jonpais

Open Broadcaster Software

The Olympus 17mm f/1.2 may ship in January. (43Rumors)

Drone footage, Laowa 7.5mm f/2, 'Shanghai'

I don't find the images from the video I posted drab at all - in fact, I was astonished at how much '3D pop' there actually was, and this is coming from someone who grudgingly admits that Leica reigns supreme when it comes to lens design, at least when it comes to my modest experience with micro four thirds lenses. One person whose opinion I greatly respect even went so far as to say the images and color of the video I shared were more impressive than many of the Academy Award winners shot on the Alexa XT. A feat all the more impressive, as all the clips were shot with Cinelike D, ungraded, under mixed lighting conditions, on the GH4 - which so many have said gives unusable results as far as skin tones go. No master colorist charging $100/hour! Nicelady Productions also did a comparison with one of the Zeiss Milvus lenses, which were designed with filmmakers in mind, and which are regarded by many as among the best stills lenses available for the money, and the Veydra didn't disappoint. The Xeen lens didn't fare very well in the test, BTW. And I don't believe either Adam Wilt or Noam Kroll would prefer the Xeens to the Veydras. Edit: Adam Wilt, in his review of the pre-production models over at pro video coalition, actually states that the Veydras handle and perform much like smaller, slower versions of the Arri Ultra Primes.

There seems to be an almost conspiratorial silence regarding the latest release from Venus Optics. Yet just about every single reviewer of the Laowa 7.5mm f/2 lens has given it passing marks; several have had experience with both the Olympus and Panasonic wide angle zooms, and at least one, Richard Wong, has tested the PanLeica 8-18mm f/2.8-4 lens as well. Nonetheless, most of the reviews i've seen have been by stills photographers, not filmmakers, in spite of the fact that this lens seems ideal for drone and gimbal work. The lens is compact, it's got all metal construction, an aperture ring, it's sharp from f/2 and it only runs around $400.00 USD in Hong Kong. It does suffer from poor performance against strong light and heavy vignetting however. I've been on the lookout for years for a nice ultra-wide prime, and I think this is the one to get. AFAIK, if you set the focus ring to three feet at f/4, everything from 1-1/2 feet to infinity should be reasonably sharp. The filter thread is 46mm (the lack of a filter thread was a huge no-go for me as far as the older Olympus and Panasonic wide angle zooms went). If you're looking for an ultra-wide that won't break the bank, this is probably the one to go for. I'll be picking the lens up on September 9th and hopefully posting a video within the week.

There's also ETC on the GH5, with less image degradation than reframing in post.

Adam Wilt's tests and comments were well worth reading, thanks! Taken in combination with what I've seen, I'm pretty confident they're a solid set of true cine lenses. If all lenses performed as well as these do, lens reviewers would probably be out of a job!

I was planning on trying them out with the Veydras. I'll probably do what Mercer suggested, just purchase one lens first. I would have liked to pick up the 4X4 Tiffen, but its super crazy expensive, and I can't see getting more than three cinema lenses at most, so it looks like I'll be getting a screw on filter. All the Veydras have the same filter thread size, so I can just buy one for now.

That's what I'd like to get into eventually. Just two to three minute shorts for YT, nothing outrageous. I'm really exhausted with street shooting. Another reason I'm interested in the Veydras is that they have user swappable mounts, so I could use them on my Fuji (except for the 12mm and 16mm)

A quick test shot with the Veydra Mini Primes on the GH4, recording in UHD to a VideoDevices PIX-E5 in ProRes. Picture Style: Cinelike D.

Does anyone here have personal experience with the Tiffen Satin or Black Satin filters?

I've stopped looking at blogs that do that - it's too annoying!

Fair enough. One thing I forgot to add is F-log. Not sure whether that'll be available or not, I'm sure Fuji can add it to the X-Pro2 if they want, but I don't recall seeing any mention of that with the rumor.

@Tim Sewell I'm getting confused here, but that's nothing new. I thought you started this thread to ask forum members about their experiences using Fuji cameras for professional video work. I'll have to re-read your post. If I were purchasing a Fuji primarily for stills, I wouldn't hesitate to pick up the X-T20 or X-Pro2... help me out here.. Tim, you're going to hate me for saying this, if you don't already, but even after mentioning all the drawbacks of the camera, you still decided to go with the Fuji. Did you already make your mind up before posting?

