tweak

All good! Happy to help anyone with tips if needed, just PM me.

Also, just as a tip for anyone modifying a 25mm Fuji, on some of the 25s it's almost impossible to unscrew the 3 grub screws around the rear retaining ring. I don't know why this is so, perhaps they are glued in, but on a few 25s it's been impossible for me to do. In this scenario it's better to jyst leave it on, protect the rear element and modify as needed.

Wait until you get to fuji 8, 17 and 35 then :D . If you do the measurements it's simply not possible to fit these lenses with no modification to the lens itself. I know you can, I'm not saying it wont work, all I'm saying is it doesn't look proper and you can't then easily/quickly just unscrew it from the adapter and put it on another camera.

Depends on the 16H/ 8Z, a lot have blue coatings but some are also the same gold as B&H/ Elmo. I don't see a difference in sharpness however just colour.

Depends if you want it to work properly/ be proper or not . If just glue it together you can't change to different mounts. Edward K does an amazing job on these lenses. 8, 17 need more work than removing the rear. 25 and 50 0.7 also need a lot of work. Mine are also all click-less.

At least it keeps the prices down .

That's only possible for some 25mm, others it is impossible to take enough off the adapter to reach infinity. 12.5 and 75 both need no modification if you have the correct adapter. 50mm needs about 1.5mm taken off the back of the lens with a thin adapter. 8, 17 and 35 are all very hard mods and need a lot of work.

4K is not worth giving up a stellar 1080p image for at this point in time (imo).

Well if you have a look around B&H still sell for more than elmoII/ Kowa8z and almost all of them come with a similar false spiel... so I'd say it isn't bullshit to assume that this is why. You yourself even say the differences are minute, thus proving half my theory correct.

The 25mm is easy to modify (probably the easiest), you can just dremel or file a bit off the corners of the back of the lens until it seats far enough down in the adapter..

8mm does for sure, but good luck finding one or modifying it. 9mm wont, it's 2/3 inch.

hahaha

Was only mentioning it because someone was asking you @Mattias Burling. Fuji 8mm is the secret treasure .

Bullshit on what? I agree with everything else you said.

@mercer @Mattias Burling 12.5 Fuji only covers 4K on GH4 not 1080p. Also I feel the 12.5mm is the least impressive of the Fuji line up of lenses sadly. It's still however a decent lens.

Sorry to say you're wrong. Rear elements between Kowa 8z/16H, ElmoII and B&H are infact all exactly the same size. I've said it twice in this thread already. I've had numerous copies of all 3 lenses and they are exactly the same. Only rear thread size of B&H is bigger than the others, not the actual lens. Also the info about B&H supposedly having better quality control I'm yet to see reflected in lens performance. I assume this gets perpetuated mostly by people with B&Hs to sell . As far as I've witnessed B&H appears to be no better quality than any of the other Kowas. The best sample of any lens I've had personally has been an ElmoII. Some are plastic, some are metal, I've had both on the Elmo II's.

It's amazing how many people twist to how they like it what the OP was asking.

For that price it's worthwhile I think! @IronFilm

I disagree. But how is this relevant to the discussion or OP question anyway? We are talking about 4K vs 1080p image, not about whether 4K is a good marketing choice for Canon or not.

That says more about the average reader than the camera/s.

Also read the second line I posted.

@mercer Hard to say, it was a while ago now and I don't have the lens with me. The vignette was quite big though, what's the difference in sensor size between GH4 4K and BMPCC? post up a little diagram. The mod is pretty hard to be honest. I used a lathe to cut down the silver/brass metal tube protruding out of the back of the lens, down to where the threads start. After that I used a dremel to painstakingly grind down the rear protrusion that comes out further than the rear element. This is difficult because if you slip you ruin the lens. It took quite a long time. I agree a 17mm would have been so nice, I was pretty bummed it didn't cover as it's also very small and light, it's a really good size.

This. @Sekhar Show me nx500 footage that looks as good as bmmcc... if you're really saying these two cameras have a similar image I don't know what to say, I can only assume you are trolling. Mattias is always pretty on-point (imo) and his tests and footage with many different cameras speaks volumes.

Exactly, we are comparing the best 1080p to the best 4K within a budget. So a real life scenario, would for example be comparing a BMMCC image to a GH4 or NX1 in 4K. These images are far from being equal, thus "with everything else equal" (as you put it) isn't really a valid situation for many here. (As nothing is equal in the same price range in regards to 1080p vs 4k. You don't get something for nothing). p.s. Not trying to have a go at you, just trying to point out that your logic (whilst true) isn't realistic for most people here weighing up 4K vs 1080p with the current tech.

The issue at hand is (for most indie filmakers on here) that everything else is far from being equal in our price range @Sekhar. I do like the benefits of 4K, but wouldn't give up a good image just to have them.