mercer

Holy crap... those fuckers stole my plot... Haha. I hope my movie gets into Sundance like there’s did. Stranger on the Shore is actually the name of a song from the 60s but it is a mystery. So unless that movie is about ghost cruising, I think I should be good. Btw, my movie is not about cruising at all.

Thanks man, I’ve been meaning to tell you how much I loved the B&W video you posted last week... loved the obtuse angles!

Testing out some “sinister” B&W from the Canon 28mm 1.8.

Thanks, which Rokinon lenses and how do you like them on the P4K?

I assume this has probably been discussed a lot but I am curious what glass you guys are using with the P4K? I assume there are a lot of Sigma 18-35mm users and native M4/3 lenses attached to the business end of your P4K, but is anyone using cinema lenses or rare vintage lenses, or even some oddball Franken-adapted lenses? I’d love to see some samples if possible.

That’s fair and maybe I was being a little sensitive since I’m in the middle of evaluating, and eliminating, a lot of lenses I’ve collected over the years. I’m discarding dozens of lenses, including Pentax SMC, Takumars, Minoltas, Carl Zeiss Jena, some Nikkors, Olympus, etc... But two lenses which are among the cheapest lenses I’ve ever purchased... the Yashica ML 50mm f/2 and 28mm f/2.8, I’ve decided to keep.

You started it by showing off all of your superior images with inferior lenses. I know the feeling and I wish I could settle on one small set. Believe me, I have tried but there are just too many nice lenses out there. But yes, the smart option really are Nikkor lenses. I recently bought the 35mm 1.4 (one of my favorite lenses of all time) and the 85mm 1.4 for only a little more than @enny ‘s budget for one lens.

Yup, I use FCPX as well and prefer it to Resolve... even the newer basic coloring tools in FCPX I prefer over the node based Resolve method. I really only use Resolve for two things... as a transcoder to get my Raw footage to ProRes 444. And I also use it for my silly lens tests. I do like how I don’t have to save timelines in Resolve, so it works great for those two reason. I used to use Color Finale but find it is unnecessary now. However, Chromatic does seem interesting so update us how you get along with it. I also have Colorista IV and I must admit, I love their guided color correction tool. It’s great for inept colorists like myself. But I stopped using it, not because I am too good for it, but because it slows down renders way too much. I’ll, probably, eventually buy a P4K just for the convenience of having ProRes for FCPX. I’ll still shoot in 1080p though... haha.

Inferior is such a strong word. For instance the Yashica ML 50mm 1.7 is an almost identical design as the Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.7 but the Yashica is all metal where the Zeiss has plastic parts. The Yashica ML 50mm 1.4 has 8 aperture blades, the Zeiss only has 6 blades. My $20, brand new, Yashica ML 50mm f/2 is sharper than the 3 different Zeiss 50mm 1.7 lenses I’ve owned. Hell, the Yashica ML lenses even have a very similar body design. So, since they were built in the same plant, at the same time, with similar builds and similar designs, some even sharing the same Zeiss glass, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that Yashica ML lenses are more than “cheap ... inferior” lenses. I will concede that Zeiss lenses are better than the Yashica lenses. There is no disputing that. But as a budgetary option, they’re not bad and often underrated. With that being said, there are plenty of budget lens options available that hold their own against much more expensive lenses. Just look at @BTM_Pix ‘s latest test, in the lens section, between the Contax Zeiss 85mm 1.4 vs. a much cheaper Samyang 85mm 1.4.

@heart0less listen for it... SLOW CLAP.... great job. It looks nice. Amazing how much the Viltrox and Anamorphic cleans that puppy up. So cinematic and clean. It almost looks like a modern lens if not for the vignette. What camera do you use again?

That’s actually the beauty of Yashica ML lenses... for such cheap lenses, they have a rich history. Read up on them to find their inherent connection to Contax Zeiss lenses... some Yashica lenses probably have Zeiss glass in them.

