Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Today
  2. My friend takes stills of his family holidays and has an ancient relic (IIRC it's a Canon 30D?) that he would always take with him. He is a minimalist and was sick of hauling it around so did his first overseas trip without it and used his iPhone 5 (current at the time). He took a bunch of photos on the trip, but when I asked him about it his thinking wasn't clear. On his next trip he took an updated iPhone (maybe an 8?) and took lots of photos again, but still didn't have clear thinking about it. It was only several years later that he had a good reply, he said "The photos look fine but I realised that I never felt compelled to print and hang any of the photos from it". He still can't define what it is, but something is missing for him. I've looked at the prints he's got hanging in his house and the difference isn't obvious - it's not like his prints have shallow DOF or anything, they just have this timeless sort of look about them, and his iPhone pics all look like iPhone pics (unsurprisingly). Even the RAW stills from my GF3 from 2011 don't look like iPhone pics, even the current ones. It might be a matter of blurring the iPhone images a bit, and toning down the strong saturation and contrast, who knows, but maybe they'll get over that hurdle soon. Maybe they already have - I still have an iPhone 12 mini and don't use the stills in my creative work. TBH it's probably the "everything is awesome!!" processing that Apple do to their images. Maybe the RAW images off the sensor are fine.
  3. I own the original version of that 14-42mm kit lens, but I also own the 12-35mm f2.8 lens, and it's only larger at full extension by about the thickness of a lens filter and is slightly fatter, but it's also 1-2 stops faster, which matters on these single ISO MFT cameras if you're walking around at night. In reviewing my footage from previous trips I concluded that in reasonably well lit exteriors (like outdoor shopping malls) my main iPhone 12 camera is fine (it's got similar noise to GX85/GH5 with a F2.8 lens) but the iPhone 12 wide rear camera has the noise performance of the GX85/GH5 with an F8 lens, and the footage was so noisy it was hard for me to use on my home video edit. So if I'm going to potentially be in less-well-lit interiors or anywhere at night, I'd appreciate the F2.8, and with the GX85 you can always crop in post on a 1080p timeline to get the slight extra reach. I haven't really had an issue with the internal audio of the GX85, but I mostly use the camera audio as ambience and have music over the top. Of course now we have these AI tools in post it's easy enough to clean up a voice if someone says something I want to put in the final edit. If you haven't seen them, they're absolutely stunning. A mic input changes everything, of course, including radically altering the camera size and conspicuousness, unless you are running a lav to it, but even then, having even "a touch of the Borg" attracts attention. The general public are very vigilant against assimilation - oddly even including those that never watched Star Trek. I definitely agree that the 14-140mm would make a great option. I only do a few trips a year and so think carefully in preparation for them. My current thinking is this: Full tourist mode is the GX85 and OG BM camera setup, and is where I don't care about weight and want the ultimate options: GX85 + 14-140mm for walking-around during the day GX85 + 12-35mm for walking-around well-lit places at night GX85 + primes for less-well-lit places at night BM for high-DR situations where I have time to manually expose and shoot (lookouts at sunset, for example.. these are strangely frequent on my holidays 🙂 ) Equipment: GX85 + 14-140mm P2K or M2K with 12-35mm F2.8 Primes: 7.5mm F2, 14mm F2.5, 17mm F1.4, 58mm F2 with SB This all fits into a camera insert inside a generic backpack Stealth tourist mode is the GX85 and is where I want to be stealthy and shoot quickly: GX85 + 14-140mm for walking-around during the day GX85 + 12-35mm for walking-around well-lit places at night This fits into a sling bag, which are now fashionable, how convenient! Non-tourist mode is the GX85 and 12-32mm zoom (and maybe the 14mm F2.5 if it'll get dark) slipped into a jacket pocket. If I'm travelling this is what I would take if I was leaving the hotel but didn't want to take a bag. I don't own the 14-140mm or 12-32mm lenses currently, but assuming my thinking doesn't change in the interim, I'll buy these in preparation for our next trip. I ended up shooting a lot with the GX85 and 14mm F2.5 in South Korea (almost exactly a year ago) and got a lot of great shots with the combo, and I really liked the size even though I took a backpack almost everywhere due to being in full tourist mode. I've shared some images from this combo before in other threads but happy to re-post if you haven't seen them.
