Leaderboard

Lenses to go with the BMPCC4k needs a new thread. This is something I'd follow.

Heck if you want a pocket camera than just buy the original BMPCC and put a Panny 20mm f1.7 on it and be happy. Doesn't get much better than that output wise. And a Bunch of batteries in the pocket on the other side! Bliss on the cheap. And damn near Arri output. I know it is not fast enough for you but that Olympus M.ZUIKO Pro 12-40mm F2.8 is going to be pretty hard to beat if you want something that is top end stuff, well built, and can be a beast on a normal m4/3 camera down the road with the AF ability and the Clutch in it.. That is the same lens Blackmagic had on Every 4K BMPCC I saw in the videos. They must know something we don't. ?

There is wonderful Angenieux 17.5-70mm f2.2 which is S16 lens - it covers GH4 without vigneting, so if you can tolerate some shadows and blur in the corner as artistic effects on 2x crop of GH5 etc, results could be majestic. (Older 17-68 and 12-120 are not S16, but 16 lenses). If you work in more controlled condition, Zeiss 11-110 T2.2 is also S16 lens, but it is pretty big. Angenioux 17.5-70, contrary, is enough compact... (and probably only one lens I truly regret that I had too early in my passion for testing lenses and than sold it - I was so lucky to find, now it is so hard to repeat. )

The Sigma 17-50 f2.8 worked pretty well when I had a BMMCC. Not as nice optically as the 18-35 art, but that extra range came in handy.

Long story short. Stay with the original ISCO if you plan to do a simple V1 modification. The close focus distance is the same as if you mod it by yourself. The additional weight is a problem if you gonna try to screw it in front of a plastic Nikon pancake. You shouldn't trust that tiny lens to hold a heavy lens like the V1 will be. So you will need a lens support. The V1 does not vignette more than with the original design within the SAME focus range. The distances are the same. But if the front stays 72mm it will vignette at the new and closer close focus, because of the small front element that comes out further than on the original ISCO. That's why i asked Christopher at VD to make a 77mm front to get a little less vignetting on the 50 pancake. So, it works. And sometimes you want to slide the rear element into the front of a taking lens and stay more flexible in the selection of the lenses. That was the V1+ mod (77mm front and no screw-in rear element) Yes, i did them all and even more. DIY mod, VD-V1, V1+, V2, V2+ The V2 is worth it. 77mm non rotating front, 85mm close focus! But at that prize … Sometimes I wish I had stayed with the original ISCO. Screw it on and ready to go. But for serious tasks (first AC, FF motor, …) you'll need that rehousing. But for that prize you can rent everything without headache … It's like a dog chasing his tail – eternally … ?

I have to admit that clip from mr Read doesn't look to me so favorable for NX1 because of too much crushed black (probably temporal stylistic preference) that leaves a question about DR. But I have some other personal favorites of NX1 shots - simply, contrary to some other or of the most members, I'm continually impress with results of all modern cameras in capable hands, looking to all of them as flowers in the garden So, to be remembered or some sort of hommage

History in general and recent history obliged us to believe in Chinese marketing even if it sometimes looks strange...

If the NX1 was that great then Samsung would not have canned it. Bottom line, more of us choose to either ditch it, or not adopt it in the first place. Samsung had the money to keep it going for the next few hundred years. They made the choice not to. For most of us, that speaks volumes. I get the feeling these post are created so people holding these cameras can unload them on eBay for more money. Just like that hoax thread about the superdooper third party firmware. Much talk here... but alas, no amazing footage to back it up. Nuff said!

Yes, that was a good video. He makes many interesting / helpful videos.

