Lenses

[jonpais]

4 hours ago, jase said:

Thanks will check out that video. Btw, I didnt present any shot with the 15mm yet, maybe you confused the almighty 20mm from my last edit

Oops! Guess you're right! ?

[kidzrevil]

On 3/1/2017 at 3:24 PM, jase said:

Which strengths do you use? And when do you choose the normal satin filter, when the black satin?

I use between 1-2. I use the satin when I want the specular highlights to bloom like a pro mist and I use the black satin for an effect closer to a black pro mist

Nikkor 28mm f2.8 ais + Speedbooster XL

I love this combo

[Gregormannschaft]

On 03/03/2017 at 11:49 AM, Bioskop.Inc said:

Jupiter 9 is a lovely small lens - soft & dreamy wide open at f2, but stop down to f2.8 & it is sharp.

Beware that there are 2 versions of it & i've only got the older/orignal version - so can't speak about the newer version (which has a thick pre-set aperture ring).

If size & weight aren't a problem then go for the Helios 40-2 85mm f1.9 - again dreamy wide open (with the added super swirly bokeh), but stopped down to f2 & it's sharp. The only downsides are the weight (1kg) & once stopped down the bokeh is star shaped, unlike the Jupiter 9.

Thanks for this, I'm now on the hunt for one on Ebay.de. It has a very creamy look wide open at f2 that I'm really fond of, so look forward to checking it out.

[jase]

3 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

I use between 1-2. I use the satin when I want the specular highlights to bloom like a pro mist and I use the black satin for an effect closer to a black pro mist

Nikkor 28mm f2.8 ais + Speedbooster XL

I love this combo

That Nikkor is indeed a great lens.

[tremblingwater]

4 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

I use between 1-2. I use the satin when I want the specular highlights to bloom like a pro mist and I use the black satin for an effect closer to a black pro mist

Nikkor 28mm f2.8 ais + Speedbooster XL

I love this combo

 

That's a really beautiful look. 

I've done research between the black vs no black. Can you describe any differences that you've personally experienced? 

[Phil A]

I'm really sorry but I think @kidzrevil 's videos are completely useless to judge lens performance. Half a second in I forget to look at the rendering of the lens because the women are just always so good looking. Only cat videos do for science!
Really enjoy following him on FB, the consistent stream of super short snipets are just great visuals and I really like the more stylized looks. 

[kidzrevil]

3 hours ago, Phil A said:

I'm really sorry but I think @kidzrevil 's videos are completely useless to judge lens performance. Half a second in I forget to look at the rendering of the lens because the women are just always so good looking. Only cat videos do for science!
Really enjoy following him on FB, the consistent stream of super short snipets are just great visuals and I really like the more stylized looks. 

Lmao thank you ! I have a lot more on my instagram 

IG : kidzrevil

3 hours ago, jase said:

That Nikkor is indeed a great lens.

Honestly its been my go to. Im really questioning why I own these other Nikkors lol

[Phil A]

I feel like f/2.8 (on FF) is the sweet spot for weight / size / performance when it comes to video. So f/2 on APS-C and f/1.4 on m4/3. Also typically easy to balance on a gimbal because rather compact lenses. I'm all about fast lenses (in photography all I used was f/1.4) but for video I think the usability decrease can be big.

I'm really contemplating lately. Theoretically the easy way is just to get a set of Zeiss / Canon / Nikon glass and be done. I think I could do just with 40 (barely anyone makes those so probably a 35 + 50) and 85mm (this one preferably macro). Maybe a 24mm for gimbal and landscapes on top. If you get them in Nikon mount, you're set for life because I don't think we will ever see a system with a bigger flange distance come out. I have 35mm 1.4 & 85mm 1.4 from Samyang but obviously that's a biatch to focus with open aperture and I struggle to balance the big 35mm lens on my mirrorless body.

On the other hand going native is also becoming really rewarding with crazy auto focus performance (inc. touch screen for focus), face-tracking, hybrid image stabilization and what not.

[jase]

17 hours ago, Phil A said:

I feel like f/2.8 (on FF) is the sweet spot for weight / size / performance when it comes to video. So f/2 on APS-C and f/1.4 on m4/3. Also typically easy to balance on a gimbal because rather compact lenses. I'm all about fast lenses (in photography all I used was f/1.4) but for video I think the usability decrease can be big.

I'm really contemplating lately. Theoretically the easy way is just to get a set of Zeiss / Canon / Nikon glass and be done. I think I could do just with 40 (barely anyone makes those so probably a 35 + 50) and 85mm (this one preferably macro). Maybe a 24mm for gimbal and landscapes on top. If you get them in Nikon mount, you're set for life because I don't think we will ever see a system with a bigger flange distance come out. I have 35mm 1.4 & 85mm 1.4 from Samyang but obviously that's a biatch to focus with open aperture and I struggle to balance the big 35mm lens on my mirrorless body.

