Leaderboard

Thanks Mr. Jones! As I’ve said a couple dozen times, what you accomplished in The Luggage with a 7D and sheer will (not to mention talent) has been very inspiring to me. But I’m actually not that close to finishing. Scheduling and finances has been way more of a problem than I anticipated. This mock-up is a one off that I am toying with. I have a final round of casting and I am putting together a teaser to help get some actors. I also don’t love the graphic design of that shot but I do appreciate that you get the SOS element as that is pretty important. I will probably end up doing some type of animated graphic for the opening title shot that appears as the water ripples out to sea and I may have the SOS stay a little longer or appear first. Good idea for the Universal Yellow. The story is pretty dark, so some sort of dark red may work better but yes, I get what you’re getting at. It’s funny you mention the 28mm FOV. Until recently, I’ve only had slow 28mm lenses and when I got that fast Canon 28, it opened up my whole world visually. Wide angle close ups denote such an interesting feeling and in FF, I can go handheld with it... which is a big plus for my run and gun style. You don’t know how many times I’ve toyed with making my film B&W... For the sake of the discussion, the top 3 were shot with the Canon 24-70mm f/4 and the last shot was with the Canon 28mm 1.8. Hahahahaha.... that is actually what the font was called. I went with it because it looked like writing and I liked that it looked aged or weathered. But yes I agree... it’s not right.

Ahh the old my smartphone can take the same pictures as any camera argument. That's why all pro shooter's have switched to smartphones ? Regarding DR it's probably like the 6Dmkii which has excellent DR. My take, a shooter that can't get great looking images with either camera needs to get to work. Because it's not the camera that sucks..

Picked up my first and likely only Leica AF lens recently, the slow but very well formed 18-56mm. It's becoming my go to lens for country self destructing reportage. Its particularly well suited for covering scenes such as "Middle aged woman screams at policeman outside Downing Street to arrest a passing politician for being 'fascist scum' " And "Same woman subsequently finds herself in press scrum while wondering why" Wish I could share this guy's sunny optimism. EDIT >>>> Removed. Note to self, don't try and judge colour while editing images on your phone at 4 o'clock in the morning in an airport boarding queue.

YT and cinema are different, but considering that "cinema" doesn't mean "big room" it means "video with your favourite famous people in it" or "video with your favourite stories". Considering that Pewdiepie has 20 billion views on his channel, and many kids watch hours of YT a day, you can't say that this isn't having an impact on what they think. My daughter doesn't care about going to see Rhianna in concert, but she just about turned herself inside-out to see Shawn Mendes (who got his start on social media) and when he came on stage she cried like people did when they saw The Beatles. Source. Peoples music tastes tend to be most heavily influenced by what they're consuming at 13 (for women) and 14 (for men) (source) and the same mechanism is likely to be the same for other content. Source. We don't have TV in our house, and we don't listen to the radio, we have Netflix and YT and that's how the kids consume content. Their heroes are youtubers and YouTubers aren't filming with Alexas in RAW or on film, they're filming with RX100s and GH5s and their phones. Some are doing it with great lighting, nice production design, nice lenses and the rest, but not RAW, not 12-bit colour, and not with filters and careful adjustment of digital sharpening.

I've just shot part one of this lens comparison which is the ~70-80mm equivalent lenses for MFT. https://app.sugarsync.com/iris/wf/D8480669_08693060_6019565 Notes: It's a mixture of cheap/expensive and vintage/modern lenses, and my goal was to see how these lenses compared aesthetically and to choose which to keep All shots were taken with my GH5 which has a 2x crop compared to FF, so your FOV may vary, and remember that the edges distort more than the centre part which is what we're looking at This isn't designed to tell you how good each lens is, but more how good they are compared to each other - google has many great examples from each of these lenses All shots taken in RAW and converted to JPG but with no other processing so this is almost SOOC I tried to match FOV for lenses with different focal lengths, but it's an imperfect test I started with each lens wide open and then stopped-down, some lenses have more photos because they have half-stop clicks, some have full-stops, some are click-less (in which case I did full-stops) but they're not exact so some exposure differences are in there, I also noticed that exposures were often off so I'm not confident that all the clicks were accurate on all the lenses (some are vintage after all) The electronic shutter only goes up to 1s exposures, so some of the lenses didn't get tested at their smallest apertures, but diffraction just kicks in so I don't feel like we're missing much Apart from adjusting aperture (and shutter speed to compensate) everything else was manual, ISO 100, and identical WB and lighting, so colour differences are the lenses I focused each lens on the marks on the little white card in the centre and normally stopped the lens down a stop or so to help with manual focus, I've heard some lenses change focus as you adjust the aperture but I didn't allow for that so the focus might shift a little perhaps Unless noted the lenses were used without a speed booster, and the SB I used with the two Helios lenses was a cheap Chinese one from ebay. I also shot the Helios lenses without a SB so you can compare and see if the SB is good or not. My next step is to test the 135-200mm lenses (270-400mm equivalents) which I can't test with the current setup because my room isn't long enough. I'll add these to this same thread when they're ready. After that I'll narrow the field down a bit and go shoot some real-world video to see how they go. Happy to hear impressions about what you see, what you like and what you don't.