I think everyone knows it's a work in progress, just quite surprised at the current point of progress in that work. If the purpose of it was to gain feedback then I don't get the differentiation between it coming from their FB group or the wider world to be honest. Unless they've got a Reduser scenario going on there of zero criticism I expect the feedback was similarly lukewarm? Don't take this as being snippy because it's not meant to be - I'm actually rooting for them - but if the people on here who weren't thrilled with what they saw and they were in the market to buy one, then it might not be doomed but extrapolate that out versus people who were thrilled with it and it's not great. As I say, I'm not looking to contradict you necessarily but I think there is some relevance to the perception issue they've caused by putting this out there. Especially as its on their YouTube channel and not just a closed FB group.

If the NX1 wasn't that great, then all of us would have sold it, but we still going strong. Let the others do the catching up.

I watched unsane last night and didn’t think it looked that bad - at the beginning. I actually though that it gave a certain docu style to it, and some parts even looked awesome to my eyes. Of course it didn’t look like a normal Hollywood movie - A bit like an art film, a filmSchool project or like a lot of other indies which have gone on to great reviews. In the last part of the movie it was like the picturestyle fell apart and the limitations of the phone became an distractions to the story. Tangerine was shot on a IPhone 5s and a Moondog adapter, and it looks great. To sum up: if you are planning on shooting weeding or the next charter in the Transformers saga then maybe your phone it not the camera you should choose. However, if you are working on an indie story-driven piece then I don’t think a phone is necesarraly the wrong choice. It gives the film a certain autentic look and then it all comes down to the storyline and style and working within it limitations. In the end, it is all about the story - and if your story isn’t good enough to be told through a phone then maybe one should spend more time improving the story, than thinking about getting a better camera. And if one doesn’t already own a camera the maybe the money is better spend on other movie-related items than on an expensive camera. Better to get a great story told with a IPhone, than not to get it told at all.

It will work with the Olympus ZUIKO 14-35mm f/2.0. AF and MF. It does have the MF linked Mechanically. SO it might be worth looking into. BiF stands for Bird in Flight. It is pretty hard to photograph or even video really fast flying Birds. It is sort of a Art that that takes lots of skill and well a decent camera with AF in it. Some of the best ones are from people that just Manual Focus. But it takes years of practice to master that. Kingfishers and Humming Birds are about the fastest in the United States to photograph. It can become addictive to try and shoot them. People spend crazy money on a great BiF rig, camera and lenses. But it is a very rewarding Hobby and you become One With Nature as they say. And the exercise is good for you to boot. Win, Win. It is sort of a Zen thing in a sense. I love it. Very calming. Good for people like me that have no Damn Patience! ?

It was great for it's time but I believe times have moved on. If the NX1 was so great none of us would have sold it. To compete with the modern contenders Samsung would have needed to release a NX1 Mk2... which they did not. I've seen nothing online to convince me that the NX1 is a better choice than the GH5 or GH5S. I don't recall being sad when I bought the A7R2 after ditching the Samsung either. And as expected, no one has posted any footage to support these claims of far superior DR. Yes there was some very good glass for it, but that glass was created for a doomed system... so I sold my glass... and camera... and never looked back. Let's not build this camera up into something it isn't, that could send so folks down the wrong path.

