So glad you made this video. I was just watching a new creator's video abou some new anamorphic lenses and the videa was titled "These lenses changed film making" and I thought to myself; how the hell can that be true when they're not even released yet
Cam has changed so much gear, his name should be "what's next". No one, I repeat...NO ONE should have that many different cameras or lenses. They've created a loop of anticipating the next drop, which is "the best camera ive owned". Meanwhile, you aren't even efficient with the one you just purchased 2 months ago. They get sponsored (paid) to create videos, spec ads and commercials using the gear they are pimping. We get worked up into a frenzy and go out and spend more money on gear we dont need. Now they are doing it in groups, creating this movie set environment, which feeds the beast and desire we have, to be apart of that "industry" of filmmakers. Red was the club to be in, now it's not. All the creators ran to Nikon, that has cooled off. They all dropped Lumix videos but then that faded like washed jeans. All of a sudden, Blackmagic is the greatest thing since slice bread. And Sony, will have them crying in their beers when they dont get invited to their sleepover camps. It never ends!
Cvp is great and yes transparent. Honestly I love Christopher frost also. He does reviews on all photo lenses unfortunately I wish he would do cinema lenses which is fairly rare.
While I can’t speak for everyone, I know for my channel, if I don’t believe in a product, I decline. I will only feature stuff on my channel that I feel is a product that my audience can use and benefit from. And I decline dozens of offers a week because they are things that just don’t align with my channel. Personally, as far as the blazars go, they are something I (personal opinion I can’t speak for everyone) really really enjoy the lenses , especially being mindful of the price. To the point where I reach to Blazar directly practically begging them for the lens. They’ve never paid me a penny. I can’t speak for everyone, but here’s my thoughts
Hi Brady, thanks for chiming in. I think it's pretty common that people review things they can get excited about. I'm not saying that's wrong, I'm saying that's part of this whole ballgame, and there's still a bias there. It goes like this. You review what you like. Youget excited. That excitement is more likely to generate views. Those views are more likely to make you friendly with the company. That relationship is likely to lead to more gear you can review and get excited about. And all of that leads to more dollars in your pocket. This cycle is normal, it's okay. It doesn't mean your review isn't valuable, or helpful, etc. But it DOES mean there's a bias - you WANT to be excited, you WANT to say good things, because that ultimately lines your own pockets. I'm not saying it makes you sinister, or dishonest, or anything like that. I'm trying to highlight for the audience that they should be aware of these things. The excitement of a mass of reviewers may not translate to their own experience after spending their own money. I'm suggesting people should be skeptical of ANY review from ANY channel (including me)!
Hey Nick I appreciate this review and I agree with most of what you said. I do want to touch on the notion of content creators/filmmakers needing products to make content. That's not entirely true it's part of the process and as you grow companies do want to throw prodocuts at you. But its not the only stream of revenue for a channel. I plan to make a video expanding on this. On my channel I focus on giving real-world results of said products sent to me or I ask for, that fit within my workflow. The relationship I have with brands and how they view my content I am able to give real feedback that has sometimes altered the end product for other customers. But keep up the good work and I watch your videos. I'd love to chat sometime 😊
Hey Joshua! Thanks for the kind words, and I’m happy to chat any time. Your channel is great! I watch it often. But it’s interesting that so far, the only people making your point that reviewers don’t “need” products to review, happen to be reviewers themselves. I’m not trying to criticize anyone in particular. I’m glad the review space exists. But to deny or hide the symbiosis in the brand/reviewer relationship does a disservice to the audience. Even if your feedback has altered products doesn’t mean you’ve always been completely honest (again I’m not saying you specifically). When you’re paid for a review (even if it’s only via RUclips views), a bias exists. No one is immune. Every channel has some kind of agenda. I’m just encouraging folks to find that agenda and figure out how it might color the content. 1- find out what’s in it for the reviewer, and 2- don’t be afraid to disagree with the reviewer group. That’s all I’m saying :-)
The main thing I'd criticise which is a dealbreaker for me is the horizontal squashing on the sides or cato and remus lenses. Its pretty terrible, and nobody mentioned it
Okay I do get your point, but I believe we do have eyes as well, and when they do show sample images I can decide by myself if I like them or not. I don’t think we need any more of those rant videos especially from other creators who are also doing sponsored videos or get gear sent. I would’ve love much more to see a review from you where you say why you don’t like them and won’t use them, instead of bashing your colegues!
THANK YOU. The 55mm Blazar Cato is hot garbage unless you keep your subjects perfectly centered and never move your camera. You move the camera even a little bit and the edges look like you’re in a fish bowl. And RUclipsrs are calling it “character.” lol I call it unusable.
Are you referring to Cammackey? Just FYI, he actually showed great examples of FEATURE FILMS that have these characteristics. Obviously the Catos arent as good as those high end Anamorphics, but with Catos we now have a WAY CHEAPER anamorphics that is 10x or even more less expensive than those high end Anamorphics that have similar characteristics, albeit with some compromises. Heck, Panavision anamorphics also showed this characteristics albeit controlled.
Interesting thoughts! Definitely truth to what you're saying, but its also a can of worms. There really is no such thing as an unbiased review or "take" on anything. Everyone has an angle, everyone is shaped by their own world view. But yes geberally brands will want to work mostly with people who generate poaitive coverage. But also - a lot of reviews are taking into account the pricing of equipment, like a review of a £2k lens is definitely going to consider that as part of the review. I think the term "review" is also very open to interpretation and like you say you get technical reviewers like CVP and others who go out and use them and feedback on their expeirence. The thing about technical reviewers... I don't want to watch lots of those videos. I'll watch maybe one or two and then I'll mostly watch videos from people who will use the equipment in the field with creative application and talk about the experience of shooting with it. My understanding is that creators are pretty much swamped with gear opportunities, they're not really that desperate for kit... I guess in most cases if a product isnt good enough it just doesnt get featured - it doesnt get expsoure. Creators are often partnering with brands that they align with. As for thr Cattos most of the videos I've seen on them have done a good job of pointing out the flaws, the sharpness, distortion and the CA and stuff like that - same with the Remus and its the reason I havent bought any yet, thats all down to the videos I've seen by the big RUclips creators. I dont think I've seen anyone saying that they challenge £5k or £10k 2x anamorphics. But they are sharing the excitment at the fact that there simply has never been a sub £2k 2x anamorphic option before... So I kinda share the excitement of many of the influencers who have made videos on them because they are exciting lenses. They arent perfect but for the price I think they're very interesting! There is also a really significant point here about the democratisation of production kit - giving people access to equipment they could never have dreamt of previously. A lot of people are not shooting at your level with a RED, nor viwing their work on large screens, everyone has different needs and more importantly different tastes. No one starts off shooting on £30k cameras with £12k lenses. But you can pick up a £1200 LUMIX cam that can now shoot open gate. Are the lenses perfect? No - but I do think they're emblematic of a "moment" where we're getting access to some crazy equipment at crazy prices. I think that vibe is what many creators have captured really well whilst still being honest about the limitations of the lenses. I guess the difference is that you're not excited by them, you wouldnt use them professionally, which is a totally valid take, but also there are a whole group of people who are pretty hyped for them! Theres definitely room for both groups on RUclips. I would love to see your take on these lenses though!
Hey Ed, thanks for taking the time to chime in. So, you're in the review space, and you understand that the vast majority of reviews will be overall positive, and overall suggest that product X is worthy of existence and purchase. My point is that the general public doesn't always understand that, or understand WHY that is. On its face, we want to believe that product X is great. But as you've said, it's much more complicated than that. My point isn't to say any particular product is bad, or that any particular person is dishonest. It's to show people that ALL of the reviewers are going to say something is great, regardless of the total reality. Yes, I'm glad budget anamorphic lenses exist. That's great! But there's a very false sentiment that they are better than they are. If I'm the average consumer, I'd rather have someone say straight to my face: save your $1500 on this lens or $4500 on this lens set. Save up for a while and just buy ONE lens which is awesome. You'll get much more out of it. But no one on RUclips ever says that. Yes, I'm lucky to play with fancy stuff. But half of my content is shot on a $3k camera with a $199 lens. I point this out in the video above. I'm definitely in favor of broader access to good gear. (Not everyone is, by the way. There are interesting arguments against the "democratization" thing.) But I'm NOT in favor of pretending like that any particular new product is better than it really is. You say that no one is comparing new budget options to $5-10k lenses. But that's EXACTLY what almost EVERY video suggests. Tell me you've honestly never heard the phrase "punch way above their weight" or "competes with lenses costing 5-10 times more" in at least a dozen videos. That's a RUclips staple which I personally hate, but it's the marketing language that brands feed to influencers, and most people just repeat it. Again, I'm not trying to criticize anyone in particular. I've watched lots of your videos, and enjoyed them. I'm not suggesting that reviews aren't valuable. My entire point here comes down to two things, which I tried to make clear. 1 - as you watch a review, question what's in it for the reviewer. And 2 - don't be afraid to disagree with a massive wave of opinion contrary to your own. That's ALL that I'm trying to say. Nothing else really.
@@nick_salazar yeah I totally get that, and I don't think you're saying anything controversial! We should promote critical thinking, I come from a science background so it's naturally drilled into me. I tend to always suggest people watch as many videos as they should and make up their own minds. I don't think I'd ever explicitly tell people to go and buy something but I will offer my own opinion. I think it's rare to ever have a truly bad product these days and if one is then people just tend not to feature it. As for the Remus / cattos I do genuinely think you have to bare in mind the quality / price ratio... (also Fun?) But yes these are important discussions to have because they lead to greater clarity and understanding in this space.
I really enjoyed my experience with the CATOs. I had created the film "Gold Bastard" using them. I am really happy to have access to anamorphic lenses with that amount of character for such a low price. I know this video is directed towards filmmakers who are also influencers and my addition to the launch was solely a standalone film - not a video about my opinion/experience, but I just wanted to say that they were really quite lovely lenses! They are possibly the most creatively stimulating addition to my kit since I first bought my Alexa Mini. They remind me of the 32mm 2x CCI Kowa lens from Keslow Camera (original modded by Clairmont - Kowa 40mm + a large wide angle adapter). I agree it's definitely important to make people aware of biases when watching gear review videos though of course. Also, you and I feel very similar about the Arles Primes from DZO. I was watching your videos about them nonstop early on because I was just as excited when they were announced haha. Those are absolutely incredible lenses and I ended up buying the original set of 5. I still can't believe I own a set of T/1.4 sharp FF primes and didn't have to spend $100K+.
LOVED your film Gold Bastard was super cool! Did you feel the lenses were a little soft in the center? Also how the F did you do the gold flakes in water shot--amazing!!
Hey Matt! Thanks so much for the kind words. You do outstanding work, and I'm not trying to criticize any particular product or person. I'm only saying that we as consumers should be more careful in how we receive new product information. I've seen too many product launches where ALL the information is about how great the new product is, and EVERY review concludes that the new product is a revolution and destined for greatness, only to be forgotten in the next six months. Personally, I haven't seen any low-budget anamorphic lenses that I would want to keep. It's true that even the cheapest lens can be used to make fantastic art, and I'm not trying to say otherwise, but personally, for MY dollars, I'll stick with what I have ... for now. Again, I think you do really great work, and if you make different choices than me, it's not only okay, that's a GOOD thing. Strong opinions make for strong art, and our differences breed variety.
@@nick_salazar No problem brother! I appreciate the kind words too. I enjoy watching your videos and I’m always happy when I see a new one pop up. I completely agree that it would be quite a boring artistic world if we all had the same creative instincts. Imperfect Anamorphics with a ton of character, fall off, and barrel distortion are exciting as hell for me - but definitely not the case for everyone. In many gear reviews, especially when bias is present, there can be a degree of sensationalism. Reviewers may either overly praise certain aspects or minimize shortcomings due to brand sponsorships, brand loyalty, and even something as simple as personal preference, which can lead to an unrealistic expectation of the product for the viewers. It’s very important that people take that into consideration. I just wanted to say that I genuinely really loved the lenses and found them really creatively stimulating. Wasn’t trying to challenge you or anything - just wanted to express it :)
@@MattBendo-CSC-AIC Thanks Matt! I didn't take your comment as a challenge or combative at all. Thanks for being here, it's a privilege to have people like you watching what I do!
Firstly, I thoroughly enjoy your content. I'm happy that you're speaking up because I find it very disappointing what's happening in the youtube space and I have as a result unfollowed a bunch of these guys. Thanks for keeping it honest.
