mercer

The only problem I see with the Veydra lenses, on Micro 4/3s, are that they're still fairly big and heavy for Micro 4/3 lenses. And they're all a T2.2... which is about an f/2 in photographic terms... correct? With the Voigtlanders at f/0.95... about a T1.2?... you're gaining a +1.5 stop for lowlight use... which is a bonus in Micro 4/3 world. If I had to choose one or the other, I'd go with the Voigtlanders, but for @jonpais 's desire to have a good cine lens(set) for multiple cameras, the Veydra lenses make sense.

Grab a Veydra in your favorite focal length and write a 1-3 minute short, or adapt a public domain short story, with 1 or 2 actors. I would use your street shooting skills as part of the production. If you want to go lightweight and handheld, I saw a cheap, rail-free, follow focus that could help with the Veydra's focus throw to keep a simple set up.

Are you considering narrative work?

Yeah, we're pretty lazy across the pond. Without screw on filters, a lot of us probably wouldn't use any. Sadly, I am probably going to invest in that magnetic filter holder because screwing on a filter is quickly becoming a chore...

B&H carries screw on Tiffen Black Satin filters. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/search?N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search&Ntt=Black Satin filter

I believe that frame that enny posted from the BMCC, the cinematographer used a Black Magic filter. I've never tried one, but I think with my next consumer camera purchase I will give the Pro Mist or some sort of diffusion filter a go.

True but you're pretty damn close to a complete set anyway, so if you take the plunge you can finish it off. If you sell your 28mm, that will get you 25% of the way to the Hollywood or the 35mm 1.4. Then you could probably sell off two other complete sets of lenses because why would you need them when you have a complete Zeiss set? Then the proceeds from those lens sales will pay for multiple Fuji lenses. Plus, Fuji deals will pop up more regularly than a Zeiss 85mm 1.4 deal will.

Man, that's a tough call. As you said, the Fuji may make more sense... but that Zeiss is some legendary glass. But at that point, if you get that 85mm... then you NEED either the Hollywood or the 35mm 1.4. Supposedly, I don't know if it's true or not, they used the same glass in those Contax Zeiss as they did in the Master Primes or Super Speeds... of course it's probably just Zeisslore. All I know is that I briefly owned the 50mm 1.7 a couple years ago and it was one of the absolute nicest lenses I've ever used but I didn't use 50mm lenses that much back then and I couldn't afford the other Zeiss lens I really wanted... the 28mm f2... so I sold the Planar for a profit. Since then I occasionally search for Contax Zeiss lenses and hit some deals yesterday. So now I'm rethinking everything. Lol. At least this keeps me from buying a camera.

By page 5 it starts getting really interesting. Hmm. When I woke up yesterday, I had no intention of buying any Zeiss lenses, but then I saw those deals. I'm looking to build 3-5 small sets of lenses. For me a small set could consist of a zoom and a Prime or two primes... a wide and portrait. So as I sell off a bunch of tester lenses, I want to rebuild with more quality. I have my Canon set up and I have my Tokina zooms. I also have a half ass Nikkor set which consists of my 28mm f/2, a 35mm f/1.4, a few Series E lenses, a couple old non-ai 50s and a Nikkor ai-s 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5... every review hates that lens but I find it has some interesting character and I bought it new for $50, so I may just keep it and the series e 50mm and sell off the better Nikkors. I don't know. my 28mm f/2 will be a difficult one to list. Another 2 lens setup that interests me is the Leica (Minolta) design 35-70mm f/3.5 and the 50mm Summicron. I have the Minolta 35-70mm, and I love it, but I no longer have a camera to use it on. Sorry, just thinking out loud here, in print...

Whew... as I scrolled down and didn't see the GH5 under best mirrorless category, I was awaiting the shitstorm that was gonna follow... but then I saw the best hybrid category. Of course the NX1 isn't on there, so it's still not safe.

You may also want to check some early EF 3rd party lenses... like the Kendy Sigma 30mm. Or one of the earlier Tokina zooms. The Tokina Angenieux lens may be perfect for what you're looking for. Tokina also made a 19-35mm that has a little bit of a cult following and is often referred to as The Plastic Fantastic. The build quality is kinda cheap and it's a variable aperture zoom but man it's a pretty sharp lens and a decent wide to normal zoom range when speed boosted.

