All Activity

Thanks for sharing, might be the only lens that can compete with the first nikon 43-86 zoom😉 After some research, a little while ago, i got the 2nd edition? of the nikon 43-86mm. One odd thought later (like how bad could it be? ) and a first edition was on its way... easiest way to tell them apart is the first has the text on the inside of the filter ring from memory. The second gives a more pleasing image for the masses, the first is er... more subjective, dare i say it a specialist lens for particular projects. Now i guess i have to find the adapter to suit as its been awhile.

I'd go with Super Takumar, Nikkors, or Olympus OM. All have a good selection of 3.5 and 2.8 lenses that can be had cheap. I put together a cheaper Takumar set a few years ago and got great deals on some bundles with the 3.5 primes.

All the footage on this one (between approx 1 minute and 2 minutes 15 seconds) was shot on the Zeiss 40-80 f3.5 handheld. I programmed 2x custom settings for the IBIS on the S5ii, one at 40mm and the other for 80mm and then only shot at these focal lengths. I bottled it for the wedding day and went back to Sigma and Lumix AF lenses, but I am considering bringing this lens back as part of my workflow for these day prior and day after parts of a wedding where I am not under any real time constraints and can afford to be more 'creative'... https://firehorsephotographyfrance.com/weddings/jenniedan

Canon FD might do it - price might be an issue perhaps? Plenty of F3.5 or F4 lenses in the lineup, they focus the way you want, and you even get a choice of coatings (normal, S C, or S S C). Some of the slower ones are macro lenses too! https://cameraville.co/blog/list-every-canon-fd-lens-ever-made Zooms are also an excellent idea. An out of the box idea is to use faster lenses, but to keep the aperture wide open and cut a round hole in a lens cap and get the aperture you want that way. I'm not sure if this would reduce the DOF in the right way? It would definitely lower the exposure though, and would definitely keep the bokeh the shape you want.

Turns out I had the Makinon in a cupboard all along and will also give it a go. Some of these old zooms have terrible 1.5m+ minimum focus distances or rely on an awkward to engage separate macro mode, but some have the macro mode on the main focus ring and some are even par-focal. The Exakta 28-70mm F4 MC Macro (made in Japan with 62mm filter thread, and mine is an M42 mount version) in particular stands out for me, nice vintage look, nice size and weight, ergonomic to use, decent optics and distortion, covers GFX 100 well, especially in square 1:1 aspect for stills or 16:9 for video, and focuses down to 1:3.2 macro with one turn of the main focus ring (no funny separate mechanism to contend with). The best for flare is the absolutely pre-historic Voigtlander Zoomar 36-82mm F2.8, think it was the first ever zoom lens for SLRs, the distortion is absolutely insane at 82mm but if you stay between 36-70mm it has a lot of cinematic goodness.

lmfao

Inspired by this post, I tried to make some flares with the Makinon. Some were shot at f/16 and others f/3.5 with an ND filter. I shot in v-log and corrected for exposure and add the official Panasonic LUT.

I have the AR mount version. It's a decent lens by my eye. My copy has a trashed front thread and the rubber missing from the zoom ring- neither are a problem for me. I've seen them in K-mount too, but I'm not sure if there any differences. The fact that it has been used to oblivion is a good sign to me- somebody loved this lens to use it that much. Judging from this video and the video he shot entirely on it, I'd say there aren't any differences. I also have a Pentax 35-105 f/3.5 constant that belonged to my father, but it's almost impossible to use. There's just so much gear noise and you have to go into a full-macro mode to get somewhat close. Here's a video describing it:

if the camera is too small, the heat will affect the footage. this is why the footage of the alexa classic is better than those of later alexa mini etc.

all true hands on experience. the cmos battery dying is no big deal. get a cheap sd card, save the settings on this sd card, load the settings when needed.

i feel c300 og is more cinematic than c100 2. maybe the olpf on c300 og is better.

true

c300 og has very good low light, according to my test. have not tested c100 2 yet. c300 og noise pattern is organic, not disturbing. can go iso 25600 if the in camera denoise is maxed. can go iso 6400 if the denoise is standard.

i think c100 2 may be one of the best ergonomic cinema camera. i use it without the top handle. it is just like dslr with angled evf and swivel lcd and all hard buttons. with efs 18-135 or efs 10-18 stm is, handheld can have good enough stable footage, auto focus is good enough for general street scenes.

for human faces and skins, it is true wide dr is great. rarely need post cc. also 60p 1080p means you can do quick pan and tilt without blurring the footage.

resolution is enough with my mba m4, especially, those takes on wide angle rocky mountains. some shots missed the focus on the talent faces. if focusing right, the faces will be clear too. color is great. how much the latest crop can improve more on this 10 year old clip, not sure.

10 bit is more robust for color grading, from my hands on experience. however, c300 og and c100 mk ii have very good presets in camera. the need for post is minimal. if you use clog instead of baked in presets, then do minor cc is ok, dont expect heavy cc. but sensor wise, c cinema cameras have much better sensor operational ranges than mirrorless, even high end mirrorless.

I picked up the Nikkor after watching CP's review and doing some searching and seeing how many people described it as not only the worst lens Nikon ever made, but also possibly the worst zoom ever made. They might be right, but I'm sure I'll find the right time to use it someday. I'm not sure if this true of all of them, but mine also has the problem that when I put it on an EF adapter, the back of the aperture selector is so tight against the edge of the adapter that it can't even possibly be moved. I had to use a pliers to take it off to make sure I didn't do something wrong. Maybe there are other EF adapters that would work better, but for anything I'd use the Nikkor to shoot, I'm sure I'd want it wide open anyway. I'm looking forward to watching the video on the Makinon. I've not heard of that one before - and if it's still $30ish on eBay, I guess there's not a reason not to buy it.

I have tried a number of cheap/crap 28-80ish lenses on the GFX 100 and they all have a knack for covering the sensor perfectly if you zoom in past 35mm So the Makinon I am interested to hunt down in Berlin and try... The Nikon in theory has the perfect focal length for the GFX 100, but I am not sure I share our YouTube friend's enthusiasm for the flare... The Makinon was much nicer to my eye

f2.8 on M43 is kinda a sweet spot though, don't ya think? Are are you trying to Spielberg it?

That is all. Thanks for coming to my TED talk.

Sorry if it was already mentioned but the Canon R50V ($699USD) seems like a no brainer. But also depending on when you need to squeeze the trigger, Canon is rumored to be announcing a new Cinema cam with the R50V compact form-factor next month: https://www.canonrumors.com/canon-to-announce-new-compact-cinema-eos-camera/

Good luck. Manufacturers changed coatings every time they went to the bathroom. They were always getting tweaked. Granted, they often had similar looks. You can find some very unique f/3.5 constant zooms that will do the job. Some of them are sharp and cheap with magnificent and crazy flares. Here are some that I found interesting. I have the Makinon zoom lens.

https://www.techradar.com/cameras/drones/new-dji-mini-5-pro-leak-suggests-it-could-be-perfect-travel-drone-thanks-to-these-two-features