Mattias Burling

No Fuji, Olympus and Leica all have acurate fly by wire lenses. So its totally doable. Loads of large sensor, premium compacts have it as well.... just not Panasonic. Which breaks deal for the lx100 as well.

I didn't ask about the 17mm, I was telling No I dont want markers on the Panasonic lenses. I want it on the screen like Leica and Fuji does with their focus by wire pancakes. Would really make the cameras shine for many of us that use zone focusing. AF takes to long

Or Olympus glass, 12mm, 17mm for example. Well what a bummer. Was thinking of getting one again for stills now when they are insanely cheap. But without a scale I will stick to Fuji. Its truly a shame. If they implemented it the gm1, gm5, gx80/85 or gx800 would all be killer street cameras instead of just decent.

Quick question for anyone that has this camera and the Panasonic 20mm or 14mm. When manually focusing, does it show a distance scale with numbers? And if so, if you set it to for example 3m and power off/on, does it snap back to that? /M

For Swedes I normally recommend Cyberphoto. But they have been taking preorders for months, so you won't exactly be at the top of the list.

Global shutter = problem solved

You seem to forget that shutter speed controls ambient light but not flash. Therefore flash can never be outdated or obsolete. Thats like saying a 50mm lens is nothing to use because its been used in the past. I suggest all that haven't got experience with flash (and apparently some that do) watch this.

EF vs MFT is just about lenses. The only real difference is that you can use stabilization with EF and control the aperture of electronic lenses such as Canon. I to would rather go for MFT but not if I found a really good deal on EF. The BMPCC is definitely worth considering for many reasons. But I dont see any reason to get the Micro besides slowmotion. Its not that much (if at all) smaller than a BMPCC with its battery attached. And definitively not with its mandatory external rig and monitor. The pocket is usable out of the box. But If you want the slowmo the Micro makes perfect sense. Choosing the BMCC over both the BMPCC and Micro would give you better audio with better connections, way better user interface with the large touchscreen, an internal emergency hot swap battery (which also can be used on its own), SSD is a joy and the 2.5K can be really handy sometimes. But any of them would do the job for a feature. See if you could find one to test in a store or a friend. The WB ad for the NX1 was on a still photographers forum. But just today when I woke up there was an ad on our craigslist for a mint NX1 + 16-50 S-Zoom + Samyang 100mm Macro + Battery Grip = $870

Exactly what option do give me when calling me a troll besides telling you to fuck off? Im all up for debate, specially on this subject where so many are confused. And you could have tryed to understand, tryed to explain your view in a different way to get your point across, find other facts. Instead you resorted to name calling and just dissmissing people as trolls.... sigh. I will ad another smily incase someone thinks I would let a non issue such as an internet discussion put me in a bad mood on this sunny and gorgeous sunday morning Im out of the discussion but will make a video instead that explanes what different sensor sizes mean and does to images. I didnt think it was necessary since guys like Daniel Levine has prooven this a long time ago in a very excellent video. And since its simple Photography 1.0. Better ad another smily Have a great day, Im of to Stockholm for some street shooting. Better start calculating my equivalents...

Or camera equivalent A Canon 550d with a 50mm L Prime equals a Nikon d750 with a cheap 35mm. No this is not about Depth of field. It never was about depth of field. I suggest rereading my posts or just letting it go. Its not about exposure either. A 50mm f1.8 on a s16 has the exact same dof as it does on a FF from the same distance. The exposure is also the same. So is the compression/separation.Switch to an equivalent lens and the compression/separation changes accordingly to the focal length. Its simple physics.

No you cant. Look at the Tony Northup frame I posted. It clearly proves that you can replicate the image from a large sensor in the way you earlier suggested. I tell you what. Take the three lenses and sensor sizes you listed in your first post. Take three photos from the same distance of the same subject. A person with a background similar to the example I posted. I will give you $100 it they turns out exactly the same.

