Jump to content

Pascal Garnier

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Pascal Garnier

  1. Well, every single manufacturer, reviewer and blogger mentions 35mm/full frame focal lengths when discussing lenses. Which makes perfect sense, since it provides us with a standard everyone can relate to and convert to for their own camera. Noone would call the picture I posted wideangle, and rightfully so. Just like noone calls 18mm fisheye (which you would, according to your logic). The only thing that does is add more unnecessary confusion.
  2. here's a quick comparison of the crop factor of the RJ/jinfinance Focal Reducer : never mind the quality (heavily compressed jpeg), this is just to illustrate how much larger your field of view becomes with the Focal Reducer. colour shift and sharpness added in post to accentuate the difference in size.
  3. andy, you forgot to factor in the x2 crop factor of the G6 ! 24mm FD becomes 48mm on the G6 with a regular FD adapter. With the focal reducer you multiply 48 with 0.71, which gives 34.
  4. Here's a very thorough review of the same Focal Reducer : http://josephmoore.name/2014/03/16/testing-the-lens-turbo-speedbooster-clone-with-extreme-lenses/ And footage :
  5. @ andy : I bought this one : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/360845797671?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649. Not sure the one you posted has the same optics (from other tests there seem to be significant differences between various manufacturers, so I can't vouch for that one). @ shotbyshaun : use the FD adapter andy suggested, looks like the ones I use. @ Sean : compression ratio is 0.71, I just measured by overlaying a still from the Focal Reducer and one without. So my 24mm 2.8 becomes a 34mm 2.0 (24*2*0.71) with this adapter. My 50 f1.4 a 70 f1.0. The best thing about this is that my Sun 24-40 3.5 zoom becomes a 34-57 2.8. Not the perfect range, but still way more usable for run&gun shooting.
  6. I subscribed to Metabones' waiting list for the Speed Booster FD to M4/3, but since I had no idea when it would become available again, I ordered a Focal Reducer from RJ/jinfinance on ebay. Received it today and shot a few tests with a Canon FD 24 2.8 (supposedly one of Canon's best and sharpest FD lenses) on my Pana G6, mainly to check how the Focal Reducer would perform in corner sharpness and chromatic aberration. I can confirm that corners are less sharp and there's a very light purple fringing in the extreme corners, BUT it is only really visible when zooming in to 1600%. There's no vignetting whatsoever and I didn't see the dreaded blue/purple center spot. I can imagine that for professional still photographers and pixel peepers this Focal Reducer is a waste of money. For HD video however : - it performs adequately with no noticeable side effects, - it makes your lenses wider (important with the 2x crop on Panasonic M43's) comparable to the field of view of APS-C sensors, - and improves low light performance (compared to my regular FD>M4/3 adapter I had to close down 2 extra stops with the Focal Reducer to keep the highlights from crushing). I will see how the Focal Reducer performs on the GH4 once I have it. For now, all I can say is that it's an essential piece of kit for anyone shooting with FD lenses on a M4/3 body in low-light. The adapter's construction is solid (all metal) and costs 25% of Metabones' version. For the work I do (doc, weddings and music videos) this is more than sufficient.
  7. People should learn to deal with criticism. Just because I disagree and have remarks about your methodology when testing, doesn't make me a troll. If you post something on a public forum, learn to live with people making remarks. Even with the new upload your way of testing makes no sense. You should match exposure, not the ISO value a certain camera manufacturer assigned to a certain exposure. As we all know, 1600 ISO means something else for Canon than for Pana since they use different sensors. Right now, the GX7 footage is borderline overexposed. The 5D almost underexposed. Any conclusions you're trying to draw from these shots is invalid. I have no problems with people doing their own kind of testing, but if you're going to share your "test" with people and expect serious feedback, then maybe post something serious to begin with. If you wanted to test noise levels at a certain ISO, you could have shot footage of both cameras with both lens caps on. That will give you the most accurate idea of noise levels and native ISO.
  8. Come on now, how hard is it to use a proper white or grey card before posting these kind of tests ? The only thing this test tells us is that you don't know how to white balance properly.
  9. Keep things simple : get a Panasonic G6 + Nikon mount Sigma 18-35 1.8 + Nikon to M43 adapter with built in aperture. Use the sensor crop function on the G6 for a 3x zoom range. This will give you a 36-210 range, all at 1.8.
  10. you might get better results with slightly underexposing (compared to how you shoot today). in my experience, bringing up the shadows slightly looks better than having your highlights overexposed.
  11. The GH4 is available for preorder in the Benelux (Belgium & Netherlands). It's 1499 EUR for body only.
  12. Why not get a new iMac ? Saves you the trouble of building yourself without any warranties and will be faster than your current setup.