Buying an EOS R/RP thinking its a "winner" camera is same like buying Peugeot 3008 thinking its the same model that won the Dakar Rally competition...

FWIW i've done work on most platforms including big screen projects. The digital content company I'm invested in uses mostly Sony (FS7) gear these days. We rent whatever fits the budget/project. I'm not brand agnostic. That said for personal ownership, Canon does make most sense for me currently: on an ecosystem level they offer DSLR/MILC/Cine bodies, and a vast range of still/cine lenses usable across them. I wish Fuji/Nikon could do the same, maybe I would switch back to them. DPAF is also the only AF i can trust as a single operator, it's kind of a big deal to me and for sure what locked me in their system for video (most cine cams have garbage AF). I could go on about the other subjective reasons why Canon appeals to me but you've probably already heard them all! That being said my choice of gear and "defense" of it on these forums doesn't imply Canon is the perfect company or is beyond criticism. But I do find the vehement online bashing towards them isn't always justified and doesn't really reflect itself so much in the real world, these academy award winners being the case in point, without glorifying that too much or anything..

Just found this huge and very thorough comparison of 50mm lenses... http://hispan.hu/50mm-lens-test/ It's in Hungarian, but is well worth translating different sections. There are test charts, sharpness tests, bokeh tests, flare tests, etc for every lens at every aperture. Very impressive and useful

That's exactly how I used to do/do it. ? Maybe in white it's better as well. E.g. -- altn edit based on Kye-feedback

Passive narrative will always have a place. Reading hasn't gone away yet --nor should traditional cinema be doomed, regardless of what future entertainment technology offers.

There is a way of thinking that I find particularly useful for this stuff: Think of a company / industry / or whatever that is/was big Think of the problem they solved or the value they gave customers Think of how you'd solve that problem with todays (or tomorrows) tech Think about what that means for that company / industry It sounds simple, but you'd be surprised how many Wall St big business folks can't do it. A few examples: Newspapers They curated and delivered content to people The internet now delivers content for free, but doesn't do a great job at curating it (fake news) The result? Newspapers are all screwed. Completely predictable, yet most didn't predict it. Record labels and record shops / motion picture industry and cinemas Curated artists, invested in making big budget productions up front (taking on risk), marketed the results, and distributed them Three scenarios: Don't curate or invest, just distribute = YouTube Curate and invest and distribute via internet = Netflix Curate and invest but attempt to monopolise distribution = illegal file-sharing Perfectly predictable (and the RIAA are basically just making tits of themselves fighting a non-winnable battle). The musicians YT was Mp3.com and the musicians Netflix hasn't been worked out yet, but big companies are fighting over it (apple, amazon, etc) etc etc. In terms of the motion picture industry, the major innovations go like this: invention of motion pictuers Addition of sound Colour Home theatre (no longer only in cinemas) Virtual reality Interactive VR Interactive AR Potentially some kind of direct neurological connection after that, but it's still a kind of VR/AR

It’s so funny that I was literally thinking that same thing! If we just flooded the JVC Facebook page and ask for the updated GYLS300!!! Lol I’m serious.

What if we all just harass JVC on social media until they listen? ? I kinda feel like it's a good sign of they're still featuring the LS300 at promotional events...