For both the times I bought a BMCC my first lens was the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC. Used it all the time. But between those two I would get a 35mm.

But you can never use a small sensor and achieve the same pictures as a large sensor. Thats why they are so popular. Taking a portrait with 100mm looks so much better (to most) than with a 50mm. Only problem is that on a MFT that 100mm has you backing out of the studion ruining the ascetics regarding background compression. The only difference between sensor sizes is the workable distance to fill the frame on a certain focal length. And that can be replaced with math and equivalent lenses. If you want the ascetics of FF you need to use FF. Here you see it clearly. The shooter has used an equivalent focal length and aperture. But look at the background. A smaller sensor can't give the same frame as the larger at a given distance no matter what. Even if the larger aperture makes the bokeh looking the same the windows have changed size. So again, Yes, the full frame gives the lenses an ascetic that crop sensors can't replicate and vice versa. Trying to use equivalent focal length and apertures does not help.

The rolling shutter is also a bit better on the BMCC. Both have moire.

@Lintelfilm Its true that for example the swirly bokeh of the picture above would be cropped out on a smaller sensor. But there are/where like you say lenses made with the smaller sensors in mind and therefor has the swirly bokeh. I would never say a f0.95 is an equivalent to a f1.8 because it isn't and I think it just confuses. I do use the term equivalent when talking about focal length even if technically that also remains the same. A 50mm is always a 50mm but practically its easier to call it a 150mm on a s16. The aperture however doesn't have such a practical difference imo. The DOF and exposure with f0.95 i exactly the same on any sensor. It is physically impossible for the depth of field to be shallower on on FF vs APS-C or s16. So I stick to focal length equivalent only and thats just for the sake of communication.

The difference is only the distance you need or can be at from your subject. If we take 105mm for example. Its a lovely focal length for a portrait shoot. The amount of background blur in combination with how much the background is compressed is just spot on. But if you put it on a s16 like your BMPCC you need to back up way to long and mess everything up. With the APS-C its not as bad, but still bad enough that you might considering an "equivalent" lens. When you do switch to a 75mm you get the subject in frame from a workable distance but loose the FOV and background compression/separation of the 105mm. The DOF, Light input, etc doesn't change with a smaller sensor. Its the exact same thing as taking a pair of scissors and cutting out a smaller square of a magazine cover. Thats why Medium and Large format is sweet. With MF I can take a 75mm and get that lovely portrait of my dog. It has the same SDOF of field that you would get with a 75mm on your BMPCC or Nikon from that distance. But still have my entire house in the frame without using a wide angle. Because with a wide angle the DOF gets wider on any sensor. The pic above would have only her head in the frame on a small sensor like the APS-C. Everything else would remain exactly the same. With Large Format you can stand a few meters away and photograph a group of people head-to-toe and still get nice separation from a 100mm. If we take the Fuji x70 that I bought yesterday as another example. Its a APS-C with a 28mm equivalent. Some might thing, ok 28mm on FF with 2.8 would give me SDOF. But it won’t on the Fuji. Not because the sensor is smaller but because it is an 18mm lens. And there for get the exact same DOF as an 18mm on FF, not very shallow. So in short. You will get the nice SDOF and characteristics of your 50mm on the Nikon but with more in frame. You will get shallower death of filed simply by zooming without zooming so to speak. And yes its awesome You can intercut, its not always that big of a difference. (Fun fact, the picture of the dog is taken with the first camera any member of my family ever bought. It was my mom who got it as a child. Still works perfectly) http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Certo_Phot