  13. I always convert all my footage to ProRes422 (not HQ). I use 5DtorRGB Batch and convert everything right after offloading. MPEG Streamclip is faster (and free), but there is a quality difference between the two.
  14. looks great ! inspiring video ! thanks for sharing.
  15. If you have the budget, I'd definitely go for a C100. There's a reason why so many people use it. Low light performance is excellent, dynamic range stunning and the camera just seems to be built for run&gun use. Imagewise it comes pretty close to the Black Magic cameras, but without all the quirks (ergonomics, internal battery, display, filesize, ...). My co-shooter for weddings upgraded his 7D to a 5D MkIII and that camera is great in low light too, much improved moire and aliasing, but still not as sharp and defined as a C100 (it's also half the price).
  16. Why aren't you considering the Panasonic G6 ? Is in the same price range en outperforms both cameras. I just made the switch from a T3i to a G6.
  17. I stay away from Neat Video cos of the render time ...
  18. If I get it right, the only reason why I shouldn't sell my G6 to get a GX7, is cos the latter doesn't have a mic input (nor manual audio control) ? But apart from that, the GX7 is a better or comparable camera with superior lowlight performance ?
  19. I ran some tests tonight and the G6 with Natural style with contrast and saturation dialled all the way down performs slightly better than a T3i with VisionTech2 picture style and running Tragic Lantern. The difference is not that big in lowlight performance, but as far as noise is concerned the G6 is the clear winner : you can shoot with the G6 at 3200 ISO and it'll look as good as the T3i at 800 ISO. Native ISO for the G6 seems to be 640.
  20. thanks matt for the feedback ! my first impression is that the G6 needs a higher ISO than the T3i, but then again I can shoot at 3200 ISO on the G6, where everything beyond 1250 on the T3i looked horrible.
  21. I'm going to run a few tests comparing the T3i to the G6, since none are available. And I'll probably end up getting a speedbooster from FD to M43. A Nikon D5300 is no option, since it lacks resolution compared to the Panasonics. And a GH3 lacks peaking, which is something I really need since I use only manual lenses. A Speedbooster is also a cheaper and more compact option than buying another camera. Thanks everyone for the feedback !
  22. I've made the switch to M4/3 2 months ago. So far, couldn't be more happy, but then again I have done nothing but well-lit shoots or with plenty of daylight. But, in a few months I'll be shooting a few wedding videos again. Which means I'll be facing the challenges of shooting in low light. My Canon T3i did a decent job, even though going past 1250 ISO meant macroblocking and all kinds of ugly artifacts. The noise on my G6 is much less obnoxious, but it's still a lot less sensitive to light than my T3i. So, I'm looking for a solution to shoot lowlight and still stay within M4/3. Without having to setup lights (strictly ambient light shooting). From the few tests I've done indoors, the G6 seems to lack that extra bit I need. Is the GH3 the camera to pick for low light shooting ? And is it's sensitivity comparable to the Canon TXi series (read : the 7D sensor) ? Or is it the GM1 I need ? To be clear : lenses aren't the problem (shooting with a 25mm 1.4, 35 1.7 and 50 1.4). Anyone else made the switch from a 7D, T2i or T3i to a GH3 or GM ? Couldn't find any direct comparisons online ... Thanks in advance.
  23. I just switched from Canon to Pana and shoot a few weddings every year. I'd buy - 2 to 3 G6's, - Gini shoulderrig - a small Glidecam or JR Steadicam - 2 Zoom H1's + 2 Giant Squid lav mics - F&V Z96 LED light - Rode Videomic (Pro) - spend the rest on lenses : Pana 14 2.5, Canon FD 24 2.8, Canon FD 50 1.4, Canon FD 35-70 3.5, Pentax 110 18 2.8, Pentax 110 20-40 2.8. If you wanna keep it lowbudget, you can use cheap C-mount lenses : I use the 35 1.7 and 25 1.4 that you'll find all over ebay. Corners will be very soft, but you can turn this into an aesthetic choice for wedding videos. - if you have money left, you can invest that in a slider and or crane.
  24. You can use an FD to EOS adapter which has an additional layer of glass inside. This will soften your image (especially when shooting wide-open), but you'll be able to focus to infinity. Another option is to switch to mirrorless cameras ... I just made the switch from Canon to Panasonic (and also Sony). FD glass works splendidly on mirrorless cameras with a simple adapter without glass. I shot this video with FD glass and a Panasonic G6 : Coely - My Tomorrow - YouTube
  25. if you're looking for a battery powered solution, the Comer CM1800 is a great light that can be used both on-camera (albeit a bit heavy) as on a tripod. http://lacolorpros.com/product/?CM1800-Comer-CM-LBPS1800-On-Camera-LED-Light if you're looking for a mains-powered solution, I can recommend the Kaiser 3157 set. It includes 3 halogen lamps, stands and softboxes. I just found one new for €300, which is an absolute bargain (my Comer CM1800 was the same price). http://www.digit-photo.com/Eclairage_de_studio-aFA0072/KAISER_3157_Kit_Studiolight_H_Trio-rKAIS3157.html for something really basic that won't break the bank, the F&V Z96 LED on ebay is a decent solution for little money. You can attach up to 4 copies to one another, multiplying your light output. http://www.fvlighting.com/z96-led-light-panel.html (can be found new on ebay for $80).
  • Create New...