WideEyedPictures

Anyone have luck with these? It's the portable TV that appears to be listed in multiple ways. - https://www.ebay.com/itm/Leadstar-D12-Portable-12-Inch-TFT-HD-VGA-ATSC-ATSC-M-H-TV-Television-Digital/113238067392?hash=item1a5d83c8c0:g:zEsAAOSwM9xbk-n9:rk:7:pf:0 or - https://www.ebay.com/itm/12inch-Digital-Television-ATSC-Portable-TV-1080P-HD-HDMI-Video-Player-Free-Ship/202473711845?hash=item2f245fa8e5:g:CbgAAOSwVx5bx~Ut:rk:2:pf:0 I just bought one for the heck of it. Needed something larger than an on camera monitor that we could use in our small video village. But the image is stretched vertically, subtle but noticeable. No matter what aspect ratio I put it on, it's stretched. Auto, 16:9, Panoramic, Point-to-Point all result in a vertically stretched images. 4:3 squeezes the image horizontally. Zoom1 and Zoom2 both punch into the image but it's still stretched. The output of my GH4 doesn't look like this on the SmallHD or on my LG TV. But I've tried C4K and UHD modes of 4K. I've tried 1080p. All of those GH4 settings result in a stretched image. So it must be the TV... right? Maybe someone knows something I don't and can help me - worth a shot. Thank you!

Hello, I'm curious if anyone knows of coupon codes for sites like HollywoodCameraWork.com or MZed.com Thank you!

Hi BenV, Would be very interested in seeing your footage with that combo as I'm thinking of getting the same lens. I've seen some footage from others, but am dying to see more. I ordered a cheap knock-off adapter - no idea what it'll be like. I expect it to not work as well as the Metabones, but I'm getting it anyway and will run my tests and report back, but it may be a while, just saying!

I appreciate your help (and defense) very much! It would appear that the result is the same regardless of the order of multiplication (listen... I'm an artist who's not good at math - sorry!) Lens*Crop*SB is the same as Lens*SB*Crop Either way, it looks like that makes total sense to me now. I know the formula and I can apply that for any future lenses I may check out. But the last mystery remains - how to do this with an ASP-C lens who's FoV would be different on a MFT lens as opposed to a full frame equivalent. But I THINK I know how to figure this out and will report back.

I may have fallen victim to the mistake several others have made. I certainly understand the difference between focal length and field of view. I said the former but meant the latter. So my curiosity lays in what the field of view equivalent is of a normal lens when placed on the GH4 with not only it's 2.3x crop field of view inherent of that sensor, but the effect of the focal reducer which opens the crop up a bit more. And my curiosity and confusion increase with lenses made specifically for APS-C lenses. I understand a lens like that will "see" just as far as any lens of the same resume but it's field of view is narrowed thus lessening the crop factor - I just don't know what math to do to figure that out.

Is that so? As I understood it, APS-C lenses actually direct the light into a more narrow area. This is why an APS-C lens on a full frame camera shows so much vignetting. Thus, if the amount of area the APS-C lens's light is producing, that seems like it's helping to decrease the crop factor some by putting more of the entire lenses image onto the sensor than that of a full frame lens.

...and a Speedbooster! I'm trying to wrap my head around what the mathematical formula must be to gauge how wide/zoomed lenses will be on a GH4 with a Speedbooster. What I know so far: - Shooting 4K, the crop is 2.3 - Shooting 1080, crop is 2.0 - Metabones Speed Booster lessens crop by 0.71 - Generic Speed Boosters lessen crop by 0.72 Is the math: " FF LENS x CROP x BOOSTER ="? or for a 18mm lens: 18mm [Lens] x 2.3 [4K Crop] x 0.72 [Metabones] = A 29.808mm lens equivalent? To make matters more confusing to me, that only covers full frame lenses, so how do we determine the results on lenses for APS-C lenses? That I have NO idea on how the math may work. Thanks so much!

I was curious what the zebra levels (both 80% and 100%) represented depending on the different luminance levels you have set. For example, if you're using the 0-255 luminance level setting, does the 100% zebra represent whites that are 255? Does the 80% zebra represent white that are at 204? Thank you!

Yes it can. Effects>Stylize>Add noise. Here's the interesting bit, under the 'Add Noise' preferences in the Inspector there is a pull down menu for "Type", one of those options is specifically "Blue Noise (reduces banding)".