mercer

I’ve recently been paying a little more attention to these lenses and from what I’ve seen, they seem to be great bargains. Depending on your usage, I don’t know if the Cine versions are worth the extra cost over the stills version, especially since stuck aperture blades are a common complaint online. From reading your other posts, it seems you’re planning on using these with the P4K, so I assume you are doing some narrative work with them? For the cost of the kit, I wonder if the Fujinon zoom would be another option? Of course, I don’t know when the M4/3 version will be available. For the money of the Cine kit, you could easily put together a Nikkor kit and have them modified. Or you could get a Sigma 18-35mm modded. Hmm... tough call. But honestly, based on the title of your post, you’d probably be better off going with native lenses or the Sigma 18-35mm.

Even though the Takumar has fungus, I still think it’s the winner. The Minoltas look good too but the Tak and Pentax just has a little more... oomph. Maybe it’s just me, but you really do adjust fairly quickly to the different focus directions. But, I believe I shot with a lot of Nikkors and Pentax/Tak Lenses when I first started, so in some ways that direction feels more natural. Sorry to say, even with the cheap price, the Petri is the big loser here. Cool test. Thanks.

Holy crap, that’s the deal of the year!!!

Do a search for “Captain Hook LUTS” and you should find something that will work in Premiere.

It sounds like some kind of anamorphic... maybe something with internal reflections causing a flaring effect... or even a fake anamorphic?

I think I’d rather have the still version... same glass with a better focus ring... I don’t use a follow focus and I don’t care about a clickless aperture. Plus they’re cheaper. But I’m still on the fence about them. I’ll probably pick up an 85mm eventually, since that seems to be the cheapest option into the Rokinon/Samyang line.

Idk, I think I’d rather have the form factor, battery life and electronic ND of the FS5. With the Raw update and ProRes Raw, you’d have a tiny beast of cinema camera. Anyway, I’ll happily pay you the price of the P4K for your FS5, though.

Well, I’d agree about production value and I’d agree with lenses in our price range, however I wouldn’t necessarily agree with professional cinema lenses. Cookes and Primos and Super Speeds are used for specific productions for specific reasons, so I don’t think stopping it down will mitigate that. But yes, in this instance, it is a valid point and since I found this video from this old thread... ... there’s a good chance that the director did just that as he describes stopping down his lenses to get the best resolution when shooting ML Raw. But as we all know, it isn’t easy pulling focus on a 1.4 lens, so if you can get this type of quality stopped down to f/4-5.6 with a super fast 24mm 1.4 that costs less than $400... then I’d say that’s a pretty good lens to have in your arsenal.

@BTM_Pix I am fairly certain your collection puts mine to shame, but if I was more into photography, I would keep a lot more lenses... I mean buy a lot more lenses. Is 135mm your favorite focal length and which is the best you’ve ever used... if you had to pick one off the top of your head? I’ve been eyeballing the Nikkor f/2 but it’s such a huge lens and goes against my desire to only own small lenses. I may buy a Samyang 85mm to test against my Nikkor because I think the Samyang is considerably smaller. I’ve even thought about buying that Canon 70-200mm f/4 L lens but the size is turning me off. But I digress... I’m not even sure I own any 135s... hmm... I used to have a couple but never fell in love with them. I may have an old Rikenon or late Canon FL/FD when they issued the rubber grip but before the new bayonet mount. While I have you, how are the Samyangs outdoors? Do they flare a lot?

I found this video online as I was researching Samyang/Rokinon lenses. According to the description, it was shot on an FS7 and the Samyang 24mm 1.5 cinema lens. So obviously this look or quality isn’t all about the lens but I think it’s pretty obvious that the 24mm holds its own.

Is it? Dang, do you guys still follow a gold standard. That is a great price.

That looks like a great lens, but I haven’t seen one cheaper than $500.

@BTM_Pix cool story... see there’s depth to my filmmaking... Since you were a recording engineer, can you get me the rights to the song? Acker Bilk was British right? So you probably know/knew him. Speaking of, I’ve almost bought the Samyang 85mm about 3 times since your test... but I’m resisting.

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.