Unless there’s a 4 or 5 before that 0, then I don’t want to hear it. Lol. Jk. Consider yourself lucky... • You don’t have to be in your 20s anymore. • You know yourself way more than you did 10 years ago. • And as Bioskop said, you never know what will turn the corner... With the voracity and ferocity in which you made your short film, you’ll probably have a studio deal by the next time a 5 is your second digit.

There’s little written about this lens but everything I have found about it has been stellar and it lives up to it’s reputation. The 50mm holds it’s own against the ZF Classic 1.4 50mm which is pretty crazy considering it’s about 40 years older. The 85mm also seems to have promise but I haven’t done as much testing with it. I think my next round of tests will be the 25mm vs. Zeiss ZF 28mm f/2. Interestingly, in screenwriting there is an acronym often referred to called KISS... Keep It Simple Stupid... and yes I am the Stupid they’re referring to. I have a tendency to over complicate things, so these little sayings really resonate with me. What editing program, that has sliders, do you use? They are indeed interesting. I would just need to justify them over my other fast lenses... my 1.4 Nikkor 35mm and 85mm I paid $300 each for. It seems like the 85mm is easily found for less than $200 but the 24mm is closer to $300+ so that becomes a little more tricky to justify if I want a set of Samyangs. Maybe I’ll just try out the 85mm first and see what happens. Good to know, thanks!

Dang... hmm... between my most recent 50mm tests and these Samyang tests, I am second guessing everything that is just and pure in the world. Btw, nice Oly sample... I really like your color. Teach me. Lol. Speaking of my 50mm tests. Here is yet another sample from my Zeiss Rollei 50mm shot wide open... And for good measure, here’s a B&W frame grab from the Zeiss 25mm 2.8... To add... @BTM_Pix thanks a lot for the Samyang tests. I think I may try and pick up an 85mm. I’m curious how it will hold up against my Nikkor aI-s 85mm 1.4. I started these “tests” to try and whittle down my lens collection but I think I’ve ended up with more questions than answers. For instance, I’m beginning to think that Zeiss are the best lenses ever made for a seasoned photographer/filmmaker because it isn’t easy to find their sweet spot, but when you do... it smacks you in the face. With that being said, I think I’ve only found that spot once or twice and the above samples aren’t it. But they’re alright, so I figured I’d share them.

@BTM_Pix great test, thank you. Hmm... I am at a loss for words. I think it’s safe to say that the Zeiss is better especially with the color tonality of the whites in the shot. But overall, the Zeiss isn’t an obvious, hands down winner. Damn, maybe I need to test the Rokinon/Samyang 50mm. Do you happen to have the 24mm?

That lens is often mentioned in reviews of other 28mm f/2 lenses. It seems the general consensus is it’s a pretty decent lens but for only a little more you can get the Nikkor ai-s which is phenomenal. Either way, it’s a great option for a budget lens. I have the ZF version and not the traditional Contax “Hollywood.” I got it for a good price but it wasn’t cheap by any means. And the only reason I bought it was because it was a Duclos mod. By just using it for a few minutes in the house, I couldn’t say it was leaps and bounds better than the Nikkor 28 or the Zeiss QBM 25mm. But I have a feeling that the Hollywood is a lens that requires a little more than a couple minutes around the house test. Comment of the day! Thanks for proving my suspicions that I am wasting time and money worrying about lenses.

I knew it! Well a Quattro is more likely than a Leica but since I’ve never, intentionally, shot a still since I bought my first DSLR, both probably aren’t the smartest of purchases. Regarding Samyang vs Zeiss... I assume only a sophisticated eye would notice the difference and only a nerd would care one way or the other. Which leads me to a bigger point... I am probably overthinking this stuff. That 28-70 is such a cool lens. I briefly had one last year but bought it for such a great price, I decided to make a little extra cash on it. Part of me thinks I would probably be better off selling a bunch of things and getting a Canon 24-70mm and the 50mm 1.2 L for a two lens set and be done with it. But... There are just so many lenses that are mechanical and optical works of art... the Nikkor 35mm 1.4... or the Zeiss 28mm f/2 “The Hollywood” to resign myself to just two lenses. But on the other hand, I’ve always subscribed to the notion that story is king so all of these lenses are truly just to tickle my fancy and could have a minor effect in the end.

