jase

1 hour ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

Cool! Can you post a picture of the setup? Excited to hear your thoughts on image quality compared to your other lenses. 

Will do. What I can tell for now after a quick test: the focus ring is awesome, nearly on the same level as the the one of the Voigtländers - nicely damped. Vignetting is clearly visible in normal photomode and (although less) in 1080p. Only in 4k, when the additional crop is applied the vignetting disappears. I yet have to see whether the vignetting appears when electronic stabilization is added. Yet, the lens itself is quite the monster... my hands were getting tired quite soon.

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

Something's not right here. I've got the GH4, XL and Sigma as well. The aperture should be constant throughout the zoom range. I just checked the calendar to see if you were playing an April Fool's joke...

No joke... I totally dont get it to be honest, already mailed the Metabones support, no reply yet. When i fully zoom until 35mm, the lowest aperture I can set is f3.6 - something is not right.

So, I finally got my Sigma 18-35 in combination with the Canon EF Speedbooster XL. Yes, this thing is huge! But up until now it ticks so many boxes for me, that I am considering to keep it.

Just one thing is really weird: when i turn the zoom ring, the aperture (!) changes, no matter which mode I am in, even in M or A?! It starts at f1.1 @18mm which is correct - however it goes all the way up until it hits f3.6 when zoomed @35mm - I dont get it, maybe @conurus could chime in?

Ok, so here is my coming out:

I shoot 99% of the time with aperture priority and let the camera do the rest (GX80). I set the maximum ISO to arround 1600 and only increase it by hand if I have to. I always shoot using auto shutterspeed. I know this might be not the "real deal", but for me doing only run&gun stuff it works pretty well. I never had that thought "boy, this looks rather choppy" while watching one of my recordings. But obviously this could be my personal shortcoming.

However, after being a forum member here I learned what aliasing and moire is and now I see it everywhere... Sometimes this is more like a curse than a blessing, because the normal audience doesnt really notice. Whenever I tell my girlfriend why a certain scene is ugly because of this and that in 99% of the cases she answers something like "mh, i dont see it - looks fine to me".

17 minutes ago, Jimbo said:

I owned the 12-35mm, great lens. The focus ring itself is nice enough, but I found it very difficult to consistently focus pull. Unfortunately it does have that annoying acceleration.

For comparison, I find the Leica 15mm much better for focus pulling. Although narrow, it's a nicer ring, has smoother action and has no acceleration.

I sold my 12-35 (for financial reasons, optically it's superb!) and then some months later I bought the Oly 12-40mm. Optically both zooms are amazing, but the Oly is so much better for focus pulling due to the clutch mechanism and no acceleration.

The pity about the oly 12-40 (and in general for all oly lenses that have this manual focus thingy) is, that once you are in the manual mode, you cant use the AF/AE-Lock Button (when configured to AF-ON) to do an occasional AF while otherwise being in this awesome manual mode. When you switch back to the normal mode, the focus ring changes focus again based on speed - very sad, because this would be otherwise the perfect thing. Seems only Canon EF glas is able to provide AF while having a somewhere decent MF at the same time.

1 hour ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

I just did a quick comparison with the 20mm and it's similar. Obviously it's bigger so it's easier to hold and the focus ring is also larger and wider. 

And i assume the faster you turn the ring, the faster focus changes? Because weird enough, on my 20mm this is not the case.. no matter how fast I turn it, the focus isnt changed any faster.

9 minutes ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

Sorry, it's a gaussian blur effect in FCPX. The lens is great if you have enough light. I ended up using the 15mm f/1.7  and 25mm in the next video because I think this video a little dark, and that looked a lot better. 

Too bad, I was afraid of that. How is manual focussing anyway with that lens? Dual IS is tempting...

1 hour ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

Here's a new video i shot with the GX85 and 12-35mm X. Skin tones look pretty good I think. 

Ah, now I also want this lens. Where the first few frames an actual focus pull or was it a dissolve effect of your editing software? If the former, boy this is quite a constant focus pull with a fly by wire lens... fingers crossed.

10 minutes ago, Simon Shasha said:

I'm on the verge of getting rid of everything and grabbing a GX85 + 20mm F1.7.