@@marklholloway Hahaha. Fair. If you go back 3-4 years, I was much slower at it. It's more of a running joke now to see how fast I can go and see what RUclips closed captioning picks up. My favorite is "Hey what's up, Skywalker bear here"
Thank you for making this. Filmmaking RUclips is becoming a slopfarm for gear reviews only and yes I get the narrative that “We HaVe To PaY BiLlS” but you also don’t have to sell out your audience at the same time. This forced narrative of “the companies don’t get a say in my review” is ridiculous and almost patronizing. Obviously if you say something atrocious about the product the oil well runs dry; that’s why you always get these great features then these small little nitpicks to make the review seem fair and unbiased. The sector as a whole has a huge problem right now. You actually don’t even see much “filmmaking “ at all anymore
What do you think about the Viltrox Epic? Minimal focus breathing and super sharp image wide open, almost no ca. slight pincusion distortion which is easily fixable in post etc. Even the Cinematographer greig freiser praised them. (Although you might say he got paid to say so)
I do like the Viltrox lenses a lot. I have used them and considered buying them. They’re a bit heavy, long flanges (no rear adapters will work except on the 100mm), but what really killed it for me was the close focus. They’re just too long for me and I hate diopters. Otherwise they’re lovely.
Agree, but the sacrifice in my opinion is worth it at least for me. I’m using a Matte Box system for the NDs to compensate for the long flange distance. And the minimum focus isn’t really that bad even the Hawk 1.33x exhibit between 60-90 cm. And plenty of other high end option are falling on that range too. But I’m glad they don’t get that much hype otherwise the price will inflate 😂😂
Thanks for waking me up! I have been binging RUclips all weekend thinking I needed these budget ones even though I’m less than excited about the actual look. At the end of the day they won’t get me the gig nor serve much more than a paper weight…
Totally disagree with you. The Blazars, especially the Remus 1.5x lineup, are some of the best lenses in the market and being used by professionals as well. I don't have any at the moment but eyeing for the B-set + 33mm lens.
I've done reviews and shared experience but don't get paid, it's generally for the learning and sharing of others use. I think your points are mostly valid but each persons motivations will be different, for example some as you say are full time YT ppl but others like myself share videos and thoughts when I have time. Some ppl were very generous with me when I was first on set sharing info and I've found YT being a way to both give back and be creative at times.
A worthwhile discussion to be sure, but respectfully, while I hear what you're saying and agree in theory with a fair amount of it, 5 years ago, your average anamorphic cinema lens was 30K to 50K per lens... Calling a spade, a spade, lenses like the Blazars are 1K to 2K per lens, with differences by and large only perceptible to seasoned, working DP's (not your average viewer or content creator). Your average viewer on YT or IG won't know the difference between those and the vintage anamorphics used on Rebel Moon. That's all there is to it. That's the "game change". 5 years ago your average solo shooter pretty much couldn't shoot anything but a well-budgeted commercial or film with anamorphic cinema lenses, and now they can. Quality of the lenses aside, that's utterly insane when you think about it. Re creator biases, though there's certainly a benefit to being in the good graces of brands who send free products (which quickly has diminishing returns once you realize the time and effort investment... no one can eat lenses), at the end of the day, products that were only available to big budgets and steep rental houses, now being available to own for 1-2K is pretty hype-worthy if you ask me. I think there's also some onus on viewers to read between the lines *which I think is probably your main point). If a reviewer gave too many disclaimers of their bias, though, I would laugh and click out. I think you're right though that there is definitely a draw to gear in order to fill the topic/idea void. And it can be a little cringey when creators are just gassing up brands. But I mean... I think that's pretty obvious at this point.
Hey Scott, thanks for the comment. Maybe bias is already "obvious" to everyone else as you say. But it isn't always obvious to me. I often have to shake myself and be like "WHY is this product getting so much attention? I would not want to work with it." It takes a little time to remember that even people whose work I ordinarily trust can get caught up in their biases, and the group hype, and publish a review that isn't quite connected to reality. Also, I strongly disagree that $30-50k lenses from five years ago are roughly equivalent to $1-2k lenses today. There are a couple gems, but WAY more duds. And the problem is that every reviewer wants to include their latest product review in the former category rather than the latter, to get more clicks. That becomes a danger to consumers, who get pushed towards each new product as if it will solve all their problems, when that's just not true.
@@nick_salazar that's fair, but don't you think differences in lens fidelity are largely imperceptible to your average viewer or even content creator? And even if they aren't. Fidelity is a bit of a moving target. Huge names like Greig Fraser are often chasing those lenses w optical flaws or "character". I totally agree that these lenses aren't "clean" by a million miles, but what's the intended look of the project, you know? Thanks for your reply, btw :)
@@ScottJeschke I'm not sure I'd use a word like "fidelity" because that's not really defined, and therefore not really measurable. Resolution is measurable. Abberrations are measurable. Distortion, close focus distance, bokeh characteristics, flare, veiling glare, corner softness, field curvature, etc etc. If your question is "do budget lenses perform well relative to expensive ones?" the answer is SURE. But there can still be big differences to the actual work you do with them. If all you care about is RUclips content, then sure, go with the "it doesn't really matter" school of thought. But I'm interested in big screens, narrative work, and I do care what it looks like in 4k resolution in a viewing environment where I can distinguish that many columns (meaning at least a 30-degree field of view). In those cases, my experience is that this stuff matters. I sold my NiSi Athena lenses and bought the Arles set because I notice a HUGE difference between those two. If I had an unlimited budget, I might take a look at Cooke, or Leitz, or Zeiss glass. But at the moment, my main spherical set is Arles because for ME there is a HUGE difference between them and the others they compete with. They're one of those "gems" I mentioned above.
@@nick_salazar yep. Exactly that. By Fidelity I just mean lacking characteristic flaws. And I totally agree there is a big difference. I'm more saying that I think the hype is more around the democratized aspect. That being said, I think one issue with the RUclips landscape is I think there are sort of three categories when it comes to filmmaking gear review 1. Solo Creator (who sometimes dips their toes into narrative and commercial) 2. Tech reviewer (who will simply lay out these specs and the facts) 3. The industry day players (who are more looking at how the gear impacts the project they are being paid for). The issue as it regards to those three categories is that the creators tend to get prioritized, (which makes sense, because they are essentially influencers) and they by creating content w the gear, are essentially marketing it and selling it. Which again, is not inherently wrong, but I tend to find all three categories are of equal value when I'm looking at gear.
@ScottJeschke - You're right that the average viewer won't be able to tell, but I will push back on Greig Fraser comment. Ironglass lenses have character but they are still amazing pieces of glass. Leica R have character but are amazing pieces of glass. There are some amazing optics in the DIY anamorphic world that many people have paid to have professionally rehoused. Greig likes unique lenses - not poor-quality lenses. Blazar was on the right track with the Great Joys-they had a better-built product without all the flaws in their current lineup. The problem was that the costs of a higher-quality product meant that they were competing with other players, and it was hard for them to stand out. So, they made an inferior product at half the cost and gained market share. Smart business move, but they totally deserve to be called out for it. Blazars were the company I thought would successfully bring an affordable 2x line-up to the market. I would have happily paid double the price for a better quality product.
I am with you ... There is no reason for 2x anamorphic on a sensor that is not reading open gate. So much is trimmed down and zoom in to fill the screen. Blazar released some new 2x lenses and very lightly here and there is mentioned about how much footage is lost because of trimming
I don't get how Blazar would 'let' reviewers use them on a 16:9 sensor. There are already quite a few comments saying the footage looks way too wide and stretched so no thank you, but it's just content shot in the 'wrong' format. If it hasn't been shot 6:5, or at the very least 3:2 and cropped for delivery, it's a bit misleading, and we don't get an idea of the real potential of the lens. That's why I generally hate it when these brands post showcase material, but don't say what camera and what format they've shot in. Quite often when I ask, it turns out to be an s35 camera showcasing a FF lens... To be fair, Cam has mentioned the 3:2 vs 16:9 point though and shown the difference with Brady.
@@uptonfilms95 yeah, they have now, as I mentioned in my comment ;-) Just didn’t really figure in the first content released. Still don’t know why Blazar would want folks to showcase these 2x lenses on 16:9 sensors tho…
Gear is cool. I would shill too if given the opportunity. My buddy has a very successful studio in NYC and shoots on a 10 year old camera, he didnt even know what Blackmagic was when I showed him🤣
Hey Nick, I just wanted to let you know I made a video about the whole drama that's unfolding about these lenses. I tried to talk about the situation in a nauanced way, but probably failed. 🤷♂️ Anyway, I felt weird making a video addressing you without letting you know, and this is the only way I know to reach you...
Damn Mr. Salazar, you’ve caused quite the commotion. Look at all these comments, looking like you dropped the hottest diss track in Filmmaking RUclips History.
i think the overarching thing that should be understood here is that two things can exist at the same time. it's said many times in this video, reviews are great and can still be of value, though there's always going to be some sort of bias. i feel like people are taking the word bias negatively when its a natural thing all people grow to have. and what may feel redundant to some could be useful to others. i personally didn't understand the hype for the remus lenses or the pavos, though the titles and content got me excited. upon watching they genuinely looked terrible to me, the warping, the CA, they did not look usable, yet i couldn't point to a single video with that same opinion. this happens with cameras and almost every new product. though like most express here, reminding people to form their own opinions through what they see and the specific information given on the product and relationships is super important overall. we can all do our due diligence in some way or another.
Bro, this is definitely the Blazar Catos. Can't lie, the footage looked terrible to my eyes. There was some weird warping that was going on as the video panned. It was almost like a vertigo effect or something. I thought to myself, If anything, I'd purchase the Remus. Man, no other way to put it, I just don't like any of the Cato footage I saw. The warping in the edges is even pretty extreme for the Remus too. I'm still hoping that the anamorphic autofocus they have coming out later will be good, though. More so than anything else, I wish they would just take their time and focus on being known for having one set of solid anamorphic that people flock to. If they took their time, they could remain in the budget anamorphic space and charge around 3K per lens. That's still a steal for anamorphic. I just wish the performance was better. I actually think the image I get from my Sirui Saturn 35mm is better. The only "problem" with them is the pin-cushion distortion at the edges rather than barrel. That can fixed in Davinci, though.
What people think looks good is super subjective, but I have to disagree with you here. Most members in the anamorphic facebook group think the Sirui lens are far too clinical and lack anamorphic character and I agree with them, plus pin-cushion distortion is gross. Also the oversaturated blue flares on Sirui products honestly look like a cheap adapter. Even the best DIY adapter setups like Kowas have EXTREMELY WARPED edges, but once you crop in and apply the fix in resolve it's not that bad and a part of what gives the lenses character and the unique look. I understand from thje perspective of people used to spherical lenses and a super sharp image that it might look weird, but if you come from a DIY anamorphic background you've pretty much accepted that that's apart of the look unless you spend 30k a lens for a Arri Master or something. Go watch shogun, literally tons of warping and imperfections in shots but I thought it looked incredible.
@@timekeepermedia5142 Thanks for the reply. I appreciate your position. I specifically like the Sirui because they are a little cleaner. Flares are subjective, but honestly the way I shoot, I don't generally end up with much of them. I do like the bokeh though and feel that the lens gives me enough of the anamorphic look without going overboard. Also, as noted, the pincushion is an easy fix in Davinci that I learned from Anamorphic on a Budget's channel. The warped edges from the Catos isn't my biggest problem though. I guess I didn't know how best to describe it. There's like a vertigo like effect going on and not just on the edges and I guess that because of the panning, I dunno. What I mean is this on Anamorphic on a Budget's channel : ruclips.net/video/3tYdKJuyLcM/видео.html I don't mind distortion but wow, when panning/dollying that effect there is just too much. It's almost dizzying.
@@MichaelAndrews-rp2od If you watch shogun, all of those artsy shots with super distortion/compression are from a fixed camera angle, they're not panning or tracking with handheld movements and that's for a reason.. even with super pricey, wider anamorphics. The 55mm Cato is definitely something you want stationary and if you want to pan, you use the 85mm. Again though, these are tools for specific jobs and looks and not great all arounders. Sirui does offer something that's in that middle ground of true anamorphic and spherical reliability and sharpness which might be good for some, but for me I either want one or the other.
@@timekeepermedia5142 Thanks for the education on that. When I think of it, when I shoot anamorphic, I have tended to have still shots. Maybe it's present on the Sirui too, but just never noticed. That makes total sense, though, to use the longer focal lengths for panning as they are normally better controlled than wider lengths with regard to edge distortion. As I mentioned in my original post, though, I'm interested to see how well the anamorphic autofocus lens they are developing turns out. I shoot Panasonic because I actually do like anamorphic, but I like having some control. To be honest, the anamorphic lenses I really want are the 75mm Pavos and then that 45mm Mercury. Man, if I had the money, lol...
hi Nick. I have two cameras - full frame and crop 1.3. I want to take only two Arles lenses. If you choose from A and B, which ones impressed you the most? I'm thinking about 24+50 but maybe there's something better.
I think 24 and 50 is a solid choice given your use case. In my experience there isn't really a weak lens in the set, they're all very good and well-matched. So if those focal lengths work well for your kind of work, you'll likely enjoy them! Maybe one day add the 35mm, which looks wonderful on full frame. Or add the 100mm instead for a long lens. But 24/50 to start does sound good to me.