  4. If you're not so bothered about the lens length when the camera is off, I'd seriously consider the non-pancake 14-42mm 'Mk ii' kit lens (the H-FS1442A, in the 3rd photo). The change in length over the zoom range is only about 10mm, it's got proper zoom and focus rings, supports dual-IS (with FW 1.1 installed) and is cheap used. Yes it's quite hard to beat the combination of size, performance and flexibility the GX85 (or GX9) offers. Main reason I bought a ZV-1 was to get a compact camera with better audio - versus the GX85 it has much better sound quality from the on-board mics plus a 3.5mm mic input. But otherwise the GX85 is nicer to use, and paired with say the Pana 14-140mm becomes super-zoom travel cam, which is smaller than 1" sensor cams like the FZ1000/FZ2000/RX10. Which is the main reason I still own one...
  5. Yup. Had my fingers (wallet) burned over a revolutionary tripod I backed. I can't remember how long the saga went on for, but it was at least 3 years and painful for all involved. Never again! But in regard to this product, maybe I am just not the market, but nah, I'd rather go with any number of alternative existing options or my phone. Surely this kind of thing these days is so niche it's near pointless? But what do I know...
  6. I have flip flopped so many times over the last...well, 6-7 years at least, between the best camera I have on me, ie, my phone and any/everything else. I always feel a little disappointed not so much with the end result, but the quality of the end result using the phone but even more, a little guilty as a full-time pro photographer, I am using such a thing in the first place. At the same time, our annual photo books have suffered by not having an 'ECD' compact camera. I was thinking/hoping that my recently acquired Nikon ZF might fulfil this role, but the reality is, it's too big, even with a small lens. It really is a decision to 'take a camera' whereas there is that 'magic' size which if you do not go above, removes the question and you just stick it in your pocket as you walk out the door because it actually does fit in your pocket. I also appreciate the flexibility of a zoom, but prefer that purity of a fixed lens. The X100 series are all too big for this IMO. I love them, but not pocketable at all other than a jacket and my definition of pocket is a jeans trouser/pants pocket, so it's out. Had the Sony ZX1 and RX100v and both great, but just a little too 'fiddly'. I keep circling back to the GR3x as I have done since it came out as the 'sweet spot' in everything really, ie, 'big' sensor in a tiny body at my most used focal length and one for the purpose I have the requirement for. But not this year... Just bought the final piece of the puzzle (a lens) for my work needs and it's a pretty tight year financially with an extra large tax bill plus a re-roofing the house job which combined are sucking up every bit of excess cash. And then some. So maybe next year. Or by then, my iPhone 13 Pro might need replacing and some of the latest, never mind future, multi-lens phones could sway me...
  7. kye

    Lenses

    That X-factor that some cameras have is equally baffling and also completely compelling..... I understand / sympathise! Wider than 15mm in a manual lens is definitely a struggle. What is the crop factor of the EOS-M 1:1 mode you're using? There are a plethora of vintage and new c-mount lenses all over eBay but the trick is to understand the size of the image circle they project and the size you need. The OG BM cameras had a crop factor of 2.88, which was quite large in the world of c-mount compared to the CCTV applications, I have spent many an hour searching eBay item-by-item googling each one to find the size of the image circle - normally to reject every lens I could afford and then just spiralling off to search in reverse-price-order and watch videos of the Angenieux lenses that are sitting there for sale for the price of a newish car. Meteor made a few lenses, some starting at 17mm and others at 22mm IIRC, but I'm no expert on their history. They were made in quantity so are accessible and I don't think people really knew about them when S16 was in-demand so they're priced reasonably. Also, most of the lens tests I've seen show that they're super-soft and vintage, but there are a few on YT where the images are super-sharp and clean, so I'm not sure if some copies are bad, or if most of the people testing them don't know what they're doing, or if most testers wanted that heavy vintage look, or if they simply uploaded them in 720p at pathetic bitrates because no-one knew how YT compression worked back then. TBH, most of the videos with these vintage lenses are either by people that don't know anything about anything, or they're by people who want the vintage look and so are pushing the quality to be as crap as possible and not showing the capabilities of the equipment. It shits me that most of the OG BMPCC tests are like this - people don't take the time to show the potential.
