All Activity

Only Lexar cards, those approved by Panasonic.

Been on the look out for a yellow lens for awhile now. Some one said something down in the lens thread a while ago about a yellow lens , that got me thinking... Also i know there's two trains of thought with with photography / videography either do it in camera or do it in post. In most ways i like the in camera theory. Seems more authentic to me to do it in camera or more personal / intentional perhaps. In post seems more like an after thought to my way of thinking. Not wanting to rock any ones boat and if you like to do things in post that's great, please continue. Anyway finally decided on a lens, a super takumar 35mm f2. Should be a thorium lens from what i have read. So probably best, not to sleep with it under the pillow. I purchased this lens mostly with the intent of adding some warmness to an image / video. Not sure if the result will be a yellow or more sepia effect. There's a couple of images for your perusal. Should arrive before my birthday i hope.

I should add that I will NOT be shooting raw but 7.2k 30p open gate Vlog when I do get to using for video. Raw I think is just a step too far for me and as my other 3 cameras do not support it, no point.

Eek. Well mine is coming used from MPB so maybe it's one that you sent back 🤪 I'll see how it goes but for me it's really intended as a 'secondary/occasional' use lens, almost exclusively outdoors in good light. I'm still not 100% I even need it but as I transition over to fully L Mount, it fills a gap. For now... What cards are you running? I have an older Prograde 256GB 1700 MB/s CF Express and a Prograde 256GB 250 MB/s card that I was using in the old S1R. For my next 2 jobs, (5 days in a row from this Friday), I will only have these for the S1Rii on it's first two outings and will ONLY be shooting stills, so these should be fine.\ But beyond that, from mid Aug, I will start shooting hybrid and as I have to invest in some new cards, it would be a good idea to get something 'approved' just to help minimise any potential overheating. I'm also trying to do the math on what size cards as it's generally cheaper to buy more smaller cards than less big (capacity) cards...

Just to understand, are the shadows maxed out SOOC because you're underexposing to get the highlights looking better on the screen? It sounds like it could be weird interaction between the Ninja and the Olympus. I never experienced anything like that with the Ninja on a Fuji or a Z Cam. And I'm pretty sure I used the PQ look most of the time when monitoring - but I've since sold my Ninjas and switched over to Video Assist.

So, how is everyone monitoring ProRes RAW video accurately? On my Olympus OM-1, I get highlights on the Ninja V monitor blown out by about 3.5 stops, but they're easily recoverable in post. I tried creating an LUT to pull back the exposure on the monitor, but all it did was lower the white point while keeping things looking clipped. I've seen the internal PQ LUT mentioned as a solution for RAW monitoring, but it still heavily clips the highlights while making everything else punchier. My biggest issue here is that the shadows are maxed out SOOC. Meaning there's absolutely nothing left to recover in them, and they're noisy as it is, so this isn't close to an ideal situation. I'm viewing the bottom 1/2 of the dynamic range, presented as a normal exposure. Having that extra 3.5 stops of highlights back would help a LOT, both in maintaining my sanity in terms of knowing what's actually clipping (even zebras can't see the extra 3.5 stops), and requiring a lot less/no post NR by letting me drop the exposure to something normal.

I did some research some time ago from what i have read raynox are the wide angle adapter of choice. If you are keen to go further maybe do a little of your own research.

The 28-200mm has quite a wide sample variation in terms of sharpness and uniformity. I had to buy two before I had a good one. What I like about it is the size and weight, for such a nice range in full frame it's tiny. The optical stabilisation is also very good, especially in video mode - which is super-useful for cameras like the Sigma Fp that lack IBIS. An alternative (although I haven't tried it personally) on Sony/Nikon is the Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6. Faster, but heavier and longer. No OIS, but cheaper.

Has anyone noticed with some of the biggest tech reviewers on youtube like Hardware Unboxed or MKHB, there's a trend at the moment for deadpan anti-hype style reviews. Be careful with that as well, it's a style-change to counteract the falling viewing figures caused by them overhyping everything every day for the past god-knows how many years, as people catch onto it and get bored of it.

