graded within FCPX. The sparrows were added in post.
That’s pretty much it! I really enjoyed working with Melissa and she is a bright, young woman with a great attitude. We had to stop something like 8 times as people drove by because they knew her. So popular! I don’t have nearly as many friends. Very sad. Is it me? I might need help. What’s that website again?
You’re damn right I did.
Was in town for a shoot at Kelley Park and had some unused footage of the Japanese Gardens. It’s a pretty cool location but can get noisy with kids. Lots of cameras too, I think I saw a few Sony’s out there! It’s a pretty quick edit in FCPX and I fear I might have entered a purple faze. Let’s hope the exit is around the corner.
A few shots were with the 7d and 70-200 2.8 is. Everything else was with the 5d and 17-40 f4. Slider shots were done with this. If you take your time you can get some super smooth shots (note: I didn’t and I think some of them were semi-silky)
I came from Premiere Pro ages ago when Final Cut was the industry standard. When Apple decided to overhaul everything in FCPX, i jumped on board. It seems as though everyone went to CS6. The monthly membership to Adobe’s Cloud sounded supremely enticing but Final Cut Pro X worked well enough for me. I’m glad I stuck with it because whoa did 10.0.7 (apparently this happened with 10.0.6 but I was late to update) supercharge everything. Now I still have some issues with exporting FCPXML into DaVinci Resolve and it’s still NOT easy to go between Motion and Final Cut, but this truly feels like a pro editing piece of software now. Toss those “glorified iMovie” references out the window.
I’m somewhat distinguished for my speedy delivery. A huge reason is FCPX. Clip and audio syncing (no more Plural Eyes), magnetic timeline, and robust Color Board with Paste Attributes all help me deliver projects quickly. The Retina support also means I don’t have to rely on my Thunderbolt Display. Full HD in a small window with video scopes on. Wow!
I also use Western Digital’s 2 tb passport. With USB 3.0 on FCPX 10.0.4 things were choppy and sluggish. I would import everything onto the limited SSD in my Macbook and duplicate everything when the project was done. Rendering and transfering time is now cut in half because somehow after the upgrade, I can edit directly from the external harddrive. Of course when I stack 4-5 adjustment layers, I’ll see hiccups and the occasional spinning beach ball from color hell but it’s worth it and I remain extremely mobile.
Give it FCPX a shot!
way to get more views. Inside joke with a buddy of mine as we were talking about this just hours earlier. I once wrote something about Adam Levine that to this day gets me hits on this blog. Well guess what?!!
Adam Levine. Adam Levine. He’s hosting Saturday Night Live and here’s the promo. Adam. Levine.
Fun Fact: Did you know that before Maroon 5 Levine’s band was known as Kara’s Flowers? I didn’t. I swear.
Over a decade ago I sought funding for starting a video production company. I pulled up Powerpoint and went to friends and family. Things happened along the way. Like a fiancé. A job. Family found and lost. Alcohol.
Vincent Laforet’s Reverie had me amazed. I was drawn back in to where I drifted from. Phillip Bloom’s work is inspirational to me. I had to get back into this. Cinematography. Film making. The passion never left. I love the part of importing clips and getting depressed at my work. It starts jumbled but hopefully by the end I can take a finger and strike an emotional chord. To at least one other person that’s not me. Because then I would have connected. The higher power that exists to me lies in the spaces between people.
So I’ve been busy working on two projects. Here is the timeline on an intro to the Be You Campaign. I’ve never made so many titles in my life! The founder has a passion to get a message across. Her message is to love yourself, all parts. How simple. How hard for me to do. She’s amazing.
I wish I had more time to do reviews on the latest gear, but I don’t. FCPX is holding up well. Macbook Pro Retina is showing kinks in the armor. Spinning wheel going on more than I like. I hope to post soon again, the clients are game changing people. Great stories and funny individuals.
Wow. Time passed by quick. Half the month is over and I haven’t posted in the new year. My apologies. I’ve now filled all seven days of the week with work, multiple jobs on most days, and I’d be lying if I didn’t say I my anxiety levels are going through the roof. I want to do well but sometimes I feel like I’m spreading myself thin and the quality of work suffers. I hope everyone’s happy.