  8. I took my GF3 around Europe and into the US and shot using only the kit lens and the 14/2.5, mostly on full-auto, and with RAW images I was basically never disappointed. The only thing that I missed was the look of Canon colour science, so I bought a 700D after that and really liked the images from it, but the additional size would have made me question if I would take it travelling. The best images I took were enabled almost exclusively because I was shooting fast, thinking creatively, and going mostly un-noticed - which are all direct results of having a small automatic camera. When I was first learning video I was absolutely stunned by how fragile and, frankly, crap the video from mega-dollar prosumer cameras was in comparison to the RAW still images from an ultra-budget pocket camera. If I was still shooting stills I would have on from discussing equipment probably a decade ago.
  9. Yeah, phones are getting really good now, with RAW and Prores and Apple Log and recording to SSDs. The thing I think is missing is a wide-angle selfie camera. Trying to film yourself using an ultra-wide but without being able to see yourself is possible but hitting record, then turning the phone around, and shooting while presenting a bright image of the frame to everyone around you is strange and awkward on almost all levels! I don't know if the diopters for action cameras also have NDs. They might, considering that a diopter is as technical/geeky as an ND would be, but action cameras are practically designed inside and out to have a short shutter, so it kind of goes against the whole ethos in a way.
  10. Haha. The line! I know. It's so hard to stay on the right side. I'll admit that I've slipped a little and in a moment of weakness, I purchased a $50 point-and-shoot as an every day carry (big mistake; I was quickly reminded that I just can't get excited about cameras without a substantial grip). But other than that, I've been very disciplined these past four months. My interest in c-mount lenses revolves around the EOS-M. I enjoy the combination of 16mm glass with this little camera in 1:1 crop. There is an aesthetic there that is more interesting to me than anything I've been able to get from my S35 and FF cameras. My theory is that sampling from a smaller piece of the sensor in combination with tiny glass throws out enough detail and in turn, brings some mystery/intrigue/engagement to the footage that is missing from most digital S35+ footage. And this is coming from someone who ignored c-mount lenses until 3-4 years ago; I didn't see the point. Before my self-imposed embargo, I decided to put together the most economical raw-shooting camera package that I could possibly think of. I got there with the M and three Cosmicar c-mount lenses (I also have a set of three Kern Switars, but they were significantly more expensive). Working with such a lightweight, low-cost kit and yet fully functional kit is freeing. What I'm missing (though, not really) is an inexpensive zoom lens that can go wider than 15mm, but most have that ugly track that I can't get past. However, the Meteor is an intriguing lens. And they are still quite affordable. I think I can say that rigged up, the EOS-M/c-mount combo makes me want to get out there and shoot more than any of the other 30+ cameras I've owned (other than maybe my beloved FZ47). It's way more fun than any other cine cameras that I can think of. If I get a couple of nice shots with it, or I am able to crop in a little further in-camera to eliminate some vignetting on an otherwise overlooked lens, I feel like I'm breaking the rules. It offers just the right amount of limitation, which I find to be inspiring.
  11. Or ANY camera you will just either pick up more or even have with you at all times ie, ‘EDC’. Which is why something like the Fuji X100 series or Ricoh GR are just so popular, - big quality out of a small package, but perhaps more importantly, fun to have and use. On that note, the Ricoh GR3x is ticking the most boxes for me right now based on only really interested in stills only, pocket-ability and love the 40mm focal length.