Ive used both and owned both more than once. They are quite different and I would decide firstly depending on what I was going to do with them. And if you decide BMCC I would also have the BMPCC in mind. You dont "Need" any accessories for the BMCC, but it can sure be "Nice" to have. But even if the NX1 is a bit more out of the box, I used pretty much the same number of accessories for it as on a Blackmagic. Im not talking about you know, but many people in got confused when the BMCC/BMPCC was new and said, "No I dont want a Blackmagic because Philip Bloom, DSVLvideoshooter, etc, said it needs a rig to operate, so Im buying a DSLR instead". Well, those guys uses rigs for DSLRs to, and for video cameras, and cinema cameras. So imo and experience you can just pop on a lens and ND and go shoot. For the NX1 you bring extra batteries, for the BMCC you bring a battery. Tripod is needed for both in most scenarios but the NX1 is of course easier for handheld without support. But if you just want to know the difference in image and output, my personal opinion is: NX1 + Detail + Slowmo + Very small files + EVF/Tilt Screen - Need conversion - Sometimes to sharp (looks to video) - Need the expensive S-Zooms imo (which are awesome lenses and can be had cheap, I payed 0 dollars after selling) BMCC + Raw + Prores + Awesome and cinematic image + Higher Dynamic Range - Bigger - No Slowmo - No EVF My choice: For narratives I would easily choose the BMCC over the NX1. Alternative If you want a camera for handheld thats a bit bigger than the NX1 but smaller than the BMCC. That shoots amazing cinematic Raw as well as compressed HD still worthy of webb publishing. Better DR than the NX1 but a bit lower than the BMCC. Long lasting battery. Can take stills. Shoots Raw slowmotion. Costs about the same used. Then the 5Dmkiii is for you. (BTW, regarding the fact that the NX1 is off the market. I wouldn't care to much. Any of the cameras will loose a lot of value over the coming years anyway. I recently put out a WB ad for a NX1 and was offered the body in mint condition including the S-Zoom and a couple of primes for less than $1000 from more than one seller.)

It sounds just about right imo. I wouldn't give you any more than that even if you never opened the box. If its over the 2 week return time we have here, 30% is absolutely standard for mint condition hardware. Last time I sold a piece of gear it was his opening line, "As you very well know we first deduct 30%", Ind I agreed. After that we negotiated regarding scuffs, warranty, etc. But one also has to decide on two paths. Do I want to talk to endless people, wait and wait, hope to get a few extra dollars or even a couple of hundreds? Or do I want to sell the item

This. And imo, better than Sony in many respects. Ups and downs like always.

Switching to FCPX is the best decision I've ever taken as an editor. It makes my life so much easier and frees up a noticeable amount of time.

They discontinued a model. And since they only had one camera... Imo its not exactly comparable to Samsung.

Yeah Im excited to see if it's a keeper. I adore the x100t and borrow one all the time from a friend. But I would most likely never bring it out since my Leica can easily replace it. And my favorite fov on the Leica is 28mm. There is one style of shooting I really like, stealth/candids up close. For film I use a small voigtlander with a 15mm. Shooting from the hip pretty much everything is in frame. And already at f5 or so, 1m to infinity is in focus. I can stand next to someone, point the camera far of from them and still capture them from head to toe. I dont have a digital equivalent for this thats as small. Enter the x70. I wont be able to point it as far of the subject with the 28mm. But with me looking downwards poking at the touch screen, they will more likely think Im just fiddeling in menus. Meanwhile I use the touch to focus and shoot feature in combination with the dead silent leaf shutter... pow I will keep you posted.

Agreed. And among that tiny group of people who does record a little video, my guess 1% actually edits and exports something.

Nope, thats not according to my arguments at all.

That sucks, I could pick one up within 10min if I wanted to. Yeah, that's also a good way. The XT2 included a 35mm if one preordered etc. Deals are everywhere for those that look I often get 20% on new cameras the first week from one of the stores because I subscribe to their newsletter. They don't do it for things like a Canon 5Dmkiv but they did for the NX1 and A7sii. Mirrorless doesn't do very well here so they need to boost sales a little to get it going. (BTW I definitely stopped myself from buying it, while browsing on it I accidentally impulsed a Fuji X70. So no more shopping for a while.)