Posted on by

Back to Camera...

Are you sure you want to delete this?

I won't list a camera because frankly, as long as the manufacturer allows you to
a) record every actual pixel,
b) at least in 10bit 4:2:2 with a visually lossless codec, 
c) has a low noise floor and
d) shares their recording tonal mapping/curves/math with the public, 
you can get images out of it that are visually, hardly distinguishable from the most expensive cameras out there. 

Rule one: super 35 lenses go on super 35 sensors. Don't mix different formats without optical correction unless you don't mind a soft image. 

Rule two: shoot in a "pseudo linear" format. like s-log, log c, whatever.. 

Rule three: design your display transfer curve very carefully.. DON'T MESS UP THE MATH! This is EVERYTHING! Use this tool. Or use Aces if your camera is supported by it. Most everything else is crap and marketing BS.»

Rule four: use good quality noise reduction tools (Neat Video) if you push the digital negative to get a film-like highlight response & range. 

That's it.

Honestly.. a blackmagic pocket prores 422 bmd log and some old super 16 Zeiss primes.. a well designed transfer curve (use the tool I linked, BMD log is supported) and high quality noise reduction.. very few systems would beat that in price vs. quality.

That's about a 3K investment if you get one main 16mm vintage zeiss lens, the body, some memory cards, noise reduction software and some other little stuff like proper ND filters. 

Why does it look so good? 

Because the sensor is small and records 2K (HD) and every actual pixel of it. The noise floor is pretty decent, especially if you push the negative a bit further and remove the chroma noise and perhaps some of the luma noise.

The color is pretty decent on-spec IF you do the transfer from BMDfilm to .709 gamut correctly.. that is.. 

Apply these principles to any digital camera and you're good. 



Back to Camera...