I saw it last night and was totally delighted throughout. From a pure filmmaking level it's so enjoyable, and beautiful to look at. This series has really shocked me with how it keeps escalating in quality in each iteration. It's really true that they are in reverse order of quality from the last to the first (these last two are more of a tie), and they are all good! What's interesting to me is they each set a new benchmark for what is technically possible for an action film in their particular era. That laser break-in scene was amazing in the first, the motorcycle chase in the second, but I bet they look ho-hum by today's standards. Now we get Cruise climbing the Burj Dubai and literally hanging off airplanes.
A big question I have is if it's $5,000 to $30,000 harder to make a lens cinema-ready: parfocal, fixed aperture, geared, long focus travel, etc. My sense is that these markets (film and photo) were historically so segmented that the lens designs totally diverged. photo lenses are small and light for single operator use, with short focus throws so autofocus can be quicker (older manual photo lenses have long throws) Film glass went higher upmarket because of the nature of the filmmaking process being so absurdly expensive. When you're paying $5-30 million for talent, what's an extra $100k for a few lenses? Now that the world's are increasingly merging, and filmmaking is getting much cheaper and more accessible, we should see a trend towards cheaper cinema housed versions of photo lenses. Someone was recently telling me that some RED lenses are literally just rehoused Canon L glass and marked up an extra $20k. I think the market is ripe for already disruptive lensmakers like Sigma to create cinema versions of all its lenses without the massive markup. If I could get the ART lenses with cinema housing for a 50% premium, I'd be making it rain.
Optimal aperture? Half the shots were wide open!
Sorry.. weird glitch on NoFilmSchool site. Clicked "post" once which resulted in a cascade of duplicate posts. Someone else had this problem elsewhere. Guys, just use Disqus.
The short film looks bad.. I want these moves, but everything here looks sloppy and jittery. Presumably if this is their marquis film to showcase the device this is the best it can do? But for $1400 and at this weight, I guess who can complain?
Get ready for *wild and crazy long single take shots* to be the new timelapse or slo-mo.. tediously ubiquitous without any sort of rhyme or reason. I think like all tools this will best be exploited subtly, but I'm sure we'll mostly get all sorts of garish chase sequences.