Since I started shooting FF, my lenses aren't making as much sense as they do with super-35mm. For instance I rarely shot with a 50mm and used a 35mm or even stayed on the wider side with a 28mm. I found a cine modded Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 with the Leitax adapter for pretty cheap, so I was hoping to fill it in with a 35-70mm. Of course an hour later I got the 25mm for $200... so I may just roll with that for now and then maybe get an 85mm down the line. But to be honest, I usually shoot with one lens and rarely change them. Do you know how the 35-70mm f/3.4 is?

I just watched it. Yeah that looks great. Nice highlights. I love the early shot of the sun's reflection in the puddle. That guy is really talented. He shot one of my favorite a7s videos as well. But I still think that Martin Wallgren may have some of the best GH5 footage. But his footage always looks great... no matter the camera... And I really like ntblowz screengrab from his Last Airbender film.

Well, since the EVA1 isn't getting the 400mbps at release, I fear the GH5 may not get it for awhile. But we'll see. I am really looking forward to that update. The footage should look insanely good.

Are there any two ring Contax Zeiss zooms that are any good?

I'm no expert, but I would think a Fuji or maybe an Olympus. Of course if you're looking for mirrorless size but DSLR stills... the Nikon D5500/5600 is pretty tiny. Or the new SL2 is pretty small as well with DPAF.

I guess the Fuji is way above that price range... but damn is that a nice image...

Hey Dave, you know I just wrote a lengthy reply going over the pros and cons of both cameras, but then I realized you're probably more aware of them than I am, so I decided to watch some of your videos again instead. And to be honest, I was floored by your earlier work, especially Picnic and Porcelainia. You did such an excellent job with that documentary, and to think it was made on a 7D with CineStyle. Really remarkable. I actually have to thank you because your Picnic video helped to lead me down the ML Raw path... first with the 50D and now with a 5D3. Now I understand that your work requires a level of tech to sell yourself. So in today's age, it seems 4K is probably a necessity but I must say I would love to see some of your 80D work. I think I am one of the few people that believe the 80D has some untapped mojo and in a lot of instances more than enough for most online work. With that being said, the 1DXii probably makes the most sense for your style. But I would think a rental of both cameras may be in order to make a final decision.

Great poster! Is that the film you showed a trailer for a few months back?

@jonpais I agree with some of that. I think you would be hard pressed to get NX1 footage to have the same depth, texture and highlight roll off as shown in that screen grab, though but maybe. As I said earlier, I think people should use whatever camera they feel comfortable with. If they like 4K, then they should shoot 4K. If they like 1080p or can only afford 1080p, then shoot with 1080p. In the 2+ years I've been around here, I have learned a ton, but I've also learned that I am not a particularly talented or skilled operator, but I love filmmaking. I was ready to quit it all as it was becoming way too expensive of a hobby without getting results I felt comfortable with. And then I made a Hail Mary pass and bought the 5D3 and it all came together for me. I'm still not nearly as talented or skilled as I'd like to be, but at least I can look at my shots and not feel angst. But even with that gratification I missed small cameras and small file sizes. So I convinced myself that I needed a small mirrorless 4K camera for casual video, or at least a camera that has IBIS. I bought and sold, or returned, a few more and have never been happy with the results. To this day, I have only liked the images I was able to shoot with either my D5500 or my 5D3. I made a couple 4K videos from my NX500 days that were okay, but I had plenty more failures than successes with that camera. So when I speak of 4K vs 1080p, my opinion is based solely on my very specific history with various cameras and my skill set with using them. And my only interest in video is for narrative work. I could not care less about any other form of videography and what is deemed acceptable or even beautiful for those disciplines. With that being said, I wish you could get your hands on a 5D3 or a BMCC for a week to give them a test ride. I think you would have a different opinion of them and 1080p when seen in Raw. You already have seen how beautiful 1080p ProRes is. Or get, or borrow, a BMPCC and put one of those fancy 12mm lenses you have on it, I think you'd be blown away by it.

