Leaderboard

This tread finally convinced me to buy a BMMCC . I couldn't be happer . My old S16 lenses are back . So cool to have a proper cine zoom in this tiny configuration . Might get another one for my super speeds.

Anamorphic setup. https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=296776&p=1875567#p1875567

Atomos did better with their promo of the polish GH5 production, promoting 10bit 4K60p recording with the Inferno. It was called born for the sabre. This looks rather generic and image quality does not wow me. Title is corny. And if showing a maiden, there are so many other great examples with poetic power. This is rather ordinary to my eyes.

Well... apparently I am a total wimp now. I tried watching that video and had to stop after about 50 seconds due to the lack of stabilization. I don't need it to be perfectly smooth, but maybe if they had used a shoulder rig or something I could have watched the whole thing. Also, couldn't tell if they were trying to dance or if the guy was practicing being a chiropractor. Those were some mighty cringe dance moves.

https://lmgtfy.app/?q=which+gopros+have+4k

First footage. Looks great to me. Detail, noise and dynamic range look very BMPCC4K like, as I'd hoped.

How about distortion, I shoot bmpcc4k and the is no automatic distortion correction so my 12-40 looks like a fisheye at 12... Really not usable for pro delivery. How would this compare? Anybody has tested it, raw image without the topical corrections....

Do you have a source for this or are you making stuff up?

Yes, it IS a great lens and a great system... Even Toneh had to admit this recently when he shot with this lens on the GH5-II... He now says it is the best vlogger combi on the market... According to him Panasonic finally fixed the CAF on that camera… It is clear that unsubstantiated one-liners do get him a lot of clicks! Furthermore he is firmly within the group that doesn't understand equivalence. Yes, it behaves like a 20-50 mm in FF terms, and yes it has the bokeh of a 3.4 FF lens, but as aperture is concerned, it DOES behave as a 1.7 as far as the exposure triangle (aperture - shutterspeed - iso) is concerned. Not as a 3.4 lens! How unfortunate that Toneh doesn’t understand this… People get confused by the fact that the light-gathering of this 1.7 lens is lower than with a 1.7 FF lens, but that is of course relative to the sensor size. On a MFT sensor you need less light to cover the sensor. This actually means that you gain nearly two stops compared to a FF 2.8 lens, and this handily does make up the ISO disadvantage that MFT has compared to FF. As to bokeh, it is very dependent on the type of footage one shoots. For my line of work, I am in 95% of the cases perfectly fine with the bokeh of a 1.7 aperture on MFT. Having a shallower depth of field can easily become tricky. My 42.5 mm 1.7 gives me a gorgeous look in the right balance of shallowness. If I want a real FF look, I reach for my 1.2 Sigma zoom (with speedbooster) or my excellent (sharp!) 0.95 17mm Mitakon. Only if one needs extrem bokeh, a FF camera with a 1.4 lens will be the better choice. The 10-25 1.7 zoom is really tack sharp, and it even outperforms most primes in this range. I will be curious to see whether they can make the announced 25-50 1.7 zoom optically as good as this one…

I understand this thread as opportunity for (the most serious and well minded) message to Panasonic. Blog post summarized it all. What I can add as small holistic addition is suggestion that it is the last chance for Panasonic (or it will be done by somebody else) to collect all very important and still distinctive virtues of m43 system and finally offer them in one camera. I mean, don't behave as not too smart little calculating coward - because moment of camera evolution doesn't allow to be as such. Barrier of price has been already broke through - I think that even 3000e starting price for m43 movie making machine is pretty competitive with added qualities mentioned in blog post. At the end of a day, this clearly is territory for professionals who make money with camera, or for high end enthusiasts (finding field of deeper self-actualisation in camera usage) seeking for best artistic instrument. Being now pretty serious involved in sort of art creation, my experience with both m43 and FF system told me that - at least in that field of interest - they are clearly not competitive, but different in some very important areas. For just one example: contrary, as it seems, to most public, I found that possibility to get deeper DOF with better light gathering (even more taking into account modern sensor sensitiveness) is crucial for my way of thinking. For making truly rich art experience, shallow DOF has to be used extremely sparingly, or even not at all. There is far more demanded mastery, and respective distinctive achievement, in capability to arrange scene with meaningful and seriously thought out content in background, than cheaply and lazy blurred it. Potential in transferring complex and deeper message in just one shot is at the side of deeper DOF, but demands more talented mind and much more crafting mastery. Being so close to the perfectly capable camera regarding compactness, reliability, ergonomic, RAW as best codec, ND, maybe or not IBIS, with best possible 4k delivery quality as indeed far away future proof, etc mentioned in blog post - price gap of say 500e is not so important. Nor the race between m43 and FF who understand their distinctive virtues. Chance to sooner bring to table the most rounded instrument is still on the m43 side with its lens ecosystem, including affordable cheap truly cine zoom solutions such as, at the moment, say DZO film's. Even with fast gradually catching up, of course including bonus crop choice, FF system is not even close to offer comparatively affordable and compact cine zoom lens.