bunk

I like it very much. It’s sharper than the 20-35 f2.8 and has the same old fashion build of the 35-70 f3.5 The focus throw is around 90 degrees. Wish it had the 120+ degrees focus throw of the 35-70, alas. It weights 600 grams. It’s close to if not parfocal and doesn’t breath. For $ 200,- it’s a steal in my opinion. There is one for $ 109.- on ebay at the moment, the glass looks fine.
The only disadvantage I can think of is that filters attach to the focus ring. But since I don’t use variable ND’s hardly a problem.

As it wasn’t for this site I probably  wouldn’t have bought it.
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/zoomsMF/2550mm.htm

Reason I like those old lenses is that you can do simple maintenance yourself …and if you fuck up you buy a new one and keep the other for spar parts.

btw. A nice trick to check if your zooms are near focal is to use a marble and make sure the sun creates a nice hotspot on it. Zoom in and focus on the hotspot and the zoom out. If the shape or intensity of the highlight changes it’s not parfocal. The 25-50 is spot on, the 20-35 not too much, and the 35-70 not at all. Before I discovered this phenomenon I thought all three were close to parfocal.

For what it's worth. I have both a R.J.Camera and a metabones bmpcc speedbooster. Tested both on my GH4 with the nikon 25-50 f4. As both have different cropfactors I had to scale the R.J.camera a small 10 %. Adjusted the colors a bit (more green in the meta) ...and I have to say, to me the R.J. doesn't look worse.

Metabones_vs_JRcamera.tif

JRcamera_vs_Metabones.tif

I think you’ll be fine with whatever profile you use. As far as I can see, the Classic Chrome profiles are more or less the same …at least I don’t see a difference worth mentioning. There is a bit more magenta in the Pro Neg Std profile but no doubt better to correct than I did.
from top to bottom
-ProNeg,
-CC 0,
-CC -4

Thanks for sharing.

14 minutes ago, Tim Sewell said:

Audio transfers just fine with my GH4 and FS700 to the BMDVA (non-4K). Also you can audio in directly via mini-XLR inputs on the recorder.

???? ...the 5'' doesn't have any mini-XLR outputs, as far as I know.

On 24 September 2016 at 0:17 PM, Lothar said:

I think Resolve doesn't throw away information regardless of the meta data of the codec.

Seems you're right. I tested it with my gh4, with a  0-255 and 16-235 luminance level. Came in exactly the same.

On 24 September 2016 at 0:17 PM, Lothar said:

Since I also own a BMPCC, what issues do you see to match BM and fuji clips?

No idea as I never tried it. But I do know grading BM footage is completely different from grading either gh4 or x-t2 footage. I only have a bmpcc for a little bit longer then a week now and still have to get used to it ...but the footage coming out of it is not comparable to my GH4, even externally recorded 10 bit prores HQ. The bmpcc walks all over it... Should have bought one way sooner.

1 hour ago, Lothar said:

How can I check this?

You could check the waveforms. Judging from your footage, it's fine as it seems to use the whole range.

btw thanks for uploading. Feels a bit thin after playing with BM footage for days but I like the colors.

7 hours ago, Jimmy said:

If you read the post you quoted, I was actually talking about viewing 2D content within VR (in an IMAX style VR cinema).

Ah, that's not how I read it. In that case ignore my post ...and I would like to add, isn't 8 K slightly over the top for just one element? Unless people like to zoom in on the screen and loose the overview of the movie they are watching.

2 hours ago, Jimmy said:

?

You say 1920x1080 isn’t good enough anymore, but it’s still the standard. Let’s create a VR rig with this standard in mind.
Screen 16:9, 50mm lens turns out you need 12 cameras to complete a 360 circle. That adds up to 22K to get anything descend and that just the equator.
Back to your 8K with 12 cams 50mm lens. You end up with 640 per cam,i.e. 640x380.
With an 21mm lens you only need 6 cams, on 8K you end up with 1280x720 per cam or HD. a quarter of the standard you just trashed. But it’s worse as you also include the poles within the 8K.

26 minutes ago, Jimmy said:

This has shifted my thinking away from 1080p towards as high a resolution as possible. VR and AR will need 4k, probably 8k

So you end up with 720 or 1080 per point of view. Doesn't sound like you really shifted away, more like you are tired of looking at 640 and less.

Btw isn't this thread about what codec best to use to archive stuff.

4 hours ago, Asmundma said:

We most probably could use neutral picture style and use a lut and some grading and have the same result. Its the film emulation lut + some grain that gives the look.

Only one way to find out ...do a couple of shoots in different situations with both profiles and see if you can match the neutral to the eoshd c-log. Next check what hapens if you apply the luts that came with it.

Wow! Love it, great work (yet again).

I looked up the lyrics. The images seems to fit them like a glove. Thanks for sharing.

cleared my plate 
is it safe, is it dangerous 
to fly in your arms? 
open wide, open up 
open minded folk 
dressed and ready to go 
for a ride 

see you soon 
my afternoon 
my midnight snack 
sunrise 
lucky penny, heads up 
perfect timing 
and the jokes are spot on 

rotate my body like an office chair 
throw me down the stairs 
write a check before you leave.