I wanna go back to basics...ultra basics :P

Nothing wrong with that combo. I totally dig it!

So, I am in the market for a handle that can be mounted on the hotshoe for mx GX80. I prefer something small and light - any recommendations or can i basically buy everything since there arent too much differences?

very nice! Started watching it before I went to work, will continue afterwards  I always like being reminded how great those cameras are.

If one looks at this pic:

It seems as if the G80 would have the same issue as the Olympus bodies for which Metabones created the Speedbooster S. That would really be a pitty.

Now that I worked for the first time with audio other than just slamming some soundtrack beneath a video, I found out why everybody is so keen on a mic socket :D

I have to agree with @Cinegain, once they fix the G80 stabilisation issues, this might be the perfect travel camera for me - with mic in, weather seeling and the fully tiltable screen. Sure, it is a tad larger than the GX80, so i still would keep it if i have to go really small (and put the pana 20 on it). Now if the oly pro zooms would have IS so we could have Dual IS... that would be just awesome. 

2 hours ago, Cary Knoop said:

Think about it, suppose you make a video at 30 frames per second and you use a shutter speed longer than 1/30 of a second. 

You would simply get duplicate frames because there is only time for 1/30 of a second per frame.

Yeah, but there is also 25p (PAL) and 24p... 

4 minutes ago, sgreszcz said:

 I also get good results with the Olympus 7-14/2.8 - what a nice lens that is.

Interesting, since you got that lens and that camera, do you care to answer some questions?

When you have the focus ring not pulled back to manual mode, how does this focus ring operate? does it change the focus pull based on speed? e.g. when you turn the ring faster, the focus pull is much shorter? or is it linear, e.g. the focus is not related to the speed you turn the wheel?

If you put the focus ring in manual mode and if you set the AF/AE Lock button in the menu to "AF-ON", can you use this button to auto focus while being in the manual mode of the lens, or does it (as it does for the olympus 17 1.8) disable the AF/AE Lock button, so that no AF is possible when the lens is in its manual focus mode?

8 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

Are you sure that the Sigma 18-35 communicates the focal length to the GX80 for the IBIS to adjust? Does it do it on the fly? That would seem like a huge usability concern. I can see the convenience of simply slapping a lens on and forgetting about it. For longer shots, you'd still need to remove the speedbooster; so, I'm not sure you're gaining much time or simplicity on that. IMO, simplicity would just be to put on one prime and that's it- many great directors have shot major films like this. Anyway, I look forward to seeing your future videos whatever the lens.

Well, at least @Andrew Reid told us in his review on page 1  And according to the master @conurus himself, with the new firmware it should work flawlessly. Well, in the end no review on earth can cover 100% of your personal requirements, so I will just test the Sigma. Since we all know, GAS is something amazing and evil at the same time

@John Matthews: thanks for your opinion, this might be a solution. Yet I know myself: although using a system that is based on changing lenses I know I wouldnt. Sounds stupid, but when I am travelling I face different situations all the time and I just know that I wont have the time for changing them based on the perfect moment. As @Cinegain pointed out some time ago, the camera (and thus the video) is the secondary focus, the trip it self is my primary focus. I dont do the trip to get the video, I do the trip and get as addition the video - if that makes any sense...

@bunk: damn, you guys are good. Exactly this scene was edited by myself a numerous times and I was never fully happy. Based on your and @mercer's remark I might do another take of the video and allign the sound as you suggested. Thanks!

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

I did not mean to replace the GX85 with the LX10, I mean for a cheaper price than the Sigma and the Metabones, you could buy the LX10 instead of, so you would be covered with a fast lens, with IBIS on the wide end. And probably, even with 2 cameras you would be carrying less weight than you would with the Sigma and Metabones. 

As far as your cutting, I would have enjoyed a few cuts that followed the snares since they were really driving the melody of the music.

Sorry, I never heard of Macklemore. I guess I'm showing my age. When you're in your early 40s, you probably will too.

True indeed, the lens is rather heavy and big. Yet, I dont see myself switching cameras during the trip a lot, again: choices...