On the other hand going native is also becoming really rewarding with crazy auto focus performance (inc. touch screen for focus), face-tracking, hybrid image stabilization and what not.

This.

In theory I would just slap the Voigtländer on any camera and be done with it. But now that I use some native glas, AF is really nice. On the other hand it makes me lazy, maybe eventually having a negative effect on my effectiveness of focus pulling...

[kidzrevil]

19 hours ago, Phil A said:

I feel like f/2.8 (on FF) is the sweet spot for weight / size / performance when it comes to video. So f/2 on APS-C and f/1.4 on m4/3. Also typically easy to balance on a gimbal because rather compact lenses. I'm all about fast lenses (in photography all I used was f/1.4) but for video I think the usability decrease can be big.

I'm really contemplating lately. Theoretically the easy way is just to get a set of Zeiss / Canon / Nikon glass and be done. I think I could do just with 40 (barely anyone makes those so probably a 35 + 50) and 85mm (this one preferably macro). Maybe a 24mm for gimbal and landscapes on top. If you get them in Nikon mount, you're set for life because I don't think we will ever see a system with a bigger flange distance come out. I have 35mm 1.4 & 85mm 1.4 from Samyang but obviously that's a biatch to focus with open aperture and I struggle to balance the big 35mm lens on my mirrorless body.

On the other hand going native is also becoming really rewarding with crazy auto focus performance (inc. touch screen for focus), face-tracking, hybrid image stabilization and what not.

I too am thinking about it. The only issue with native glass is that you get tied down to one system

[Phil A]

13 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

I too am thinking about it. The only issue with native glass is that you get tied down to one system

Agreed. And even with the adapted stuff you need a really comprehensive selection if you want to cover your desired focal lengths on all systems. Even with focal reducers you don't get the exactly same results.

FF = 1
APS-C = 1.5 x 0.71 = 1.1
m4/3 =  2 x 0.71 = 1.4
BMPCC = 2.77 x 0.58 = 1.7

It's annoying. I have some Sony APS-C lenses now and I'm satisfied with them, I even get colors I can really live with out of SLOG, but I am not willing to shell out 900€ for the 24mm 1.8. I would really like to stick with Sony APS-C but I'm afraid they will never give us a more professional MILC (10bit, higher bit rate, no overheating, no screen dimming, bigger battery, less RS, ... basically the GH5 in Sony APS-C), if something comes it'll probably be full frame in A7 / A9 line. And I think it's delusional to think there're many more APS-C lenses coming from Sony.

I'm kinda teased by the GH5 (even though I hated m4/3 when I tried the GF2 back in the day, probably not skewed because my main camera then was a EOS 1Ds III). It does everything I need & even more and will be way more reliable than the A6300. But I'll wait for NAB before I decide anything.

[kidzrevil]

@Phil A sony is a great system to invest into they just come out with too many bodies too quickly. After using all these lines im sticking with Panasonic. I like the look of their leica branded lenses like the 15 and the 42.5 although I wouldn't mind having their 12mm as my one and only

[Baz]

On 3/8/2017 at 2:43 PM, tremblingwater said:

Hey everyone,

I have a really odd question. Can anyone recommend any lenses that have extreme chromatic aberrations? I'm trying to work on something that I want to get the look for but doing it digitally doesn't have the same effect. Any old lenses would do - generally 28mm - 80mm would be great.

For once, google really doesn't help.

Thanks everyone

Nikon AiS 50mm f1.2 and 85mm Ais f1.4. Both wide open. But the 50mm is something else at f1.2. Truly beautiful look and my favourite lens in the whole world. But it can be a bastard to focus it sometimes because the d.o.f is so shallow.

[kidzrevil]

Nikkor 28mm f2.8 ais

 

[jonpais]

As promised, a field test of the Oly 25mm f/1.2 shot on the Lumix G85 and the Fuji 90mm f/2 shot on the Fuji X-T2. At $1,200.00 USD, not sure if I'd trade in my Leica 25mm just yet if you've got one, the Oly is sharp, but it doesn't hold a candle to the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC DN. It does offer a nice manual focus clutch system though, which I wish was incorporated in all my AF lenses. The Fuji lenses are getting kind of boring to test, since they're all outstanding, and the 90mm f/2 is no exception to the rule. Looking at the files from the X-T2, the images are so crisp and detailed, I only wish it had IBIS so I didn't have to use a tripod or monopod for support. Like just about all of Fuji's lenses, the 90mm f/2 has an aperture ring and is all-metal. Aside from Voigtlander, I don't believe there's another manufacturer east of Germany that produces such solidly built lenses. One thing to know if you're in the market for the 90mm is that the lens will make clunking sounds when moved unless attached to the body and in record mode. I'm given to understand that is because of electromagnets that only become active when actuating recording. 

