jonpais

That is awesome news!

Reader Peter Kent had this to say over at 43 Rumors: I've been testing Ver 1.1 on the G85 for the last 30 mins and it is much improved; I now consider the G85's IBIS usable for video recordings. It's not perfect and I'm not sure if it's as good as the GX85 because I no longer have access to one but it does not look bad at all. Supposedly the Em1-II is like using a stabilizer or tripod, I am not seeing those results with the G85 and Ver 1.1 but I am also not using a Dual IS lens. I still see a little shake sometimes and I've seen one or two jumps but the jumps are very smoothed out now and I no longer find them distracting. I'm now wondering whether the GX85 might not be the better option, especially now that I'm not even sure whether the G85 is compatible with my Speedbooster. ?

I just checked the Metabones site and the G80 isn't on the list of compatible cameras with either the XL or the Ultra. ☹️️

@Kisaha I'm just curious: can you produce a shred of evidence that Fuji marketing targets 'die hard Fuji funs [sic], and upper-middle class purists and hipsters'? Concerning your comment about the 'pragmatic dynamics' of the Fuji system, if by that you mean ergonomics, Sony cameras lacking features like touchscreen and IBIS have been embraced by enthusiasts and professionals alike. In fact, Sony have for a long time now received criticism from even their staunchest supporters, who complain about their convoluted menus, which also falls under the category of ergonomics. Also, whether or not you can 'tweak' the image in post to obtain results similar to the picture profiles in the XT-2 is not the point: the purpose is quick turnaround time, not tinkering around for hours in post. As far as the cost goes - while I'm not a working professional, I really don't consider $1,600 to be outrageous for a refined prosumer flagship camera as good as the XT-2, which some might call a poor man's Leica, though that might be a stretch - I paid more than that for my GH4 almost 3 years ago. Finally, there's the image quality - I haven't been so impressed with the image quality from a mirrorless camera since I don't know when.

@vulgatron I was just trying to talk myself out of getting the kit lens.

@Cinegain Since you mentioned Veydra, and I was going to bring this up earlier when you mentioned the anamorphic mode in the GH4 - I can't tell you how disappointed I was to learn that they'd dropped plans to build an anamorphic lens. Maybe when the GH5 arrives, they'll have another go at it.

@Cinegain Since you already ordered the kit lens, please don't read my rant against universal zooms.

So I go to the shop this evening, and they'd gotten the GX85 instead! Looks like I'll have to wait a bit... So, I'm guessing I won't get such a good deal after all.

First of all, there is something shady about not offering a 'body only' option, but it is what it is. What if you've already got a kit lens? Some here say you can always sell the kit lens for a good price on eBay, but I've never tried, so I have no idea. For me, selling shit I don't need on eBay is a hassle I just don't want to deal with. Furthermore, I simply don't buy the idea of a universal zoom because of all the compromises involved. Number one is the variable aperture, which again, many forum members don't seem to mind, but it drives me batty. But that's just me. If for example, you have a zoom where the telephoto end starts at f/5.6, you pretty much have only one setting at which the picture will stand a reasonable chance of being critically sharp. You can't open up any wider, and if you close down, diffraction destroys the resolution. Would you purchase a prime lens which only had one aperture at which images were acceptably sharp? In the case of the Panasonic 12-60mm, the lens has been optimized for the wide end, meaning that from 25-60mm, the image will not be as sharp. It also means you won't be able to throw the background out-of-focus quite as easily as with a constant aperture zoom like the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8. And at all apertures, the 12-60mm f/3.5-5.6 in particular is not going to deliver edge-to-edge sharpness. Yet I often place the subject at the edges of the frame. And even though the 12-60mm doesn't cost a king's ransom, you're still paying for features like OIS, which in this case, is rather mediocre, a couple stops at best. I love lenses: your camera is only as good as the glass you stick in front of that sensor. A good lens is one you never want to remove from the camera body. Which is why, if I felt compelled to buy Panasonic lenses, in your case, I would be looking at maybe the 20mm f/1.7 or other moderately fast primes (though I've never used one, I'm just going by the cost and user reviews). Third party manufacturers like Sigma also offer some extremely good inexpensive AF primes for micro 4/3. If the rationale is you don't want to keep changing lenses, there are several great non-interchangeable lens cameras by Sony and Panasonic. Here are some screen grabs from a clip I posted recently where the subject is not in the center of the frame: These were all taken at f/2.8 with the Nocticron 42.5mm. Now, if you were shooting with the 12-60, you couldn't have shot these at f/2.8, but you could get f/5.6. Yet the image would have over 20 lines per mm less sharpness at that focal length, which is huge. I'm not by any means suggesting you spend $1,400 on a lens, but investing in some primes like the ones I mentioned above will give you much better results. Finally, if you are interested at all in getting anything resembling the 'full frame' look, by which I assume you mean throwing the background out of focus, shooting at f/5.6 or f/8 isn't going to cut it.

