FS7: Would You Buy A Panasonic AU-EVA1?

The Mitch!

If you made a version without those red lines I would be very happy. In scandinavia we cannot have stuff like that its all VERY hipster here. You can make a "northern europe" version in black cork?
 
Liam Hall said:
Because you've stopped discussing and started making personal insults.

Indeed, I'm not taking sides in your spat with Donny, I couldn't care less what focus technique you use. I know what I do, and I'm happy with that.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately there was no more meaningful dialoge with Donny, and his moranic redundancy. Assuming that I or anyone for that matter who uses AF is just a rank amateur is rather insulting. Not to mention what I choose to write in my signature.

I can think of many skills that take years of training and a basic creative intelligence, like lighting, and a colorist, a DP, screen writer, and director, that I hang on their every word. But a debate about a skill that can be acquired in an afternoon that is the defining factor between a profesional and a rank amateur is insane.

Like I said, in this day and age The only camera I buy will have AF and face recognition, no matter what the screaming fools try to tell me, and I will buy this camera from the sponsors on this form who I bought my last cameras from.
 
Last edited:
Bern Caughey said:
Focus pulling cannot be learned in a day, & I'd dare say great Focus Pullers raise it to the level of an art. Imagine some of them compare it being a musician.

Not putting myself into that catagory, but have seen them in action.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that is true, but that was never really the argument. I'm sure there are those focus pullers who have risen to the highest levels of their craft, and from the sound of it Mr. Donny is one of them.

In the context of the discussion we are talking about two cameras here the EVA1, and the C200. One of the two having the state of the art AF and face recognition, as well as focus assist features. I think it's safe to assume most people who buy either one of these cameras are not using them in major cinema venues, and can't afford a full on crew. After all the C200 was designed around one man operation, and in all honesty I think most of us here are capable of holding a camera on our shoulders looking through a view finder and focusing on a bird, or on the other hand having the discrimination and experience to use AF and face recognition when the situation calls for it. I don't really see the argument of one cancelling out the other. You use the tools you have when the the situation calls for it. Where is the problem here?
 
Donny 123 said:
1... Most stills zooms are par focal ..??? its the opposite is it not.. I dont think any are unless you get a lucky one.. and for good reason.. they dont need to be and it costs alot to make them so.. what you been smoking man..

2 Yes that would be alot better.. :).. easy rig and tripod.. dont work 12 hr days.. seriously though these days not really the case e.g. the new and excellent Fujinon cine zooms.. Sigma Zooms.. the Zeiss .. these lenses are not heavy and are relatively cheap..
Click to expand...
I've not been smoking in 19 years since my first was born. and I've been testing and servicing lenses for 30 years. Almost every day. I have repaired more lenses than most people here on this forum will see in their entire lifetime haha ;-)
BTW parfocal and back focus are not the same thing - I've seen these notoriously mixed up since the dawn of digital cameras.
 
Michael Thames said:
In the context of the discussion we are talking about two cameras here the EVA1, and the C200. One of the two having the state of the art AF and face recognition, as well as focus assist features.
Click to expand...

...I can't find the link right now, but I remember reading about 6-9 months ago, a rambling blog post from a famous old-school British DP where he mentioned how amazing the AF in the C300 Mk2 was when they were shooting tight macro-photography shots for a jewelry ad. The gist of the post was that they could perform quite complex camera movements while the C300 Mk2 kept perfect focus the whole time. He stated that it was not possible to keep focus manually, and they did not have the budget to go with a full motion-control rig to get the shots.
 
optitek said:
I've not been smoking in 19 years since my first was born. and I've been testing and servicing lenses for 30 years. Almost every day. I have repaired more lenses than most people here on this forum will see in their entire lifetime haha ;-)
BTW parfocal and back focus are not the same thing - I've seen these notoriously mixed up since the dawn of digital cameras.
Click to expand...

Mr. Donny for the love of God, get yer Damn quotes in focus.
 
optitek said:
1. Most still zooms are parfocal.
Click to expand...
He's right, of course. Most still zooms are parfocal, when the back focus is adjusted correctly. The problem is that most still zooms don't give you an easy way to adjust the back focus. It could be misadjusted by a little or a lot.
 
My Canon 70-200/4 IS L is in practical use parfocal. On the other hand, the versatile Canon 24-105 is a disasters when it comes to holding focus through the zoom range. It's just horrible. I don't know if they are adjustable when it comes to back focus.
 
Osslund said:
My Canon 70-200/4 IS L is in practical use parfocal. On the other hand, the versatile Canon 24-105 is a disasters when it comes to holding focus through the zoom range. It's just horrible. I don't know if they are adjustable when it comes to back focus.
Click to expand...
All lenses have back focus shims under mounts- still or cine. All lenses need to be adjusted from time to time. I don't get why people think that still lenses do not need it. When I worked at a rental houses lenses were serviced after every job. That included shimming. Now with pixel size on 4,5 microns- 1/5th(!!!) of the traditional circle of confusion size that back focus tolerance is based on, when we need it more than ever- people think it's somehow going to do it by itself and if not they just write off the optics. Simply astounding ....
Maybe still lenses should cost $20k so they "deserve" proper care....
 
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/03/mythbusting-parfocal-photo-zooms/


Im not a focus puller Michael.. although I did do it asa job for a few years .. I was talking more of the operator pulling their own focus.. yet again I,ll re state my point..Im not against AF.. some times it would be great.. gimbal etc.. and if it was in the camera well ok no loss.. what Im saying is that for a generation of DP,s to come of age needing/relying on auto focus is not a good thing.. and that your and others point of touch screen "manual" focusing does belay the fact you have never really worked in the freelance professional field.. as that would patently not work and is obvious to any jobbing DP.. and it would take more than an afternoon to really get good at manual focus.. as it would to make a good guitar .. but more over is not just turning the barrel.. its the ability to decide where you want the focus to be.. which is not always center frame.. or largest object in frame.. or an object coming towards you.. you decide.. you change it in a split second.. AF cant do this.. if the next generation of DP,s cant work without AF,AE and IS.. I believe the craft of DP for all forms features, doc,s corps will be diminished .. end of ran.. over and out.. I have no personal gripe with you..I dont even know you.. I was just discussing something on the inter web.. you do yourself a disservice to call people morons and fools.. its not that serious ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top