![mastin labs j trick mastin labs j trick](https://www.tipsquirrel.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/start-image.jpg)
Mastin labs j trick pro#
Using these preferred ISOs on your BMPCC 4K in conjunction with the expose-to-the-right aka ETTR principles espoused by Australian cinematographer/director Paul Leeming of Leeming LUT Pro will provide optimum exposure and the most suitable footage for grading. Instead of the more commonly used base dual native ISOs of 4, Mr Undone recommends ISOs of 4 and supports those numbers with a thorough set of tests.
Mastin labs j trick how to#
With Blackmagic Design’s Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K being a reasonably recent release in short supply in many parts of the world, high-value information on how to get the best out of it also remains in short supply so Gerald Undone’s data on the two best ISOs is particularly welcome. Blackmagic Design’s Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K aka BMPCC 4K. Call my crazy, but MFs as straight-on DSLRs are one-trick phonies for people with money to burn.Discussing Blackmagic Pocket 4K exposure complications, ETTR vs middle grey, what Highlight Recovery does, and why ProRes isn’t good for low ISOs. And then I wouldn't really need it As soon as you go into larger format, you generally want some sort of tilt-shift (unless you're strictly doing portraits), so I would include spot camera. And then I'd need to use old MF lenses which will have issues (because modern MF lens prices will NOT go down ). In short, no one would buy one for price alone, at least I wouldn't, unless it was like $1,000. My guess is 95% of all commercial work gets stopped down from maximum DOF. The slightly shallower DOF you can get up close would not be noticed by most people. There is little resolution to be gained, they're mostly 50mp cameras and you can now get similar resolution from Nikon, Canon, Pentax and Sony. The article is about finding the price sweet spot for digital medium formatĭigital medium format isn't as, I don't know how to put it, standardized or commoditized, like full-frame and down (as if anyone can agree on those). One could blow these photos up to 10 feet and they wouldn't pixelate. Here's a shot that shows how much color richness you get from hundreds of megapixels of data.
![mastin labs j trick mastin labs j trick](https://i.pinimg.com/474x/c8/cb/74/c8cb74d07880033b9004f8c9b7e6d903--human-photography-photography-editing.jpg)
The Brenzier method relies on a telephotos and a lot of shot duplication where you could miss something, or have a parallax issue. It's only meant to take 25 shots and stitch them together. So my thing is made for a specific camera, in this case an A7R and 55mm. The problem with pano heads is they do too much and are too heavy and difficult to work with (at least for me). I'm hoping to get some knockout shots in the next few weeks now that the "Large Format For A7" thing I'm building is working well. However, I think this image shows that special look you can get with larger format images. Again, all the inventing (and embarrassing myself with comments on EOSHD ) leave me little room for taking good photographs. Here one I did the other day using a pano method. you can get ONLY A FEW FEET AWAY In this is use a Graflex 4x5 with my "digital" back, Sony A7. Bad photo (she was tired) but shows the shallow DOF. This is what I've been working on for the past year and a half. I shot a promo image of a car in front of a museum with a 85/1.4 wide open on a FF camera and stitched 8 frames together, giving the look of something like a 32mm f0.45 on FF and something no MF lens can do - though my memory is a little fuzzy on the exact FL/aperture as its been a few years. Side note - for stills you could use the Brenzier pano method to replicate the look of any larger format with smaller sensors, even theoretical ones. Its distance to your subject, and nothing else. The article I previously linked explains it perfectly, so I don't need to rehash anything. Yes, it makes more sense to use longer FL's form an actual usage standpoint because in reality its silly to shoot a 12mm portrait from three blocks away to get the same look as a 135mm - but all this lens compression stuff is just nonsense. Are there lenses with an fstop like that? So my question would be:Ĭan you copy the same shot/framing/perspective and DOF with medium format and lens of 50mm F2.8 wide open compareable on an MFT camera without speedbooster and croping, etc.? I mean physically what lens would you shoot with that really exist? I can't do the math really but wouldn't this be in need of something roughly around 25mm F0.7? Also the idea of shooting with a 2x crop chip and use a F0.6 to blur out the background. You are all probably right but apllied this means that you shoot with a 24mm lens 3m away from the subject and then crop in later to gain the same perspective/framing as you would be shooting with a 85mm from the same distance? This sounds like a stupid idea just to proof the point of "same perspective". I think Reid is looking at it from a real world 'perspective'.