About bass vs. snare: valid point. After watching again I think you are right that this would improve the video.

About this Macklemore guy, I did not want to express that everybody should know this song, I am sorry!

8 hours ago, jonpais said:

You've inspired me to take my microphone and audio recorder out of the closet, Jase. I wish I new something about how to mix my own music. May I ask how you added the sound of the water and stuff? Was that recorded on location, or added in editing? Surely, not the camera's internal microphone? And the editing, did you lay the soundtrack first, then cut the clips to the music, or what? Anyhow, i've got a lot to learn...  

About 70% of the sounds I got from freesound.org - the other 30% are from the internal microphone of the GX80, believe it or not  The sound of the creek with the frozen flowers is added, the other water sounds are from the internal mic.

I dont start editing without a soundtrack. Sometimes this is a process of weeks before finding some track that matches my idea of the video. Fun fact: I knew the soundtack already while being in Peru, so this wasnt so had this time. Since this is the first time that I used sounds additionally to a soundtrack, I experimented quite a lot how they can play nicely with the soundtrack. My findings are that i always use a very short fade in and a longer fade out, that sometimes goes into the next clip (for example the waves at the beginning). Yet sometimes you dont need a fade in/out (for example at the beginning when you hear the childrens giggle (which is btw from the GX80) followed by the birds).

@mercer thanks man, I always appreciate your opinion!

regarding the lens stuff: for now i am very happy with the GX80, it is compact enough to bring it everywhere without issues, so buying a new camera (except some canon 5d mk 3 :D) is currently not an option.

regarding your criticism: weird, because i made all cuts based on the bass within the song, so there shouldnt really be a cut that is not in sync :/ any particular cut you could point me to?

the soundtrack is rather known: it is an instrumental version from Macklemore's song Downtown (in a selfmade edit).

56 minutes ago, mercer said:

I thought the Sigma is fly by wire, it's just designed better. 

mh, but if it would be fly by wire, this would mean that Sigma changed the focus mechanism specifically for the EF mount, since the Nikon Version doesnt need any electronical contact. I doubt so, tbh.

4 minutes ago, Cinegain said:

Yeah, looking at the footage shot, it doesn't look like the gear is holding you back from the actual experience. The camera is just casually there, sorta speak. But the Sigma is a beast, true in performance as well, but the size and weight is not to be underestimated. 

Truth is: thats exactly what I thought. I have seen it in real once, and it is really big - but well, there is no such a thing like the perfect lens, is there? The Sigma ticks nearly all the boxes (focal length, lowlight, dof, AF & no fly by wire MF) yet at the expense of being huge.

It is true that I like the 20mm, but only for doing AF without any focus pull afterwards - too much throw for my taste and the ring is far away from being smoothly. I fear that the focusing of the 12-35 Pana wont be much better and I dont think i necessarily need the Dual IS, I am quite pleased with the footage tbh in terms of (or better lack of) shake.

Even more interesting is that M43 lenses know different types of manual focussing. Some of them are linear, no matter how fast you turn the focus ring (Pana 20mm, Pana 15mm), some respond to the speed of turning the wheel (oly 17mm) which is even more of a pain in the ass.

Choices...

Thinking of going with the Sigma 18-35. It is rather big, but with the XL it is reasonable wide and it has AF. When I want to be compact I will take my Panasonic 20mm 1.7 any day.

used, however with no signs of usage.

Just now, jonpais said:

I bought the XL for something like $700 including shipping to Vietnam. It costs $650 USD at B&H. How cheap are you talking?

absolute bargain: 300 euros!

37 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

 

The 18-36 Sigma would be 36-72 on m4/3, not wide at all in my book. Everything further from 24 is just not wide enough (that is why I detest the 18mm zooms for most APS-C systems, 30mm are not wide enough for me, 24-26 is much better)! As I said, everything is depending of the style of the video/photo-grapher.

Ofcourse there is always the speedbooster option..

Sorry, I forgot to mention that i could buy a Metabones Speedbooster XL EF Mount quite cheap, so the Sigma would translate into a 11,5-22,5 (23-45 FF equiv), which would be quite promising...