Regardless, a single-handed gimbal like the Crane is going to work best with a lightweight wide angle prime. It will be easier to balance, easier to keep your subject in focus. Using an 18-35mm f/1.8 is just silly in my opinion. i fail to see why you'd want to use a super heavy APS-C zoom lens like the Sigma on a gimbal anyhow, since you won't be zooming while you're filming. The advantage of using a SB and full frame or APS-C lens on a small sensor is for shallow depth of field, and it's difficult enough as it is to keep a moving subject in focus, especially with a single operator, no focus puller. For that particular focal length, a Leica 15mm f/1.7 or Sigma 30mm f/1.4 are much better options, and the Sigma has the advantage of being not only fast, but it will cost some $1,100.00 USD less than a Metabones XL + Sigma Art. Edit: The Samyang 12mm f/2 or Laowa 8.5mm f/2 might also be good inexpensive alternatives for flying on a gimbal.

A few things to consider if you're planning on purchasing the X-Pro2: the X-T2 has a more pronounced grip than the XPro2, and even then, many filmmakers will insist that the vertical power booster is almost a necessity for better handling, not to mention that you'll need the VPB to monitor audio, while the X-Pro2 has no battery pack option; the microphone input on the X-T2 is a standard 3.5mm jack, while the X-Pro2 is 2.5mm, requiring an adapter; the X-T2 can be charged through its USB 3 port while the X-Pro2 cannot; the EVF on the X-T2 has higher magnification (0.77x vs. 0.59x); the X-Pro2 has a higher resolution LCD (1.62 million dots vs. 1.02 million dots), but this is only part of the story - the LCD on the X-Pro2 does not articulate (though to be honest, I've never used the articulating screen because I think it's useless for video, though others might disagree); the Q button on the X-Pro2 is extremely easy to depress inadvertently, just like the Lumix GH5; and the X-T2 has two more function buttons than the X-Pro2. If I absolutely had to get a second camera to pair with the X-T2, it'd be the X-T20 for sure - because I'd be buying it because it is seductive as all hell; it's small so it could easily be flown on a gimbal, no problem (not that the X-T2 can't be), it's got no extra crop in 4K (a pretty significant bonus IMO) and has a touch screen to boot. Oh, and it's got the same sensor as the above two cameras but won't bankrupt you. Edit: Fewer than ten of our regular forum contributors have posted comments in this thread. If the question had been regarding the GH5, the number of responses would have been infinitely greater - for a reason.

I see several here, including @kidzrevil, swear by the Tiffen Black Pro Mist filters. I was reading Barry Braverman's blog and he seems to think those are best used in combination with vintage optics like the old Cooke zooms and Zeiss CP.2 lenses, and he recommends instead using the Tiffen Satin and Black Satin, as well as the Scheider Digicon and Black Magic types for general use with relatively low cost 4K cameras, camcorders and DSLRs. Does anyone here have experience with any of these filters?

With the release of an X mount for their Mini Primes, Veydra's also showing confidence in Fuji video.

Thanks, @BTM_Pix, I'll give that a shot. Too bad they didn't assign that function to the menu/ok button like Panasonic, could have avoided that issue.

As far as I can tell, no custom white balance in video mode. Of course, no zebras either. Still a ways to go before I can take the Fuji seriously as a video camera.

but no manual aperture ring. ?

I'll tell you why - because in the five or so years that I've been uploading videos to my YouTube channel - over two hundred videos to date - not a single person has ever made a remark like that. They may say they think the soundtrack is too loud or inappropriate for the content; the contrast too high or the colors too red; the editing too fast or too slow; or, they may disagree with my judgement in a lens comparison: but nobody, and this is on YT, mind you - nobody, to the best of my recollection has just flat out said anything was nasty. They almost always articulate the reasons why they don't like something, like grownups do.

@lenny87 Curious, are you using an external recorder?

Nasty is a pejorative term and does not describe anything other than your personal feelings about the image. So it's not really constructive at all.

You're aware that most zoom lenses nowadays (excluding cinema lenses) don't have a manual aperture ring, aren't you?