The same could be said to any youtubers. I put bias label on ALL of them without discrimination. However, they're still valuable source of information. I always skip what reviewers think about the products. I don't care what they think or feel. It's my money that I spend, not theirs. All I want is data. Gullible people fell for hype, it's emotional purchase not objective one.
People might be a bit smatter than you think. A clear legal disclosure, of free gear, loner gear, or sponsorship, puts the viewer on notice for bias. That's not the issue in this space, it's the 70% that don't give a clear legal disclosure, or any disclosure at all. Just a side note, once a channel is a certain size, the free gear is a nice bonus, but mostly irrelevant. The channels that get 90% of the views in this space don't really need it.
Hey Mark, thanks for commenting. I enjoy your work and I’m not trying to single anyone out. Maybe other people are smarter than me, but I personally have to shake myself and be reminded of these things. Anyone who is consistently paid to review product has a bias. No one on RUclips is saying “I have a financial incentive to make exciting reviews” but that incentive exists. Which video gets you more revenue - The one talking about a “new low budget game changer” or one talking about “another similar middle market average lens”? Reviewers have an incentive to sensationalize, so they do. That’s my point here. This particular launch I’m talking about has been vastly sensationalized, and it’s NOT a sensational product. New? Yes. Unique at its price point? Yes. Game changer for filmmakers? Absolutely not, but it’s being touted as such by folks who know better, to an audience that might not.
@@nick_salazar I agree with most of what you said in the video, and is this comment. My point of difference was really the disclosure. Your disclosure example, in the video, was a clear and legal disclosure. The idea that RUclipsrs should then go on to give extra information on top of this is really impractical. I don't think that's the main issue at all. I know the videos you are referencing, and I did not see any that had a clear and legal disclosure. If every one of those videos had a clear disclosure in the first 60 seconds, it would be very easy for the average viewer to understand what is going on, but that didn't happen. As someone that's BTS on this, the real issue is non-disclosure of free gear, loaner gear, paid videos, paid trips, etc. 70% of videos are not disclosing, or not legally disclosing. I totally agree with your comments on the RUclips review hype train, and you should make a video like this to shine a light on it. If everyone gave clear disclosure, paid video, free gear, etc, it would be easy, or at least easier, for an average viewer to work this out.
@@markwiemels I'm not sure what you mean by "disclosure" versus "legal disclosure." Also my point is that, despite that "standard line" you often hear, there's still an important bias that people tend to either forget or outright deny. The bias is that review channels tend to be overly positive, reviewers have a hard time publishing anything negative. So the reviews are NOT neutral, not even (and especially not when) they claim to be. Reviewers are virtually always biased towards the positive based on their chosen career. Very few people understand that, and virtually no one admits it.
@@nick_salazar Look up FTC disclosure guide. It's pretty clear, that's what I'm talking about. I'm not disagreeing with you about the bias, or neutral aspect, at all. If everyone followed the FTC laws, the macro picture of all this becomes very clean to the viewers. I think the average person is smart enough, that if given a proper legal disclosure "Free product, paid video, flown to Japan" and then they go on to say "This is a totally unbiased video" - they can make up there own mind. The majority of these review videos are illegal. The videos you are talking about, in this video, all of them that I watched are illegal. If all of those videos started with a disclosure of sponsorship or free gear, etc, the viewer can then be on guard for the bias. The viewer then sees 10 of those videos, all with legal disclosure, it gives them a clear big picture of what's going on. As for the fact that review channels need to get people excited about every new product, that's a reasonable thing to say. This is not something that is covered in the disclosure, I think it's good for people to talk about that, and I'm glad you made this video about it.
What probably exacerbates this setiment is the proximity between the reviewers and the marketing departments of these brands not factoring that in, to use different voices and get thus unique perspectives of their products. Friends will in most cases share opinions on what their friendship is built upon (in this case filmaking and gear) so ultimately in their delivery they will see and miss the same things which then comes across as collusion to pull wool over everyone's eyes. I have no doubt positive conversations and reflections through videos like this between creators and viewers will ulimately grow into better well thoughout content and a better community!
Interesting and good points. I think it'd be interesting for you to rent some of them and then discuss what about them would make you not want to use them. It is true that it feels like people are often sharing them because they depend on the review for money. I think it'd be great to hear the why and why nots from you
How about dzo Arles? Every RUclipsr saying it’s almost as good as signiature primes or cookes. Maybe they’re that good lol or maybe they just had a big ad spend.
Trust and transparency go hand in hand, I find. From what I hear expressed, is that bias, in itself, is not a problem. For example the CVP channel. I agree with that.
I was thinking about buying the Blazar but when I sit and think about it how I plan on shooting I think ima end up frustrated with them so I think I will just get the nisi Athena even when I think about using the two Athena make me less frustrated lol
Hola!! If you say we are 5 viewing congrats I’m number 6!! lol Jokes aside, great to see your content and big thanks for coming forward to talk about this, indeed CVP are one of the honest and straight on this matters. Brands also add to this problem since they don’t want to get criticizes, and what I’m not sure is that if they realize that on the long term is not good for business as well. Thanks for sharing!! Cheers.
Love the comments in one lol. It will always be a thing. The RUclips filmmaking space is just turning into gear sales at this point. But if the creators can do it why not. I prob would to.
Which spherical budget lenses do you think are the best? I need to pick up lenses for a team that does not have the opportunity to use the rental. And so far we have chosen Sirui Jupiter Macro.
The boring, frustrating, true answer is that "it depends." Depends on your budget, your crew size, and your goals. What look are you going for? How many people do you have to help? What kind of support/stabilization equipment do you have? How much money can you spend? Etc, etc. There are LOTS of great options in the spherical space, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. I'm not sure what led you to Sirui Jupiter, but that's a pretty specific choice, so maybe you already know what you need.
@@nick_salazar Yes, a good description) What led me to these lenses was their price on the secondary market. $350 apiece would allow us not to expand budgets. But of course, if there is a more interesting alternative, then you can expand the budget.
I just saw a review opened with "This camera was not given to me for free, so I'm not biased in any way". That last part, where someone can even consider himself "not biased in any way" really doesn't land well.
Love this . What about the blazar anamorphics or the laowa nanomorphs ( i like those because it has a natural flare And it is not very in your face it’s way more subtle than the other budget ones )
I was about to make a video about Blazar lenses… Thank you for making this. I love their 1.5x lenses but those 2x lenses look bad… very bad. The top and bottoms being out of focus is disgusting. The Remus are pretty tame and have used them on many projects
Rant away Nick, and totally agree about CVP. To me it's pretty obvious these reviewers rely on having products for reviews, so I keep that in mind. What has surprised me about the release you must be referring to though is how much content's been shot on 16:9. Let's cut off a chunk of the vertical FOV to showcase our product - like I'm scratching my head.
Hi, Nick. tell me, have you considered buying a kinefinity mavolf camera before as a large format camera and an alternative to the RED VV? I am interested in it because of the large format and the second native iso, which is immediately sewn into the video. This allows you to show details in very dark areas, and lower the exposure in post-production. and when the viewer in the cinema will watch very dark contrasting scenes of the film, these small details will appear in gradations of black. Can the RED VV perform the same tasks in low-light scenes?
I did consider the Kinefinity cameras. They are good products and a good value. But ultimately there were a number of reasons I chose Red and I’ve been very happy with it. Don’t get too caught up in the hype around dual native (or triple native) ISO. It’s not nearly as important as people would have you believe. If you compose well, light your scene, and expose your camera properly, that’s all that really matters. Shooting RAW helps too, but isn’t strictly necessary to get a great result. Focus on the fundamentals, not the fancy specs or the hype.
I am just really tired of non-experts reviewing cameras like they are experts. None of these guys have any clue on how to professionally produce content. Most of them have garbage footage when they do post yet. They get all of this gear for free because they have a little bit of a following on RUclips.
Bro I literally was thinking yesterday while shopping for gear that I can’t trust any of these RUclipsrs because no matter how honest they say their being, they aren’t, especially if the product was given to them and not purchased. Do you honestly think a RUclipsr who is growing still would want to give a bad product review for say a company like DJI to potential lose that partnership. Absolutely not. So when l look for gear reviews I now look for people who have actually used their own money and used in real life to make an unbiased opinion
I always steer away from videos with titles like “game changer” “only light,mic,camera,lense you will EVER need” “this change filmmaking forever” …. And so on. And it’s always the same 5 -6 channels that do this and they recently collaborated on a short film to introduce a new camera and how it does open gate and at the same time the blazar remus. Didn’t they say that that was a game changer? And now this new blazar cato will change filmmaking…. 🤦🏻♂️ I don’t know if they are really filmmakers or just sales man.
You are spot on 💯 and what hurts the most is there were several ‘Tubers I like and now their channels are exactly what you’re describing 💔 Building trust with your core audience should be the top priority and will provide longevity. Once they sense you’re cashing out it’s only a matter of time before you lose your core base and it becomes hard to reverse that.
Dzo Arles don’t fall into this camp? I got so hyped up about them cause everyone is glowing talking about them but it makes me wonder if maybe it’s not just a marketing push.
Most products fall into this camp, including Arles. My point is to be skeptical of the messengers, and don't be afraid to disagree with a whole crowd of reviewers. As far as Arles goes, I was really excited by them when they were announced. I flew out to Cinegear on my own dime to see them, I pestered DZOFilm for a loaner to review, and LOVED them. So I eventually bought the A-set of five lenses with my own money. The Arles are definitely the right choice for me. But they might not be for you. If you're contemplating them, try to look at lots of sample footage, rent/borrow one if you can, etc. Just don't take anyone's word for it that they'll be good for you.
I feel the same way you do. I saw 2 reviews on the blazars Catos and I wasn't sold at all. The binocular pan that I saw in those reviews are terrible! I'm not really sure how it goes but sometimes the company will reach out to a list of creators right? If that's the case I'm sure most of the more reliable and non bias ones turned down the offer for review because they know. And now we are left with a hand full who are not doing a good job of selling these things because they're not good at all... I'm just saying 🤷🏾♂️
@@timekeepermedia5142 never, but you're right,can't expect much. I'm just working with what my eyes are showing me, and personally I don't like it. Too distracting.
It's hard to enforce complete honesty and transparency because the cost is less relationships with companies because what company wants to send products to someone who could genuinely speak their mind? Regardless, "review channels" are just doing their job of "reviewing" a product, and that's not necessarily wrong. The issue is that a lot of review channels don't know how to best utilize the products they get and a lot of the audience don't know what kind of look they want. Aspect ratios wider than 2.66:1 are going to look ridiculously wide if they're not cropped so why are reviewers just leaving that uncropped footage in? Barrell distortion is fine when it's subtle but there is such a thing as too much distortion so why are reviewers just leaving it uncorrected? 2x anamorphics only really work on Open Gate sensors so why are reviewers using it on 16:9 sensors? All of these things can work if they're used with intent but 99% of the time they're not. And the reason they're left in is because they need to get the video out in time of the embargo and to not get left behind from everyone else who got that same product doing the same thing. On the other hand, a lot of viewers of these reviews don't know the look that they want to make. They just want to make their videos look more "cinematic" but don't understand that it doesn't come from a lens or a camera. It takes learning how to light, how to make motivated camera movements, how to color grade PROPERLY, how to block your subject, how to write good dialogue, etc. and once you have all of that, THEN you can look for the gear that will get you the look that you want. But the fundamentals aren't sexy, so they don't watch. The responsibility falls on both "reviewers" being informative instead of hyping and the audience being educated on what they NEED to get the look they want.
Don't forget the legions of seemingly impartial reviewers out there (those that lead off with the refrain, "I purchased this product with my own money...") who are riding the same hype train in most cases and in essence, simply auditioning for the role of full-time reviewers . There is just a general unwillingness to condemn any product, but on the flip side, little constraint exercised in proclaiming products as revolutionary or "game-changing".
My issue is with "content creators" that review products that don't actually go out into the world and work for a living with this gear. They don't know what its like to put this gear through its paces in the real world.
Different folks like different aspects of anamorphic lenses. For some it’s the shape of the bokeh. Or the softer less perfect image with specific kinds of flaws (falloff, distortion, aberrations). For some it’s the overall nostalgic feeling of older films made with them. Personally I love the complex flare from rotating astigmatizer designs (Panavision, Caldwell, Xelmus). But good anamorphic lenses always have significant drawbacks (size, cost, and/or fragility). I tend to agree that in general, spherical lenses are more attractive for most projects. Once in a while anamorphic can be lovely, but FAR less often than RUclips influencers would have you believe (in my opinion).
