Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (22,438 visits to this link)
17,205 topics in this forum
-
- 9.1k replies
- 2.4m views
-
- 1.2k replies
- 407.4k views
-
- 0 replies
- 480 views
-
- 700 replies
- 277.4k views
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.7m views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 689.2k views
-
- 11 replies
- 550 views
-
- 543 replies
- 244.2k views
-
- 7 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 7 replies
- 300 views
-
- 78 replies
- 2.8k views
-
- 8 replies
- 552 views
-
- 5 replies
- 237 views
-
- 20 replies
- 713 views
-
- 66 replies
- 32.6k views
-
- 25 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 114 replies
- 52.6k views
-
- 8 replies
- 520 views
-
- 462 replies
- 108.6k views
-
- 25 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 3 replies
- 841 views
-
- 16 replies
- 781 views
-
- 63 replies
- 32.1k views
-
- 7 replies
- 619 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 10 replies
- 789 views
-
- 8 replies
- 583 views
-
- 3 replies
- 430 views
-
- 12 replies
- 812 views
-
- 0 replies
- 313 views
-
- 15 replies
- 8.4k views
-
- 103 replies
- 52.5k views
-
- 7 replies
- 498 views
-
- 6 replies
- 882 views
-
- 2 replies
- 504 views
-
- 5 replies
- 923 views
-
- 0 replies
- 327 views
-
- 20 replies
- 7.7k views
-
- 22 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 0 replies
- 398 views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.2k
-
Total Posts350.7k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
I get what you are saying though for sure. It's an artistic taste. I do still like it; i just find that you can get away with less, which is what I will end up getting with my 12-35 2.8 for example. It's a 5.6 full frame equiv. But I still think I can get enough to get by. And I get a nice tiny lens and dual IS. -
I still do like shallow DOF, but I've find even the equivelant of a full frame f4 for example is just fine.
-
I think sometimes on forums and YouRube comments sections, too many get jumped on for wanting fast lenses with the often false assumption it’s all about getting the most shallow DOF possible, but for many of us, that is not the primary driver which is low light capability, ie, without the picture turning into a muddy mushy mess. Personally, I do like a shallow(er) DOF, but then for me it’s not a fad but something I have preferred for 25+ pro years. But not the razor shallow f1.0 in bright sunlight shallowness that causes all kinds of issues, more some clear separation and modest background blur rather than obliterated any and all context. Focal length can also of course remove said context so it’s all about balance and intent. In good light, outdoors, nothing much in it really but it’s definitely easier/more options with full-frame for low light. I don’t have anything faster than f1.8 for primes and no issues with low light. -
Yeah I just figured why not embrace being on micro four thirds and use the small lenses I guess haha. But I DO need good lowlight for weddings and some concert stuff I do. G9II as Andrew said is good in lowlight. I rank it not bad. From my testing, if well-exposed then even ISO 12,800 is not too shabby all things considered. It does seem to revert back to contrast detect af at that high of an ISO though, or maybe that’s just V-log being b-log; I know log profiles in general aren’t always great with AF in lowlight. I may toy around with using cineD v2 in intense lowlight and running it through the same Davinci node tree I used to use with Nikon flat. Should still hold up better being 10 bit and I know to get a comparable exposure you don’t need to have as high of an ISO. I was unsure if I’d miss the extra two stops difference between the Panasonic 12-35 2.8 and the sigma/metabones combo. Same for DOF. But DOF isn’t everything. I think I’ll get enough with the 12-35. And I know I’ll just love how compact it will make the setup feel. And again the DJI 15mm 1.7 will sort of bridge the gap when I really need it.
-
Good call. I have spent years and years going back and forth between primes and zooms and in the end came to what should have been a very obvious conclusion and that is I need both. Depending on the circumstances. In an ideal world, I could do it all with fast zooms but fast zooms (faster than f2.8) are a rarity and come with the penalty of size & weight. I was debating (yet again) at the end of my most recent season the case for continuing with just primes (needs +1 body) or going back to zooms (needs -1 body) but there are compromises to both scenarios. Instead, I decided to go with the -1 body, but keep the primes and though it means a couple of extra lenses in my bag, that (and having to do a lens swap every now and again) is my only compromise. I took a very hard look at the G9II and I think if my needs were different, I might have gone for it (over the OM-1) but in the end decided I wished to stick with full-frame stills but would go back to shooting S35 for video. Which is what I am doing.
-
