mercer

Oh I want the test, in fact, after seeing your subjects, I am even more intrigued... I have that Jena Tessar and I was going to bring out with me on my next shooting day. I used to love that lens but haven’t been able to find a sample that didn’t have a busted aperture. My predictions are... • the Nikkor should mop the floor based on pure lens IQ... but... • the Helios will have that je ne sais quoi. • the Zeiss Planar will be perfectly... adequate and... • the Tessar “eagle eye” will be the surprise sleeper of the bunch. The net positive of f/1.2 lenses is stopping them down to f/2 to get a near perfect lens. Plus, it’s my understanding that a lot of films are being shot with available and/or minimal lighting, a 1.2 lens can be an invaluable tool in such circumstances.

It does sound like a job for that. Although I am fairly sure that you will post some amazing sample from some cheap, boring sounding lens and throw everybody off guard... or you’ll post samples from an amazing 50mm lens that won’t adapt to EF. I am just entering the selling phase of my recent lens tests and I’m still a little undecided on 50mm lenses. I almost feel like I need one more nifty fifty to round out my lens “sets.”

The funny thing is, I was searching that same exact topic when you posted that video. So, what is the best vintage 50mm lens? I am kinda obsessed with the focal length on FF, and there are so many great 50mm lenses out there. So far, my two favorites are the Canon FD 50mm 1.2 L and the Nikkor 50mm f/2... two diametrically opposed lenses. I also really enjoy the Rollei Zeiss 50mm 1.8 and although not a vintage lens, the Zeiss “Classic” 50mm 1.4 ZF is an interesting lens with a buttload of character wide open with great micro contrast stopped down a little. What does everybody else like?

Beautiful image! This is why I can’t move on from ML Raw.

It’s my understanding it’s better. Some people are using it as b-cam for their C100. What sub-$500 camera has detailed wides and is great in lowlight?

This little camera is really starting to look appealing now that they are regularly selling for under $500. Eugenia did a great job with it in this video...

Most cameras are more expensive than a used G7. I don’t know if the CineLikeD hack works with the GX850, but maybe that’s an option... @BTM_Pix ? I had a G7, a GX85 and a G85, and if I were to go back to Panasonic, at that price range, I’d go with the G85. In fact, if I were @Shell64 , I’d consider selling my G7, buying a G85 and getting a GX85 as my B-Cam. Good deal... now use the profit from a GH4 sale, to help fund the GH5.

Or the LX100... or the GX85... What lens(es) do you use with your G7 and what type of stuff do you shoot?

Maybe the FZ1000.

Here’s one from my new favorite lens...

It’s really easy for me to spend your money but at the end of the day, you are getting SOO much more with a gh5 for about double what you’d pay for a gh4 and like you said, at $1000 used... it’s not that much money but in the end think of the headaches you’re saving going with the gh5. Compared to the GH5? Well, you get the beefy 1080p and 4K codec (which meets all of the requirements for a Netflix production), IBIS, waveform monitor, LUT viewing, the newer color science, 10bit internal, 6K Anamorphic...

The problem with the cheaper Panasonic cameras are that they are all crippled and with the GH5 being so cheap, I think it’s probably worth the price difference to get the extra features.

You can get VLogL for it. It would probably work great with Sage’s GHAlexa LUTS.

Well the GH4 is a 5 year old camera that was $1500 at release. And the FZ2500 is a 3 year old camera that was $1200 at release. I just don’t understand why the newer sub-$1000 cameras, with IBIS, do not have better 1080p?! With that being said, the FZ2500 is one of my all time favorite cameras. I have a search on eBay saved and will buy another one once I can find one for the right price. The 200mbps all-i is beautiful in that camera and it does 10bit 1080p externally. Idk, all-i codecs seem to have a thicker image and better motion than intraframe codecs.

Love your work, Panny!!! Do you know how the .mov all-i codec on the GH3 is? I still can’t believe you have to buy a GH5 to get the all-i codec from Panasonic... all of these sub-$1000 Panasonic cameras should have all-i 1080p.

You’ll always get the best image shooting at the native iso with BM cameras... CDNG, Braw, or ProRes.

??

Reread my comment. I didn’t say that those companies released 4K TVs too soon, I said they released 4K video recording in their cameras too soon. Just my opinion.