Different strokes for different folks, and while anamorphic might be great for one project, it may not be for another. For me they make me want to go out and shoot, and that's largely down to the separation and kind of textured background you can create with them, even at t8+. Focus fall-off around the edges also helps make subjects pop off the background a bit more. Whether you like that look or not is a different question. Personally I do. I'm doing a promo video for an artist at the moment, and the way he paints, if I shoot on spherical, the content doesn't really link with his style, whereas anamorphic does. It's down to the textures in the backgrounds, the imperfections, distortions. Spherical looks more 'perfect', but that's not how he sees the world, and to convey this aspect, anamorphic works great. In this case. If you've watched Killing Eve, the look they created in Series 3 is simply gorgeous. Shot on spherical. I may be wrong, but in series 4, it looks to me like they introduced quite a lot of anamorphic shots, and to me, series 3's look was more pleasing for the content.
Hee hee, I bought these lenses and was aware they have flaws. I love the lenses, and I believe they are great for me at this price point, to have a play with anamorphic lenses, i can't justify 5k a lense to have a play! I get what you are saying and all the emotional words used to describe these lenses. But let's be real here, all products are doing this, and I feel the disclaimers are fine. It is buyer beware. You can't protect people from themselves. I watched the videos, specifically from cammackey, bought them, and I am happy with the purchase. I have also done RUclips videos showing their performance and flaws. You do your research and buy at your own risk.
If you're happy with your purchase, that's all that matters (for you). But there's a difference between idea of "you can't protect people from themselves" and having a reviewer disingenuously push you into something you might otherwise skip, because they're lying to their audience about their motives and incentives. Buyer beware indeed - question your sources of information, and don't be afraid to disagree with the group. That's all I'm saying.
I appreciate your honesty however please don't speak for everyone. Don't use the phrase most folks when you say I Think. Because you think doesn't equal you know. I get your point of the possible bias towards certain things when it comes to money and reviews. However, something you don't like doesn't mean someone else doesn't like. So I appreciate you saying this because I too have also thought about this (especially when it comes to adobe) before and other brands, and how it creates this false idea for needing something or wanting something when you current gear is still relevant and great. So I don't hate you however when you speak for MOST FOLKS you loose a bit of credibility in your argument and it turns into the perception of you complaining with no real hard facts other than your experience (Though valid for you ) and thought process. Just saying it would have hit harder if you didn't include unknown other people in your thoughts.
Dude! The industry in Los Angeles is collapsing because of what you say in your basement. Basement people are the future. As long as you are not living with your parents because that would be unfair.
Of course RUclipsrs will lie about the products they endorse. There is always a bias because if you go against that grain, no brand will work with you. Thats just how brands are.
Reviewers also seem to be blinded to the reality that their reputation is on the line. Their egos are so inflated by the hype from fans that they ignore the immorality of promoting products, taking advantage of the ignorance of viewers.
Haha thanks. These PTC shots are usually pretty impromptu, just done whenever I have a spare moment. The clip on mic is way easier than setting up a boom. Sorry it ruins it for you!
He’d never you the Catos so you guys shouldn’t either is basically what he is saying lol. Why do you think they are so crappy? Just say it we know what lenses you are talking about
Always look at people actually doing REAL WORK that you want to do and buy what they're using in that work. If you want to make commercial work with highly-produced interviews, buy what they're actually using in their real work they trust for their clients. Content creator reviews are worthless. Just copy the pro's as much as you can, they are the ones doing actual work. There's content creators I even like their work, but they're all sponsored and get paid or sent free gear that's overkill on projects. You can't buy what they have and expect everything to be the same for you.
While I don’t mind conversation about getting to the bottom of the status of review culture on RUclips, one thing that never does well is blatantly having bad faith discussions pretending it’s altruistic, the whole “RUclipsrs are scared to tell you this” while simultaneously being coy about the brands and creators you’re criticizing (which I’m sorry, we all know whom your talking about) is sorta the same “saving of face” that you want people to be transparent about while not doing it yourself, and arguably for the same reasons . I’m also guessing that you haven’t tried to TALK to some of these creators to gain clarity prior to making this video, and made certain assumptions, which you then posted and monetized on.. Wanting authenticity and accountability from creators while also demanding a non biased take is kinda an oxymoron; if you want someone’s opinion, which will come with authenticity, even when it’s inconvenient, (which is why we watch creators instead of asking chatgpt to think for us) then that comes with implicit bias because all opinions are based on one experiences that others don’t have. That’s not a camera review thing, that’s something most people learn as an adult. Which my last point which I think is echo’d here, infantilizing the audience to make a point is kind of played out, many of these folks make good on disclosing the nature of their brand relationships, despite that goalpost being moved by folks that are not only (on average) old enough to fight and die for their country, but vote and lead families. Not one creator I know hopes a viewer blindly buys a product, as that’s actually inherently bad for business, and return policies exist. Someone mentioned (with these lenses) that at the end of the day, we have eyes, and if we don’t like something, we can ask questions, but ultimately, just not buy it. Nick I’m sure you’re a nice guy, had some points I can understand, but the idea of knowing what’s under the veil of RUclips reviews while actually not speaking to reviewers but presenting it to an audience that truly doesn’t know how it works and can only go off of what they believe people in the know, can tell them, is disingenuous at best
Hi Kofi, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’m perfectly fine with you saying you think I’m guilty of the same thing I’m complaining about. I explicitly invited that kind of skepticism in this video, twice. My entire point is that people should question the motives of the content they watch, and feel free to disagree with a wave of homogenous opinion. You’re right when you say all reviews will have a bias. My point isn’t to say bias is bad. My point is to question WHAT that bias might be. Many people, myself included, need to be reminded of that from time to time. I don’t consider it to be a lesson that “everyone already knows.” Maybe you never need that reminder, and good for you. But I don’t think it’s fair to say that no one ever does.
@@nick_salazar in that case I’ll accept the invitation, I actually agree with feeling free to disagree with a homogeneous opinion, I would audit one’s own behaviour as instead of doing that yourself in the very public comment section of these creators, you made this video implying RUclipsrs with positive opinions are afraid to say something, which isn’t entirely true, also the implication that being sent things is the sole revenue driving source is also not true at all, at minimum not solely. This is what I mean by bad faith videos, most of these things would be solved by having open and ADULT conversations, instead, videos like these come out, which galvanizes folks that don’t know how it works that already have negative feelings, and then creators trying to rectify the beginnings of a very toxic culture, which I’m not sure if you’re aware (maybe based on your own biases) are perpetuating. If you uniquely need reminders in videos I think that’s something unique to yourself to be aware of, if you’re unable to control your credit card, it might be beneficial to maybe not consume this type of content, but passed being very upfront with the basis of relationships with brands, these folks have done a good job, which has an ever moving goal post
@@KofiYeboah Kofi, forgive me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like what you're trying to say is that 1 - I shouldn't publish this opinion in public, because 2 - I'm wrong about what I'm saying, and 3 - that if there's a problem, it must be with me personally and I should fix it in private. Is that essentially what you're saying? It's fine if you are. You can criticize me all you want, I don't mind. But it really feels like you're trying to sweep this issue under the rug. I mean, this video has under 3k views at the moment. If this is such a dangerous topic to discuss in public, why should such a small reaction warrant such an intense response? Or as shakespeare put it, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." You say my video is made in bad faith. Okay, let's explore that. What's the goal of my bad faith? Am I trying to create a huge channel and become the next MKBHD or Gerald Undone? If so, I'm talking about all the wrong things. Discussing color grading on my V-Raptor X is not exactly a topic for the masses. Am I just a troll out to incite controversy? If so, I should probably rethink my whole strategy, 99% of which is just talking about random stuff I'm working on. I guess, if you think I'm specifically doing something bad for a purpose (the definition of "bad faith"), what's the purpose?
@@nick_salazar Meh, i have time to day , no i dont think you shouldn't publish your opinion, but ill say yes, its a little disingenuous where clarity could be achieved with conversation, and you took the route of making this video. instead of doing the thing thats inconvenient, Im understanding this was a video for the greater good? I'd assume that would help, no? in fact im not sweeping anything under a rug, but if the issue your presenting is based on lack of information, or just wrong information (again which you can obtain by SPEAKING to someone), then its just that, its disingenuous. Yes, a video made making incorrect assumptions while being vague in what and who your speaking about, who also are folks you can have those conversations with, and choosing not to, but framing a video as "iknow what they don't want to tell you" while actively not knowing that to be true, again, disengenuos... Im not sure if thats not clear, help me out if it isnt.
@@KofiYeboah well, a couple months ago I did just what you suggest, in the comments section of a Gerald Undone video. This video: ruclips.net/video/_7c4ZbBzqK0/видео.html - the comment received no reply, not from Gerald or anyone else. You say I should have a conversation about this stuff, in public comments sections. Well, I tried, but it didn't work. I don't think I'm obligated to pester every creator in their comments sections or DMs about this concept. Instead, I'm having that conversation where it actually matters - with the audience. My message is only that they should learn to be critical, and be okay to disagree. And if you don't like it, it's perfectly okay for you to disagree with me. I'm not above that concept or better than anyone else.
I'm not trying to pick on any particular person or product here, I'm just illustrating a lager point. But to answer your question - yes, I have used the lenses whose launch I mention in this video. It was brief experience with pre-production samples. So feel free to say my opinion about them is irrelevant 🙂 My personal opinion is not the point here.
Blazar is a weird one. I was really interested in the Catos, but there was absolutely no footage or reviews up until they went up for preorder, and the preorder discount only lasts for a week. PLUS, the 40mm won't even drop until February. This leaves no time for anyone to rent or test these lenses before taking advantage of the sale, and having to just hope that one of the lenses in the set performs well without seeing any real-world use. Just a really strange approach that seems very much intentional. While I'm still interested in them, I can't justify spending a few grand on a set of lenses without any ability to test them at all. Hopefully this just opens the door down the road for other companies to keep pushing the boundaries of affordable anamorphics. It's getting there, but not yet.
@@LOMISFILM Drives me absolutely nuts. The Arles are a perfect example. Even the SP3’s are geared towards the photography market, which makes absolutely zero sense. I love Cooke and agree with their decision, but give us a 20/21, a 40/42, 65 etc…, and then I’ll show interest. Cinema lenses should come with cinema focal lengths. It’s clearly a marketing tactic used to lure people who wouldn’t necessarily pay these lenses any attention in the first place. Super disappointing. Obviously, focal lengths are subjective, but there are some expectations that aren’t being met. I’ve stopped investing in these products as they don’t have a long tail.
@@schoolstuff5235 DZOfilm seems to be on the right path though. I'm going with a set of Arles next year instead. Seems like a much wiser investment. As much as I'm dying to get some anamorphics, I don't trust Blazar, and everything else worth the money is too expensive for an owner/operator that doesn't primarily shoot projects that warrant it. It'll get there one day, but not yet.
If you think that the Cooke SP3’s are geared specifically towards the photography market , then you don’t understand what these lenses were made for… These lenses were developed mainly for B Cam/crash cam/gimbal-stedicam usage on feature films/tv series, the secondary market is for doc, indie, higher budgeted content creation. Source: I’ve been a friend/customer of Les, the owner of Cooke since 1997 and knew about these lenses when they were in development. I own a set of hand picked/color matched Cooke S3/S2 and have used most of their Lens sets through my work as Union Cinematographer. You make a wild assumption about Cookes and then groan about how you’re disappointed but honestly it shows your bold, massive inexperience as to what these lenses are about and then you run with it.
Cheap anamporphics are TRASH. I'm a commercial DP and I'd never put any of that crap on a camera. I understand the market for it but for anyone with a clue about what they are doing, no chance in hell we are using them.
Cam Mackey?
So glad you made this video. I was just watching a new creator's video abou some new anamorphic lenses and the videa was titled "These lenses changed film making" and I thought to myself; how the hell can that be true when they're not even released yet
Cam has changed so much gear, his name should be "what's next". No one, I repeat...NO ONE should have that many different cameras or lenses. They've created a loop of anticipating the next drop, which is "the best camera ive owned". Meanwhile, you aren't even efficient with the one you just purchased 2 months ago. They get sponsored (paid) to create videos, spec ads and commercials using the gear they are pimping. We get worked up into a frenzy and go out and spend more money on gear we dont need. Now they are doing it in groups, creating this movie set environment, which feeds the beast and desire we have, to be apart of that "industry" of filmmakers. Red was the club to be in, now it's not. All the creators ran to Nikon, that has cooled off. They all dropped Lumix videos but then that faded like washed jeans. All of a sudden, Blackmagic is the greatest thing since slice bread. And Sony, will have them crying in their beers when they dont get invited to their sleepover camps. It never ends!
Cvp is great and yes transparent. Honestly I love Christopher frost also. He does reviews on all photo lenses unfortunately I wish he would do cinema lenses which is fairly rare.
While I can’t speak for everyone, I know for my channel, if I don’t believe in a product, I decline. I will only feature stuff on my channel that I feel is a product that my audience can use and benefit from. And I decline dozens of offers a week because they are things that just don’t align with my channel.
Personally, as far as the blazars go, they are something I (personal opinion I can’t speak for everyone) really really enjoy the lenses , especially being mindful of the price. To the point where I reach to Blazar directly practically begging them for the lens. They’ve never paid me a penny. I can’t speak for everyone, but here’s my thoughts
Hi Brady, thanks for chiming in. I think it's pretty common that people review things they can get excited about. I'm not saying that's wrong, I'm saying that's part of this whole ballgame, and there's still a bias there.