Yeah, I'm not a fan of that font either. I used to be a designer making websites for people in the 90s, and font choice is difficult and takes a lot of time. They have so much influence on your design you really need to take some time with it. If you can, try and use the software such that you can just change the font on the actual poster by just using the arrow keys on the keyboard to cycle through the list of fonts on your computer, that saves a lot of time. (It's normally something like highlight your text, click into font drop-down, click on one font, hopefully the "cursor" stays in the list and you can use up/down arrows to cycle and it updates the writing on the actual image.)

Sounds like they're in full on troll / click bait / Canon shrill mode. Well as one of the youtube commentators said.... "They have already build a 500$ mirrorless full frame camera. And then they overpriced it to 1300$, because that's what they do."

Does anyone else seem to remember that this question has popped up on here previously at some point? As far as I recall, the general consensus was that you need to go into the Settings menu of the camera and make sure "Motion Cadence Colour Science Mojo" is set to ON. Have a go with the Search option just to make sure I've remembered correctly though.

Looking around to buy a nex camera, i come across several video that are presented as "cinematic style" Made with gh5,xt3,bmpcc or whatever their feature is a color that is strongly characterized. I like them and i think i should buy a camera that would allow me to do that. Then i watch a movie, at cinema or tv and the color is totally different. It is the opposite of what is defined cinematic style in slr videos. In this case colo is true color, natural, as well as light and everyhting else So what is the cinematic style?? What is your opinion about? I want to reach the latter style in my video, not the first one...

I would probably buy the SSD holder if I came across it readily in stock. I don’t mind the 8sinn for now, I’ve never in my life accidentally pulled the cord out while shooting, and am confident that I won’t at the moment. The hdmi adapter is great, I do wish there was one for the mini xlr as well but don’t know how that would work. And YES! Haha, I do not like those vapes.

Yeah the still of seagulls is wonderful! Got a few shots with my Fuji 23mm f2 and Minolta 135mm 2.8 The 2.8 is on the soft side wide open, looks pretty nice at f4 tho. Its not a bad lens but I am not really a fan of the 135mm focal length at least no on crop cameras. Gives a nice reach for wedding tho, probably wouldn't have it otherwise. 4th pic is the 128. The 23mm F2 reminds me how nice it is to have AF sometimes. Used the standard fuji color profile and auto WB

2 step balancing is just so little! most have 3-5 steps with 0 also. This is just a bad design, as most setups need different settings. Imagine if you have your GH5+ 70-200, and then you want to put an 24-70, suddenly you have run out of steps, because the 70-200 is very forward heavy, the 12-35 not at all, and you will still miss a couple of middle steps for different lenses and setups. par example: The Ace M is 0-4Kg, that means that is perfect for the average mirrorless, let's say, my plain NX500 with the PZ lens or a pancake = 400-500gr, or the full rigged NX1 with the 16-50S and cage and a Focus SmallHD = 2Kg, or even a fully rigged FS5mkII with a 70-200 = 2.5 - 3Kg. The Ace XL is a 2-8Kg head, that means, you need at least a C200 camera, which starts from 1.5Kg, so easily reaching 4-5Kg, and Sony FS7mkii that is near 5Kg. For some rigs, for super professional and fully rigged situations, maybe the Ace XL is not enough. I some times operate a fully rigged C300mkii with Fuji/Arri Cine Zoom lenses, and you can not believe the tripod (Sachtler) we use! Takes 2 persons to move the set up. Just some tips for future tripod-head buyers that will check the thread!

Those are some very impressive looking stills indeed! Beautiful tones, and the motion blur of those birds is just great

Oh my God that is Blasphemy coming from an old, hmm I am old, Leica user. You are Only suppose to shoot in B&W, and Color it if you can. You got it ass backwards!

I think the approach is to mirror how we are directed in our actual vision which is by light, movement and sound cues. I'm not sure 360 will ever really gain traction other than niche or edutainment purposes but I think what would be very viable is 3D 180. You're then giving people the same cinematic experience that they've grown up with but just enhancing it with a bit more "look around" capability, which will offer up some interesting new possibilities. Remind me to do a thread one day about my design for a camera for £3500 that could deliver that Well, £3504 if you include the cost of the hammer and gaffer tape.

The LS300 is HD only on SDI. Whether that is hardware limited or software I actually don't know. I'd imagine its the former though as I'd assume the 4K60p upgrade wouldn't have been HDMI only.