I'm not really "over" IBIS, I've just realized I don't "need" it. But I would love an LS300. Maybe after I sell a screenplay. I think the multi sized sensor and prime zoom of the LS300 are some of the best advancements in the past 5 years. If Panasonic thought of it, it would be the most praised tech on this site. Lol.

Well, there are a lot more costs in manufacturing than just the price of parts. And there are plenty of modern super 35mm cine lenses that will mount to EF: • Zeiss Compact Primes • Schneider Cine Xenar III • Cooke Mini S4 • Rokinon Cine • Tokina Cinema The EVA1 seems to be more of a B-Cam to a Varicam LT than an A-Cam to a GH5. I don't agree with that marketing/production decision but Panasonic seems to have designed it that way. And not too many cinematographers are putting old Schneider Super 35mm glass on a Varicam LT. I'm sure there are plenty of cinematographers that would love to mount a set of Tevidon lenses to the EVA1, but there are more that are going to use a Zeiss Compact Prime to match the Master Primes on their LT, Unfortunately, Micro 4/3 is just not a professional cinema camera mount. And the EF mount offers enough possibilities for professional cinema lenses and for lower cost professional still lenses. But as far as adapting goes, there are plenty of older lenses that will adapt to EF: For some PL mount lenses... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/995147-REG/fotodiox_ar_pl_eos_p_pro_canon_eos_adapter.html For some Arri B mount lenses... https://www.rafcamera.com/adapter-arri-b-to-canon-eos Hell, you can even adapt some old Konvas Lomo glass... http://m.ebay.com/itm/OCT19-OST-19-OCT-19-KONVAS-LOMO-to-Canon-EOS-EF-mount-C7-adapter-/260875544582 So you're right, there are some lenses that won't work but the EVA1 isn't designed for those lenses because not a lot pro cinematographers would use old c-mounts or Veydras or Speedboosters. I think you're more interested in the possibilities of a future AF200 and not an EVA1. I am too. Honestly, I think Panasonic offered too much with the GH5 and they eliminated any room for their low budget cinema camera market. The EVA1 appears to have the same codec as the GH5 with the same firmware update path. Since the 400mbps 10bit is scheduled as a firmware update for the EVA1... where does that leave the supposed summer GH5 firmware update?

Yeah, I am blown away by that shot. This is the perfect example for the anti 4K argument. Obviously the DP and colorist need to be commended here, but I don't think this would be possible with a consumer 4K camera. The GH5 may get you close, but I doubt the highlights would look as good.

Passive aggressive much? I both love and hate this discussion because I have seen first hand that in the end it doesn't matter. I think a lot of people want to justify their purchases and decisions and that leads to heated discussions on a gear related forum. So if someone wants 4K, shoot in 4K. If someone wants 1080p, shoot in 1080p. Hell, your 1080p ProRes footage is way better than the sooc 4K footage from the same camera... so there are obviously other factors at play instead of 4K vs 1080p. And no matter what a filmmaker does with consumer 4K, straight out of camera, I think they would be hard pressed to get an image as cinematic and beautiful as the screenshot @enny shared. That shot looks epic.

It's hard to tell from the short footage but it looked okay. If I owned a 70D I would definitely be taking advantage of Raw and DPAF, even at 720p, but I think there are builds of ML that shoot in 10 or 12 bit that will get you closer to 1080p... probably 2:35 ratio. I wouldn't consider Raw a condemnation but if you don't want to shoot in it, there are plenty of other options. Of course Raw or ProRes will probably give you the most latitude in post. With the cameras that shoot it, at a lower price point, you have the BMPCC or BMMCC for 1080p Raw or ProRes, or the 5D3 for 1080p ML Raw. Or if you're looking for a more user friendly camera, you could always get the GH5. If you don't want to spend that kind of money but still want to be able to grade footage in post within a modest h.264 codec, then the Panasonic G85 will give you a little leeway with the CineLikeD profile or if you want good 1080p, the Nikon D5500 or D7200 has a really nice Flat Profile that handles grading fairly well. Hope that helps.