Emanuel

I love your posts man! ; -)

I hope not though : ) The trouble is the P4K price range though. I believe they will need to put the bar down.

Figurative speech... I believe. You know, context always counts ; ) I guess he meant they can count with a very hard way to expect them. That's all (E : -)

Right from the wide end. But it is 24-35mm instead. Even though, you may find the older but smaller coverage sister more versatile if you'll use for both in APS-C too indeed: http://thurtlepower.com/dorsetweddingphotographerblog/sigma-18-35mm-dc-hsm-mini-review-and-first-impressions/ The perfect S35 lens aperture from the closer MFT:

These are tests conducted on Sigma with a XL version where is (in the comments section) explicitly written there's no vignetting from about 22-24mm on going along his GH5 for that setup, obviously: And here is one where the same user tests tap-to-focus feature on the same camera coupled to the same focal reducer to those who think it might not be possible to go with AF on P4K (touchscreen focus is an autofocus feature BTW, whether you use it or not ; ) On the other hand, here are these samples which follow your feeling @seanzzxx -- very welcome to the discussion BTW (part II): source: https://***URL removed***/forums/post/58134184 Another one on a7R: source: https://***URL removed***/forums/post/57637470 Here's a 3rd one which proves in the real world the results may vary from that 23-25mm (to stand Daniel's 22-24mm statement) mark though (on a 5DII now) -- count on some distortion anyways: http://thurtlepower.com/dorsetweddingphotographerblog/sigma-18-35mm-dc-hsm-mini-review-and-first-impressions/

Crazy, why? I only find something crazy when it is completely unexpected. Is it? Well, tap-to-focus is a sort of autofocus or half AF as you wish. Manual focus, definitely, is not. Indeed. SB XL is designed for FF while Ultra model for APS-C coverage, but there's also some glass which covers FF such as 18-35mm f/1.8 other than the wide end. A Nikon mount adapter is dumb, some smart adapters give it when used with GH5 series as for instance. I am wondering what about P4K?

LOL Despite all those "despites" ; ) ...what about glass to only cover the S35 format aka APS-C? Any experience with that coupled to SB on P4K? Any vignetting? Is tap-to-focus working with the adapter?

The Eisensteinian weirdness effect coexists on the simple fact the focus is not over the couple of kids, but behind the boy. Take a look on the puppet on his back. The girl is closer, obviously more focused than the male counterpart. His post is only reflecting all that; poster's reaction. Operator's mistake, not the camera for Christ's sake! : -)

So, don't clip the highlights then... ; ) In a serious note though. ETTR... Expose to the right with this device. You won't get so much noise there from the shadows. Trust me ; -) Other than that, no camera in the world will offer you such Grail : -)

And an interesting match... : -)

I see you two are as hard as the most tough Greek philosophy school... LOL : ) Embrace the excuse you want for that waiting game but... IQ??! The same you find along any 10-bit capture tool (applies for 8-bit or 12-bit devices anyway) if you don't care for your acquisition ballpark. There are no miracles outside the realm of the Lord : )) That's it (E : -)

Any tips? Here's one: I guess we can all give a hand to end in behalf of all of us, isn't it?

They are mixed up, with GH5 footage too! Actually, the point to have posted them... : ) You see? You didn't even notice it ; ) Check it there again, especially regarding the 1st one but the 2nd is an interesting sample for the subject matter as well ; -) Really, with care it is possible to match them! Here's the proof of it at its best : -D

My only beef if I can tell it like that (nothing your settings or a committed work @ post may not be able to solve, after all) is actually that oversharpened look those customary settings bring by default. Other than that, here's another example from that cup standard already above-mentioned: As everything in filmmaking, the proof is in the pudding ; ) Here's another example of more a tool for all that theory to put in practice:

I will tell you quite frankly my humble two cents on it: ...the best device is the one you take with you as we both know ; ) Does that fulfills the cup? Take a look on that 1st clip I've just introduced with my editing, as for instance. So, fits my bed ; )) No extra size needed ; -)

AFAIK it will also depend on the shooter and settings, obviously : -) Not a bible but:

https://www.thephoblographer.com/2018/09/25/adapter-review-fringer-ef-fx-pro-tested-on-the-fujifilm-x-pro-2/

@Andrew Reid I know it is unnecessary to refer it or even add a request here, that's unlikely the million dollars doubt, only the question to know the answer for now, though. What's the best deal between those two current best options tested from the field by the hands and eyes of some shooter like you? I think that's everything many of us are eagering to know.

Last but not least James Miller's stuff graded:

Yeah, but only for the 1st part of your entry : ) I don't think nor hope/want the prediction of your 2nd line may end pretty much accurate anyway... : )) BTW that "PRO" high-end pilgrim route is simply blocking a better service from BMD on introducing into a full media convergence age we all live, more advanced and updated hybrid features such as AF, IBIS only to name a few for their middle-to-lower product range FYI : -) Who wants to walk back?

I must confess that large(r) screen in-camera makes that device unique of a kind as far as both ergonomics and usability concern too (aside IQ and the usual codecs mantra, obviously). People apparently don't care, but... photo source: MY

Both @Mattias Burling and @noone approaches are pretty on spot... ; -)

Is there anyone who can test tap-to-focus along the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 with Viltrox or even Metabones SB adapters?