I’ve been getting just a few hours of sleep and came across Phillip Bloom’s recent post here. Now don’t get me wrong, I’d rather have more work than less, and it’s amazing that I get work with amazingly talented and genuine people, but his story makes you think. Maybe it’s just because I look up to the guy and his talent. For now, as long as I stay focused on the moment, it’s wonderful.
I’m working with an uber-talented squad of musicians. They’ve aspired to make some monthly web episodes to highlight what a hilarious bunch they are. Here’s a test run of the opener. Full pilot episode should air Monday. I wanted a Leverne and Shirley vibe but they opted for this.
They cut that track and it’s huge bonus to work with artists that produce music you would buy.
Here’s what the pilot episode’s timeline looks right now. I prefer FCPX’s workflow but it’s a pain sometimes.
Stay Tuned but check them out here for now:
Picked up the Canon 17-40 f4L from a photog in San Jose. He’s got a great studio in downtown. My rule of thumb, if a dude has Steven Seagal’s pony tail, he’s probably really cool. Snapped a couple pics, pulled up camera raw, here you go. This should tide the blog over until New Years. I’m glad we made it passed the Apocalypse, sad that we didn’t have a Zombie invasion. I’ve been stocking up, working out, and mapping my route to Costco. Oh well…
Shot everything wide open at 17mm on a 5d m3 (i know…) and tossed in the originals just because.
After:
Before:
After:
Before:
you a special Christmas and a very Happy New Year. Thanks for visiting my blog. It’s been a wonderful tool that brings me discovery, humility and dashes of clarity.
Happy Holidays!
Michael
The first thing someone usually tells you upon purchasing your first DSLR, is to ditch the kit zoom lens and get yourself a prime. In the Sony universe, most will recommend the Minolta 50mm 1.7. It’s a great lens, built solidly, and performs sharply. It also can be had for roughly $80. I’ve owned one, then sold it, then searched for it again. I went a different route, spend a few more bucks and obtained the f1.4 version of Minolta’s standard lens. Here’s why:
-on the a77, light is important and I could use the extra third stop
-as far as bokeh on a crop sensor behavior is more like the full frame equivalent of 2.1 vs 2.55, rather than 1.4 vs 1.7.
-sharper overall at wider apertures
-Sony equivalent is twice as much as the Minolta
They are both great choices as short tele-portrait lens (remember 50mm on an aps-c is really 75mm) and are built from an era of durability. They are also really small compared to other brands since the focus motor is screw driven and doesn’t require a mechanism in the lens body. So they are truly pocketable. The manual focus ring is tiny however, and though the rotation is smooth on the copies I’ve had, it really was designed for autofocus. An autofocus that is loud but quick on the a77.
and now a video shot with it….
There are a lot of rumors and folktales about this one.
-made with Leica
-Minolta sold it cheaply as “thank you” to it’s users
-every time a picture is taken with it, Zooey Deschanel sings a quirky song
The facts are it takes solid, sharp and contrasty photos that performs well against the much more expensive Zeiss line of lenses.
Here: Pitted against Sony “G” and Zeiss high end lenses.
It has it’s drawbacks. 28mm is not wide enough and f4-4.5 is not fast enough, especially on a crop sensor, for general purpose. The minimum focusing distance is also pretty long, but it comes with a nifty macro switch that lets you in pretty close. It’s manual focus only but still comes in handy. I used it for some of the shots in the video that follows. The focus ring feels flimsy and is oddly located in the rear but autofocus is extremely fast on the Sony a77. For full frame or other high megapixel cameras, the resolution and detail it can capture with the right light is amazing. It’s also, like all other Minolta lenses, built like a tank….apart from the focus ring.
and now a video shot with it……making a pot of chili. Lost the footage of tomato puree going into it. blah, blah, blah just watch it.
The Minolta 50mm 2.8 Macro. This oldie doesn’t have a nickname but it doesn’t need to. Here’s what it does have though…1:1 magnification. Many of today’s zoom lenses have the word “macro” written somewhere on the lens. It’s somewhat misleading and in best case scenario gets you as close as 1:4. Moreover much of today’s dedicated macro lenses have a maximum magnification of 1:2. Serious macro photography requires 1:1 magnification.
