cantsin

Probably not, because it won't have the high frame rates for stills and, likely, not an electronic shutter.

Aah, thought you meant an adapter for the EOS-M. Yes, there are plenty of d mount adapters for the Pentax Q. My review of d mount lenses was shot with one. The Pentax has a usable flat color profile, but only 30p and a weak codec (and lots of artificial sharpening you can't dial out). Made this video 5 years ago with a first-generation Pentax Q and adapted Kern Switar 13mm/f0.9 d-mount lens:

Short answer: There is really no equivalent to the Sigma 18-35mm/1.8 for MFT, unless you adapt it (optionally with a Speed Booster) to th GH5s. A lot of people use the adapted Sigma 18-35mm on mirrorless bodies for video shooting.

7artisans 35mm/f1.2 (Canon EOS-M100), all shots with wide-open aperture:

The cameras will still cost $10,000: "We will make cameras that will shoot professional-quality films in 8K resolution but at only a third of current prices and a third of current camera sizes,” Foxconn chairman Terry Gou said yesterday at a holiday party, according to Nikkei." https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/circuitbreaker/2018/2/13/17007986/red-foxconn-potential-8k-camera-partnership

RAW gives you the most flexibility, but actually, the RAW from many Blackmagic cameras (Pocket, Cinema 2.5K and Ursa 4.6K) offers more dynamic range/better highlight roll-off than 5D MK III raw (because BM uses dual-gain sensors with bigger sensels). On the other hand, BM cameras do not have optical low-pass filters and therefore produce significantly more moiré than the 5D MK III. For good DR and highlight roll-off in standard picture profiles, I'd take a Canon XC10/15, C100 and above or a Fuji XT2 - basically any camera that has near-perfect color rendering out of the box.

Curtis Judd tested the GH5s timecode function and found out that it drifts out of sync after 40 minutes:

@Matthias, which d-mount adapter? Can you give us a link?

I do have both BMD cameras (Pocket and Cinema 2.5K) and Canon cameras with ML (50D and EOS-M), and I love both. But: Lock-ups with the Canon cameras do occur, crashes where you lose your settings do occur, too, operation mistakes because of complex and fiddly interface overlays/menus do occur as well - whereas the BMDs have super-simple, clean and robust user interfaces, and create very little risk of operation errors. ML, IMHO, remains experimental (which also applies to documentation and utility software being hidden in the discussion forums, need to use nightly builds etc.etc.).

The limitation of the BMPCC Speed Booster remains that it is optically designed for a 1"/s16 image circle (which why it can have the extreme 0.58x factor) but won't be usable on any bigger sensor. The image circle of the GH5s is considerably larger than s16.

Clearly: archive.org The site for CC licensed content, including most net label music. A greatly underappreciated resource.

You might understand them better if you tried the latest Canon mirrorless cameras (M5/M6/M100, all having the same sensor and image quality). If you are a photographer - not a videographer - they're really nice, rounded and mature APS-C cameras with superb ergonomics, out-the-cam images, dual-pixel autofocus in bodies that are as compact and light as MFT cameras.

Yes, the Angenieux is parfocal and not as good as the Schneider. (But it's much more compact and lightweight.)

Yes. It's a cctv lens, and because of its barrel, it doesn't fit most c-mount adapters. I have a modified version of the lens with a glued-on MFT adapter. Optically, it's not a great lens. It's not parfocal either (unlike the Schneider 6-66mm). It's completely optimized for bright pictures and compact size, but neither very sharp, nor very well corrected.

I'd buy two Godox SL-60W. There's not much in the price range under $600 except light panels (which I find too limited in their uses vs. single lights, but that depends on what you want to shoot). (Btw., the spelling is still not correct - it needs to be "Aputure").

Yes, the clear recommendation is the Godox SL-60W, a 60W single-LED lamp for around $160 that is the low-budget film light champion, with really great light quality and a very robust build. The only downsides is that it doesn't include battery powering and has a slightly noisy fan. (Btw., it's "Aputure", not "Aperture" - maybe edit the title of the thread so that people looking for information can better find it.)

Which ones? How? Can you give me pointers?

Yeah, but the problem is that they're all with d-mount which you can currently only adapt to the Pentax Q. (Here's a shoot-out of d-mount lenses made with the Pentax Q that I did a few years back for the (no-longer existing) German Schmalfilm magazine: http://www.filmkorn.org/d-mount-objektive-im-vergleich/ You can get a 3D printed d-mount-to-MFT adapter from Shapeways, but its plastic is so thin, fragile and wobbly that one cannot really use it in production. And since a few weeks, Fotodiox offers a d-mount-to-c-mount screw-in adapter. I bought and tested it, but unfortunately it's worthless because it doesn't recess the lens to correct flange focal distance - so your d-mount lenses can only be used as macro lenses. Would be curious to hear if you found a different solution. (Postscript: And the Kern c-mount lenses for the Bolex H8 have a non-standard focal flange distance, so they don't work on standard c-mount adapters either.)

But unfortunately, they never built lenses for Super 8 cameras...

The two best S8 lenses ever built are the Schneider Optivaron 6-66mm/f1.8 and the Schneider Macro-Cinegon 10mm/f1.8, both with Leica M mount for the Leicina Special camera. Their optical and mechanical quality is much better than the CCTV c-mount lenses one would normally use.

For non-commercial videos under Creative Commons or public domain licenses, archive.org is an alternative. It's a non-profit platform, dedicated to long-term preservation of media (and a great resource of freely reusable footage, images and audio btw.), is ad-free, has a calm interface and similarly elaborate download options as Vimeo.

The 22mm with DPAF is excellent (as I can report from using it on my M100 which packs with sensor and image quality of the M5/M6/80D into an ultraportable body.). But back on topic: The newer EOS-M models are no longer based on the chips and on-board operating system of the EOS DSLRs, but on the electronics of the Powershot compact cameras. Genius cost-saving move by Canon since users don't see or feel any difference. So ML cannot be ported to them. The original EOS-M (as well as the EOS-M2 that was never sold outside Japan) will likely remain the only mirrorless camera with ML' s raw video recording/digital Super 8.

I wonder whether it's feasible to rig up the EOS-M in such a way that it becomes more ergonomic as a moving image camera yet not losing its compact size - in other words, getting it closer to a real Super 8 camera. My main gripe is the fiddly interface, especially with the ML overlays.

Panasonic's own spec page has all the necessary information: Quote from that page: "Image sensor size 17.3 x 13.0 mm (in 4:3 aspect ratio)" "File size(Pixels) -Still Image 4:3 3680x2760" -> 2760 pixels is the maximum vertical resolution of the sensor. "File size(Pixels) -MOV C4K 4096x2160" -> 4096 is the maximum vertical resolution of the sensor. 4096/3680 is 1.113 (or 11.3%) wider. (I stand corrected from my earlier calculation where I falsely calculated with the 16:9 still resolution of 4016x2256).

To dig out this old thread... A few days ago, Vimeo announced that the total storage limit for free accounts will shrink from 25GB to 5GB. That's quite a drastic step - and suggests that Vimeo is in financial trouble. Through decreasing the limit, Vimeo will simultaneously cut its operating costs (since it runs on Amazon's AWS rental cloud) and increase revenue through members upgrading to paid membership plans. It means that Vimeo no longer sees potential in growing its total user base, but in higher revenue from its existing user base, even with the risk of shrinkage (since many people are likely to stop using the site because they're already past the 5GB limit and unwilling to switch to paid subscription). So I wonder whether it's time to think up a plan b for one' s videos if Vimeo should go under (not now, but perhaps sooner than we think)...