Music by Eric Matyas

www.soundimage.org

[andy lee]

The Sigma 30mm 1.4 is as killer lens as sharp as any Zeiss or Panavision Cinema lens , I use this lens a lot outside for night shoots at f2 , I rarely go beyond f2 ever as pulling focus on a moving person at 1.4 is a waste of time , I light most sets for 2.8 and go to 2 outside at night

[PannySVHS]

 

Hallo @andy lee!

Because off you I got a Panasonic G6 and GX80 now. Latter one has beautiful tactile feel, though it´s a about 0.5 - 1inch

to small in height and width for my hands.

G6 has very nice HD, better than GX80 I would state. And bought a G70 last week- to me the perfect ergos for a photo/video hypbrid, but not

the same beautiful tactile feel of the GX80. So because off you I got three Lumix cameras now. I think you "owe" me now some great

pleasure of seeing more screenshots of you film "Pandora". Even better some teaser footage!

Everyone of us wants to see you Nikon 28-70-200 lenses in action with the cool Lumix G7/70 cameras!

Of course you don´t owe me anything. It would be the other way around

cheers

11 hours ago, jonpais said:

As promised, a field test of the Oly 25mm f/1.2 shot on the Lumix G85 and the Fuji 90mm f/2 shot on the Fuji X-T2.

Hey Jonpais!

Beautiful colors. Fuji comes first but around 50 sec I thought G85 looked just as good as Fuji! 1.27, beautiful! But you´re right, Fuji mojo seems

hard to beat.

[jonpais]

Continuing the field tests of all my lenses, the next in line is the venerable Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 with the Lumix G85. I was suffering from back pain when i woke up this morning, still am, so the last thing I wanted to do was carry around that honking piece of glass, but I did anyway, though I didn't end up shooting much. Looking at the few clips on my Mac when I got home, I was reminded of just what at incredible instrument the Sigma is - tack sharp even wide open, beautiful color rendition. So yeah, I do think shooting APS-C and full frame glass on m43 is a pain in the butt, but light gathering ability, bokeh balls and the super 35 look aside, if you're after the ultimate in resolution, good focal reducers with quality glass might be a better choice than many native m43 lenses. I should add that I'm just going by what I've seen from my Sigma lenses with the MB SB XL: Lens Rentals .com has already published several articles showing that focal reducers can actually degrade image quality. And although every single reviewer who's tested the slow PanLeica 12-60mm f/4 kit lens with the GH5 is praising it to the heavens, I will eat my vegetables every day if it holds a candle to the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. Lastly, as far as build quality goes, the Sigma is all plastic and rubber, while the two Vario zooms I own are mostly metal - yet the Sigma feels solid, the focus and zoom rings are heavily dampened, while the Panasonic Vario lenses feel like Fisher Price toys made in China. Of course, I expect the Leica designed kit zooms to have far better build quality. 

[PannySVHS]

 

Good point regarding Pana 12-60, doesnt sound like a moving making tool of choice, I mean for fictional short movie pieces.

But still, the promise of an all in one light zoom solution sounds promising, with stabilization and much lighter than a 28-70 full frame glass.

So my question to @andy lee: Andy, can you recommend or say a few nice things about the Leica Elmarit

14 to 50mm with OIS F2.8-3.5, in Four Thirds mount, not mft?

Looks kinda tempting, though it is not a small kit lens anymore.

cheers

[Fredrik Lyhne]

Looking forward to seeing you eat your vegetables @jonpais  Off course a f/2.8 - f/4.0 zoom lens can't compete with a f/1.8 in light gathering capabilities, but I bet it will be difficult to tell them apart at f/4.0 - f/5.6 mixed together in a youtube video. Honestly I think you would be able to make just as good videos with the PL 12-60mm and Oly 75mm (or even just the Oly 12-100m for that matter) as all your primes since you usually don't shoot wide open, but where's the fun in that  I could be wrong though, but I'm really looking forward to getting that new PL 12-60mm to replace my 12-35mm Fischer Price lens, which btw is a really good lens for what it is. 

In my opinion the new breed of super fast lenses from Panny and Oly are best suited for still photographers who wants shallow DOF. It's just so difficult to get the focus right at f/1.2 / f/1.4 and if Shane Hurlbut's test is anything to go by they perform noticeably better when stopped down a little. I love my Nocticron lens and the PL 12mm, but in my experience getting the lighting, exposure, framing and WB right is far more important than having a better/faster/sharper lens. In other words, I more often let my gear down than otherwise.

I agree that the Fuji 90mm looks great (the 25mm too), but it is really better than the Oly 75mm? I don't know, maybe I need a bigger monitor than my 15" MBP mid 2014 to see it...

Really appreciate the tests though, keep em coming!