It goes like this. You review what you like. Youget excited. That excitement is more likely to generate views. Those views are more likely to make you friendly with the company. That relationship is likely to lead to more gear you can review and get excited about. And all of that leads to more dollars in your pocket.
This cycle is normal, it's okay. It doesn't mean your review isn't valuable, or helpful, etc. But it DOES mean there's a bias - you WANT to be excited, you WANT to say good things, because that ultimately lines your own pockets. I'm not saying it makes you sinister, or dishonest, or anything like that. I'm trying to highlight for the audience that they should be aware of these things. The excitement of a mass of reviewers may not translate to their own experience after spending their own money. I'm suggesting people should be skeptical of ANY review from ANY channel (including me)!
Why did Brady butter feel the need to defend himself!!??
@@anneboyer6359 Because he's a grown ass man and does what he wants. ie. Defend himself
Hey Nick I appreciate this review and I agree with most of what you said. I do want to touch on the notion of content creators/filmmakers needing products to make content. That's not entirely true it's part of the process and as you grow companies do want to throw prodocuts at you. But its not the only stream of revenue for a channel. I plan to make a video expanding on this. On my channel I focus on giving real-world results of said products sent to me or I ask for, that fit within my workflow. The relationship I have with brands and how they view my content I am able to give real feedback that has sometimes altered the end product for other customers.
But keep up the good work and I watch your videos. I'd love to chat sometime 😊
Hey Joshua! Thanks for the kind words, and I’m happy to chat any time. Your channel is great! I watch it often. But it’s interesting that so far, the only people making your point that reviewers don’t “need” products to review, happen to be reviewers themselves. I’m not trying to criticize anyone in particular. I’m glad the review space exists. But to deny or hide the symbiosis in the brand/reviewer relationship does a disservice to the audience. Even if your feedback has altered products doesn’t mean you’ve always been completely honest (again I’m not saying you specifically). When you’re paid for a review (even if it’s only via RUclips views), a bias exists. No one is immune. Every channel has some kind of agenda. I’m just encouraging folks to find that agenda and figure out how it might color the content. 1- find out what’s in it for the reviewer, and 2- don’t be afraid to disagree with the reviewer group. That’s all I’m saying :-)
You definitely don’t need stuff. You make a ton of valuable content beyond review.
5:55 I agree. The Proteus are a poor man’s Cooke and they look great-just heavy.
The main thing I'd criticise which is a dealbreaker for me is the horizontal squashing on the sides or cato and remus lenses. Its pretty terrible, and nobody mentioned it
Okay I do get your point, but I believe we do have eyes as well, and when they do show sample images I can decide by myself if I like them or not. I don’t think we need any more of those rant videos especially from other creators who are also doing sponsored videos or get gear sent. I would’ve love much more to see a review from you where you say why you don’t like them and won’t use them, instead of bashing your colegues!
The "reviews" should all open with a statement about sponsored content.
@@rumenalexandrov 👏🏼
Well said
THANK YOU.
The 55mm Blazar Cato is hot garbage unless you keep your subjects perfectly centered and never move your camera.
You move the camera even a little bit and the edges look like you’re in a fish bowl.
And RUclipsrs are calling it “character.”
lol
I call it unusable.
Panavision has entered the chat
I call your take, hot garbage and completely uneducated.
@@colemoweryYep, this guy is bent.😂
Are you referring to Cammackey? Just FYI, he actually showed great examples of FEATURE FILMS that have these characteristics. Obviously the Catos arent as good as those high end Anamorphics, but with Catos we now have a WAY CHEAPER anamorphics that is 10x or even more less expensive than those high end Anamorphics that have similar characteristics, albeit with some compromises. Heck, Panavision anamorphics also showed this characteristics albeit controlled.
Mate I could not agree more with your sentiments. This is prevalent in every industry, but especially within the umbrella of tech.
Interesting thoughts! Definitely truth to what you're saying, but its also a can of worms. There really is no such thing as an unbiased review or "take" on anything. Everyone has an angle, everyone is shaped by their own world view.
But yes geberally brands will want to work mostly with people who generate poaitive coverage. But also - a lot of reviews are taking into account the pricing of equipment, like a review of a £2k lens is definitely going to consider that as part of the review.
I think the term "review" is also very open to interpretation and like you say you get technical reviewers like CVP and others who go out and use them and feedback on their expeirence. The thing about technical reviewers... I don't want to watch lots of those videos. I'll watch maybe one or two and then I'll mostly watch videos from people who will use the equipment in the field with creative application and talk about the experience of shooting with it.
My understanding is that creators are pretty much swamped with gear opportunities, they're not really that desperate for kit... I guess in most cases if a product isnt good enough it just doesnt get featured - it doesnt get expsoure. Creators are often partnering with brands that they align with.
As for thr Cattos most of the videos I've seen on them have done a good job of pointing out the flaws, the sharpness, distortion and the CA and stuff like that - same with the Remus and its the reason I havent bought any yet, thats all down to the videos I've seen by the big RUclips creators.
I dont think I've seen anyone saying that they challenge £5k or £10k 2x anamorphics. But they are sharing the excitment at the fact that there simply has never been a sub £2k 2x anamorphic option before...
So I kinda share the excitement of many of the influencers who have made videos on them because they are exciting lenses. They arent perfect but for the price I think they're very interesting!
There is also a really significant point here about the democratisation of production kit - giving people access to equipment they could never have dreamt of previously.
A lot of people are not shooting at your level with a RED, nor viwing their work on large screens, everyone has different needs and more importantly different tastes. No one starts off shooting on £30k cameras with £12k lenses. But you can pick up a £1200 LUMIX cam that can now shoot open gate.
Are the lenses perfect? No - but I do think they're emblematic of a "moment" where we're getting access to some crazy equipment at crazy prices. I think that vibe is what many creators have captured really well whilst still being honest about the limitations of the lenses.
I guess the difference is that you're not excited by them, you wouldnt use them professionally, which is a totally valid take, but also there are a whole group of people who are pretty hyped for them! Theres definitely room for both groups on RUclips.
I would love to see your take on these lenses though!
Hey Ed, thanks for taking the time to chime in. So, you're in the review space, and you understand that the vast majority of reviews will be overall positive, and overall suggest that product X is worthy of existence and purchase. My point is that the general public doesn't always understand that, or understand WHY that is. On its face, we want to believe that product X is great. But as you've said, it's much more complicated than that. My point isn't to say any particular product is bad, or that any particular person is dishonest. It's to show people that ALL of the reviewers are going to say something is great, regardless of the total reality.
Yes, I'm glad budget anamorphic lenses exist. That's great! But there's a very false sentiment that they are better than they are. If I'm the average consumer, I'd rather have someone say straight to my face: save your $1500 on this lens or $4500 on this lens set. Save up for a while and just buy ONE lens which is awesome. You'll get much more out of it. But no one on RUclips ever says that. Yes, I'm lucky to play with fancy stuff. But half of my content is shot on a $3k camera with a $199 lens. I point this out in the video above.
I'm definitely in favor of broader access to good gear. (Not everyone is, by the way. There are interesting arguments against the "democratization" thing.) But I'm NOT in favor of pretending like that any particular new product is better than it really is. You say that no one is comparing new budget options to $5-10k lenses. But that's EXACTLY what almost EVERY video suggests. Tell me you've honestly never heard the phrase "punch way above their weight" or "competes with lenses costing 5-10 times more" in at least a dozen videos. That's a RUclips staple which I personally hate, but it's the marketing language that brands feed to influencers, and most people just repeat it.
Again, I'm not trying to criticize anyone in particular. I've watched lots of your videos, and enjoyed them. I'm not suggesting that reviews aren't valuable. My entire point here comes down to two things, which I tried to make clear. 1 - as you watch a review, question what's in it for the reviewer. And 2 - don't be afraid to disagree with a massive wave of opinion contrary to your own. That's ALL that I'm trying to say. Nothing else really.
@@nick_salazar yeah I totally get that, and I don't think you're saying anything controversial!
We should promote critical thinking, I come from a science background so it's naturally drilled into me. I tend to always suggest people watch as many videos as they should and make up their own minds. I don't think I'd ever explicitly tell people to go and buy something but I will offer my own opinion. I think it's rare to ever have a truly bad product these days and if one is then people just tend not to feature it. As for the Remus / cattos I do genuinely think you have to bare in mind the quality / price ratio... (also Fun?)
But yes these are important discussions to have because they lead to greater clarity and understanding in this space.
I really enjoyed my experience with the CATOs. I had created the film "Gold Bastard" using them. I am really happy to have access to anamorphic lenses with that amount of character for such a low price. I know this video is directed towards filmmakers who are also influencers and my addition to the launch was solely a standalone film - not a video about my opinion/experience, but I just wanted to say that they were really quite lovely lenses! They are possibly the most creatively stimulating addition to my kit since I first bought my Alexa Mini. They remind me of the 32mm 2x CCI Kowa lens from Keslow Camera (original modded by Clairmont - Kowa 40mm + a large wide angle adapter). I agree it's definitely important to make people aware of biases when watching gear review videos though of course.
Also, you and I feel very similar about the Arles Primes from DZO. I was watching your videos about them nonstop early on because I was just as excited when they were announced haha. Those are absolutely incredible lenses and I ended up buying the original set of 5. I still can't believe I own a set of T/1.4 sharp FF primes and didn't have to spend $100K+.
LOVED your film Gold Bastard was super cool! Did you feel the lenses were a little soft in the center? Also how the F did you do the gold flakes in water shot--amazing!!
Hey Matt! Thanks so much for the kind words. You do outstanding work, and I'm not trying to criticize any particular product or person. I'm only saying that we as consumers should be more careful in how we receive new product information. I've seen too many product launches where ALL the information is about how great the new product is, and EVERY review concludes that the new product is a revolution and destined for greatness, only to be forgotten in the next six months. Personally, I haven't seen any low-budget anamorphic lenses that I would want to keep. It's true that even the cheapest lens can be used to make fantastic art, and I'm not trying to say otherwise, but personally, for MY dollars, I'll stick with what I have ... for now. Again, I think you do really great work, and if you make different choices than me, it's not only okay, that's a GOOD thing. Strong opinions make for strong art, and our differences breed variety.
@@nick_salazar No problem brother! I appreciate the kind words too. I enjoy watching your videos and I’m always happy when I see a new one pop up.
I completely agree that it would be quite a boring artistic world if we all had the same creative instincts. Imperfect Anamorphics with a ton of character, fall off, and barrel distortion are exciting as hell for me - but definitely not the case for everyone.
In many gear reviews, especially when bias is present, there can be a degree of sensationalism. Reviewers may either overly praise certain aspects or minimize shortcomings due to brand sponsorships, brand loyalty, and even something as simple as personal preference, which can lead to an unrealistic expectation of the product for the viewers. It’s very important that people take that into consideration.
I just wanted to say that I genuinely really loved the lenses and found them really creatively stimulating. Wasn’t trying to challenge you or anything - just wanted to express it :)
@@MattBendo-CSC-AIC Thanks Matt! I didn't take your comment as a challenge or combative at all. Thanks for being here, it's a privilege to have people like you watching what I do!
Firstly, I thoroughly enjoy your content. I'm happy that you're speaking up because I find it very disappointing what's happening in the youtube space and I have as a result unfollowed a bunch of these guys. Thanks for keeping it honest.
Thank you for the kind words! I’ll keep doing my best. Stay skeptical my friend.
Some people are quite clear about products and relationships and simply don’t make negative reviews. (Don’t hate me)
Some like yourself do it gracefully or “fair and lovable” ❤ Also I still haven’t decoded what you say in the first 3 seconds of your videos 😅
@@marklholloway Hahaha. Fair. If you go back 3-4 years, I was much slower at it. It's more of a running joke now to see how fast I can go and see what RUclips closed captioning picks up. My favorite is "Hey what's up, Skywalker bear here"
Thank you for making this. Filmmaking RUclips is becoming a slopfarm for gear reviews only and yes I get the narrative that “We HaVe To PaY BiLlS” but you also don’t have to sell out your audience at the same time. This forced narrative of “the companies don’t get a say in my review” is ridiculous and almost patronizing. Obviously if you say something atrocious about the product the oil well runs dry; that’s why you always get these great features then these small little nitpicks to make the review seem fair and unbiased. The sector as a whole has a huge problem right now. You actually don’t even see much “filmmaking “ at all anymore
What do you think about the Viltrox Epic? Minimal focus breathing and super sharp image wide open, almost no ca. slight pincusion distortion which is easily fixable in post etc. Even the Cinematographer greig freiser praised them. (Although you might say he got paid to say so)
I do like the Viltrox lenses a lot. I have used them and considered buying them. They’re a bit heavy, long flanges (no rear adapters will work except on the 100mm), but what really killed it for me was the close focus. They’re just too long for me and I hate diopters. Otherwise they’re lovely.