Has anyone mentioned the tamron 17-50 2.8? That one could be nice and good for your budget. I think 2.8 is enough to shoot indoor events that are not well lit. Even though the lx100 is cheap, I don't see why you would consider that one over a used gx80 or not just keep your gh4 with a stabilized lense, for example 17-55 stabilized kit lense to begin with? I think you will be able to still sell the gx80 in two years from now by the way, and while you might have reasons to do that, you don't wanna loose the lenses you have, rather your camera. With both the gx80 and lx100 you run into codec and therefore color restrictions, apart from IBIS your gh4 still is a far better camera in that context and has a mic jack too. Instead of getting IBIS and downgrade everything else you could even consider getting a small rig. Do you want to shoot b-roll slow motion or 24fps? If 24fps, you can get the gx80 with 4k 100mbs, if not, the 60p 25mbit/s 1080p will not hold up well to any grading or even nice luts you already use. Apart from that I think the mentioned nikkor zoom lense should give you everything you want, if you shoot manual like me. For B-Roll, I would consider getting a rather close lens. 40-50mm with a simple adapter should serve you fine. Last but not least, two alternative ideas: Is the problem for you changing lenses, or changing all your filters (tiffen contrast, nd filters..) as well? A: Get some kickstarter lens flippers you can wear on your belt, will save lot's of time and you can use the lenses you alredy have! They have them from https://www.friidesigns.com/ or some simple ones for just two lenses: https://www.amazon.com/NEW-Gowing-Lens-Holder-Canon/dp/B00KYP0LK0. I met someone on event who changed his lenses lightning fast. Remember two lenses will always give you better quality than one with the same range. B: If you have problems changing filters, I use XUME Magnets for like 80dollars total who are a life saver too and always impress people who don't know them. My final advice would be: Always consider if you can get what you want cheaper too, instead buying a new big thingi. Go simple and future proof, and invest in lenses, not cameras. The lenses you already have are quite nice and so Is your gh4! What I use: Sharp vintage Lenses for the best look I can get. Once I get a client that want's a sharper/clinical look, I will use my 18-35 1.8 that I kept, paired with a simple 50-70mm range, like you. Cheers

The GF1 had a real following.. I read a few reviews that loved the ergonomics when I was buying my GF3. I think the GF1 had a button combination that worked well for some people, and they're seriously small and solidly built. I'm not sure about the GF1, but my GF3 has a metal body, which was excellent considering I dropped it once and it slightly wrinkled the corner and that was it - a few more mm of damage would have damaged the LCD screen!

What is gained is the extra zoom from 200-600mm so that I only need one camera. I shoot more photographs than video nowadays & often wind up using the FZ1000 more because of the option of extra zoom from 200-400mm. At 1095g the RX10M3 is quite a bit heavier than the RX10M2 (813g) but even today I have to very deliberately go out with my pair of cameras but if I were to get an RX100 too then I would carry that on far more occasions.

The old nikon 28-70mm 2.8 with speedbooster is a f1.8 Lens uf you want to compare it to native m43 lenses. Buy a copy with broken autofocus, it should cost around 200€ It's actually pretty good.

It's one of those perennials that pops up quite regularly when people are looking for a "standard" zoom lens for Panasonic cameras so it's in a few threads. It pops up as an option because the lens range and speed it has isn't one that you can get in a native MFT lens and if you could it would certainly cost far more than the £300-400 price you can pick up a used LX100 for. It's not a solution for everyone but it can make a lot of sense for many situations because you're basically getting a free backup camera into the bargain. Be aware though that the LX100 can't have the Cinelike D hack so you are restricted to standard profiles (or the excellent EOSHD profile) which is why it won't work out for everyone. But if it does then it's an alternative worth considering. It's one of a couple of such anomalies (like the Leica Q and Sigma DP0 Quattro) where even if you own the interchangeable lens version of the cameras (Leica SL and Sigma DP Quattro in this example) it's still actually cheaper to buy the fxed lens version of the camera if you need that focal length than it is for the equivalent lens for the interchangeable camera. As I say, it's not for everybody but if it fits your needs then it's there as an option

I ummed and ahhd about a used one during my lens buying frenzy. Slept on it and decided it was too good a price not to get it and went back into the shop the next day and they were literally handing it over to it's new owner when I arrived. Apparently it's not polite to exclaim "Oh for fucks sake" in Japanese shops. Who knew. Anyway, I thought we'd all agreed the other week that the best general purpose zoom lens for MFT was actually the LX100

I'll be damned, I did down vote that post. I have no clue why. Nothing you said in it goes against my thoughts. Only person I ever intentionally down voted was Jon. He seems to sort of be the Old Jon again. That is good. I removed my down vote. You are a virgin again. Praise the Lord! ? I think it might have been the old "Too many Beers" syndrome! ?

