kye

My friend takes stills of his family holidays and has an ancient relic (IIRC it's a Canon 30D?) that he would always take with him. He is a minimalist and was sick of hauling it around so did his first overseas trip without it and used his iPhone 5 (current at the time). He took a bunch of photos on the trip, but when I asked him about it his thinking wasn't clear. On his next trip he took an updated iPhone (maybe an 8?) and took lots of photos again, but still didn't have clear thinking about it. It was only several years later that he had a good reply, he said "The photos look fine but I realised that I never felt compelled to print and hang any of the photos from it". He still can't define what it is, but something is missing for him. I've looked at the prints he's got hanging in his house and the difference isn't obvious - it's not like his prints have shallow DOF or anything, they just have this timeless sort of look about them, and his iPhone pics all look like iPhone pics (unsurprisingly). Even the RAW stills from my GF3 from 2011 don't look like iPhone pics, even the current ones. It might be a matter of blurring the iPhone images a bit, and toning down the strong saturation and contrast, who knows, but maybe they'll get over that hurdle soon. Maybe they already have - I still have an iPhone 12 mini and don't use the stills in my creative work. TBH it's probably the "everything is awesome!!" processing that Apple do to their images. Maybe the RAW images off the sensor are fine.

I own the original version of that 14-42mm kit lens, but I also own the 12-35mm f2.8 lens, and it's only larger at full extension by about the thickness of a lens filter and is slightly fatter, but it's also 1-2 stops faster, which matters on these single ISO MFT cameras if you're walking around at night. In reviewing my footage from previous trips I concluded that in reasonably well lit exteriors (like outdoor shopping malls) my main iPhone 12 camera is fine (it's got similar noise to GX85/GH5 with a F2.8 lens) but the iPhone 12 wide rear camera has the noise performance of the GX85/GH5 with an F8 lens, and the footage was so noisy it was hard for me to use on my home video edit. So if I'm going to potentially be in less-well-lit interiors or anywhere at night, I'd appreciate the F2.8, and with the GX85 you can always crop in post on a 1080p timeline to get the slight extra reach. I haven't really had an issue with the internal audio of the GX85, but I mostly use the camera audio as ambience and have music over the top. Of course now we have these AI tools in post it's easy enough to clean up a voice if someone says something I want to put in the final edit. If you haven't seen them, they're absolutely stunning. A mic input changes everything, of course, including radically altering the camera size and conspicuousness, unless you are running a lav to it, but even then, having even "a touch of the Borg" attracts attention. The general public are very vigilant against assimilation - oddly even including those that never watched Star Trek. I definitely agree that the 14-140mm would make a great option. I only do a few trips a year and so think carefully in preparation for them. My current thinking is this: Full tourist mode is the GX85 and OG BM camera setup, and is where I don't care about weight and want the ultimate options: GX85 + 14-140mm for walking-around during the day GX85 + 12-35mm for walking-around well-lit places at night GX85 + primes for less-well-lit places at night BM for high-DR situations where I have time to manually expose and shoot (lookouts at sunset, for example.. these are strangely frequent on my holidays 🙂 ) Equipment: GX85 + 14-140mm P2K or M2K with 12-35mm F2.8 Primes: 7.5mm F2, 14mm F2.5, 17mm F1.4, 58mm F2 with SB This all fits into a camera insert inside a generic backpack Stealth tourist mode is the GX85 and is where I want to be stealthy and shoot quickly: GX85 + 14-140mm for walking-around during the day GX85 + 12-35mm for walking-around well-lit places at night This fits into a sling bag, which are now fashionable, how convenient! Non-tourist mode is the GX85 and 12-32mm zoom (and maybe the 14mm F2.5 if it'll get dark) slipped into a jacket pocket. If I'm travelling this is what I would take if I was leaving the hotel but didn't want to take a bag. I don't own the 14-140mm or 12-32mm lenses currently, but assuming my thinking doesn't change in the interim, I'll buy these in preparation for our next trip. I ended up shooting a lot with the GX85 and 14mm F2.5 in South Korea (almost exactly a year ago) and got a lot of great shots with the combo, and I really liked the size even though I took a backpack almost everywhere due to being in full tourist mode. I've shared some images from this combo before in other threads but happy to re-post if you haven't seen them.