Agree, but the sacrifice in my opinion is worth it at least for me. I’m using a Matte Box system for the NDs to compensate for the long flange distance. And the minimum focus isn’t really that bad even the Hawk 1.33x exhibit between 60-90 cm. And plenty of other high end option are falling on that range too. But I’m glad they don’t get that much hype otherwise the price will inflate 😂😂
Thanks for waking me up! I have been binging RUclips all weekend thinking I needed these budget ones even though I’m less than excited about the actual look. At the end of the day they won’t get me the gig nor serve much more than a paper weight…
Totally disagree with you. The Blazars, especially the Remus 1.5x lineup, are some of the best lenses in the market and being used by professionals as well. I don't have any at the moment but eyeing for the B-set + 33mm lens.
Yes! Taking everything with a pinch of salt and make sure that you know the reviewer and what their angle is!
I've done reviews and shared experience but don't get paid, it's generally for the learning and sharing of others use. I think your points are mostly valid but each persons motivations will be different, for example some as you say are full time YT ppl but others like myself share videos and thoughts when I have time. Some ppl were very generous with me when I was first on set sharing info and I've found YT being a way to both give back and be creative at times.
A worthwhile discussion to be sure, but respectfully, while I hear what you're saying and agree in theory with a fair amount of it, 5 years ago, your average anamorphic cinema lens was 30K to 50K per lens... Calling a spade, a spade, lenses like the Blazars are 1K to 2K per lens, with differences by and large only perceptible to seasoned, working DP's (not your average viewer or content creator). Your average viewer on YT or IG won't know the difference between those and the vintage anamorphics used on Rebel Moon. That's all there is to it. That's the "game change". 5 years ago your average solo shooter pretty much couldn't shoot anything but a well-budgeted commercial or film with anamorphic cinema lenses, and now they can. Quality of the lenses aside, that's utterly insane when you think about it.
Re creator biases, though there's certainly a benefit to being in the good graces of brands who send free products (which quickly has diminishing returns once you realize the time and effort investment... no one can eat lenses), at the end of the day, products that were only available to big budgets and steep rental houses, now being available to own for 1-2K is pretty hype-worthy if you ask me. I think there's also some onus on viewers to read between the lines *which I think is probably your main point). If a reviewer gave too many disclaimers of their bias, though, I would laugh and click out. I think you're right though that there is definitely a draw to gear in order to fill the topic/idea void. And it can be a little cringey when creators are just gassing up brands. But I mean... I think that's pretty obvious at this point.
Hey Scott, thanks for the comment. Maybe bias is already "obvious" to everyone else as you say. But it isn't always obvious to me. I often have to shake myself and be like "WHY is this product getting so much attention? I would not want to work with it." It takes a little time to remember that even people whose work I ordinarily trust can get caught up in their biases, and the group hype, and publish a review that isn't quite connected to reality.
Also, I strongly disagree that $30-50k lenses from five years ago are roughly equivalent to $1-2k lenses today. There are a couple gems, but WAY more duds. And the problem is that every reviewer wants to include their latest product review in the former category rather than the latter, to get more clicks. That becomes a danger to consumers, who get pushed towards each new product as if it will solve all their problems, when that's just not true.
@@nick_salazar that's fair, but don't you think differences in lens fidelity are largely imperceptible to your average viewer or even content creator? And even if they aren't. Fidelity is a bit of a moving target. Huge names like Greig Fraser are often chasing those lenses w optical flaws or "character". I totally agree that these lenses aren't "clean" by a million miles, but what's the intended look of the project, you know? Thanks for your reply, btw :)
@@ScottJeschke I'm not sure I'd use a word like "fidelity" because that's not really defined, and therefore not really measurable. Resolution is measurable. Abberrations are measurable. Distortion, close focus distance, bokeh characteristics, flare, veiling glare, corner softness, field curvature, etc etc. If your question is "do budget lenses perform well relative to expensive ones?" the answer is SURE. But there can still be big differences to the actual work you do with them.
If all you care about is RUclips content, then sure, go with the "it doesn't really matter" school of thought. But I'm interested in big screens, narrative work, and I do care what it looks like in 4k resolution in a viewing environment where I can distinguish that many columns (meaning at least a 30-degree field of view). In those cases, my experience is that this stuff matters.
I sold my NiSi Athena lenses and bought the Arles set because I notice a HUGE difference between those two. If I had an unlimited budget, I might take a look at Cooke, or Leitz, or Zeiss glass. But at the moment, my main spherical set is Arles because for ME there is a HUGE difference between them and the others they compete with. They're one of those "gems" I mentioned above.
@@nick_salazar yep. Exactly that. By Fidelity I just mean lacking characteristic flaws. And I totally agree there is a big difference. I'm more saying that I think the hype is more around the democratized aspect. That being said, I think one issue with the RUclips landscape is I think there are sort of three categories when it comes to filmmaking gear review 1. Solo Creator (who sometimes dips their toes into narrative and commercial) 2. Tech reviewer (who will simply lay out these specs and the facts) 3. The industry day players (who are more looking at how the gear impacts the project they are being paid for). The issue as it regards to those three categories is that the creators tend to get prioritized, (which makes sense, because they are essentially influencers) and they by creating content w the gear, are essentially marketing it and selling it. Which again, is not inherently wrong, but I tend to find all three categories are of equal value when I'm looking at gear.
@ScottJeschke - You're right that the average viewer won't be able to tell, but I will push back on Greig Fraser comment. Ironglass lenses have character but they are still amazing pieces of glass. Leica R have character but are amazing pieces of glass. There are some amazing optics in the DIY anamorphic world that many people have paid to have professionally rehoused. Greig likes unique lenses - not poor-quality lenses.
Blazar was on the right track with the Great Joys-they had a better-built product without all the flaws in their current lineup. The problem was that the costs of a higher-quality product meant that they were competing with other players, and it was hard for them to stand out. So, they made an inferior product at half the cost and gained market share. Smart business move, but they totally deserve to be called out for it. Blazars were the company I thought would successfully bring an affordable 2x line-up to the market. I would have happily paid double the price for a better quality product.
I am with you ... There is no reason for 2x anamorphic on a sensor that is not reading open gate. So much is trimmed down and zoom in to fill the screen. Blazar released some new 2x lenses and very lightly here and there is mentioned about how much footage is lost because of trimming
I don't get how Blazar would 'let' reviewers use them on a 16:9 sensor. There are already quite a few comments saying the footage looks way too wide and stretched so no thank you, but it's just content shot in the 'wrong' format. If it hasn't been shot 6:5, or at the very least 3:2 and cropped for delivery, it's a bit misleading, and we don't get an idea of the real potential of the lens. That's why I generally hate it when these brands post showcase material, but don't say what camera and what format they've shot in. Quite often when I ask, it turns out to be an s35 camera showcasing a FF lens... To be fair, Cam has mentioned the 3:2 vs 16:9 point though and shown the difference with Brady.
True, 2x is a niche market in the standard formats, in the pro-sumer market. You have to crop too much of the image.
@@alzibaba agree
@@alzibabaCam Mackey mentioned it a lot. And so did Brady Bassette.
@@uptonfilms95 yeah, they have now, as I mentioned in my comment ;-) Just didn’t really figure in the first content released.
Still don’t know why Blazar would want folks to showcase these 2x lenses on 16:9 sensors tho…
Gear is cool. I would shill too if given the opportunity. My buddy has a very successful studio in NYC and shoots on a 10 year old camera, he didnt even know what Blackmagic was when I showed him🤣
Hey Nick, I just wanted to let you know I made a video about the whole drama that's unfolding about these lenses. I tried to talk about the situation in a nauanced way, but probably failed. 🤷♂️
Anyway, I felt weird making a video addressing you without letting you know, and this is the only way I know to reach you...
Damn Mr. Salazar, you’ve caused quite the commotion. Look at all these comments, looking like you dropped the hottest diss track in Filmmaking RUclips History.
i think the overarching thing that should be understood here is that two things can exist at the same time. it's said many times in this video, reviews are great and can still be of value, though there's always going to be some sort of bias. i feel like people are taking the word bias negatively when its a natural thing all people grow to have. and what may feel redundant to some could be useful to others. i personally didn't understand the hype for the remus lenses or the pavos, though the titles and content got me excited. upon watching they genuinely looked terrible to me, the warping, the CA, they did not look usable, yet i couldn't point to a single video with that same opinion. this happens with cameras and almost every new product. though like most express here, reminding people to form their own opinions through what they see and the specific information given on the product and relationships is super important overall. we can all do our due diligence in some way or another.
Bro, this is definitely the Blazar Catos. Can't lie, the footage looked terrible to my eyes. There was some weird warping that was going on as the video panned. It was almost like a vertigo effect or something. I thought to myself, If anything, I'd purchase the Remus. Man, no other way to put it, I just don't like any of the Cato footage I saw. The warping in the edges is even pretty extreme for the Remus too.
I'm still hoping that the anamorphic autofocus they have coming out later will be good, though. More so than anything else, I wish they would just take their time and focus on being known for having one set of solid anamorphic that people flock to. If they took their time, they could remain in the budget anamorphic space and charge around 3K per lens. That's still a steal for anamorphic. I just wish the performance was better.
I actually think the image I get from my Sirui Saturn 35mm is better. The only "problem" with them is the pin-cushion distortion at the edges rather than barrel. That can fixed in Davinci, though.
What people think looks good is super subjective, but I have to disagree with you here. Most members in the anamorphic facebook group think the Sirui lens are far too clinical and lack anamorphic character and I agree with them, plus pin-cushion distortion is gross. Also the oversaturated blue flares on Sirui products honestly look like a cheap adapter. Even the best DIY adapter setups like Kowas have EXTREMELY WARPED edges, but once you crop in and apply the fix in resolve it's not that bad and a part of what gives the lenses character and the unique look. I understand from thje perspective of people used to spherical lenses and a super sharp image that it might look weird, but if you come from a DIY anamorphic background you've pretty much accepted that that's apart of the look unless you spend 30k a lens for a Arri Master or something. Go watch shogun, literally tons of warping and imperfections in shots but I thought it looked incredible.
@@timekeepermedia5142 Thanks for the reply. I appreciate your position. I specifically like the Sirui because they are a little cleaner. Flares are subjective, but honestly the way I shoot, I don't generally end up with much of them. I do like the bokeh though and feel that the lens gives me enough of the anamorphic look without going overboard. Also, as noted, the pincushion is an easy fix in Davinci that I learned from Anamorphic on a Budget's channel.
The warped edges from the Catos isn't my biggest problem though. I guess I didn't know how best to describe it. There's like a vertigo like effect going on and not just on the edges and I guess that because of the panning, I dunno. What I mean is this on Anamorphic on a Budget's channel :
ruclips.net/video/3tYdKJuyLcM/видео.html
I don't mind distortion but wow, when panning/dollying that effect there is just too much. It's almost dizzying.
@@MichaelAndrews-rp2od If you watch shogun, all of those artsy shots with super distortion/compression are from a fixed camera angle, they're not panning or tracking with handheld movements and that's for a reason.. even with super pricey, wider anamorphics. The 55mm Cato is definitely something you want stationary and if you want to pan, you use the 85mm. Again though, these are tools for specific jobs and looks and not great all arounders. Sirui does offer something that's in that middle ground of true anamorphic and spherical reliability and sharpness which might be good for some, but for me I either want one or the other.
@@timekeepermedia5142 Thanks for the education on that. When I think of it, when I shoot anamorphic, I have tended to have still shots. Maybe it's present on the Sirui too, but just never noticed. That makes total sense, though, to use the longer focal lengths for panning as they are normally better controlled than wider lengths with regard to edge distortion.
As I mentioned in my original post, though, I'm interested to see how well the anamorphic autofocus lens they are developing turns out. I shoot Panasonic because I actually do like anamorphic, but I like having some control.
To be honest, the anamorphic lenses I really want are the 75mm Pavos and then that 45mm Mercury. Man, if I had the money, lol...
hi Nick. I have two cameras - full frame and crop 1.3. I want to take only two Arles lenses. If you choose from A and B, which ones impressed you the most? I'm thinking about 24+50 but maybe there's something better.
I think 24 and 50 is a solid choice given your use case. In my experience there isn't really a weak lens in the set, they're all very good and well-matched. So if those focal lengths work well for your kind of work, you'll likely enjoy them! Maybe one day add the 35mm, which looks wonderful on full frame. Or add the 100mm instead for a long lens. But 24/50 to start does sound good to me.
The same could be said to any youtubers. I put bias label on ALL of them without discrimination. However, they're still valuable source of information. I always skip what reviewers think about the products. I don't care what they think or feel. It's my money that I spend, not theirs. All I want is data. Gullible people fell for hype, it's emotional purchase not objective one.