With regard to VR, I've mentioned it before but if you ever get the chance to go to a 'VR Cinema' (just a big room with lots of swivel chairs so you can move around the image without moving) then it is really quite interesting. It lends itself to short 15-20 minute documentary pieces and the ones I've seen were a far more visceral experience than if they were shot flat. Its strange because although its a solo experience in one way its also shared because there are lots of you in there so when you take the headset off it sparks more post viewing discussion than a normal film as you have all experienced subtly or often dramatically different versions of it depending on how you were orienting yourself and how active you were. Plus, no one can be stuffing their faces while they've got the headset on or talk to anyone so it removes the annoying pricks factor out of viewing stuff in a cinema as well I think it actually lends itself very well to vlogging (not just for the overcapture/post shot framing aspect) but people really need to de-gimmick it to get it there.

I'm pretty sure thats a summation of Instagram so the answer could be gajillions.

That looks cool, I like it being on that line, it integrates it in a funny-sort of way. I'd move it to the left so it's not crowding the guy, although it does have a bit of that person-looking-straight-at-edge-of-frame kind of trapped vibe. I really like it as the frame for the poster too. @mercer is really getting good with those 28mm lenses!! (I'm assuming that's a 28 shot?)

My technique as well?? The font looks a bit like Chalk more than handwriting mercer. Really a good shot tho, great composition I think Lovely shots, straight out of camera?

or at least documentary shooters that the Oscars tend to pick use Canon

Yes and Wow!

Good point @webrunner5 ... I actually posted an earlier version by mistake... here’s the fixed one... I don’t know if I love the font that much either but it’s meant to look like handwriting on a post card that is part of the mystery of the story.

I've bought the old fella a Ninja V so I'm off to shoot some Superbike stuff in 4K60p on Monday.

That is a pretty Ghetto looking resolution chart LoL. ?

It should also be noted that many of these documentaries took 2-3 years to produce, shoot, edit, and release - and then another year or so to be nominated for an Oscar. So, this is not a reflection on what cameras documentaries are shot on in 2019, but rather what people wanted to shoot on in 2014 to 2016. That doesn't mean that three years from now, all docs will be shot on Sonys, but just a point that it's not really about what is released now. With that said, even in 2019, Canon has the nicest looking image and the most reliable products in the doc-budget space. I wouldn't be surprised if the next few years many doc films are still shot on Canon cameras. However, they need to be careful because many people in the doc space want to shoot on Netflix-approved cameras just in case Netflix wants their film - low budget or not. So crippling cameras to not have 10-bit 422 could cost them in a few years in the awards space. On my last 3-4 shoots, the client requested 422 10-bit 4K - which I use an EVA-1 for. All Canon has is the C300II and it's an amazingly lovely image, but the design is terrible and the general specifications are starting to get a bit old. Canon just needs to understand that the C300II should die, release a souped-up C300 III and charge as much as they want for it, while also simultaneously releasing a compact C100 III with the 4K 10-bit 24-30fps that documentaries want and sometimes are required to have - anywhere under $7k. I WANT to use Canon but have been using the EVA-1 and FS7 more on shoots because it's required. As a filmmaker/DP, it is frustrating to like a specific image (like Canon) and not be able to use it because it doesn't have the required specs. -- Canon's Lineup Should Be: C300 Mark III (THE BEAST) - 8K upgradeable sensor, 60-96fps in 4K, internal raw, 10-12 bit at all resolutions - $15,000 For: Anyone who wants the highest quality Canon image. C200 (THE RAW CAMERA) - An affordable internal raw camera. Great B-Cam to C300 productions that need a camera on gimbal at all times - $7500 For: short docs, music videos, commercial producers. C100 Mark III (THE DOC/BROADCAST CAMERA) - 4K 10-bit 422 in HD and 4K. 120fps 10-bit in HD. 30-60fps in 4K. - $5499 For: One-man band crews, documentary filmmakers, owner-operators. -- Seems fairly obvious to me. Yes, the C300II will die, but if they don't let it die than I think they're going to lose out once Panasonic, Black Magic, and Sony release their next generation EVA, Ursa Mini, FS5, and FS7. ANY cinema/video camera released without 10-bit 4K from this point forward is a complete oversight.

Yay I've got a Canon camera - I'm a winner

Love it man, its got a 1980s fantasy look a bit. Lovely.

False. So very very very false. On multiple levels. Just flat out false.

