bunk

Color looks fine to me ...the balance of the sound on the other hand not so. No idea what the girll was talking about, the music is way to loud to my ears.

What would help is if you advance the sound track some four frames. I downloaded the 720 version and it helped imo. The cut's should fall in place where you feel the beat ...not where the beat is.
For the same reason the trompets feel out of sync when your brother turns his head. It's out of sync and you will never get in in sync as it doesn't match, although they idea is good. What you can do is make the cut on the trumpets starting with this frame↓ and it "feels" as if your brother turned his head on the beat.

my 2 cents
 

What would help is if you advance the sound track some four frames. I downloaded the 720 version and it helped imo. The cut's should fall in place where you feel the beat ...not where the beat is.
For the same reason the trompets feel out of sync when your brother turns his head. It's out of sync and you will never get in in sync as it doesn't match, although they idea is good. What you can do is make the cut on the trumpets starting with this frame↓ and it "feels" as if your brother turned his head on the beat.

my 2 cents
 

Apart from how you want to place the filter inside the speedbooster (sillyputty comes to mind) and keep it there, I think you will reduce the effectiveness of the filter significant.
The APS-C lens through a speedbooster will pass almost all light to the m4/3 sensor and thus in effect use the complete filter diameter of 72 mm. The effective diameter of the lens inside the speedbooster is only 32mm. That's trashing a lot of filter.
Just something to consider.

Thanks for sharing.
It's incredible strong footage, you just have to look at the histogram. Even after torturing it doesn't fall apart.

It's almost a punishment to get back to GH4 footage after playing what comes from the terra. Luckilly the BMPCC gives a bit of the terra feel

I remember Northrup being ridiculed here on this forum. JCS was the  one who came to his “defense” and made the article he linked to in his post one page back. It’s simple math, it’s how things work.
It’s not a coincident that Houdini, Max, Maya, SoftImage, Modo, Lightwave, Blender, you name them all will give the same outcome when you set up a camera test. They all use the same math from the beginning of 3D time.
Hollywood uses it to produces blockbusters. The test I made was completely clean but you can add distortion to mimic specific lenses and maybe even sensors (wouldn’t surprise me).
I’m not a lens specialist but I don’t think a 25mm F0.7 exists in the real world, yet I used it in the example above. But that is not the issue here.
The question was what are the full frame aesthetics compared to the others. And they answer should be the technical limitations we have to deal with in every day live. But those will be solved and when that happens, the answer is none.
Then the believers will start to point out the differences in characteristics of lenses and or sensors but like Gatopardo said they are there between FF lenses and sensors as well …and since there will be more computer generated lenses within time than vintage lenses, those differences will fade as they will all give the same dull characteristics and you won't be able to tell what camera or lens was used ...and I'm talking about consumer cameras as this is a consumer forum.

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion

The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso.
Resulting in for instance the properties below.

Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF
 






You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise.
Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info.
CinemaFile.zip

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion

The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso.
Resulting in for instance the properties below.

Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF
 






You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise.
Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info.
CinemaFile.zip

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion

The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso.
Resulting in for instance the properties below.

Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF
 






You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise.
Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info.
CinemaFile.zip

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion

The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso.
Resulting in for instance the properties below.

Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF
 






You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise.
Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info.
CinemaFile.zip

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion

The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso.
Resulting in for instance the properties below.

Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF
 






You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise.
Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info.
CinemaFile.zip

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion

The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso.
Resulting in for instance the properties below.

Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF
 






You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise.
Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info.
CinemaFile.zip

In Cinema 4D I set up 2 cams. A FullFrame Camera driving a Crop camera. I used releas 13 which is from around 2010, way before the whole Northrup discussion

The Xpresso above is based on Crop x Focal Lenght, Crop x Aperture and (crop)squared x Iso.
Resulting in for instance the properties below.

Three different points of view. 2 x a 50mm f1.4 and 1x 105 mm f2.8 lens in FF
 






You can check them in Photoshop, or better render them out yourself (file attached, Download the demo) but I'm pretty sure they are to the pixel precise.
Let me know how to contact you so I can give you my Paypal info.
CinemaFile.zip

Thanks for sharing.
It's incredible strong footage, you just have to look at the histogram. Even after torturing it doesn't fall apart.

It's almost a punishment to get back to GH4 footage after playing what comes from the terra. Luckilly the BMPCC gives a bit of the terra feel

Thanks for sharing.
It's incredible strong footage, you just have to look at the histogram. Even after torturing it doesn't fall apart.

It's almost a punishment to get back to GH4 footage after playing what comes from the terra. Luckilly the BMPCC gives a bit of the terra feel

Thanks for sharing.
It's incredible strong footage, you just have to look at the histogram. Even after torturing it doesn't fall apart.

It's almost a punishment to get back to GH4 footage after playing what comes from the terra. Luckilly the BMPCC gives a bit of the terra feel

Just messing around with some clips...
 

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.

I'm not Kidz 'r Evil, but gave it a try anyway... Feels like solid footage.

I like that one the best!

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.

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!

 

That's probably because you only watched it.
In that case it's the best DSLR footage you will ever see
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.

I tred weird lightroom session just for fun
 
 
 

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.
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.