Lenses

[Mattias Burling]

5 hours ago, mercer said:

Yeah I’d be curious to see that lens on the P4K. Have you had a chance to use the Micro... or any inspiration/ideas for a grip?

I could test it on both as soon as I find the adapter. I have used it on Fuji and yesterday I was shooting some street with it on the EOS-R. It's a cool lens. Like always with 7artisans it's not clinically sharp, but I know you care as little as I do about that.

[BTM_Pix]

10 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

I could test it on both as soon as I find the adapter. I have used it on Fuji and yesterday I was shooting some street with it on the EOS-R. It's a cool lens. Like always with 7artisans it's not clinically sharp, but I know you care as little as I do about that.

Which adapter do you have for MFT?

 

[Mattias Burling]

13 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Which adapter do you have for MFT?

 

Kipon with Close Focus is always my go-to for MFT. Takes care of the long focus distance inherited by the Leica mount.

[BTM_Pix]

3 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Kipon with Close Focus is always my go-to for MFT. Takes care of the long focus distance inherited by the Leica mount.

Yeah I need to not cheap out and buy that one.

Minimum focus distance on the 28mm with the one I've got is about 2 nautical miles.

[Zach Goodwin2]

New picture taken with the FD 35-105 F/3.5 on Canon T2i

[leslie]

13 minutes ago, Zach Goodwin2 said:

New picture taken with the FD 35-105 F/3.5 on Canon T2i

video those toadstools for about a minute then zoom out and  have godzilla stomp all over them, hey presto you will win the $!50 video challenge... how easy is that ? btw you can keep the camera ?

[mercer]

A couple shots from the Canon FD 50mm 1.2 L that I had modified to EF mount. The more I use the lens, the more I like it. I’m still flying blind with my MacBook Air. I am pretty set with lenses, so now I need to decide on a monitor/computer. Since these are all color tests just to look at the footage, I have time to make a decision before editing begins. I looked at some of my previous frames on my friend’s phone and they had a greenish tint that I’m not seeing on my computer and phone... I haven’t checked these, but I assume they aren’t exactly what I’m seeing... ugh. 

[leslie]

how does the fd modification work ? my understanding is the flange distance is the issue and  most of the mods have to include some glass to correct the problem. To get around that would include major surgery and a large pile of coins right ?

btw i dont see any tint at this end from your pics maybe its your friends phone ?

[mercer]

7 minutes ago, leslie said:

how does the fd modification work ? my understanding is the flange distance is the issue and  most of the mods have to include some glass to correct the problem. To get around that would include major surgery and a large pile of coins right ?

btw i dont see any tint at this end from your pics maybe its your friends phone ?

Thanks, one of the issues with the MacBook Air, is that it doesn’t have a 179 degree screen, so how I sit, or how much I have it open effects the look of the footage. It can make contrast hard to judge.

It’s an EDMIKA Mount... basically the FD Mount is removed and replaced with a custom mount that’s designed to make up the difference in flange distance between the FD and EF Mount.

I had the mod done by Simmod and had them declick the aperture and do a basic maintenance but they use the same kit you could buy directly from EDMIKA. The mod looks pretty simple, although I am mechanically minded. I just didn’t feel like messing with it since I wanted the lens declicked and relubed. 

[Geoff CB]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

A couple shots from the Canon FD 50mm 1.2 L that I had modified to EF mount. The more I use the lens, the more I like it. I’m still flying blind with my MacBook Air. I am pretty set with lenses, so now I need to decide on a monitor/computer. Since these are all color tests just to look at the footage, I have time to make a decision before editing begins. I looked at some of my previous frames on my friend’s phone and they had a greenish tint that I’m not seeing on my computer and phone... I haven’t checked these, but I assume they aren’t exactly what I’m seeing... ugh. 

Waveforms are your friend! Bottom image looks like it is well balanced. 

[mercer]

3 minutes ago, Geoff CB said:

Waveforms are your friend! Bottom image looks like it is well balanced. 