People might be a bit smatter than you think. A clear legal disclosure, of free gear, loner gear, or sponsorship, puts the viewer on notice for bias. That's not the issue in this space, it's the 70% that don't give a clear legal disclosure, or any disclosure at all.
Just a side note, once a channel is a certain size, the free gear is a nice bonus, but mostly irrelevant. The channels that get 90% of the views in this space don't really need it.
Hey Mark, thanks for commenting. I enjoy your work and I’m not trying to single anyone out. Maybe other people are smarter than me, but I personally have to shake myself and be reminded of these things. Anyone who is consistently paid to review product has a bias. No one on RUclips is saying “I have a financial incentive to make exciting reviews” but that incentive exists. Which video gets you more revenue - The one talking about a “new low budget game changer” or one talking about “another similar middle market average lens”? Reviewers have an incentive to sensationalize, so they do. That’s my point here. This particular launch I’m talking about has been vastly sensationalized, and it’s NOT a sensational product. New? Yes. Unique at its price point? Yes. Game changer for filmmakers? Absolutely not, but it’s being touted as such by folks who know better, to an audience that might not.
@@nick_salazar I agree with most of what you said in the video, and is this comment. My point of difference was really the disclosure. Your disclosure example, in the video, was a clear and legal disclosure. The idea that RUclipsrs should then go on to give extra information on top of this is really impractical. I don't think that's the main issue at all. I know the videos you are referencing, and I did not see any that had a clear and legal disclosure. If every one of those videos had a clear disclosure in the first 60 seconds, it would be very easy for the average viewer to understand what is going on, but that didn't happen.
As someone that's BTS on this, the real issue is non-disclosure of free gear, loaner gear, paid videos, paid trips, etc. 70% of videos are not disclosing, or not legally disclosing.
I totally agree with your comments on the RUclips review hype train, and you should make a video like this to shine a light on it. If everyone gave clear disclosure, paid video, free gear, etc, it would be easy, or at least easier, for an average viewer to work this out.
@@markwiemels I'm not sure what you mean by "disclosure" versus "legal disclosure." Also my point is that, despite that "standard line" you often hear, there's still an important bias that people tend to either forget or outright deny. The bias is that review channels tend to be overly positive, reviewers have a hard time publishing anything negative. So the reviews are NOT neutral, not even (and especially not when) they claim to be. Reviewers are virtually always biased towards the positive based on their chosen career. Very few people understand that, and virtually no one admits it.
@@nick_salazar Look up FTC disclosure guide. It's pretty clear, that's what I'm talking about. I'm not disagreeing with you about the bias, or neutral aspect, at all. If everyone followed the FTC laws, the macro picture of all this becomes very clean to the viewers.
I think the average person is smart enough, that if given a proper legal disclosure "Free product, paid video, flown to Japan" and then they go on to say "This is a totally unbiased video" - they can make up there own mind.
The majority of these review videos are illegal. The videos you are talking about, in this video, all of them that I watched are illegal. If all of those videos started with a disclosure of sponsorship or free gear, etc, the viewer can then be on guard for the bias. The viewer then sees 10 of those videos, all with legal disclosure, it gives them a clear big picture of what's going on.
As for the fact that review channels need to get people excited about every new product, that's a reasonable thing to say. This is not something that is covered in the disclosure, I think it's good for people to talk about that, and I'm glad you made this video about it.
@@nick_salazarso would you rather have them not say anything at all?
What probably exacerbates this setiment is the proximity between the reviewers and the marketing departments of these brands not factoring that in, to use different voices and get thus unique perspectives of their products.
Friends will in most cases share opinions on what their friendship is built upon (in this case filmaking and gear) so ultimately in their delivery they will see and miss the same things which then comes across as collusion to pull wool over everyone's eyes.
I have no doubt positive conversations and reflections through videos like this between creators and viewers will ulimately grow into better well thoughout content and a better community!
Interesting and good points. I think it'd be interesting for you to rent some of them and then discuss what about them would make you not want to use them. It is true that it feels like people are often sharing them because they depend on the review for money. I think it'd be great to hear the why and why nots from you
It’s entertaining when you rant.
This is def blazar lenses lol they’ve been thrown at me ad-wise all month so far
How about dzo Arles? Every RUclipsr saying it’s almost as good as signiature primes or cookes. Maybe they’re that good lol or maybe they just had a big ad spend.
Trust and transparency go hand in hand, I find. From what I hear expressed, is that bias, in itself, is not a problem. For example the CVP channel. I agree with that.
I was thinking about buying the Blazar but when I sit and think about it how I plan on shooting I think ima end up frustrated with them so I think I will just get the nisi Athena even when I think about using the two Athena make me less frustrated lol
Maybe wait and see if the Simera-C lenses come out in M-mount. If they do, they will be a compelling option for sure. I'm hoping to test them out.
@@nick_salazar that will be really nice I just finished watching a video on them
Hola!! If you say we are 5 viewing congrats I’m number 6!! lol Jokes aside, great to see your content and big thanks for coming forward to talk about this, indeed CVP are one of the honest and straight on this matters. Brands also add to this problem since they don’t want to get criticizes, and what I’m not sure is that if they realize that on the long term is not good for business as well. Thanks for sharing!! Cheers.
Love the comments in one lol. It will always be a thing. The RUclips filmmaking space is just turning into gear sales at this point. But if the creators can do it why not. I prob would to.
Which spherical budget lenses do you think are the best? I need to pick up lenses for a team that does not have the opportunity to use the rental. And so far we have chosen Sirui Jupiter Macro.
The boring, frustrating, true answer is that "it depends." Depends on your budget, your crew size, and your goals. What look are you going for? How many people do you have to help? What kind of support/stabilization equipment do you have? How much money can you spend? Etc, etc. There are LOTS of great options in the spherical space, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. I'm not sure what led you to Sirui Jupiter, but that's a pretty specific choice, so maybe you already know what you need.
@@nick_salazar Yes, a good description) What led me to these lenses was their price on the secondary market. $350 apiece would allow us not to expand budgets. But of course, if there is a more interesting alternative, then you can expand the budget.
@@IlyaPodnebesmiy try DZO Vespids
I just saw a review opened with "This camera was not given to me for free, so I'm not biased in any way". That last part, where someone can even consider himself "not biased in any way" really doesn't land well.
Exactly.
Love this . What about the blazar anamorphics or the laowa nanomorphs ( i like those because it has a natural flare And it is not very in your face it’s way more subtle than the other budget ones )
I was about to make a video about Blazar lenses…
Thank you for making this.
I love their 1.5x lenses but those 2x lenses look bad… very bad.
The top and bottoms being out of focus is disgusting. The Remus are pretty tame and have used them on many projects
Rant away Nick, and totally agree about CVP. To me it's pretty obvious these reviewers rely on having products for reviews, so I keep that in mind. What has surprised me about the release you must be referring to though is how much content's been shot on 16:9. Let's cut off a chunk of the vertical FOV to showcase our product - like I'm scratching my head.
Hi, Nick. tell me, have you considered buying a kinefinity mavolf camera before as a large format camera and an alternative to the RED VV? I am interested in it because of the large format and the second native iso, which is immediately sewn into the video. This allows you to show details in very dark areas, and lower the exposure in post-production. and when the viewer in the cinema will watch very dark contrasting scenes of the film, these small details will appear in gradations of black. Can the RED VV perform the same tasks in low-light scenes?
I did consider the Kinefinity cameras. They are good products and a good value. But ultimately there were a number of reasons I chose Red and I’ve been very happy with it.
Don’t get too caught up in the hype around dual native (or triple native) ISO. It’s not nearly as important as people would have you believe. If you compose well, light your scene, and expose your camera properly, that’s all that really matters. Shooting RAW helps too, but isn’t strictly necessary to get a great result. Focus on the fundamentals, not the fancy specs or the hype.
@@nick_salazar Thank you!
I am just really tired of non-experts reviewing cameras like they are experts. None of these guys have any clue on how to professionally produce content. Most of them have garbage footage when they do post yet. They get all of this gear for free because they have a little bit of a following on RUclips.
Bro I literally was thinking yesterday while shopping for gear that I can’t trust any of these RUclipsrs because no matter how honest they say their being, they aren’t, especially if the product was given to them and not purchased. Do you honestly think a RUclipsr who is growing still would want to give a bad product review for say a company like DJI to potential lose that partnership. Absolutely not. So when l look for gear reviews I now look for people who have actually used their own money and used in real life to make an unbiased opinion
I always steer away from videos with titles like “game changer” “only light,mic,camera,lense you will EVER need” “this change filmmaking forever” …. And so on. And it’s always the same 5 -6 channels that do this and they recently collaborated on a short film to introduce a new camera and how it does open gate and at the same time the blazar remus. Didn’t they say that that was a game changer? And now this new blazar cato will change filmmaking…. 🤦🏻♂️ I don’t know if they are really filmmakers or just sales man.
You are spot on 💯 and what hurts the most is there were several ‘Tubers I like and now their channels are exactly what you’re describing 💔 Building trust with your core audience should be the top priority and will provide longevity. Once they sense you’re cashing out it’s only a matter of time before you lose your core base and it becomes hard to reverse that.
Dzo Arles don’t fall into this camp? I got so hyped up about them cause everyone is glowing talking about them but it makes me wonder if maybe it’s not just a marketing push.
Most products fall into this camp, including Arles. My point is to be skeptical of the messengers, and don't be afraid to disagree with a whole crowd of reviewers. As far as Arles goes, I was really excited by them when they were announced. I flew out to Cinegear on my own dime to see them, I pestered DZOFilm for a loaner to review, and LOVED them. So I eventually bought the A-set of five lenses with my own money. The Arles are definitely the right choice for me. But they might not be for you. If you're contemplating them, try to look at lots of sample footage, rent/borrow one if you can, etc. Just don't take anyone's word for it that they'll be good for you.
I feel the same way you do. I saw 2 reviews on the blazars Catos and I wasn't sold at all. The binocular pan that I saw in those reviews are terrible! I'm not really sure how it goes but sometimes the company will reach out to a list of creators right? If that's the case I'm sure most of the more reliable and non bias ones turned down the offer for review because they know. And now we are left with a hand full who are not doing a good job of selling these things because they're not good at all... I'm just saying 🤷🏾♂️
have you ever shot with DIY anamorphics like Kowas? What kind of performance do you expect for a $1000 2x anamorphic lens?
@@timekeepermedia5142 never, but you're right,can't expect much. I'm just working with what my eyes are showing me, and personally I don't like it. Too distracting.
It's hard to enforce complete honesty and transparency because the cost is less relationships with companies because what company wants to send products to someone who could genuinely speak their mind? Regardless, "review channels" are just doing their job of "reviewing" a product, and that's not necessarily wrong. The issue is that a lot of review channels don't know how to best utilize the products they get and a lot of the audience don't know what kind of look they want.
Aspect ratios wider than 2.66:1 are going to look ridiculously wide if they're not cropped so why are reviewers just leaving that uncropped footage in? Barrell distortion is fine when it's subtle but there is such a thing as too much distortion so why are reviewers just leaving it uncorrected? 2x anamorphics only really work on Open Gate sensors so why are reviewers using it on 16:9 sensors? All of these things can work if they're used with intent but 99% of the time they're not. And the reason they're left in is because they need to get the video out in time of the embargo and to not get left behind from everyone else who got that same product doing the same thing.
On the other hand, a lot of viewers of these reviews don't know the look that they want to make. They just want to make their videos look more "cinematic" but don't understand that it doesn't come from a lens or a camera. It takes learning how to light, how to make motivated camera movements, how to color grade PROPERLY, how to block your subject, how to write good dialogue, etc. and once you have all of that, THEN you can look for the gear that will get you the look that you want. But the fundamentals aren't sexy, so they don't watch.
The responsibility falls on both "reviewers" being informative instead of hyping and the audience being educated on what they NEED to get the look they want.
Don't forget the legions of seemingly impartial reviewers out there (those that lead off with the refrain, "I purchased this product with my own money...") who are riding the same hype train in most cases and in essence, simply auditioning for the role of full-time reviewers . There is just a general unwillingness to condemn any product, but on the flip side, little constraint exercised in proclaiming products as revolutionary or "game-changing".
They're all looking for a party to dance at. I found out how much of a scam it was after i trying and test myself.
thank you Captain Obvious
My issue is with "content creators" that review products that don't actually go out into the world and work for a living with this gear. They don't know what its like to put this gear through its paces in the real world.
there's indeed 5 of us watching
The 2x FF from Blazar are utterly grotesque… and no one is saying how bad they look 👀
I don’t see the advantage of anamorphic lenses over spherical lenses. I wish somebody could point out the difference.
Different folks like different aspects of anamorphic lenses. For some it’s the shape of the bokeh. Or the softer less perfect image with specific kinds of flaws (falloff, distortion, aberrations). For some it’s the overall nostalgic feeling of older films made with them. Personally I love the complex flare from rotating astigmatizer designs (Panavision, Caldwell, Xelmus). But good anamorphic lenses always have significant drawbacks (size, cost, and/or fragility). I tend to agree that in general, spherical lenses are more attractive for most projects. Once in a while anamorphic can be lovely, but FAR less often than RUclips influencers would have you believe (in my opinion).