The most popular focal distance is 100mm. The smaller the focal distance, the closer you must be, which essentially means there is less natural light to work with. This is one reason why the 100mm is usually preferred over the 50. However, if you put a 50mm on an aps-c sized sensor, such as the Sony a77, that gives a FOV equivalent of 75mm. This is a nifty tradeoff since this lens fits in your pocket. Minolta did make a 100mm 2.8 Macro lens that some considered to be THE best macro lens period.
The biggest plus is you can find this lens going on ebay for half the price of either the Sony equivalent, which is the same optically, or the 100mm Macro. As a bonus, the 50mm macro can double up as a medium portrait lens good for 1/4 body shots.
and now a video…
Minolta made some “G” or “L” class lenses in there first go round with autofocus. Legend has it that through it’s formal cooperation with Leitz (more known for it’s Leica division) Minolta integrated unusually high performance optical technology that some would prefer over the twice as expensive Zeiss. With a focal length of either 85mm on a full-frame or 127.5mm on an aps-c combined with an ultra fast 1.4 aperture it makes for a beastly portrait lens. Creamy Minolta bokeh, rich colors, and a hulk-like build add to the credence to it’s nickname “Queen of Portraits.”
and now a video:
Sony lenses that are accessible to me are crap. Nice images. Cheap, but cheaply made. Plastic mounts. Flimsy focus rings. Lightweight, sure and that has its benefits but one drop and…..
This got me searching for some comparable Minolta lenses. Love! Metal mounts, brick-like build, brick-like weight (maybe that’s not a plus), and the colors! The creamy bokeh! My collection was unmanageable. I had to let a few go. I now feel compelled to shine a light on a few of them while they’re in my possession.
The “Beercan” is probably the most well known of Minolta’s first generation AF glass. It is heavy. 70-210mm and a constant f4 is a pretty nice feature set considering ebay prices go around $150 US dollars. The autofocus is driven by the camera’s in-body motor and the glass is propelled by a screw. The zooming is in body so the barrel doesn’t extend as you zip across the range. It’s pretty long though and looks obscene mounted on the a77 without a grip. It’s sharp from around 5.6. The focus ring is narrow and not the best for full-time manual adjusting.
The “Beercan” produces much better IQ than the “Big Beercan” (75-300), is faster than the “Mini Beercan” (100-200) and has more reach than the “Baby Beercan.”
In the Sony/Minolta world of cameras, it’s a must have. It is legendary.
And now a video…
Shot with a Full Frame Canon 5D Mark ii, APS-C Sony A77, and m4/3 Panasonic GH2. If you can’t tell the difference then I’ve spent way too much time mulling over the technical aspects of a camera. Scratch that, I already know I do.
Is there ever a need or a reason to have to know somebody? Is being surefooted with a singular goal more of a risk than being open to constantly trying new things? I’m pretty sure all my original thoughts were wrong. I’m pretty sure that this type of story is rarer than total eclipse. I’m happy that I get to know Brian and Ada. It never gets boring to say but he is her first boyfriend AND vice verse.
I got to spend a day with them and their first baby, Brayden.
Technical stuff of note:
The last scene with the dog (Gigi) was shot with the Canon 5D Mark ii. I’m starting to get addicted to the full frame look. That tree almost looks 3d! Most everything else was shot with either the Sony a77 or a hacked GH2. It’s getting real annoying how one camera’s strengths are another’s weakness. The a77 was by far the easiest to shoot with, quickest to get focus, and the easiest to compose (articulating screen and evf). Shot in 60p and slowed 40% in post for all the slo-mo shots. The biggest issue with the GH2 and a77 was the lighting. I walked in relying on natural sources and it just wasn’t working. The higher ISOs I had to use gave me some noisy footage. I also came in to snap stills not motion and was a bit groggy from being up all night battling the sniffles….ahh excuses – I feel magically better about the video now. As far as the stills go, I was much happier shooting with the a77 paired with a vintage 1985 85mm 1.4 Minolta lens. I never missed a shot I wanted. The Mark ii just wasn’t fast enough to lock focus on certain occasions and I missed a few shots. When I pulled all the images though, the 5D pulled a significantly higher useable hit ratio. Wish I could take all three cameras and roll em into one.
Lenses used:
Minolta 85 1.4
Minolta 50 1.4
Minolta 50 2.8 Macro
Canon 50 1.4 USM
Leica Summilux 25 1.4
Chopped in Final Cut
Bonus:
I came across this and have to share. The Sony team behind the NEX decided to make fun of DSLR users. I think I turn into the last guy sometimes. “Let me put it into video mode!”