  12. You assume correctly. Yeah, I'm not saying in any way that it's perfect or that I don't get why a lot of people prefer a wider angle. It's why Sony came out with the ZV1 II - I just wish they hadn't taken a note from Canon and taken away a useful feature for every other useful feature that they added. The next time I buy a new iPhone (probably when the new one is announced later this year), it might even remover that use of the ZV1 for me since the newer ones can apparently record to an SSD now. I assume that there are also close-up diopters for those action cameras that also feature ND? One of the reasons that I shy away form using any of my action cameras for that kind of thing is that it's annoying to have to remember all of the necessary accessories and it's a bit fussy to have to put them on/take them off when the light changes (e.g. when walking into a building). With the ZV1, I just push a button and an ND filter pops into place. 🙂 Also, even if I were still regularly vlogging, I definitely wouldn't be trying to do it at the Vatican. When traveling abroad these days, I pretty much bring the GFX 100 II and a few lenses (and maybe a DJI Mini 3, depending on where)... and maybe a film camera, depending.
  13. Lurking these boards these cold days over here since I unfortunately had the loss of my life... one's of very own* mourning path, last month* : ( ...it's rewarding to see that our posts from more or less recent past don't go away so unnoticeable at least over here, after all: Just to give my regards @kye and to the rest of the gang :- ) *in Portuguese
  14. kye

    Lenses

    Window shopping is technically allowed, but you've walked right up to the line my friend, so don't lose balance or focus!! The lens(es) that come immediately to mind are the Meteor zooms from the USSR.. They have clean bokeh (linked to timestamp): They're m42 mount, but can be adapted easily: https://fotodioxpro.com/products/m42-c-p-v2 Do you want them to be specifically c-mount? Why? (I'm curious) I'd imagine that adapting FF or S35 lenses would be much more fruitful? My impression of c-mount zooms is that most are 15-22mm on the wide end, which is pretty easy to replicate with FF or S35 manual zooms if you can get a speed booster in the stack. I got a manual RMC Tokina 28-70mm F3.5-4.5 in m42 mount that combined with my m42-m43 speed booster gives me 20-50mm equivalent, and a nice vintage vibe without being too mangled (so it's the optical quality of a high-end c-mount zoom from back in the day). What camera is this for?
  15. Thanks for sharing those pics, that's useful. Here is a rough estimate for each camera then.. estimating from your pics and from the images I compiled: GX85 with pancake lens - 12cm wide x 10-12cm long GX850 with pancake lens - 11cm wide x 9-11cm long ZV-1 - 11cm wide x 10cm long LX10 - 11cm wide x 9cm long Interesting that the GX85 with 2.6-3x zoom lens is only 2-3cm longer than the LX10, which is the smallest of the bunch, despite the fact that the GX85 has a much larger sensor and has IBIS and an EVF. Considering that the size while off doesn't matter to me that much and that the stabilisation is so critical, the fact I can get Dual IS on the 12-32mm really makes a difference when doing walking shots, which is a lot of the shots I take. Even if I add the 12-35mm F2.8 lens, the GX85 only grows to 10cm at the wide end and 14cm at the long end, including the body, so although the lens is hugely fatter, it's not much larger and might even look less like a telephoto to causal bystanders (and might even look older / less modern and therefore less threatening because it's fatter). I think I'm talking myself out of wanting an LX10 or GX850. I did really like the auto-everything / no-controls-just-shoot-creatively aspect of my GF3 though, so the GX850 would provide that same experience but with dramatically higher resolution images. It's a different kind of shooting really, maybe that's how I should look at it. I watched this yesterday and was absolutely stunned at how great it was - you can tell the guy is a professional cinematographer.. still, many of the images could be captured at 90-95% with a small camera. The more I see edits like this, the more I am reminded it's about composition and lighting and (in the absence of skill like the above) just shooting more so that you have a greater chance of getting lucky. I guess that's potentially a theme for this whole thread. Smaller camera = shooting more = more options and more variety = more options in the edit = better edits.