That X-factor that some cameras have is equally baffling and also completely compelling..... I understand / sympathise! Wider than 15mm in a manual lens is definitely a struggle. What is the crop factor of the EOS-M 1:1 mode you're using? There are a plethora of vintage and new c-mount lenses all over eBay but the trick is to understand the size of the image circle they project and the size you need. The OG BM cameras had a crop factor of 2.88, which was quite large in the world of c-mount compared to the CCTV applications, I have spent many an hour searching eBay item-by-item googling each one to find the size of the image circle - normally to reject every lens I could afford and then just spiralling off to search in reverse-price-order and watch videos of the Angenieux lenses that are sitting there for sale for the price of a newish car. Meteor made a few lenses, some starting at 17mm and others at 22mm IIRC, but I'm no expert on their history. They were made in quantity so are accessible and I don't think people really knew about them when S16 was in-demand so they're priced reasonably. Also, most of the lens tests I've seen show that they're super-soft and vintage, but there are a few on YT where the images are super-sharp and clean, so I'm not sure if some copies are bad, or if most of the people testing them don't know what they're doing, or if most testers wanted that heavy vintage look, or if they simply uploaded them in 720p at pathetic bitrates because no-one knew how YT compression worked back then. TBH, most of the videos with these vintage lenses are either by people that don't know anything about anything, or they're by people who want the vintage look and so are pushing the quality to be as crap as possible and not showing the capabilities of the equipment. It shits me that most of the OG BMPCC tests are like this - people don't take the time to show the potential.

I took my GF3 around Europe and into the US and shot using only the kit lens and the 14/2.5, mostly on full-auto, and with RAW images I was basically never disappointed. The only thing that I missed was the look of Canon colour science, so I bought a 700D after that and really liked the images from it, but the additional size would have made me question if I would take it travelling. The best images I took were enabled almost exclusively because I was shooting fast, thinking creatively, and going mostly un-noticed - which are all direct results of having a small automatic camera. When I was first learning video I was absolutely stunned by how fragile and, frankly, crap the video from mega-dollar prosumer cameras was in comparison to the RAW still images from an ultra-budget pocket camera. If I was still shooting stills I would have on from discussing equipment probably a decade ago.

Yeah, phones are getting really good now, with RAW and Prores and Apple Log and recording to SSDs. The thing I think is missing is a wide-angle selfie camera. Trying to film yourself using an ultra-wide but without being able to see yourself is possible but hitting record, then turning the phone around, and shooting while presenting a bright image of the frame to everyone around you is strange and awkward on almost all levels! I don't know if the diopters for action cameras also have NDs. They might, considering that a diopter is as technical/geeky as an ND would be, but action cameras are practically designed inside and out to have a short shutter, so it kind of goes against the whole ethos in a way.

Window shopping is technically allowed, but you've walked right up to the line my friend, so don't lose balance or focus!! The lens(es) that come immediately to mind are the Meteor zooms from the USSR.. They have clean bokeh (linked to timestamp): They're m42 mount, but can be adapted easily: https://fotodioxpro.com/products/m42-c-p-v2 Do you want them to be specifically c-mount? Why? (I'm curious) I'd imagine that adapting FF or S35 lenses would be much more fruitful? My impression of c-mount zooms is that most are 15-22mm on the wide end, which is pretty easy to replicate with FF or S35 manual zooms if you can get a speed booster in the stack. I got a manual RMC Tokina 28-70mm F3.5-4.5 in m42 mount that combined with my m42-m43 speed booster gives me 20-50mm equivalent, and a nice vintage vibe without being too mangled (so it's the optical quality of a high-end c-mount zoom from back in the day). What camera is this for?