Couldn’t agree more. I think I’ve mentioned this before, probably multiple times, but I am the type of shooter that could film an entire movie with a single lens. But then I always worry I should have at least a second longer lens option. Which is another reason why I like fast 50mm lenses for that middle ground. You raise a great point about having different sets, especially if I stick with my gut reaction of having a modern and vintage lens set. I guess as of now, my modern set is my Canon lenses and my vintage is my Zeiss QBM. It’s those damn Zeiss ZF Classics are throwing a wrench into my plans. Another option that was kinda my original plan when I bought my 5D3 was to build a set around one fast prime and then get a zoom to cover the rest of the focal lengths. For instance, I had the Canon 24-70mm f/4 and the 35mm f/2 as my fast prime. Due to some unforeseen life circumstances I had to abandon that idea. But maybe that’s worth revisiting. Anyway, the moral of the story is that I blame you because all of your lens tests got me thinking. So, thanks!

Well now you’re just teasing me with a Leica camera in frame... shot with a Sigma Quattro... you do know I am not talented enough but am stupid enough to buy more gear, right? Seriously, don’t feed an addict. Have some compassion. Haha. Yeah I don’t know either about the Rokinon, but I’m sure the 1.4 variants are cheaper than their T-Stop counterparts. With that being said, I can’t wait to see a comparison... I have a feeling there probably isn’t that much of a difference in IQ.

Yup, I believe in the pamphlet, it specifically states these cameras are for children and male hobbyists with cats on their back.

@kye I’ve done/been doing something similar by listing every lens I own and narrowing down my favorites. I then narrowed down the ones I definitely know I want to keep. Now I am in the testing phase by seeing which lenses are just undeniably better than their counterparts. From their I will take my slate of short films I have planned for the next year and decide which lens/lenses/lens sets will fit the tone/theme/story of each short. From their I hope to narrow down my collection from 15-20 to 5-10... it will be closer to 10... let’s be honest here. You do product photography too... what was that shot on? Also, is that Rokinon 85mm, the same lens as the Cine version?

Yep, it seems like it’s an activity camera more than an action camera. At the right price, they will sell a boatload of these. I may even buy one.

Thats still impressive... you must have some deep shirt pockets.

To add to your earlier point, I’ve found the jump from 24mm to 50mm to feel quite normal and then a jump to 85mm completed a set for me. I can’t see too many instances where I would need anything longer. But I also like the simplicity of a two lens set with a fast 35mm and 85mm. But in all honesty, I know myself, and I would bet money that, short of using a zoom lens, I will rarely, if ever, change a lens/focal length during a scene. So it’s a matter of having a couple different lenses, with different qualities, at similar, or the same, focal lengths. And this is where my choices become difficult... well really... there are just too many nice lenses out there.

Without a doubt, all lenses will be sharper when stopped down, so in most instances a 1.4 will out sharpen an f/2 lens when at f/2. My Variable ND Filter only darkens for 5 stops. In broad daylight, I’ll have to stop down my lens a touch to avoid over exposure. The problem is in lowlight. All of those shots are at dusk and were shot between 800 and 1600 ISO. With ML Raw, I prefer to keep my ISO at 800 or below but will push it to 1600. So, with the Canon FD and Zeiss ZF.2, the half a stop of their 1.4 aperture over the Zeiss Rollei’s 1.8 aperture can make all of the difference. With that being said, the Zeiss Rollei shot was my favorite of the lot. It wasn’t the sharpest but I think it had the best mix of qualities that I personally like. Now I need to get them out in better light so I can draw my final conclusion.