An update on my testing. I was thinking about what I wanted - something low quality in the optical path to dirty up the image a bit, and then it struck me - what I want is a cheap wide angle adapter! Then I remembered I had bought one years ago and went and found it and gave it a go. It's too small for most of my lenses (it's 52mm but most of my lenses are 58mm) but is a cheap 0.45x wide angle adapter so I shot some quick tests. Here are some direct with/without comparisons to give an idea of what does. These are all SOOC so ignore the incorrect WB settings and mismatched exposures etc. All lenses are wide open. GX85 + 14mm F2.5 without adapter: GX85 + 14mm F2.5 WITH adapter: Very interesting and definitely makes the image wider. If I use a zoom then I can match the framing and we can get a more direct comparison. GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at 12mm without adapter: GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at ~18mm WITH adapter: GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at ~25mm without adapter: GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at 35mm WITH adapter: Very interesting results and in the direction I'm going for. As a proof of concept it definitely has promise, but I'd need to buy one correctly sized of course. BUT, then I put it on the TTartisans 50mm F1.2 and fully wide open (of course!) basically all hell breaks loose! GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 without adapter: GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 WITH adapter: It's obviously not rated for F1.2 lenses!! The bokeh is also heavily modified too, which the above images hint at, but check this out.... GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 without adapter: GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 WITH adapter: These are the sorts of things you can't do with plugins, so this is what I'd be chasing real optics to do. However, the most interesting thing about a wide angle adapter is that it's basically a speed booster, so you get more light into the lenses and you also get a wider angle of view, which means that to get the same angle of view with the adapter you can use longer lenses, which can give shallower DOF for a given f-stop. Double bonus for MFT! So, I ordered the cheapest 58mm wide angle adapter I could find, and ordered the cheapest vND I could find to fit it (as the fronts are larger than the rear which makes it larger than my good vND. Oh yeah, and I also watched a bunch of reviews of anamorphic adapters and after seeing the prices (wow!) I just ordered a Sirui 1.25x anamorphic adapter, which is the cheapest of the bunch by a long shot. I'm not really that interested in the streaks but the softening and edge distortions should be great, and it's also like a horizontal-only speed booster so will let me use longer lenses for the same FOV.

Interesting video, and I guess it really shows what can and cannot be done in post. I have played with the AI depth mapping in Resolve in the past (maybe v18 or v19 but not v20) and I found that it was worse than the iPhone portrait mode, so wasn't really usable in most uncontrolled situations. I suspect it will eventually get good enough to use, but I don't think that will happen that quickly. The rest of the effects are already doable in Resolve if you're willing to do them the manual way with power-windows and plugins, but this tool is probably worth it if you wanted to do it fast or if you wanted a specific aesthetic. Interesting demo though, and for what it does it seems pretty good. No, I just went and looked and while both the 55mm F1.8 and also the Mir-1B next to it have some yellowing, with the Takumar having more than the Mir, my Tak 35mm F3.5 doesn't appear to have any. However, be mindful that it's pretty easy to get rid of any yellowing in these lenses (IIRC even by just leaving the lens in the sun for a while) so mine might simply have been treated.

It's exceedingly rare that a client will ask for an aesthetic that allows me to dust off my vintage lenses. And on the passion project side, I've shot four of five of my last narrative shorts with Canon zooms. The next one will be with a Canon zoom as well. That decision was based on speed, convenience, and the fact that I trust modern AF much more than a friend who has been given an hour of instruction on pulling focus, changing lenses, and calibrating motors. Of course, I'd rather have a professional 1st AC and some more interesting lenses. But there aren't that many of them around anymore (at least not in my market) and the pros that we do have usually don't want to cut their rates to work on a no-budget film. It's the same reason that I sold my RED cameras. They just weren't getting any use.

kye does your takumar 35mm f3.5 have any yellowing ? the reason i ask is I'm looking at 35mm takumars for that reason (thorium lenses i believe) rather than doing it in post. It will probably end up a one trick pony however i think i can live with that. Is that a client constraint ?

I always enjoy your posts, Kye. Threads like this are keeping this forum alive. This new Resolve plugin seems relevant to the discussion. I just downloaded a copy of this last night and had a play. It can't really affect bokeh much without a depth map (as shown, you can have AI generate one for you in Resolve), but even without it, the other characteristics can help create a unique aesthetic. It's a handy tool to have for those projects that won't allow for real vintage glass to be used -- which at least for me, seems to be most of them these days.