He has $500... so to me the obvious choice is a 5D Mark ii and ML Raw.

Yeah, it seems that way. It looks great... although I have had my first camera freeze ever since I switched to this build. It’s nothing that a power off/on doesn’t cure, though... so no big deal.

Yeah, idk, I think they are all the same. The problem occurred in 2014 when they forced 4K on us a generation, or two, too soon so Sony and Panasonic could sell some 4K TVs. None of the companies had even perfected 1080p yet... and they still haven’t. Andrew, with your skill set and talent, I really think it’s time you move onto a cinema camera. I doubt you’ll ever get all you really want from these hybrids. And with the size getting smaller, and the specs getting better, an EVA1, or whatever, would be a better choice. With that said, I agree with this silly RX100 update. Waste of engineer’s time.

I know you’re not a Canon fan even with ML Raw but I can say wholeheartedly that I will get better images with my Canon than my Micro. 14bit color Raw with only 12 stops of DR will give ME better results than 10bit color and 13 stops of DR. I’m sure a better colorist can eek out a better image with the Micro, but I’m not that guy and I really don’t want to be a great colorist... too many other things to worry about with a one man band production. With that being said, B&W seems to be the great equalizer for a hobby filmmaker like myself. @kye thanks, I always appreciate your insight. I’m really just killing time in between script pages and shooting days even messing around with post color work until I get a better post set up... but it’s still kinda fun to do even if it has no reflection on what my final film will look like. And yes, ML has a greyscale preview or you can set the live view to any picture profile you want without it affecting the final image... so I do use monochrome on occasion to see tones but mostly to see the focus peaking better.

Thanks, I bought it for a stupid price, so it was a no brainer. Of course, I remembered quickly why I went the 5D3 ML route instead of the BM route a couple years ago. But this will force me to sit down and put the work in. And I’ll still get the ease of ProRes. So, like you said, it will be great for certain projects. I think you’re right about the c-mount. Last year, I was forced to use my Canon 28mm lens and due to the circumstances, I took the time to learn the nuances of the lens and focal length and I think I’m better off for it. It’s been a long road but I’ve learned a lot about myself as a filmmaker and weirdly the joke I made earlier about a 50mm lens and a wide angle/telephoto adapter would almost suit me better than a collection of focal length lens sets... if I can get over my indecisive nature. Lol.

A 12mm lens is a 12mm lens. On FF, a 12mm lens would give the FOV of a 12mm lens. APS-C is 1.5x FF, so a 12mm lens on an APS-C camera would give the FOV of an 18mm FF lens. The Micro has a 2.88x crop, so a 12mm lens would give the FOV of a 35mm FF lens. But yes, it is confusing. I was watching some Spielberg films and learned he prefers 30mm and under lenses... now that’s S35, so I had to go backwards to figure out the FF FOV... my brain almost melted. Lol. But I really overthink this stuff... I’m half tempted to get a Speedbooster for 28mm f/2 and then get a Century Wide Angle converter and Telephoto converter... it would be a hell of a lot easier.

A 12mm lens would give the FOV of an 18mm lens on aps-c. An 8mm would be a 12mm. The SLR Magic is definitely a possibility if I can find one cheap enough. After further thought, though, I’ve decided I cannot justify using a lens that cost more than the camera. The Nikkor 20mm 3.5 on the BMPCC Metabones adapter would equate to a 35mm 1.8 in FF terms. I should add that I also have a Cine-Nikkor 10mm 1.8 c-mount lens. In my preliminary test, it wasn’t that sharp wide open but I only tested it for a few minutes around the house. I’m waiting for an IR Cut filter to give it a proper test and to see what f-stop it sharpens up at. Some positives are: it’s tiny, the focus has a short throw, I can handhold it steadily and there is zero focus breathing. And it looks cool as shit on the Micro. From some of the tests I’ve seen online, it sharpens up nicely when stopped down. If so, my 28mm f/2 speedboosted would give me a nice small two lens set with an equivalent 28mm and 50mm FOV. Here’s a photo of the Cine-Nikkor 10mm 1.8... As you can see, it’s very similar in design to the older non-ai Nikkor lenses... hopefully it will have the optical quality as well.