Hi Chris, It's not just the export. It depends on the right aspect too. Therefore:

1. Convert to 1280 x 720 progressive (30p or 25p) if it's not shot already in this format (just make sure it's not interlaced anymore)
2. Export as h264 with 7000 kbps maximum

That's it

Well what about when I shoot 1920/1080 30p?

Ok so I'm confused...do you export an mpeg4 h264, or a quicktime h264? Explain how you exported this movie, and would it essentially be the same for a 1080 project file? Thanks for the help!

Don't be confused. There is no difference between mpeg4 h264 and "Quicktime" h264. Quicktime is just a program not a compression format. Whenever you export a "Quicktime h264" it will be a mpeg4 h264. So don't care about that. Actually the format itself is not the key to good quality - the conversion and the image are.

The video above was shot in 1920 x 1080i50 PAL-format. The easiest way (not the best one, but the one I use) is to drop the original Final Cut cut sequence (the whole sequence not just the clips inside) in a new 1280 x72030p Sequence (Preset: XDCAM EX 720p30), render it completely, export it as it is as Quicktime and then convert it to h264 with the 7000 kbit limit in Quicktime Player, Compressor, or any other tool you like.

This is because Final Cut Pro does quite a good job in resizing and de-interlacing (when needed).

If I look at your films I guess I know why you ask these questions. Let me assure you, that even if you do everything as explained above, your films won't look as crisp as this one here. You probably won't be able avoid all compression artifacts in the stream, because of the rich and detailed backgrounds and elements. Here we have a very clean surrounding (the elevator), almost no camera movement and hard cuts. This is the most easiest thing for compressing.

Problems always appear on leaves (a lot of moving, fuzzy lines and colors) detailed backgrounds (especially at the edges of the frame), slow dissolves (all pixels changing in every frame) and camera movement (tilt, shift, zoom or handheld). It's just not possible to do the same image quality on a compressed image as in the original. Otherwise the original would be compresses already.

Hope this helps a little bit.

Thanks so much for that information. Yea, yours looks like you shot it with an $85,000 HD Cam. Will keep that in mind!

great look! Thinking very hard about getting this setup myself, since I have access to alot of Nikon lenses. These were standard Nikkor lenses, intended for still photography originally?

Hi, Håvar
Yepp, standard Nikon AIs for analog still photography. The one thing you have to make sure is, the lenses should be quite tight otherwise you always have some "shakies" while pulling focus.

Do you use the native lense between camera and adapter?

yes, there is no other solution so far.

Luschdig... ;-)

hi stefan,really nice work,also the choice of the actor really cool,
there is a big difference with the ex1 and ex3?
ciao

Hey, Martin, thanks. The actor is Manuel Kühne from Lucerne, Switzerland. He's really cool and very good.
There is no "big" difference between EX1 and EX3. In fact it's the same camera. Exept for the viewfinder and the build. What I love about the EX3 is the viewfinder with the colored peaking. Therewith it's absolutely possible to do serious focus pulling without a HD-monitor aside, even with the LetusExtreme attached. Actually I don't shoot without the Letus at all. Even documentary stuff with kids is well possible.

realy clean. the actor is realy funy

very cooll! good idea!

So can you use the Nikon's without the 35mm adapter or will they pop right on?

you need the adaptor

I just can't stop going back to this video ... I'ts just too good! I'm still impressed! I can't believe this is shot with the same camera I got! I'm setting a goal to achieve this kind of quality work ... I hope to learn from you ...

I'm going to buy ex1 but I'm not sure if its the best choice. I'm considering buing ex3, mainly because of ablity to change lenses (dslr nikon lenses). I heard a lot about letus adapters but in fact I dont now what main profits it gives me. You wrote that you use letus almost permanently - why ? :)
Is something more beside ablity to change lenses ?

... and one more: can I use my nikkor lenses with ex3 without any problems? Does evrything works propely ?

How is the 24p or film look in this camera?

thank you stefan, quality video and thanks for all the info.

looks gorgeous...and good info. thx.

have you had any problems with the Letus Extreme? I've heard it's not very well made and malfunctions often. The Ultimate is about 4 times the cost but seems a little more robust and apparently has glass rather than plastic.

and i'm really impressed with your work, btw.

A couple more questions:
i) is that a real elevator or a set?
ii) what did you use lighting wise?