Yeah, the waveforms seem slightly different between Resolve and FCPX. But yes, I have to trust the waveforms more I guess. Thanks. 

[kye]

My Canon FD 70-210 F4 lens, Canon FD 2x teleconverter and Fotga FD to MFT adapter have all arrived now, and first impressions are wow..  this is a really nice lens.

Test pics from it to come.

[TurboRat]

On 7/4/2019 at 8:36 PM, kye said:

My Canon FD 70-210 F4 lens, Canon FD 2x teleconverter and Fotga FD to MFT adapter have all arrived now, and first impressions are wow..  this is a really nice lens.

Test pics from it to come.

 

Wow really interesting to see what you shoot with that. Isn't it too bulky to carry outdoors?

[thephoenix]

never say never again. new at home

[kye]

1 hour ago, TurboRat said:

Wow really interesting to see what you shoot with that. Isn't it too bulky to carry outdoors?

I shoot sports - mainly my kids football games.   There's a thread on here about sports videography talking about it.

I think I'm getting the setup dialled-in..  GH5, 1080p120, Cine-D, monopod, and that lens combo which on the GH5 gives a 280-840mm equivalence.  It's pretty big but I'm not moving around that much and having the monopod works pretty well.  Plus it's manual focus so I'm supporting the lens while focusing so there's less mechanical strain.  The IBIS isn't good enough to get steady shots at the longer end but with 120 fps it's not bad once you conform it to 25p.

[kye]

Canon FD 70-210mm F4 zoom lens and Canon FD 2x teleconverter test shots....  all shots taken with base ISO and manual WB on GH5.  Due to the large range of zoom (both with and without the 2x TC) I moved the tripod when I added the TC) so you can't compare the framing between the sets of shots.

Canon FD 70-210 F4 at 70mm f4 (140mm FF equivalent):

Canon FD 70-210 F4 at 210mm f4 (420mm FF equivalent):

Canon FD 70-210 F4 at 70mm f4 with 2x TC (280mm FF equivalent):

Canon FD 70-210 F4 at 70mm f8 with 2x TC (280mm FF equivalent):

Canon FD 70-210 F4 at 210mm f4 with 2x TC (840mm FF equivalent):

Canon FD 70-210 F4 at 210mm f8 with 2x TC (840mm FF equivalent):

Edit: just realised I stuffed up the f8 shots without the TC, so I removed them from the above.  Will have to re-do.

 

 

[webrunner5]

Wow looks like a keeper.

[kye]

8 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Wow looks like a keeper.

Yeah, it does look nice.  I also deliberately went for the genuine Canon TC because I wanted to keep a 'pure' optical path to get the best results, and it seems it doesn't disappoint either, which is a good thing as I paid more for the TC than for the lens!!

I'll see how it handles when I take it to a game or two.  I'm thinking the only remaining item is probably a lens hood - flare is a big deal in these situations.

[kye]

How many people have a fast ~160mm lens (or equivalent) and get a lot of use out of it at the fastest apertures?

My reasoning for asking is that I've noticed this is a hole in my lens lineup and I do miss it occasionally but it never seems to be urgent enough to buy anything (and there's nothing cheap & good).

My lens lineup for my GH5 is:

• 8mm F4 (16mm f8 equivalent)
• 17.5mm F0.95 (35mm F1.9 equivalent)
• 40mm F1.8 (80mm F3.6 equivalent)
• 58mm F2 (116mm F4 equivalent)
• <gap>
• 70-210mm F4 (140-420mm F8 equivalent)
• 135mm F2.8 (270mm F5.6 equivalent)

My plan is to replace the 8mm F4 with an 7.5mm F2 lens, which would mean I have fast lenses in a ~2x ratio from 16mm to 80mm equivalents, but theres a gap between 40/58mm and 135mm for a fast lens.  The GH5 isn't the best in low-light and I do record a bit in pretty sim situations, so it is a thing.  