I can't imagine having to shoot raw for a feature documentary as opposed to h264/h265. I can't be filling up 4 terabytes a day for weeks or months or years of shooting. I guess when these codecs were the best internal codecs on offer (GH5, S1, S1H, S5) Panasonic put more effort into perfecting them.

I suspect that's because the in-camera LUT is processing the video before it's compressed, but in post you are working video after compression (which is likely to have reduced or smoothed over some detail, depending on picture content and bitrates).

There is a time for a clean aesthetic. There is a time for a more timeless more filmic aesthetic. There are times for a far grittier aesthetic too. Those who have been following my other thread will know I've mostly got my travel / walk-around AF setup nailed. (GH7 and GX85 bodies combined with the 14-140mm zoom, 12-35mm F2.8 zoom, 9mm F1.7, and 14mm F2.5 pancake lens) This setup will give a relatively clean starting point which can be graded to create a pretty wide range of looks. However, not everything can be achieved in post. I have also collected a bunch of modern MF lenses and vintage lenses over the years and these might be useful in creating other looks that I can't do in post with the above kit. So I'm trying to work out if I should just archive them or if they're still good for anything I want to do, and if so, what might that be? I've looked through my continually growing collection of lens comparisons, but found nothing conclusive. Thus begins a moderately sized lens / camera test... The setups included in the test are below. The details in brackets are the FF equivalents. OG BMPCC + 12-35mm F2.8 (35-100mm F8.0) This setup is included as I think it will be a reference for the rest of the setups (at worst) and might end up becoming part of my standard kit (at best). GF3 + 15mm F8 (30mm F16) This setup is included as it's essentially a modern Super-8mm camera, and considering it is absolutely tiny and takes the same batteries as the GX85 it's almost inconsequential to bring on a trip. GX85 with: Modern: Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 (24-70mm F5.6) Modern: Panasonic 14mm F2.5 (28mm F5) Modern: Panasonic 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 (28-84mm F7.0-11.2) Modern MF: TTartisans 17mm F1.4 (34mm F2.8) Vintage: Cosmicar 12.5mm F1.9 SB (36mm F5.5) Modern MF: Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 (35mm F1.9) Vintage: SB + Yashica 28mm F2.8 (40mm F4.0) Vintage: SB + Tokina 28-70mm F3.5-4.5 (40-100mm F5.0-6.4) Vintage: SB + Takumar 35mm F3.5 (50mm F5) Vintage: SB + Mir-1B 37mm F2.8 (53mm F4) Vintage: SB + Takumar 55mm F1.8 (78mm F2.6) Vintage: SB + Helios 44M 58mm F2.0 (82mm F2.8) Modern MF: Voigtländer 42.5mm f0.95 (85mm F1.9) Modern MF: TTartisans 50mm f1.2 (100mm F2.4) I haven't included all my lenses, but the ones I have omitted have been included in other tests previously and are broadly similar to ones I have included, so if they become interesting as a result of this test I have some more reference materials. I watched a doco on Netflix the other day called Attack on London, and was really inspired by the look of the 'recreation' images they have obviously filmed for the doc, and seem to have used one of the filthiest anamorphic lenses around (and potentially added more dirt in post as well). Here are some screenshots.. These might not have been streamed at the highest bitrate available, but I don't care - they look great and have so much texture and feel. This isn't the exact aesthetic I'm going for, but it's one that I saw recently that has a lot of texture and FEEL. My hope is to work out what the ingredients are to getting this kind of feel and then work out when I would want it and then work backwards to what equipment and processes I'd use to get it. My initial impressions (guesses) are that the ingredients are: shallower DoF lower levels of sharpness decent amounts of grain film colours (especially having a tint and having subtractive sat) The above images have more elements to them than this, but I don't care much for things like CA etc, so I don't think they're part of the minimum required elements. I plan to shoot comparisons with the setups above in a range of different scenarios and then see what I can see, before moving onto the post workflows and what role those play.