Thanks for sharing those pics, that's useful. Here is a rough estimate for each camera then.. estimating from your pics and from the images I compiled: GX85 with pancake lens - 12cm wide x 10-12cm long GX850 with pancake lens - 11cm wide x 9-11cm long ZV-1 - 11cm wide x 10cm long LX10 - 11cm wide x 9cm long Interesting that the GX85 with 2.6-3x zoom lens is only 2-3cm longer than the LX10, which is the smallest of the bunch, despite the fact that the GX85 has a much larger sensor and has IBIS and an EVF. Considering that the size while off doesn't matter to me that much and that the stabilisation is so critical, the fact I can get Dual IS on the 12-32mm really makes a difference when doing walking shots, which is a lot of the shots I take. Even if I add the 12-35mm F2.8 lens, the GX85 only grows to 10cm at the wide end and 14cm at the long end, including the body, so although the lens is hugely fatter, it's not much larger and might even look less like a telephoto to causal bystanders (and might even look older / less modern and therefore less threatening because it's fatter). I think I'm talking myself out of wanting an LX10 or GX850. I did really like the auto-everything / no-controls-just-shoot-creatively aspect of my GF3 though, so the GX850 would provide that same experience but with dramatically higher resolution images. It's a different kind of shooting really, maybe that's how I should look at it. I watched this yesterday and was absolutely stunned at how great it was - you can tell the guy is a professional cinematographer.. still, many of the images could be captured at 90-95% with a small camera. The more I see edits like this, the more I am reminded it's about composition and lighting and (in the absence of skill like the above) just shooting more so that you have a greater chance of getting lucky. I guess that's potentially a theme for this whole thread. Smaller camera = shooting more = more options and more variety = more options in the edit = better edits.

Cool you have a setup that works for you. I guess the thing that I noticed with the different focal lengths was that you needed the width to make it look like you weren't holding a camera. I assume this angle is the ZV-1 on the handle? Whereas this is a GoPro on a similar handle: It just doesn't have that same "I'm holding you as far away from me as I can!!" sort of vibe 🙂 I do recall parts of Asia also having signs up that said "No selfie sticks", as well as places like the Vatican IIRC? The Vatican also doesn't allow tripods either, so not sure how the handle would go if it splits into legs. Make Art Now also got a reasonable frame with the Insta360 Ace Pro by putting a diopter on it to shorten the focal distance: But, in the end, it's what's in front of the camera that matters 🙂

When I was first getting into video I experimented with a selfie angle, but eventually realised that the videos I wanted to make didn't need it. What I learned though was: You need a super-wide angle lens, unless: - you want to be walking around with your arm extended almost the whole way, which is tiring, impractical in more crowded situations, and attracts a huge amount of attention - you want to be walking around with a camera on a stick, which has the same challenges in crowds and attracting attention - you are fine with the frame just being of your head and nothing else You don't actually need a selfie-screen You can just get used to the framing and if you put yourself in the middle of the frame then the lens distortion is fine - millions of hours of vlogging footage was recorded on Sony FF cameras with 16-35mm lenses and no flippy-screen If I was vlogging as part of my videos I'd just get one of the action cameras with a half-decent audio input and customise it from there, potentially with a diopter to adjust the focus to be perfect for the right vlogging distance and throw the background out of focus a touch. I'd also just apply un-sharpening in post to improve the image quality by 20-40%.

Just window shopping for tiny cameras (tiny-er than the GX85) and realised I don't really care that much about the size of the camera with the lens turned off, I care about the size when I'm waving it around actually shooting footage. Comparing the LX10 with GX850+12-32mm kit lens, I think the LX10 might be longer?? The zoom ratio is only 3.0 compared to 2.66 for the 12-32, so they're almost identical lenses too. Obviously, it's smaller when closed: BUT, the LX10 lens really really extends (at least for some of its zoom range)... and (as far as I can tell) the 12-32 doesn't extend nearly as much? These are the best images I could find of the lens extended: Also, the 14-42 doesn't look much larger either: Does anyone have all these bits and can give a more definite answer? If the incognito factor is important then it might be that the GX850 and 12-32mm might be better. In fact, the LX10 might not even have much of size advantage over the GX85 with the 12-32 lens, when both are fully extended... I got a direct size comparison image and superimposed the best quality images of the two lenses extended that I could fine (the lens images are transparent so you can see the overlays - the size match is almost perfect on both). Obviously lens extension isn't everything, but in use it's potentially a factor. Members of the public are aware that the longer the lens the more zoomed it is, so anyone who is uncomfortable with the idea of being filmed from a distance might really notice such a thing.

What a fascinating project! I wish them well, but it's not exactly what I need. I do think there is a niche here, though. The competitors are: MFT - much larger in comparison Action cameras - either don't shoot in high enough bitrates or don't have a good / large enough front-facing camera or don't have the lens options Smartphones - some don't shoot in high enough bitrates but all(?) either have one focal length on the selfie-side that isn't very wide or have several on the rear but no selfie screen at all (or it's tiny) The challenge with such a system would be the crop factor and getting lenses at the wider end - it's hard enough for the S16 crop of the P2K and M2K, but this is much worse. Perhaps the competition is a smartphone plus an action camera with front-facing screen? Still not the best combo.