There are certain rules when it comes to creating cinematic moving pictures. Shoot in 24 frames per second (or 23.98fps exactly). Record in widescreen formats, either 16:9 or 1.85:1 (anamorphic 2.35:1 looks really epic too). De-saturate and get some shallow depth of field shots.
I wanted to see what these rules would look like with a pocket camera as the recording device. Case subject: Sony HX9V. A pocket camera from last year with middle of the road reviews but regarded as a decent video shooter.
The biggest challenge was the small sensor. This meant making sure there was adequate light, as a lack of it would lead to noise reduction activation and a resulting super soft image. The other disadvantage of the small sensor, compared to the larger ones found in DSLRs, is the lack of shallow depth of field. Everything is focus, which has it’s advantages for sure. People definitely and defiantly overuse this effect. I’m guilty of it too. To overcome this I had to focus really close and use the camera’s good macro mode and to zoom in and switch focus locks.
Most of everything else was done on Final Cut Pro X. The HX9V records in 60 or 30 frames per second 1080p only but the 60p conforms nicely in FCPX to a 24p timeline. The added bonus is being able to slow mo any recorded scene smoothly since the editor has 60 frames to work with instead of 24 traditionally. I recorded in 16:9 but added some additional crops for a 1.85:1 ration. Finally I took saturation far down, the colors are actually quite nice on the camera, and added a slight vignette. Finally I added some slight orange, purple and teal.
Sony’s HX9V, and assume the replacement HX20V & HX30V, produces some sharp images that rival the GH2’s resolving power when there is sufficient light. There are two image stabilization modes that can be used together. One is optical, in the lens, and the other is software that when combined has a VERY smooth effect. Probably best I’ve used and similar to what a couple hundred dollar steady cam would achieve. The 16x zoom (20x on the newer HX20v) is pretty amazing as well as it effectively gives me a walk-around 24-385mm lens that fits in my pocket! Best of all you can probably find one used for a hundred bucks if you hunt around.
Sidenote: Stills suck, comparable to iPhone 4 photos.
So here are the results using a day of random shots:
http://youtu.be/Ox2J7tJ8C8k
See how this bite-sized camera stacks up against DSLRs 4-7 times the price.
These tips stem from the fact that I have shaky hands. It started out with the intention to, for myself, pixel peep the Apocalypse Now 444 GOP 12-15 Soft hack on the GH2. I slapped on the Fotodiox Alpha A mount adapter, which I can recommend (has an aperture ring built in), and fixed a 35mm 1.8 lens. I paired this setup with the Pico Skater Dolly, found a flat wooden plank and shot different parts of the house.
After I imported the footage into FCPX, I discovered that on some shots I panned slow, on others too fast. In fact, I decided I wanted a much slower dolly effect after finding the music I wished to pair with it (Leather Wings by This Will Destroy You). Being lazy I decided to retime everything and smooth it out with FCPX’s built in Optical Flow.
Obviously getting the shot right in camera is ideal but in a pinch I thought it looked pretty good. There seems to be some warping effect on the intro scene around the asian fan lift. What do you think?
There’s a lot of acclaim for the GH2 and hardly any talk about the A77 with regard to video capabilities. Just scour Vimeo and discover thousands of uploaded GH2 footage compared to only a few hundred decent A77 video. I wanted to run an unscientific test to see just how superior the GH2 is, if at all. All outside shots were at ISO 160 with an ND filter, 1/50th shutter speed and 4700k white balance. Indoor at ISO 320, 1/50th, 5700k. I used an adapter on the GH2 and guessed on the aperture to match the a77 which generally hovered between 3.5 and 4. I used the Sony 16-50mm 2.8 SSM on both with the GH2 on 25mm and A77 on 27mm to account for their respective crops.
Resolution. The GH2 produces the sharpest images, almost a true 1080p. Though you can record 1080p at 60, 30, or 24 frames on the A77 it produces soft pictures that look more like 720p. Tree leaves and bricks look great on the GH2. I can hardly tell the difference on macro shots as the A77 has no trouble resolving detail there. Also aliasing is less of a problem on the GH2 and non existent when using ETC mode.
