Amro Othman

Love these shots! 😄

Another potential contender for all round compact lens for the OG Pocket is this Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6.
It has two levers (one for zoom and one for focus) but in terms of smoothness I think the focus works better than the zoom but its still easy to overshoot. Like a manual version of DFD really.
The OIS is reasonable and is obviously a big advantage with the OG Pocket.
I only got this lens under sufferance to check remote zoom functionality for my controllers as it is a powered zoom and thankfully I got it really cheap because after using it in semi-anger for the first time a few days ago I am not particularly fond of it at all.
In use, I found it tricky to get focus with but the combination of it having lowish contrast so not firing the less than ideal focus peaking of the OG Pocket and monitoring on the the less than ideal OG Pocket screen and the failing eyesight of the less than ideal OG Me might well explain that so I'll have to give it another go under different circumstances.
Anyway, here are some rough, soft, low res grabs from the ProRes 422 video file and I suppose I could maybe recommend this combo if you are after less a Super 16 and more a Super 8 feel 🙂

Some frames from the Panasonic 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 on the OG BMPCC.
This lens is a good size appropriate option for the OG BMPCC as a general all rounder and has the additional benefit of IS.
It is pretty slow though but this has the advantage of you not really needing ND when you are in what passes for broad daylight in Copenhagen.
The big downside is that there is no manual focus so you have to rely on the one shot AF on the camera to pre-focus. 
Again, though, the small aperture is an advantage here as you generally have enough DOF to get away with the AF getting you in the ballpark.

Some stills from a feature film I just wrapped on yesterday. This is just with a lut applied no further adjustments or corrections. 

 

Here's a set I'm slowly collecting / modifying.
Pentax SMC Takumars:
17mm f4 24mm f3.5 35mm f2 50mm f1.4 - 7 element 50mm f1.4 - 8 element 55mm f1.8 85mm f1.8 105mm f2.8 135mm f2.5 200mm f4 I've de-clicked them, had 3d printed focus and aperture gears fitted and lightly grub screwed, shimmed them all for infinity focus with EOS adapters, and have 80mm fronts on all but the 17mm. Yes, they're a bit slow at either end, but with an A7s, plenty of fun to be had.
 

It’s pretty obvious from that side to side that the first pic was taken in sunshine and with the second, a cloud had passed over so if this is the only evidence for any color difference, the clown show is in town.
But I haven’t watched the videos and I’d expect some with them having different sensors and one being FF and the other APSC.
Same or different lens?

Not sure it’s about ethics - at all. It’s profit. Want all day video? Buy an fx30/fx3/fx6. 
 
Want a hybrid ? Buy an a7iv/a6700/a7C 
5 years ago I’d be in shock to have these options and quality 
This
in fact I’d be happy getting the a6700 for hybrid use and if demands dictate more - grab a used fx30 for long form video. Best AF in the game, best DR at price points, best log profile at price point, easy single lens mount with cheap 3rd party options. 
 
as a non-paid user of these products I’m very happy with this

Why do you assume it's intentional crippling? If it's such an easy barrier to overcome, why has no other company done it yet? Maybe it's actually just beyond the current engineering and technological limitations, or not financially viable - but they want to give us the option to use it in some form anyway. 

Intentional crippling would be if they took the FX30 sensor, put it in the a6700 body and then DIDN'T include 4K120p. Then the same people screaming bloody murder about overheating issues would jump on here and complain about Sony intentionally withholding capabilities that they know the sensor has. You just can't win with some people.

As for making the limitations clear - who do you think writes the brief for all those Youtubers? That's how they make the limitations clear in 2023.

It's not a camera that interests me at all - It's not at all a professional cinema camera, so it's not for me. If other people can't afford a better alternative, then they'll have to learn to compromise. But to write off a camera that is not intended for your desired uses, because it's not capable of doing something no other competing camera can, is a little silly.

Why get so worked up about it then?

You clearly deflected the question as well; what other camera is there that offers 4K120 at that price? I can't think of any. Which means you're expecting Sony to solve a problem that nobody else has even attempted to (4K120p 10-bit in a very compact body at a very affordable price). The next cheapest (mirrorless) option I know of is the GH6, and to pull that off they had to have a smaller sensor, much larger body, and charge twice as much.