I thought I addressed that with my theory that the RGB slider operates on a linear image before the gamma curve is applied, which explains why it clips almost immediately in Gamma DR but not in Gamma Normal or C. But I expect that the RGB slider multiplies shadows as well, so not sure how much usable DR you would gain as it basically just lowers exposure overall. Certainly something to test if you want to follow the rabbit hole! I think the only way we could meaningfully get a DR increase is if we could apply the RGB multiplier to the top half of values, but not the bottom. Most of what I've seen so far, both with my tests and yours, is really minimal, if at all present. As far as I can tell, MP doesn't really add DR with a positive value, it just raises the blacks up a bit. At most you gain back a little bit of noise. With negative values yeah, it seems to lose shadow detail. So I usually leave it at 0. Haha yeah, I just spent a good part of my day on this, and the funny part is I doubt I'll ever even use my NX1 for a project again! For my next project we're using the director's XT3. I did shoot a big project on my NX1 using RGB boost last year, which I might detail here once it's released. For me it was all about finding a general setting that worked for everything, since I wasn't going to fiddle with settings on set even if I knew wanted. So I used RGB values near 1.99 in Gamma DR, built some LUTs that worked with those settings, and left it that way. Worked pretty well in hindsight.

..or all that effort goes to "waste". Imagine if the rumors back in 2015 were right and Nikon and Samsung were co-making a Nikon NX1 camera. 2019 would have happened 3 years earlier. Still NX1 has the best ergonomics in business and just lost its title as the best pro APS-C camera just recently. 73min continuous recording years before the GH5, DIS+OIS years before the Canon similar system, super Amoled screens and - still in my opinion - best in business touch interface, first H265 implementation, still most megapixels in business, unique lenses ("unicorn" 16-50mm 2-2.8f OIS, very cheap and good pancakes, stelar native and tiny fisheye!), better 1080p than all crop Sony's (almost film like) and better 120f e.t.c JVC was very close to deliver an MKii for 3.5-4.000$€£, a workhorse camera not available right now and we missed that opportunity! I do not want/and I can not afford to give 9000€ for a C200, nor 8 for an EVA, I do not believe they deserve that kind of money in this economy and this era. P4K and EZ are in the right direction though.

Here is the probably the cleanest thing I have shot (a7sii, iscorama pre-36, Nikon 50 1.8): and here is just a montage from my old anamorphic set up (sun 2x, rectilux):

Had an interesting chat with JVC at BVE Expo today. They acknowledge the LS300 is a cult classic, which is evidenced by them selling more now than they did at launch. They had it on show with a Ninja V which again they acknowledge as the solution to the achilles heal of the viewfinder. It looks very well matched with it actually. The slow burn of the sales over such a long time hasn't resulted in mega sales in total and as it such an outlier of a product for them there seems little prospect of a follow up anytime soon.

This is one of the reasons why the GH5 is so great. You can set it to 10 fps and it will also remove the audio automatically so that you don't have to do it in post. Truly cinematic results

Hello! I have new stills from a recent shot I was DPing. It's another theme, Kinda of game of thrones thing ?. I think this is a good point of reference to see how color look in this type of forest/swamp with those costumes and production design. Here i used some old vintage Takumar lenses because of the organic look they have, i think they help to sell the fantasy theme. I use the same procedure I always do, and my style of grade using GHa Daylight to LogC. And diffusion LOT of diffusion!

Concept of "cinematic" image dictates high end cinema industry. There, I think, you have to recognize turning point of your question. Trying to run out of DR limitation of (unnatural contrasty) consumer cameras, lowlow budget indie creators - which predominate here at forum - tend to prefer mellow look of film cameras, often to the level that IMO look retro bizarre. But modern cinema prefers and dictates more and more absolutely clean image as standard that, here in our popular pejorative translation, often looks "too-sharp" or "video-ish". I think that Lubezki nicely summarized that turning point regarding challenge that he experienced: "When I signed on to do The Revenant, I wanted to do all the day scenes on film, just because of the high dynamic range, and I wanted to do all the dusk and night scenes with a digital camera. That's because the digital cameras are more sensitive to light. They can see more in the shadows, and you can push them a bit. For example, let's say that Arri says their camera is ISO 800 native. You can shoot it at IS0 1600 and there's still no noise. You're able to shoot scenes at night with firelight, and you can capture the stars and the Aurora Borealis in the night sky - things that film couldn’t do. I started doing a lot of tests while we were rehearsing the movie, and every time I went back to the lab to see the results, the images I was capturing with the digital cameras were more interesting to me because they had less noise or no noise at all. It was like opening a window for the audience to get them immersed in this world, whereas film still had that poetic or romantic look, and the grain and texture was making the world of The Revenantlook more romanticized. It wasn't really allowing me to get immersed into the world of these trappers the way the digital cameras did. Little by little I realized that I didn't want to shoot the movie on film. For a middle-aged cinematographer who’s been shooting for so many years - that's a very hard call. It's like suddenly saying to a musician “You know, forget about your incredible piano, you're going to play this concert with a Minimoog.” It's heart-breaking, but the images spoke for themselves..." In result, compare his nature image-depicting of The Revenant with that of, say, Almereida's in Heaven's days.

