BMPCC 4k - speedbooster + EF or native MFT?

[kye]

4 hours ago, noone said:

To be fair Kye, the cheaper Zhongyi Mitakon f0.95 lenses for M43 are not THAT bad and neither is the Kipon Handevision  40mm 0.85 (though that is expensive)   The Kaxinda (never heard of it before and it may just be one of the others rebadged) 25mm 0.95 is an unknown quality to me, 

The SLR Magic 25 0.95 is probably the Mitakon altered slightly.

I do think the voigtlanders are nice though!

It would be interesting to see how they measure.

I've said all this before, but I think people gloss over things a lot of the time, so I'll share some links again.

People are very critical of the Voigtlanders and consider them to be inferior because of how soft they are at apertures that other lenses don't offer.  People then seem to extrapolate this to them being inferior to the alternate slower offerings, and in fact, this is false and it's just a lack of education on their behalf, because the Voigts are similar or better than the other MFT contenders at a similar aperture.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/03/finally-some-more-m43-mtf-testing-are-the-40s-fabulous/

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/01/finally-some-m43-mtf-testing-25mm-prime-lens-comparison/

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/wide-angle-micro-43-imatest-results/

Of course, people can always look at these and then react with "oh, ok, so they're sharper or almost as sharp in the centre as the competitors that 5 minutes ago I was saying kill them completely, but look at how the sharpness falls off at the edges".  This is true.

If you value edge-to-edge sharpness then that's great, don't buy these.  Being fully manual and with easily de-clickable apertures, they're not really photo lenses either, they're really video lenses.  So if we're going to start talking about video lenses then we need to change our entire frame-of-reference because sharpness is the holy grail in photography but not in cinematography.

If you haven't already, go read up about the lenses that are lusted after and are the go-to Hollywood lenses.  Then go find tests for them and see how they really perform.

Once again, lensrentals is a spectacular resource here.  The tests of the Zeiss CP.2s and Super Speeds, of Canon and others, reveals they're not that sharp, and they fall-off drastically in the corners.  Have a scroll through and see how the graphs look:

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/06/just-the-cinema-mtf-charts-zeiss-cine-lenses/

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/05/just-the-cinema-lens-mtf-charts-xeen-and-schneider/

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/06/just-the-cinema-lens-mtf-charts-canon-and-sigma/

I think it's really just a sign of how things are on the internet, people judge at face value and don't actually look to see if their beliefs are true, even when there is data available.  And perhaps the bigger challenge we have on camera forums, we idolise how Hollywood has done things for the last decade (shoots 1080p with soft lenses) and then immediately disregard that and start banging on about how everyone needs 6K at a minimum and that lenses should be judged by how sharp they are.

When I joined the forums I was no different.  I wanted 4K and sharp lenses because I'd just come from shooting stills and I'd recorded 1080p with my Canon DSLR and found it way too soft and didn't realise that the fuzzy mess was Canon-related not 1080p-related.  My journey of learning video has benefitted the most from un-learning the falsehoods that were already there, rather than to learn new things in addition to what I knew.

[noone]

This is one of the reasons I do not use M43 now.

A humble 1.8 lens FF will give even greater blur and can do it with auto focus.

I keep looking for a manual focus f0.95 M43 prime though (cheap) to try on my FF Sony (yeah i am dumb enough and curious enough to do it)

.

The problem is that it is only really the MF lenses that have a mechanical aperture and focus.    I would love for it to be a voigtlander but they are all too dear just to experiment and even the Mitakon ones are mostly.

[leslie]

i bought the viltrox  nikon plain adapter (no glass )to m4/3 to adapt the almost cult like tokina 28-70mm atx pro, a promist 1/8 lives on the front of it most of the time and i use the tokina pretty much half the time. it seems to work alright. The rest of the time it has some kind of  m42 ish to ef lens mounted up to the p4k.

I have an irrational fear of the crop factor, Its mostly in my mind....i think.  I tend to try to claw back every mm that i can. To that extent i bought the vitrox  speedbooster ef to m4/3 it works ok as well. Although there is abit more play around the locking pin than i would like. So far everything seems to mount up and work ok except 2 russian lenses that i bought.

I'd like to get the 0.64 metabones at some point. but other stuff keeps getting in the way and i haven't found one at a price point i'd pony up for yet 🙄

Theres also a cheap fd adapter i have thrown into the mix so that i can use some of my fd lenses from the film era.

I dont really think you can go wrong with any of the current speedboosters.  Mattias burling did a review on the popular speed boosters 12 months or more ago, so did tom antos although he only compared the 3 meatabones on the p4k

 

[leslie]

i should add i'm a bit old school and tend to lean towards mf , its just what i'm used too. I guess auto focus would be nice but then since i dont have it , i dont miss it either. Plus for the price of a new voigtlander i bought 3 or 4 very nice pentax m42 lenses. I count that as a win, some might see different, One day i'd like one of those 17.5mm 0.95  voigts......