I prefer the 40mm (Konica Hexanon) to the 58mm (Helios 44) so halfway is 74mm (because 40mm * 1.85 is 74mm and 74mm * 1.85 is 136mm) so a fast 80mm seems appropriate.  I have missed it on a couple of occasions, like when I shot the bull-riders, but not so much as to make me go home and buy something.

I'm thinking that options for lineups are either:

• 8mm, 17.5, 40, <missing 85mm>, 135
  which is a 2.2x, 2.3x, 2.1x, 1.6x progression
  or
• 8mm, 17.5, 58, 135
  which is a 2.2x, 3.3x, 2.3x progression - that 3.3 ratio is a bit much of a gap I think

I think my options are:

• a fast 85mm, but there aren't really any that are good and cheap - even in the Russian line-ups
• a 135mm with a 0.7x speed booster for a 95mm equivalent (I already own an MD 135mm f2.8 lens and a 0.7x M42 speed booster, so would mean only buying either a lens or SB)
• a 100mm with a 0.7x speed booster for a 70mm equivalent (I don't own a 100mm lens so would have to buy a m42 one)
• I could also buy a 0.7x FD speed booster for the 70-210 F4 but it's just too large to carry around 'just in case'

If I was doing an overseas trip for example, I'd take the 8, 17.5, 40, and would want something around the gap for situations where I want some reach, but don't want as much as 135mm.  A previous trip I took the 8, 17.5 and 58 but missed having something longer, and didn't like the 3.3x gap between the 17.5 and 58mm.

On the negative side, I've heard that fast 85mm lenses tend to be heavy too.

Thoughts?

[noone]

I have had a LOT of prime lenses in the range 85-150 as well as many old zooms.        I would strongly suggest you save jut a little for a more recent lens in that range (some of them are getting old too but will hold up for year to come).    Something like a Canon EF 85 1.8 or EF 100 f2 (I have not had the 85 but loved the EF 100).    The 100 can be found for a couple of hundred dollars and I well worth it and Is not huge.      I was spoilt by the Sony FE 85 1.8 which is about the biggest bargain going in photography (though still not dirt cheap) as it Is relatively small and light while being as good as many more expensive lenses.   The EF 85 1.8 still seems quite good though and there is a Chinese knock off that is even cheaper (there is one for the 100 f2 as well.       I also loved the EF 135 f2 L but that is a bit larger and heavier (but a very nice lens if you can afford it.      I do still have a FD 85 1.2 L and that IS pretty heavy and large (for an 85) as well as being a bit expensive still (has come down in price a bit in the last few years now that there are many more 85s available in many mounts and even the MF Mitakon 1.2's.

I had to sell the EF 135 f2 L and EF 100 f2 and FE 85 1.8 (wish I hadn't) but I do not have a camera to use them on now.     I have kept a sigma 150 2.8 APO macro that I had at the same time as the 135 and when deciding which to keep, I thought the Sigma was a bit more versatile while being as good (an ok middle distance tele, a great portrait lens and an excellent macro lens).

I have had an old Nikon 85 1.8 and an old Minolta 85 1.7 and they were not bad, just not as good as many more modern lenses.

I hardly use the old FD 85 1.2 L (it does need a fix due to dissolved bearings though works for now) and I have an ancient Promura 135 1.8 I almost never use as the more modern lenses are so much better.       I think I will get an older Sony E mount APSC camera this week to use with some of my remaining lenses but I also will not have any focal reducers for a while and my 85 "needs" will be met by using a Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 on APSC....Maybe look for some shorter lenses without a focal reducer?  Will till be quite fast (I usually use 85s stopped down a bit no matter how good they are wide open with just a few uses wide open).    My kit has pretty much stabilised now and will be 17mm tilt shift lens (EF), 24 1.4 (FD), 20-35 2.8 (EF), 55 1.8 (FE), 85 1.2 (FD), 150 2.8 (EF), 300 2.8 (adaptall) with a few other odd and ends but I will need to add a couple of focal reducers.

 These are from the Sigma 150 2.8 on an old Canon 450D 1.6x crop sensor camera.