Ergonomics, UI, menu system still, and definitely best in business. NX500 is still at the top of the "smaller" sensors at DxO. I bet if they tested the NX1 with a better firmware version that would top the charts also. Our GH5 cameras already have their "skin" peel off, LESS than a year of use. Build quality in both my NX1 cameras is exceptional, one is heavily used which I bought used a couple of years ago, still going strong being my main camera most of the time. Sensors still no dead/stuck pixels. 74min continuouss video recording. I did a couple of photographic jobs with the GH5 and the results are night and day. Not even close, plus the most APS-C megapixels count still in the industry. H265 is mainstream, even the torrent sites share everything in H265. 500MB of the Expanse series, is equal or better than 2GB of the expanse in H264 (just downloaded some episodes recently and I was shocked of how good the small H265 were). I consider the NX video AF more reliable than a600/a6300 cameras I have used (it could be user error of course, I couldn't find anything on that paranoid menu system). The S lenses, unique and a great advantage. The 16-50 is THE workhorse. Top screen, everyone's snobed back in the day! Great Super Amoled Screens. Best wi fi/bluetooth implementation back in the day. Others catched up though. Color science still better than most. No issues with my battery grip! I did a 3 hours photo shooting the other day, just half (and a bit more I guess) of my battery gone. No overheating in the hottest Mediterranean summer days. Not even the NX500. Mic in and headphones out IN body. Not even this is a standard, even in those days. DIS (I know, it isn't IBIS but it's there, and working). If I found more time I will add some more.

No really, the dynamic range is fine. You have to get the settings bang on. Gamma DR, -2 contrast (not too low), 16-235 and Smart Range + ON. I adjust the master pedestal as well and increase bitrate with the hack. None of that existed in firmware 1.0, so people thought it lacking. It isn't. The sensor tested for 12.8 stops on DXOMark if I remember correctly...That is more than a Canon 1D X Mark II and 1D C. On the build quality I'm afraid I have to have a divergent opinion to you sir there as well! It's superb for the price. All the controls feel solid and the magnesium alloy chassis feels like metal not plastic like it can do on a lot of other cameras (cough, cough GH4). It's also very responsive. When does it ever lag? Have you seen how fast it puts down a 28MP RAW before starting 6K readout for video? Compare that to the GH5 with it's laggy end to recording video and on many other cameras there are much slower buffer clearance times. Colour science is in Nikon-Canon league. Autofocus with the S lenses is superb, on-chip phase detect. Better ergonomics than a Sony A7 III. £800 used. NX-L for full frame. It's still the best bargain ever. So feel free to nitpick it on the basis that your battery grip might be faulty

The next version of Mavic Pro will have 1/1.7" sensor which is bigger than the current 1/2.3" but still much smaller vs 1", guess 1" is too big (or power hungry) even for rumored bigger size for Mavic Pro 2, hence I bought a P4A on special (few hundred dollars off + further 10% discount) recently, the image quality totally blow my Mavic pro away!

I tend to agree that phones will eventually take over a segment of filmmaking. And if I remember correctly Soderberg said he would definitely consider shooting more films on an iPhone. I’ve been saying this for a while... future filmmakers do not care about the technical elements as much as we do. If you make your living working on films or videography, your world will change in a few years. Hell look that this forum alone... there are an increasing number of posts from newbies asking which camera they should get to start shooting weddings or corporate. People are jumping into this field without much prior knowledge and eventually phones will be more than capable enough to fill those technical roles. Right now I think the question is... which manufacturer will be the first to put a larger sensor into a phone? Apple? Samsung? Red? Hell I think Canon even has some new phone patents... get ready for the inevitable. I, for one, am excited for this. I want to tell stories, so if that can be done on a phone with a small gimbal and a lens adapter... of some sort... Then why the hell not?