18 hadn't changed as far as i remember. i suspected 19 or 20. i skipped 19 got 20 and things has changed... took a bit to figure it out. I also bought one of these on prime day, had it in the cart, was hoping it would come on sale and it did. Saved $20, so worthwhile waiting the extra week or so.

Nice images! I feel like you've absolutely nailed the core concept - it's about capturing "the way they felt at the time". This is where the pixel peeing leads the creativity astray, it's not about capturing the way it appeared at the time, it's the way it felt at the time.

It's been a while since I've been able to work on any kind of movie, but here are some recent landscapes photos. I'm not doing anything artistic, just trying to capture some of my favorite places the way they felt at the time. The only edits are very slight changes to saturation and exposure. 90% of my photos are from 10+ mile hikes so I only bring my lightweight 28mm and a CPL, but in this group is a rare photo taken from the roadside using a 24-105.

Good to know. This is not going to be a ‘workhorse’ lens for me, but rather something to ‘fill in holes’ if you know what I mean and much more for photo than video and especially as a walk around one stop shop landscape lens. Yes I think it will work very well. I considered the 70-300 but decided I wasn’t really gaining anything over the 70-200 I already have except a less good lens. Also the Samyang 35-150 but I’d need (want) the battery grip for that and were back into big boy territory and no thanks. 28 and 40 are my to ‘go to’ focal lengths below 50 that I prefer to work with. They have a certain kind of look and especially with 28, it’s about as wide as you can go before any distortion begins to appear. So yes, ultimately and as soon as possible, I do want this lens because it ticks every single box I have below 50mm. Exactly why I chose it over the f2.8. Optically it’s very good and it’s actually OK in low light. And I think it’s slightly lighter even than the 28-45 Sigma?! Real world about the same but about as big and heavy as I prefer to go. I think so. Pretty confident that it will comfortably replace the A7RV and Zf, both cameras I love. The combo of glass, slightly less but I am going from 3 different mounts/brands to 1 single and that is a big deal plus 1 less body and 3 less lenses. It’s a good decision. I’ll find out next week when I am using it, but today (I’m on a job) back to the Sonykon’s!

The "I'M DONE" in the end was the chef's kiss.

Liked the lens, probably will get that in the future. Probably the casualties on my side will be the two Nocticrons, the 35mm and 50mm. Lovely and cute little lenses, but I almost do not use them - this year I probably only used the 18-50mm f/2.8 zoom and the Viltrox 75mm 1.2.

The 28-200mm is a good lens. I tried two samples, both performed the same. Acceptably sharp wide open between 28mm and 40mm. A bit soft wide open between 50mm and 150mm and very soft wide open at 200mm. But increasing the aperture just by one stop make the lens much sharper and the lens is very good at 200mm f8. It's a very good compromis because when you look at by example the 12-60mm PL I also own, the 28-200mm is a 14-100 f2-f3.5 equivalent in M43. Even when stopped down to be as sharp at a good copy of the 12-60mm PL, the 28-200mm can do the equivalent of 14mm F2, 25mm f2.8, 50mm f3.5 and 100mm f4 while being sharp. You loose the 24mm wide angle but I think it's a good trade for most use. My only issue with this lens is it makes sometimes a short but loud motor noise and vibration (about 2s) when using it in video with the S1 and S5. No issue with the S5II, S1II and S1RII. If you like lenses with high contrast and good color rendering, the 28-45mm is really excellent. Mine is very sharp at 28mm and extremely sharp at 35mm and 45mm even wide open. The focal range can feel somewhat limited but there is no better 28mm on L mount except the overpriced 28mm APO Summicron. The 70-200mm S Pro f4 looks good to pair with the 28-200mm indeed, I have the 70-200mm S Pro f2.8 and while it's a sharp lens with pretty good rendering, the size is an issue, at least for me. Yes and I think you will appreciate the S1RII. Like I don't record a lot of fast motion, I begin to think I could sell my S1II as the S1RII is easier for me to work, I can get good detail rendering from the H265 8K files whereas I need to shoot almost exclusively in Prores Raw on the S1II because I don't like the weird detail processing on the H265 or Prores files out of this camera.

That 28-45mm is a very nice lens.. This guy was using the S1II but using the sigma 28-45mm 1.8 lens