Color. I like the colors on the A77. If I had no desire to do any corrections in post the A77 would win. But with a high bitrate hack, the GH2 has a lot of latitude with what you push around in post. The new Apocalypse Now 444 hack also helps with smoother gradients. Likewise, setting the A77 to Sunset with manual white balance accomplishes the same thing.
Noise. The A77 has ISo 100 to 1600 in video mode that generally feels like a stop brighter at each respective ISo compared to the GH2. Images are clean through ISo 640. I think it’s a hair better than the GH2. However, the GH2 (with hack) can go all the way up to ISO 12800 and the noise grain looks so organic and film-like that it’s not a distraction to me. When I see noise on the A77 it’s an eyesore.
Motion. The a77 looks better in my opinion and emotes a more cinematic visual. It can record in 1080p at 60 frames per second that can be retimed for some nice slow motion. The Gh2 can record at 60 frames per second only in 720p but it pretty much looks like the A77’s 1080p because it resolves so much detail. With a wide variety of patches, it also is less prone to macro blocking so filming water in the distance won’t be a worry. Moire is almost non-existant on the GH2, can’t say the same for Sony.
Rolling shutter. On the Gh2 record in ETC mode. On the A77 record in 60p. Poof gone, otherwise it’s a small issue all DSLRs have.
Crop. 2x on the GH2 still gets nice bokeh. Video crop on the A77 (because of SteadyShot) is 1.86x but it does get 1.5x bokeh and light which is nice.
Weird Stuff. The a77 and GH2 under certain lighting conditions can produce banding in the images. Usually scrolling through different shutter speeds or getting more light will resolve it. Both are equally distracting when it occurs.
Ease of use. The A77 is by far the easiest to use. It’s a great size, good heft for handheld shots yet not heavy. Slap an SSM lens, turn on autofocus and use that great tilty screen and thats all you need. No bulky monitors. Or use peaking for manual focus. Perfect ENG style camera. It’s also weather-sealed with a magnesium alloy body so shooting in the rain or dusty environment isn’t a worry.
Pro results. With the right exposure there is no beating the GH2’s image quality unless you’re ready to invest over 3k, not including lenses. Also, while peaking is great I had mixed results. I had a green light on the Red Bull in one of the above shots but it looks more than soft, it looks out of focus. The GH2’s zoom in video makes it easy to get pinpoint focus when setting up a shot. It won’t work during record though when peaking on the A77 does. The Sony can be used for producing great video, but the limited bitrate make it less than ideal.
Misc. If money is a factor, sure the A77 is more expensive, but with the in-body steady shot all lenses are stabilized. Slap an old Minolta 50mm 1.4 or Beercan and get creamy bokeh. The equivilent lens for the GH2 with cost substantially more if it had optical stabilization. BUT since the GH2 is micro four thirds you have an almost infinite lens supply. With the right adapter you can connect just about any lens from any era. Plus with 4:3 MJPEG mode you can shoot in Anamorphic Widescreen a la Blade Runner style!
Creativity. I think the A77, since it’s easier to pick up at random and use, allows me to concentrate on the moment, composition, and other things. It’s important for a one man crew such as myself. There’s some technical prep work that needs to be done on the GH2 and quite possibly more gear that needs to be added. (ex.I want to go to the skate park and shoot wide angle. With the GH2 if I go with a vintage lens I need a steadycam and followfocus. I can get rid of the followfocus and get a Panny 20mm 1.7 but that has no Optical Stabilization (though it’s contrast detection auto focus is pretty good). With the A77 I can turn on focus tracking and slap any lens I want on it, hand held. In this respect, the A77 might be a bit more versatile with what its able to do.
Conclusion. The A77 is by far the better stills camera. If I’m out and about with no agenda I’m taking it with me. If someone is paying for video work, it’s gotta be the GH2 because when optimized, it produces stunning images.
P.S. I lost lots of footage on the GH2 recording on a 32gb Transcend Class 10. Everything looked good in playback but the files were corrupted when trying to transfer. I had no issue with the SanDisk 95 mb/sec Extreme Pro card. Plus it turns the a77’s 12 frames per second burst into a killer feature with 8 second buffer clearing on RAW + jpeg, 6 seconds full 24 megapixel jpeg, and even less on 12 megapixel mode. It’s again even faster if put into 8 or 10fps mode.
Michael Merto 