I mostly use the phone for cutaways and shots of my cameras while shooting. I like shots of cameras shooting, or someone shooting with a camera. Though its also great to grab a quick shot when you're walking around instead of taking the camera out of the bag. I also have a waterproof case, I've used the phone instead of a GoPro at times (wife and I snorkeled the Great Barrier Reef with just the iPhone). The stills below are similar to what I usually do with the phone. Chris

Here’s my video review on the speed booster I got from a previous thread. Just posting here so we don’t have multiple M50 threads. Speed booster really solves the issues with the 4K crop. I wish Metabones would make an “XL” version for EF-M so it takes the 4K crop to proper super35. But still, the .71x isn’t too bad.

Yeah I agree the that first video is too saturated for my tastes also. But that is a Apple thing apparently that most Normal" people really like LoL. It states that there was No color correction done. I am sure a skilled colorist can make a iPhone look like a Arri if they want in this day and age. And I don't think you can really ignore, or dismiss them as a somewhat serious video and photo tool anymore. They can get the job done in a lot of situations. Low light, well not so much, but they do sell light you know. ?

I am never cutting edge with phones, but have just got a iPhone 7 plus and have a couple of observations. I have been using it to film barn owls in flight. OK that sounds a bit insane, but the direction of travel with this tech is clear. 1. Higher density sensor with improved digital zoom - at least for decent light conditions and HD resolution, and better processing for noise reduction. 2. Extra lenses - we already have 28mm, 56mm equiv. (I think) so why not 110? Blending the output of more than one camera opens up all sorts of possiblities. 3. Combined optical and digital stabilisation - filming at 6x zoom on my iPhone (is that around 180mm equiv?), one handed, and it is still remarkably smooth. 4. Usable, and suprisingly directional audio from a tiny microphone. 5. Very adequate, intelligent and responsive video AF. It isn't going to challenge the top of the range, but it will certainly push out a lot of the mid market competition.

And the large depth of field from the small sensor is an absolute boon when you need to keep the background magic trick in focus.

Maybe not for narrative film making but I see a lot of smartphones being used professionally by journalists in my work. I remember being quite shocked when I first started seeing them being used a few years ago for reporter pieces to camera outside stadiums by "real" broadcast companies but its so commonplace now it doesn't even register. I'm not talking just self shot pieces here either - though that happens as well - but a regular setup of a cameraman and a reporter, its just that the camera on the tripod is a smartphone instead of an ENG camera. Typically, they'll be on a rig like this one What has really pushed it forward over recent years is the availability of good audio options and its even becoming more commonplace at press conferences I've been doing to see smartphones being connected directly to the audio split box to take the feed from the console. So standards don't have to drop just because the form factor and price of the gear you're using have. Everything about them is becoming more sophisticated in terms of hardware and software (apps like LumaFusion are serious editing tools now and the Teradek Live:AIR products let you do multi cam broadcasts) and of course where they really win out is not just in the form factor but also in how fast they can get to air from anywhere. So I can definitely say they have reached a point where you can do professional video work with them but the transition to "proper" film making (whatever that even means today) is always going to be hampered by the lens on the front of it. If RED actually get it together in terms of a viable bolt on camera for the HYDROGEN then we might over time see it gain the same traction. I'm of a generation that sees a smartphone as a device whereas the people who will be making the films I watch in my retirement home see it as an extension of themselves. It is that ubiquity that will drive the change because to them, they do everything else on it so why wouldn't you make "real" films on it? And to be honest, I have to say that dealing with a fixed device that limits your choices also limits the rabbit holes you can fall down so it can actually improve creativity and productivity.

Looking back I owe everyone a big thank-you for using the forum and taking an interest in the blog, it is amazing what it has turned into with so little effort on my part I think this place must be the only website on the entire internet without adverts. Long may it continue like that. Got a GX9 arriving tomorrow... about time I did a review of something cheap with the big shift to high-end stuff. Let me know what you'd like to see in the review of it.

Lomo Anamorphics on a Red Dragon by Chris Leclerc

If you can't see the difference, then great for you!