I think the phrase "cinematic colour" relies far more on the first word than the second particularly when bearing in mind how many films that helped define and still inform the language of cinema were shot in Black & White. Ciematic, to me, is determined by every single element in the frame being directed and controlled. Everything from the lighting to the shot selection to the location to the art drection and on and on has to be intended and managed deliberately. If you haven't got that right before it hits the sensor then no amount of lossless codecs or grading is going to be able to inject that. Its why the "run and gun" approach, to me, just isn't compatible with it outside of some very specific circumstances. I think you can try and ape the aesthetic somewhat but with the best will in the world, pointing a "cinema" camera at three people at a table in an Italian restaurant is never going to look like it did in The Godfather unless you control all of those moving and non-moving parts. The good news is that it doesn't have to as it can still look "nice" and be exactly what you need but you just have to manage your expectations, especially as a one man operation. The better news is that if you do want it to look like The Godfather then there has never been a better time to be able to do that than now due to the accessibility of equipment. But the rest of it in terms of controlling and creating that image before it gets to your incredibly affordable sensor, and the graft that goes with it, remains the same.

The golden age of cinema was truly something to be admired. Here are the TOP SECRET insider settings that will MAGICALLY turn your camera into a CINEMA BEAST. PROFESSIONAL CINEMATOGRAPHERS DO NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW THIS We all know that you can't get cinematic video straight out of a camera, so most of these are in post. Camera: Shoot in NATURAL or the default style (LOG profiles are a trick to fool the try-hards) Set your aperture to F8 (that's why the most famous photographers say "f8 and be there") Film had a wonderfully organic resolution, so It's important to get the highest resolution camera you can - shoot 8K RAW if you can, 10-bit is barely a minimum, but 12-bit or 14-bit is better Depending on the aesthetic you want you can film at 23.976 fps, or less. Ideally you would film at a rate that varies to simulate the camera operator turning a handle, but even the most expensive cinema cameras still lack this feature, even in 2019, it's madness but it's reality Post-production: Set your Saturation to zero Lower your contrast until the whites aren't white, and the blacks aren't black, you want that soft look Highlight all your audio tracks and delete them, if you want you can add a single track back in and put in a single piano soundtrack, but silent is the most 'pure' Whatever frame rate you recorded at, you must play it back at 23.976 fps - this will give that classic "people walking as fast as ants" look Add noise, film grain plugins that have real digitised film grain are best - DO NOT GO CHEAP ON THIS When you output your footage it's important to get the settings right - the most important is to output in 1080 as a MAX (4K is totally out) Yes, I'm taking the piss, but actually if you want to replicate the silent film era then these are good instructions. My point is that there is no 'cinematic' look, so the only place that you can be sure of that won't help you is anyone using the word "cinematic". Seriously, cinema looks so great because it's a combination of every department doing their job really well. We've been making movies for long enough to work out what matters and what doesn't, and anything that doesn't matter has been cut from the budget of film-making since before any of us were born. What you really want is to make great looking films, which is really a personal thing that only you can find out what it means to you, and the only way to do that is to learn every job in every department of a film production and do them all really well. Film-making is art that uses enormous amounts of technology - that's why is SO DIFFICULT IT'S NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE. Welcome to our pain, and our pleasure.

Meike 25mm Cine in action, there a full set coming soon. Some seem to think they are Veydra clones. https://www.reddit.com/r/Filmmakers/comments/atv62q/meike_25mm_is_literally_the_same_as_veydra_25mm/

Ouch

Here are a couple of frames from the GH5S + Kowa Prominar combo. I'll be able to post a video later this month.