On 9/9/2016 at 1:24 PM, Hanriverprod said:

I didn't mean to sound negative on the footage or the camera, in fact, I'm excited that another small company is putting these cameras out there.  Good times for indie filmmakers!

Your first post was fine and i completely understood it. Sorry for the confusion.

Back at my desktop I gave it another try. Just love to grade this footage!

3 hours ago, Hanriverprod said:

I think the  lighting is bad in this shot.

Might be the lighting but I suspect before all- in my case- my grading capabilities. There is almost too much room to grade. Grading on a very reflective laptop doesn't help much either. An attempt to get better highlights. Follow IronFilms advice try it out yourself it's fun.

13 hours ago, DBounce said:

Just watched it. Looks OK, but I will confess this footage does not exactly blow me away. Waiting for more.

That's probably because you only watched it.

13 hours ago, j.f.r. said:

Looks like DSLR footage.......

In that case it's the best DSLR footage you will ever see

10 hours ago, funkyou86 said:

I'm no professional grader, but damn after t3i and Gh4 the grade just cuts through like butter. 

And that's an understatement. Best footage I ever laid my hands on. Can't get it to break, really impressed.

If I wasn't the amateur I am, I would order a Terra right away.

2 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

I cropped in 100% on this video with the UM46k, using 4K.

I think he wants to know how far you can crop into 1080 footage from the UM, before it breaks down.

26 minutes ago, Liam said:

Sorry, maybe wasn't very clear. Both of those are Andrew's clog. The one labeled "clog ungraded" was a frame from t3i video, the other is a jpeg photo.

Ahh ...OK, still like the 'clogungraded' better than the Jpeg photo ....even if the share the same exact grade from beginning to end

7 hours ago, Liam said:

hope my smile brightens some people's days

Well at least this day as it's a nice escape when I get stuck with my work.

Both have the same grade. The grade was based on the 'flat' one and later applied to the "Clog" version. Both lips and skintone look better on the "Clog" version imo.

18 hours ago, jgharding said:

Can't wait to shoot with this in 720p120fps in 2035! LEL.

It must be 2035 already as there is a version of the C700 with ...global shutter.

Adapterrings of different brands with the same mount defiate enough to make mounting of one brand of a lens on one and the same speedbooster a frustrating experience. Let alone mount different brands of lenses with their repsective adapterrings one and the same speedbooster.

In my experiene you should not use one speedbooster for severall mounts. 

I tried for my C/Y lenseses, Yashinon 45-135 and nikkors with a ef-mft speedbooster. In the end none of the lenses would reach infinity or stay parfocal. Once I found out the Yashinon is "parfocal" with a slight modified speedbooster, I kept the glass in the speedbooster fixed in that position. I then adjusted the C/Y lenses so they would reach  infinity ...which is a relative easy job with C/Y lenses. I'am pretty sure that if I mount those adjusted C/Y lenses on a dedicated C/Y speedbooster they would be way off.

For my nikkon glass I bought a n/g-m4/3 speedbooster.

4 hours ago, tupp said:

The protective metal "tongue" on the back of some of the Nikkor lenses hits this forward flange, preventing the lens from being mounted.

Nothing a rough wetstone or iron vilings can't get rid off. I think I removed around 5mm from the metal tongue (aluminum) of my 20-35mm nikkor and it mounted just fine with adapter ring on the ef speedbooster.

15 minutes ago, Fredrik Lyhne said:

I just sold my GH4 learned how out much easier it is to grade footage from the GX85.

 

Just so I understand correct. You find it easier to grade your Natural footage shot on your GH4 than the Natural footage you shot on your GX85. How is it easier?

5 hours ago, andy lee said:

Film companies dont relase any hi res stuff until after the film is released  [snip] 

there is no micoblocking on the actual footage I shot .

Aha, I see. Looking forward to the original footage once it's released.

2 hours ago, andy lee said:

Panasonic G7 superb in low light

There are a lot of macroblocks, both in top and to a lesser degree in the middle picture. How are you going to hide them or are they just not visible enough.

12 hours ago, sanveer said:

 Would anyone with the GX85/80/7ii know?

One Point Color under Creative Control mode see pag 84 of the user manual.

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/dscoi/DMC-GX80/EG_EC_EF_EB/guideENG.pdf

GH4 has it as well, never used it so can't tell how well it works.

7 hours ago, jonpais said:

Would focusing on my iPod be easier than using the touch screen on the GH4?

Well you wrote " This evening, I tried setting the camera on manual focus and using the AF 'button' on the touch screen to set focus and move around, but that didn't turn out so well either."

I was under the impression the reason that didn't turn out too well, was that you challenged the gimbals extra by unbalancing the camera when touching the screen. The Ipod can be attached to the handle with a clamp so no extra load on the gimbals.

But apparently it had an other reason.

Did you try the app. If memory serves me right you can focus with screen of your ipad/phone as well.