  16. Yesterday
  17. Cool you have a setup that works for you. I guess the thing that I noticed with the different focal lengths was that you needed the width to make it look like you weren't holding a camera. I assume this angle is the ZV-1 on the handle? Whereas this is a GoPro on a similar handle: It just doesn't have that same "I'm holding you as far away from me as I can!!" sort of vibe 🙂 I do recall parts of Asia also having signs up that said "No selfie sticks", as well as places like the Vatican IIRC? The Vatican also doesn't allow tripods either, so not sure how the handle would go if it splits into legs. Make Art Now also got a reasonable frame with the Insta360 Ace Pro by putting a diopter on it to shorten the focal distance: But, in the end, it's what's in front of the camera that matters 🙂
  18. That's all pretty reasonable. Though at least for me, the ZV-1 works well at its widest - partly since I don't often want to film myself in extremely crowded situations. I have a mount on my dashboard with a 1/4x20 (it's on a little t-track that is made for the mounting points on a Jeep) where I can use it to film myself while driving (nearly the perfect focal length for this) and then since I'm usually going out to the middle of nowhere, there's really nobody to care that I'm there. When I put the ZV-1 on the little Sony bluetooth handle, it puts it just about 4-5 inches further from me which works out well enough for a head & shoulders shot (which is still tighter than a lot of the kids prefer, but I like it). This is an example - most of the "vlog" parts were with ZV-1 - either dash-mounted or on the handle. I think the car-mounted cameras were a Hero 9 and an Insta360 One R with 1" mod. Just about everything else including the silly thing with the Racetrack rocks at the end was on the original GFX 100. About the only thing that I'd change would be for the handle to be about 2-3" longer, to have the internal ND on the camera be another stop stronger, and for the lens OIS to be a bit better for bumpy roads (Jeeps, by design, have pretty stiff suspensions). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faS2uFTCZBM
  19. Can anyone recommend any non-cinema c-mount zooms without the little dips caused by the internal runners when wide open? So far, I've only heard of two: Canon V10X15 15-150 f2.8 Cosmicar 22.5-90 f1.5 I'm still trying to make this a "no gear year", but that doesn't mean I can't look!
  20. I think Pana versus Oly/OMDS lenses having zoom rings that operate in opposite directions is really annoying... Anyway, here are pics of the Pana 12-32, 14-42 PZ, 14-42 kit and Oly 14-42 EZ on my GX80 (all with filters on the front), with the zoom set to give maximum lens length (which was max wide on the Pana and max tele on the Oly - minimum lens length was in the mid zoom range). Also the ZV-1 set to maximum lens length, and a GX80+Oly14-42 and ZV-1 side-by-side. Note the 10cm mark on the ruler is approx. aligned to the front of the body, so the all the lens lengths are between 55mm and 60mm i.e. around the same... (The ZV-1 has a JJC filter adaptor stuck to the front of the lens tube - https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07GWQ6CXL )
  21. I agree that the only usable MF (focus while filming) is on the Olympus 14-42 EZ, but no OIS as you said. The Panasonic 14-42 PZ is the next best with a silly MF lever. I've had all three lenses though and never thought of trying to manual focus one after the other- could be an interesting comparison.
  22. I've got the Pana 12-32, 14-42 (non-pancake) and 14-42 PZ lenses, plus the Oly 14-42 EZ (power zoom) lens. No LX10 (or GX800 anymore), but my ZV-1 might be an interesting size comparison. I'll take some photos of the extended lenses on my GX80 with a ruler alongside. Note that of the pancake lenses, only the Oly has a focus ring, but it doesn't have any OIS - swings and roundabouts...
  23. When I was first getting into video I experimented with a selfie angle, but eventually realised that the videos I wanted to make didn't need it. What I learned though was: You need a super-wide angle lens, unless: - you want to be walking around with your arm extended almost the whole way, which is tiring, impractical in more crowded situations, and attracts a huge amount of attention - you want to be walking around with a camera on a stick, which has the same challenges in crowds and attracting attention - you are fine with the frame just being of your head and nothing else You don't actually need a selfie-screen You can just get used to the framing and if you put yourself in the middle of the frame then the lens distortion is fine - millions of hours of vlogging footage was recorded on Sony FF cameras with 16-35mm lenses and no flippy-screen If I was vlogging as part of my videos I'd just get one of the action cameras with a half-decent audio input and customise it from there, potentially with a diopter to adjust the focus to be perfect for the right vlogging distance and throw the background out of focus a touch. I'd also just apply un-sharpening in post to improve the image quality by 20-40%.