I walked into the camera shop this morning to inquire about the G85, they said they'd get back to me. They did, and quoted a price of $675 USD, so I went ahead and agreed to buy one. Now, I just hope Panasonic fixes the stabilization issue.

A fairer comparison would be with one of the newer Panasonic bodies, the GX80 or G80. The GH4 will be almost 3 years old by the time the GH5 is released. But I seldom shoot beyond ISO 800 on the GH4 because it does produce a lot of unattractive noise.

You are right, but it appears that the NR on the Olympus has smoothed away a bit of detail as well...

@Michael Ma When you have time, could you share any video of people shot with the Summilux, please, please?

Wow. I'm not familiar with the 50mm Summicron-R. The Nokton 42.5mm f/0.95 runs $800, or half the price of the Nocticron...

@Cinegain You shoot with an Olympus?

When viewed on my late 2013 iMac, the YouTube picture is dull and lacking any true whites or blacks. Have you figured out what the problem is? Other videos I've seen in HDR look fine.

Any particular reason you're considering either of these two variable aperture zooms?

My field test of the Nocticron is up.

Well, it only took 8 hours for YouTube to process, so here it is, the PanLeica 42.5mm f/1.2, nearly all shot at f/2.8 (where the lens is reaching the peak of its potential). GH4, C4K, ISO 200, Natural, -4, -4, 0, -2, 0. No color correction or sharpening added in post. Free background music from JewelBeat.com

I've only recently bookmarked Mirror Lessons, they do some good reviews. Their gorgeous video test of the Fuji XT-2 nearly had me sell everything I own just to get one. And for around 400 clams, it looks like you could do much worse than the Mitakon 42.5mm. It's got beautiful bokeh. There really is something about handling an all-metal manual focus prime. In their review of the Mitakon 85mm f/1.2, LensTip had this to say, You have to admit we live in very interesting times. Not long ago we tested the humble Korean Samyang 2/135 which was able to compete on equal terms with the significantly more expensive Zeiss Apo Sonnar 2/135, a top-of-the-range product, the best German optics specialists and Japanese factories can offer. Now the Chinese Mitakon 1.2/85 was able to defeat the legendary Canon EF 85 mm f/1.2 USM II in some categories, including the resolution which is most important one. Already that fact alone makes the tested lens recommendable. The Mitakon is a new brand and the beginners often make different mistakes ; still the results of the Speedmaster 1.2/85 prove that its producers have a huge potential. If they keep improving and developing as fast as they’ve done so far they soon will become a very serious player in the international photography market. And they don't hand out praise lightly. Like I said, i would never have spent $1,600 on a u4/3 lens if it hadn't been discounted so heavily. I'm still not sure why they sold it to me so cheaply, since this one shop usually tries to cheat me. In fact, while there might be some problems with the APSC version of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (I haven't encountered any yet on my MFT copy), it also sells for a little over $300, and it is optically superior (on the bench, anyhow!) to the Nocticron in many ways - but it is not a true portrait lens. The Nocticron does have beautiful rendering though, however that is quantified.

Shane Hurlbut. But since watching a review by Steve Huff, where he keeps dragging this beautiful fucking Cosina across a wooden table, I can't watch any more of his videos.

When I did a search on YouTube, most of the 'tests' I saw of the Nocticron were of weeds and garbage (literally), with shutter speed set at 1/000 second (because he didn't want to shell out for an ND filter); or set exclusively at f/1.2 (WTF?), when stopping down to f/2.8 gives you 30 lines per mm more resolution; or shot in a studio by a reputable cameraman, but with the ugliest set and lighting imaginable. And this is already two years after the lens was released. Then I came across this fool who belongs in an asylum who can go on for 15 minutes blabbing about the '8 best lenses', without even bothering to give any criteria or showing sample images, yet he has over 50,000 subscribers! I guess I have too much time on my hands...

Reverting back to my normal, bitter old, self - for having the camera in his hands for three weeks, this one-minute clip is a bit underwhelming. Question: Janne Amunet says 'this camera likes underexposure'. Does he mean the meter tends to overexpose, or that clips actually look better when they are darker? I'm not sure I understand. I don't have experience with that many cameras, but I know that my GH4 gets noisy when underexposed. But to get properly exposed shots, I almost always have to stop down a touch from what the histogram says.

While I'm in YouTube processing hell, I thought I'd post a 4K screen grab from a test I just did of the Leica Noctricon (Lumix GH4, settings -4, -4, 0, -2, 0).

Sorry to hear that. A good sturdy tripod is worth its weight in gold. I purchased an iFootage Wild Bull T7 carbon fiber tripod about a month ago. I haven't had to add any weight to it, but I have to always be on the alert, because wherever I go here, there are little unsupervised hyperactive kids running around. I put a link because I love this tripod so much!