Different strokes for different folks, and while anamorphic might be great for one project, it may not be for another. For me they make me want to go out and shoot, and that's largely down to the separation and kind of textured background you can create with them, even at t8+. Focus fall-off around the edges also helps make subjects pop off the background a bit more. Whether you like that look or not is a different question. Personally I do.
I'm doing a promo video for an artist at the moment, and the way he paints, if I shoot on spherical, the content doesn't really link with his style, whereas anamorphic does. It's down to the textures in the backgrounds, the imperfections, distortions. Spherical looks more 'perfect', but that's not how he sees the world, and to convey this aspect, anamorphic works great. In this case.
If you've watched Killing Eve, the look they created in Series 3 is simply gorgeous. Shot on spherical. I may be wrong, but in series 4, it looks to me like they introduced quite a lot of anamorphic shots, and to me, series 3's look was more pleasing for the content.
@@nick_salazar everything should be in 16:9 these days to fill my screen. Letterboxing is so 1990's.
Hee hee, I bought these lenses and was aware they have flaws. I love the lenses, and I believe they are great for me at this price point, to have a play with anamorphic lenses, i can't justify 5k a lense to have a play! I get what you are saying and all the emotional words used to describe these lenses. But let's be real here, all products are doing this, and I feel the disclaimers are fine. It is buyer beware. You can't protect people from themselves. I watched the videos, specifically from cammackey, bought them, and I am happy with the purchase. I have also done RUclips videos showing their performance and flaws. You do your research and buy at your own risk.
If you're happy with your purchase, that's all that matters (for you). But there's a difference between idea of "you can't protect people from themselves" and having a reviewer disingenuously push you into something you might otherwise skip, because they're lying to their audience about their motives and incentives. Buyer beware indeed - question your sources of information, and don't be afraid to disagree with the group. That's all I'm saying.
I love hearing something about this.
I appreciate your honesty however please don't speak for everyone. Don't use the phrase most folks when you say I Think. Because you think doesn't equal you know. I get your point of the possible bias towards certain things when it comes to money and reviews. However, something you don't like doesn't mean someone else doesn't like. So I appreciate you saying this because I too have also thought about this (especially when it comes to adobe) before and other brands, and how it creates this false idea for needing something or wanting something when you current gear is still relevant and great.
So I don't hate you however when you speak for MOST FOLKS you loose a bit of credibility in your argument and it turns into the perception of you complaining with no real hard facts other than your experience (Though valid for you ) and thought process. Just saying it would have hit harder if you didn't include unknown other people in your thoughts.
Great video! Very valuable information. Thanks for the honesty.
Dude! The industry in Los Angeles is collapsing because of what you say in your basement. Basement people are the future. As long as you are not living with your parents because that would be unfair.
Of course RUclipsrs will lie about the products they endorse. There is always a bias because if you go against that grain, no brand will work with you. Thats just how brands are.
Reviewers also seem to be blinded to the reality that their reputation is on the line. Their egos are so inflated by the hype from fans that they ignore the immorality of promoting products, taking advantage of the ignorance of viewers.
Seriously, bro, how can you light and shoot the most most beautiful talking head but have a clip on mic that ruins it all? It must be on purpose.
I should have also said, really good points. I agree completely!
Haha thanks. These PTC shots are usually pretty impromptu, just done whenever I have a spare moment. The clip on mic is way easier than setting up a boom. Sorry it ruins it for you!
Cam is lame.
He’d never you the Catos so you guys shouldn’t either is basically what he is saying lol. Why do you think they are so crappy? Just say it we know what lenses you are talking about
And this is why I watch you
Thank you Matt!
Always look at people actually doing REAL WORK that you want to do and buy what they're using in that work. If you want to make commercial work with highly-produced interviews, buy what they're actually using in their real work they trust for their clients. Content creator reviews are worthless. Just copy the pro's as much as you can, they are the ones doing actual work. There's content creators I even like their work, but they're all sponsored and get paid or sent free gear that's overkill on projects. You can't buy what they have and expect everything to be the same for you.
Thanks for this statement! Really necessary!
While I don’t mind conversation about getting to the bottom of the status of review culture on RUclips, one thing that never does well is blatantly having bad faith discussions pretending it’s altruistic, the whole “RUclipsrs are scared to tell you this” while simultaneously being coy about the brands and creators you’re criticizing (which I’m sorry, we all know whom your talking about) is sorta the same “saving of face” that you want people to be transparent about while not doing it yourself, and arguably for the same reasons .
I’m also guessing that you haven’t tried to TALK to some of these creators to gain clarity prior to making this video, and made certain assumptions, which you then posted and monetized on..
Wanting authenticity and accountability from creators while also demanding a non biased take is kinda an oxymoron; if you want someone’s opinion, which will come with authenticity, even when it’s inconvenient, (which is why we watch creators instead of asking chatgpt to think for us) then that comes with implicit bias because all opinions are based on one experiences that others don’t have. That’s not a camera review thing, that’s something most people learn as an adult.
Which my last point which I think is echo’d here, infantilizing the audience to make a point is kind of played out, many of these folks make good on disclosing the nature of their brand relationships, despite that goalpost being moved by folks that are not only (on average) old enough to fight and die for their country, but vote and lead families. Not one creator I know hopes a viewer blindly buys a product, as that’s actually inherently bad for business, and return policies exist. Someone mentioned (with these lenses) that at the end of the day, we have eyes, and if we don’t like something, we can ask questions, but ultimately, just not buy it.
Nick I’m sure you’re a nice guy, had some points I can understand, but the idea of knowing what’s under the veil of RUclips reviews while actually not speaking to reviewers but presenting it to an audience that truly doesn’t know how it works and can only go off of what they believe people in the know, can tell them, is disingenuous at best
Hi Kofi, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I’m perfectly fine with you saying you think I’m guilty of the same thing I’m complaining about. I explicitly invited that kind of skepticism in this video, twice.
My entire point is that people should question the motives of the content they watch, and feel free to disagree with a wave of homogenous opinion.
You’re right when you say all reviews will have a bias. My point isn’t to say bias is bad. My point is to question WHAT that bias might be. Many people, myself included, need to be reminded of that from time to time. I don’t consider it to be a lesson that “everyone already knows.” Maybe you never need that reminder, and good for you. But I don’t think it’s fair to say that no one ever does.
@@nick_salazar in that case I’ll accept the invitation, I actually agree with feeling free to disagree with a homogeneous opinion, I would audit one’s own behaviour as instead of doing that yourself in the very public comment section of these creators, you made this video implying RUclipsrs with positive opinions are afraid to say something, which isn’t entirely true, also the implication that being sent things is the sole revenue driving source is also not true at all, at minimum not solely. This is what I mean by bad faith videos, most of these things would be solved by having open and ADULT conversations, instead, videos like these come out, which galvanizes folks that don’t know how it works that already have negative feelings, and then creators trying to rectify the beginnings of a very toxic culture, which I’m not sure if you’re aware (maybe based on your own biases) are perpetuating. If you uniquely need reminders in videos I think that’s something unique to yourself to be aware of, if you’re unable to control your credit card, it might be beneficial to maybe not consume this type of content, but passed being very upfront with the basis of relationships with brands, these folks have done a good job, which has an ever moving goal post
@@KofiYeboah Kofi, forgive me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like what you're trying to say is that 1 - I shouldn't publish this opinion in public, because 2 - I'm wrong about what I'm saying, and 3 - that if there's a problem, it must be with me personally and I should fix it in private.
Is that essentially what you're saying? It's fine if you are. You can criticize me all you want, I don't mind.
But it really feels like you're trying to sweep this issue under the rug. I mean, this video has under 3k views at the moment. If this is such a dangerous topic to discuss in public, why should such a small reaction warrant such an intense response? Or as shakespeare put it, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
You say my video is made in bad faith. Okay, let's explore that. What's the goal of my bad faith? Am I trying to create a huge channel and become the next MKBHD or Gerald Undone? If so, I'm talking about all the wrong things. Discussing color grading on my V-Raptor X is not exactly a topic for the masses. Am I just a troll out to incite controversy? If so, I should probably rethink my whole strategy, 99% of which is just talking about random stuff I'm working on. I guess, if you think I'm specifically doing something bad for a purpose (the definition of "bad faith"), what's the purpose?
@@nick_salazar Meh, i have time to day , no i dont think you shouldn't publish your opinion, but ill say yes, its a little disingenuous where clarity could be achieved with conversation, and you took the route of making this video. instead of doing the thing thats inconvenient, Im understanding this was a video for the greater good? I'd assume that would help, no? in fact im not sweeping anything under a rug, but if the issue your presenting is based on lack of information, or just wrong information (again which you can obtain by SPEAKING to someone), then its just that, its disingenuous. Yes, a video made making incorrect assumptions while being vague in what and who your speaking about, who also are folks you can have those conversations with, and choosing not to, but framing a video as "iknow what they don't want to tell you" while actively not knowing that to be true, again, disengenuos... Im not sure if thats not clear, help me out if it isnt.
@@KofiYeboah well, a couple months ago I did just what you suggest, in the comments section of a Gerald Undone video. This video: ruclips.net/video/_7c4ZbBzqK0/видео.html - the comment received no reply, not from Gerald or anyone else.
You say I should have a conversation about this stuff, in public comments sections. Well, I tried, but it didn't work. I don't think I'm obligated to pester every creator in their comments sections or DMs about this concept. Instead, I'm having that conversation where it actually matters - with the audience. My message is only that they should learn to be critical, and be okay to disagree. And if you don't like it, it's perfectly okay for you to disagree with me. I'm not above that concept or better than anyone else.
but, did you try the lenses?
I'm not trying to pick on any particular person or product here, I'm just illustrating a lager point. But to answer your question - yes, I have used the lenses whose launch I mention in this video. It was brief experience with pre-production samples. So feel free to say my opinion about them is irrelevant 🙂 My personal opinion is not the point here.
I see your logic and I raise you one; You don't have to try men to know you're not gay.
Blazar is a weird one. I was really interested in the Catos, but there was absolutely no footage or reviews up until they went up for preorder, and the preorder discount only lasts for a week. PLUS, the 40mm won't even drop until February. This leaves no time for anyone to rent or test these lenses before taking advantage of the sale, and having to just hope that one of the lenses in the set performs well without seeing any real-world use. Just a really strange approach that seems very much intentional. While I'm still interested in them, I can't justify spending a few grand on a set of lenses without any ability to test them at all. Hopefully this just opens the door down the road for other companies to keep pushing the boundaries of affordable anamorphics. It's getting there, but not yet.
I agree completely. The 40mm focal length should be the first lens to drop, certainly not in wave two, or three.
@@schoolstuff5235 it seems like misdirection. Doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the buyer. Seems like a major red flag.
@@LOMISFILM Drives me absolutely nuts. The Arles are a perfect example. Even the SP3’s are geared towards the photography market, which makes absolutely zero sense. I love Cooke and agree with their decision, but give us a 20/21, a 40/42, 65 etc…, and then I’ll show interest. Cinema lenses should come with cinema focal lengths. It’s clearly a marketing tactic used to lure people who wouldn’t necessarily pay these lenses any attention in the first place. Super disappointing. Obviously, focal lengths are subjective, but there are some expectations that aren’t being met. I’ve stopped investing in these products as they don’t have a long tail.
@@schoolstuff5235 DZOfilm seems to be on the right path though. I'm going with a set of Arles next year instead. Seems like a much wiser investment. As much as I'm dying to get some anamorphics, I don't trust Blazar, and everything else worth the money is too expensive for an owner/operator that doesn't primarily shoot projects that warrant it. It'll get there one day, but not yet.
If you think that the Cooke SP3’s are geared specifically towards the photography market , then you don’t understand what these lenses were made for… These lenses were developed mainly for B Cam/crash cam/gimbal-stedicam usage on feature films/tv series, the secondary market is for doc, indie, higher budgeted content creation. Source: I’ve been a friend/customer of Les, the owner of Cooke since 1997 and knew about these lenses when they were in development. I own a set of hand picked/color matched Cooke S3/S2 and have used most of their Lens sets through my work as Union Cinematographer.
You make a wild assumption about Cookes and then groan about how you’re disappointed but honestly it shows your bold, massive inexperience as to what these lenses are about and then you run with it.
Cheap anamporphics are TRASH. I'm a commercial DP and I'd never put any of that crap on a camera. I understand the market for it but for anyone with a clue about what they are doing, no chance in hell we are using them.
Blazar Remus B set will 100% be used on bigger shoots than whatever you're doing. Such negativity for no reason yikes
@@timekeepermedia5142 even if they're used on crash cams alongside the Mercurys, that's still more than what most people can foresee.