jonpais

They are small when compared to other cine lenses, but they are hefty when compared to fast native primes.

I don’t know, but while the long focus throw on the Veydras and other cine lenses is perfect for use with a follow focus, I would think it would be too long for pulling focus by hand, which is what I think the OP is intending to do, if I’m reading his remarks correctly. Not only that, but most true cine lenses will be unnecessarily large and heavy, as in general, they must all be the same length and have the same outer diameter. Even the Mini Primes are pretty large and heavy when compared to much faster native prime photography lenses.

Thanks, Nathan. Unfortunately, I don’t have the Panasonic for comparison.

hehe. I own the Nokton 17.5mm, never shot with it much and haven't done any side-by-side comparisons with say, the Veydra 16mm. But I think I prefer the Veydras overall.

When the Voigtlander Noktons were first introduced over seven years ago, they occupied a unique place in the micro four thirds ecosystem. Not only for their speed, but for their outstanding build quality - you won’t find craftsmanship like this in any other set of native m4/3 lenses. Cosina later further refined their lenses for filmmakers, adding clickless apertures, something still not found on many native optics. Like the Veydras, the Noktons are completely metal and glass, with no motors or electrical contacts, ensuring that they should give years of dependable service. Optically, for a long time the Noktons were the benchmark against which other lenses were compared - for their record-breaking resolution anyhow. We’re fortunate nowadays to have a much wider selection of optically superb, fast primes for micro 4/3, and deciding which glass to pair with your Panasonic or Olympus camera has never been more confusing. It’s important to remember, however, that cinema lenses, more so than photography lenses, are meant to be purchased as a set. The filter thread size, front outer diameter, length and position of the gears are generally identical to make changing lenses when used with a follow focus and matte box less of a chore. Because cine lenses usually live on rails. So before deciding between photography lenses and cinema lenses, the first question should be, do you plan on doing a lot of focus pulling? And if so, are you prepared to invest in a cage, rails, a matte box, a follow focus, an external monitor, batteries, cables, a rig and so on?

I’ll let you know as soon as I shoot with it. ?

Wrong thread.

Some commentors are asking which lenses Max used. According to DxOmark, the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 R has a T stop of 2.1, so I suppose that’s relevant. Waiting to hear back from Max. But fairly certain that’s not the lens he used.

@AaronChicago Refn's Pusher is the best crime trilogy ever made. Watched it a half dozen times probably. Bleeder was excellent as well. Among my all-time favorite directors.

Low light performance, vs a7 III. Two of the chief reasons I would consider switching to a larger sensor format are low light performance and superior AF. Max finds around a 2-stop difference, although normally, a one-stop difference is to be expected between APS-C and full frame. Max is using the Eterna film simulation on the Fuji, PP1 (movie) on the Sony. I realize many here like the film simulations found on the X-T2, but I always found them a bit too contrasty for video. Eterna looks like an improvement over what was offered before, though Max finds it's still too contrasty. Generally, I find Max to be pretty objective, but if anyone here owns both the Sony (the a7r III I imagine) and the Fuji, I'd be interested in seeing another comparison.

If you’re planning on shooting both photo and video and aren’t doing any rack focusing, there is no advantage to buying cine lenses.

It was a difficult decision to make, but I traded in my Nocticron for the Olympus 45mm f/1.2.

Thanks, @mercer .

Leica Nocticron.

According to 4/3 Rumors, Sigma will be releasing a new lens around NAB 2018: 50/1.4: Fuji X-mount, Sony E-mount and micro 4/3; 9 blades, less than 300g, around $600.

@IronFilm If he stops down voting every comment of mine, that would be a step in the right direction.

Attention-starved Mattias posts inflammatory remarks in an attempt to get someone to comment negatively to them and to redirect attention onto himself. For the very same reason, he down votes every comment of mine in an attempt to get me to acknowledge his pathetic, insignificant life since he doesn't receive that sort of attention in real life.

But in this case the feature is already in the camera. Since the M50 4K crop is already 2x, I don’t see how enabling DPAF is going to strain the new DIGIC 8 processor. I prefer Sony’s business model of putting the 693-point AF from their $4,500 a9 in their $2,000 a7 III. As do virtually all reviewers outside the apologists in this forum.

+1

O

Trying to start a quarrel by posting off topic messages.

Disrupting normal online discussion for your own amusement.

We’re not talking about segmentation in the same way many here are. We’re talking about having to move up into the expensive cinema lineup rather than being able to shoot uncrippled 4K with an interchangeable lens camera like Fuji, Olympus, Sony and Panasonic. Is that so hard to do without destroying Canon’s world-class reliability? To borrow the car analogy, why should I have to move up from a sedan to an SUV just in order to get air conditioning? Geez...