I'm really impressed by how sharp this looks at full screen size, much crisper than images i've seen using the same equipment. It cuts together beautifully, your variation in shot size, framing and focal length works wonderfully well. Particularly love the close up at around 2mins and 2 mins 10 secs. Fantastic!

Hey, Peter, nice to have you here.
So, one comment after the other:

No, i hadn't any problems with the Letus Extreme. But I have to confirm, the equipment is definitely not rock solid. I'm not sure if I would go on a long outback production with just one LEs.

Thanks for the comment

i) it's a set. We built it within our small studio. Just 8 aluminum panels (made by the plummer), two rails from the hardware store, a peace of carpet, some wood, and a demo panel from the elevator builders showroom.

ii) that's the best question so far!!! (wondered already, why nobody cares).

I took 24 30W fluorescent lamps Osram Biolux FLH1 (Colour temperature 6500 K Colour rendering group 1A Colour rendering index Ra › 90 Light colour 965 Luminous flux 1600 lm) and rigged them up on a wooden square. Then we built the whole elevator ceiling with the lamp rigs. Finaly we added a neutral frost (1f-stop) underneath the lamp rig in the rear of the elevator. That's it. No konoflo or so, just (used) tubulars with standard starters.

For the face we used a reflector in the close ups.

(Btw: I'm testing compact fluorescent lamps in a transportable box. Beautiful light (5500k) and almost no energy needed. Ideal for indoor shooting in apartments (4000 W of light on an common household plug - GREAT. I'll show some examples here in the next few days.)

Concerning the sharpness: I guess most examples we see here on Vimeo are not sharp because the users just don't know how to deal with 35mm lenses.

I guess:
30% is just out of focus (get a proper monitor, use PMW-EX3 or practice)
20% wrong f-stop (always to much DOF)
20% wrong lenses (zoom lenses never reach that crisp focus if they don't cost a lot) or to long lenses (35mm is a good lens for almost everything.
10% lousy light
10% setup problems like back focus, no sharpness on the ground glass, tilted lenses, way to much zoomed in or f-stops below 5,6.
10% fucked up in compression

Thanks again (the close up is made with an old 24mm nikkor, the actor was about 15 cm away.

That would be the 24mm you're holding up to your eye? I like this marriage of the old and the new. Have been lusting after P & S Technik's Pro 35 adaptor for this camera, it's such a sexy looking beast. Good to know such crisp results can be had from a far less expensive piece of gear. Thankyou for all that detailed information, Stefan, i look forward to seeing your next adventures with light and lenses.

Really really nice job !
and thank you for all these informations about lighting and dof !
I will try to do the same quality of work than you.
Thanks again for all.

Hi Stefan, congrats on your comertial, excelent work. Now i'm convinced more that before to buy the Sony Ex3. I have a few questions if i may.

Do you think the Ex3 is a good camera for low budget shortfilms?( i'm a student of Film making here in Argentina, by the way, if one day you come here let me know i can give you a good tour around.)

What do you recomend me to pay more atention to a short film with half take outside and the other 1/2 indoor??

I know this questions sound kind of lame. But again i will be very thankfull for you atenttion.

Thanks for all. Nice coments.

sorry i have 1 more quistion.

This comertial, you saved the info into the SXS memory? If this is true, you didn have problem with the quality when compresing? and what thas mean export with "h264'? thanks again for the time.

Hi Damian, I don't know whether the EX3 is a good camera FOR YOU for shorts. Depends a lot of your style. If you want to do something filmlike, the EX3 is only good with 35mm adapter.

"What do you recomend me to pay more atention to a short film with half take outside and the other 1/2 indoor??" Sorry I didn't get this... please repeat a bit more specific.

And to the other question: yes it was sored on SXS card. Imported into Final Cut Pro and exported as Quicktime with h264 codec.

World's most boring commercial spot. DEFINITELY WILL NOT SHOW AT THE 2010 SUPER BOWL BROADCAST, GUARANTEED!!!

But the camer has potentials... ;-))

Wonderful Job!!

Hi Stefan,

Nice work.

You mentioned that you shot this in 1080i50.

I'm also an EX3 owner now, but I'm still trying to get my head around the choice of these HD video formats... can you explain why you (or anyone) would choose to shoot interlaced instead of progressive? Certainly progressive offers a superior result, no?

Is it because this project was destined for interlaced TV broadcast? Should I then only shoot progressive for the Web (or film transfer)?

Great result. You are a great!
Do you use any Picture Profile in the EX3?
Thanks