It looks to me like it was added in post as part of the grade, but obviously can't confirm that. Apparently it's the same sensor as the P4K, so until we get ISO tests I'd just assume that it's the same as that?

I did notice the flares - they were there but not overpowering.. I'd imagine for many who are interested in the flares in-particular that this might be an interesting option to use in situations where more typical anamorphics would flare too heavily.

I just realised that you have to have the handle in order to use AF... it appears there's no way to configure the buttons on the camera body itself - the manual only talks about configuring the buttons on the optional (and huge) handle.

Perhaps the premise of the question would be interpreted differently if the two cameras were more different to each other. For example, if I asked the same about the GH5 vs GH6, then there would be things to talk about, and spending time looking at the various specs and performance would be worthwhile. It's also helped by the likelihood that I'd own the GH5 and be questioning an upgrade - so it's a question that would have real-world implications and would be of value to discuss, rather than a purely theoretical question. In the case of the A7S3 vs A74, the strengths are very similar or don't really matter (both have enough DR for almost anything you might want to shoot) and the weaknesses are similar too.

I think this entire line of thinking is a product of the online camera ecosystem - it is based on the idea that cameras can be evaluated separately to them being used. It's designed to make you buy the latest stuff. It makes as much sense as having forums devoted to discussing hammers, evaluating their shapes, the materials in the handle, the hardness of the metal, etc, but without talking about using them to build something.

Nice images! The have a softness to the rendering that is quite filmic and very pleasing. I was wondering how much was the adapter, how much was done in post etc, then I saw that you were also using a Takumar, so that would be contributing strongly to the look too I would imagine. I'm not a huge fan of the anamorphic streaks (except in sci-fi or action films) but one thing I really like about anamorphics is the lack of artificial sharpness and the fact that the bokeh is oval-shaped it creates additional separation in a way that circular bokeh doesn't - I find it subtly contributes to the sense that cinema is in a world that is like our world but isn't quite the same.

Yes, a pity it doesn't have BLE. Controlling it with the BM camera app would have been really good. Will said that you can use it with a USB-C hub to connect an SSD while also powering it via USB. Have you tried that? Maybe it is just limited to connecting to one device and the USB charging doesn't count?

All good points, but perhaps most significantly, it has a cooling fan..... in something approaching the size of an action camera. Sony, etc, have no excuses.

AI invented a time machine and you've been amongst us this whole time??

Really? I never realised that... I think M4K just has AF-S, not AF-C. Maybe I just saw how huge the P4K was and never paid much attention beyond that!

You can respectfully disagree, but maybe there's a reason that no-one has done this yet....

There is no such thing as objectively better. There was a famous blind test that included high end cameras like the ARRI Alexa and Red Epic Dragon 6K, but also much lower-end cameras like the GH4.. here's a couple of articles talking about it: https://www.4kshooters.net/2014/08/20/12-cameras-blind-test-bmpc-4k-bmpcc-gh4-arri-alexa-red-epicdragon-6k-sony-f55-fs700-kineraw-mini-canon-c500-5d-mark-iii-1dc/ https://www.4kshooters.net/2014/08/24/12-cameras-test-part-iii-arri-alexa-red-epic-dragon-6k-blackmagic-4k-kineraw-mini-gh4-5d-mark-iii-more/ But here's the kicker - the audience was industry professionals and some of them preferred the GH4 to the ARRI or the RED. In the end, everything is subjective.

Actually, I take back my comments that overheating testing is incomprehensible, because I found this.... (linked to timestamp) ...and in case you don't want to hit play, the BM Micro Studio Camera was used to film inside the race car of a 24 hour race in Daytona, and: it was being powered from the car it was recording 4K to a 4TB SSD in BRAW 8:1 it recorded for 24 hours straight with no overheating and no dropped frames the average temp in the car was 120F / 48C the suspension in a race car is stiff and shaking the camera too Just goes to show - all these huge cameras that overheat in air-conditioning are just flat-out design failures.

Will has just released his full review of the new M4K and it looks like the sleeper camera of the decade.... One thing of extreme interest to me was that it has AF, and although he only shows it once in the video, it looks pretty snappy. Of course, he also mentions that it's the same sensor as the P4K... sooooo, the P4K sensor has AF, but the P4K does not!