  24. Just window shopping for tiny cameras (tiny-er than the GX85) and realised I don't really care that much about the size of the camera with the lens turned off, I care about the size when I'm waving it around actually shooting footage. Comparing the LX10 with GX850+12-32mm kit lens, I think the LX10 might be longer?? The zoom ratio is only 3.0 compared to 2.66 for the 12-32, so they're almost identical lenses too. Obviously, it's smaller when closed: BUT, the LX10 lens really really extends (at least for some of its zoom range)... and (as far as I can tell) the 12-32 doesn't extend nearly as much? These are the best images I could find of the lens extended: Also, the 14-42 doesn't look much larger either: Does anyone have all these bits and can give a more definite answer? If the incognito factor is important then it might be that the GX850 and 12-32mm might be better. In fact, the LX10 might not even have much of size advantage over the GX85 with the 12-32 lens, when both are fully extended... I got a direct size comparison image and superimposed the best quality images of the two lenses extended that I could fine (the lens images are transparent so you can see the overlays - the size match is almost perfect on both). Obviously lens extension isn't everything, but in use it's potentially a factor. Members of the public are aware that the longer the lens the more zoomed it is, so anyone who is uncomfortable with the idea of being filmed from a distance might really notice such a thing.
  25. If not for the challenges focusing/framing on the teeny tiny screen and lack of HDMI output (or wired connectivity to iPhone for video preview), I think my Backbone-modified Insta360 One R would be superior in almost every way (1" sensor, lots more frame rates/resolutions). It's too bad that wifi preview is laggy and that (at least the last time I checked), still pretty small since it won't rotate to landscape with the phone. But yeah, totally agreed that their main competition is action cameras. I'd also add used ZV1 ($450ish right now) and used RX100 V ($500ish) to the competitor list. I'd still use my ZV1 for vlogging stuff if I didn't have a backlog of unedited vlogs going back to 2020 or so. You can't swap the lens, but it's basically a 24-70 equiv. If people really want the 20mm of the wide for the micro, I guess they could get a used ZV1 II ($700) which has like an 18-50 equiv. lens (and better 3x ND filter), but has the minus of a slower and non-stabilized lens. For me, assuming the HDMI output is decent and not overly laggy (or the built-in screen is better than I'd expect), it'd be something I could mount on the back of some of my telephoto lenses to turn them into telescopes. 1/2.3" sensor + Leica R 250/4 = 1500mm equivalent lens. Or on the 560mm Telyt-R, a 3500mm (though since both lack any sort of stabilization, even on a heavy tripod with a sandbag, the slightest breeze will cause visible jitter) - and if any of the first-party lenses are better than the example images indicate, maybe they'd be a nice plus. 🙂
  26. What a fascinating project! I wish them well, but it's not exactly what I need. I do think there is a niche here, though. The competitors are: MFT - much larger in comparison Action cameras - either don't shoot in high enough bitrates or don't have a good / large enough front-facing camera or don't have the lens options Smartphones - some don't shoot in high enough bitrates but all(?) either have one focal length on the selfie-side that isn't very wide or have several on the rear but no selfie screen at all (or it's tiny) The challenge with such a system would be the crop factor and getting lenses at the wider end - it's hard enough for the S16 crop of the P2K and M2K, but this is much worse. Perhaps the competition is a smartphone plus an action camera with front-facing screen? Still not the best combo.
  27. Last week
  28. It looks to me like it was added in post as part of the grade, but obviously can't confirm that. Apparently it's the same sensor as the P4K, so until we get ISO tests I'd just assume that it's the same as that?
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...