Looking at the videos so far it looks like overheating issues are limited to 4K120. So, if you ignore that mode entirely, you've still got a camera that is on par with the competition at that price, but with better AF. You just also have the option to occasionally get some shots at 4K120p.
And all this comes in a consumer photo camera. You can't be upset that a company won't blow their entire R'n'D budget trying to satisfy a few people who expect to be able to use it beyond what it is designed and advertised as (yet who won't buy it anyway).

On a side note, I never liked the term "creator" from the start. It's pretentious. 
No matter how awesome a video I make is, I didn't cReAte anything. I captured something that God created, and edited it into something cool. I produced something, but I didn't create shit.
Imagine an architect looking at a building he/she designed and declaring: "I created this". 
But it makes people who make a basic-ass video or reel feel good and important, so that's one of the reasons it's so popular IMO.
/rant.

On a side note, I never liked the term "creator" from the start. It's pretentious. 
No matter how awesome a video I make is, I didn't cReAte anything. I captured something that God created, and edited it into something cool. I produced something, but I didn't create shit.
Imagine an architect looking at a building he/she designed and declaring: "I created this". 
But it makes people who make a basic-ass video or reel feel good and important, so that's one of the reasons it's so popular IMO.
/rant.

On a side note, I never liked the term "creator" from the start. It's pretentious. 
No matter how awesome a video I make is, I didn't cReAte anything. I captured something that God created, and edited it into something cool. I produced something, but I didn't create shit.
Imagine an architect looking at a building he/she designed and declaring: "I created this". 
But it makes people who make a basic-ass video or reel feel good and important, so that's one of the reasons it's so popular IMO.
/rant.

On a side note, I never liked the term "creator" from the start. It's pretentious. 
No matter how awesome a video I make is, I didn't cReAte anything. I captured something that God created, and edited it into something cool. I produced something, but I didn't create shit.
Imagine an architect looking at a building he/she designed and declaring: "I created this". 
But it makes people who make a basic-ass video or reel feel good and important, so that's one of the reasons it's so popular IMO.
/rant.

Wow! So much depth. I can feel the spaces in between the objects
 

Dear lens enthusiasts,
I plan on doing a showoff of my adapted projection lenses with a little comparison to 'normal' consumer glass.
Initial plan was to put the camera on a tripod, put a tiny something around 70 cm in front of it, then have a human subject (most likely me) sit around ~ 2m in front of the camera and, finally, some deep background with just a bit bokeh in it.
Rack focus between those three.
Time and place of shoot: golden hour, somewhere outside, non-controlled environment.
No color charts (I don't have any), no corner-to-corner sharpness tests.
Maybe I'll manage to put an anamorphic adapter in there, too.

A visualization of what I have in mind (apart from the color chart):
Examples taken from this test.



Thoughts?

Tamron 45mm with Formatt Supermist Black 1/8 Filter on Sony F3. 

We live in an age where a little Fuji gives cinematic results when you pair with the right lens
Anyway I am uploading both images. The warmer and brighter one is the Sigma. Same WB. I THOUGHT I had the same F-stop on both lenses but they look so different that I probably had the Sigma at least a stop higher and didn't realise. I will have to do a test carefully to be sure!

I would be curious to see the difference if you already have screen captures handy, thanks!
X-T3, I wouldn't have guessed.  It looked really good.

Yeah, totally agreed! But there is something about this lens, it renders so nicely. It really looks 3D in certain shots (I know that the lens is only part of the equation, but it's still a big part!)
 

Not a d*ck, but it's a tough ask doing a blind test online because:
people getting things wrong is embarrassing and this wasn't anonymous and the internet never forgets lenses are a lot more similar to each other than any of us would like to admit so its actually a ridiculously difficult thing to do (don't tell anyone.....shhhhh)

Ok nobody guessed and maybe I was being a d*ck by playing a guessing game- so the lens is a Zeiss Distagon ZE 35mm F2.0 ❤️

I've found my favourite lens ever guys. Totally has surpassed the PEN-F 38mm f1.8. 
Can anybody guess which one it is? Hint: it's a Carl Zeiss made in Japan

I've found my favourite lens ever guys. Totally has surpassed the PEN-F 38mm f1.8. 
Can anybody guess which one it is? Hint: it's a Carl Zeiss made in Japan

I've found my favourite lens ever guys. Totally has surpassed the PEN-F 38mm f1.8. 
Can anybody guess which one it is? Hint: it's a Carl Zeiss made in Japan

Good enough for Canon "HD"