Ed_David

completely portable. small.  6k vs 30k used for a phantom miro.  
excited about this guy.
curious to see dynamic range vs miro (from demo reel chronos looks like 10-12 stops similar to miro and red one mx)

yeah extra stop with a speedbooster is always a plus with slowmotion

dang that looks like the same light!!  THANK YOU CHINA!

I'm excited about this one, I saw the original 300D's price got slashed on B&H by like $400 last week so I assumed a new one was probably on the way. Some more pics leaked to the Aputure Facebook group:

dang that looks like the same light!!  THANK YOU CHINA!

Sorry for the OT @Ed_David but I’ve been thinking about the FD-K35 comparison for a couple weeks now and how it correlates with the lenses I already own...
I guess it’s better than my obsession a few months ago with the triangular aperture, Rollei Zeiss lenses that were derived from the late 60s Super Speeds, Scorsese used in Taxi Driver.

i actually did do a test!  uploading asap
i have to reevaluate the test but it's also possible because I may have shot at T1.2 not T1.4 hence the k35 which is T1.4 or so (might be sharper) or I screwed up focus.  i'm not really the best at testing stuff in a scientific way.  I'm sloppy and lazy.

Seems like it might be quiet, but still holding out hope for the predictions I made in the other thread I started. Namely, a C100 Mark III or some other small form factor camera from Canon or Panasonic (think FS5 sized or smaller) in their new mounts (RF or L). 
a Black Magic BM Raw recorder would be great as well since I'm looking to switch to Da Vinci soon (also looking forward to that update).
Some other updates that would be great:
- An attachment to stick the DJI X5s on the Ronin-S would be great.
- Pricing and availability of the Panasonic 10-25mm f1.7 (or a GH6 tease).
- CFExpress official launch so we can update on XQD cameras and not be locked into Sony's cards. 
 

Predictions/Hopes for Blackmagic 16:

Better stabilization options.
Prores support in Windows
Dolby Atmos support.
More options in the export menu for customization.

And #1: Ability to use external monitors without their hardware cards.

i actually did do a test!  uploading asap
i have to reevaluate the test but it's also possible because I may have shot at T1.2 not T1.4 hence the k35 which is T1.4 or so (might be sharper) or I screwed up focus.  i'm not really the best at testing stuff in a scientific way.  I'm sloppy and lazy.

Will do, I have a nFD 50mm 1.4 that was modified to Nikon F so I will make sure the 1.2 L is worth the extra money. Of course, everything I’ve read and have been told claims that it is. But if it isn’t, I’ll surely sell it and make almost double what I paid for it.
It doesn’t really have to be that sharp wide open, 1.2 or faster lenses are really only useful for extremely low light or for that dreamy effect. So the question will be how sharp it is at 1.4 and f/2 compared to the 1.4 version...
Hopefully it’s noticeably sharper because the red band makes me feel cool.

I’m going to try out ML Raw on the EOS-M just so I can test the 50mm 1.2 out before I send it to get converted. It’s one of the cleanest used lenses I’ve ever bought, so I cannot imagine I won’t like it. I’m hoping it will scratch my itch for a couple other 50mm lenses I either have or am interested in. 
I just looked a few days ago for the 24mm and the cheapest one I could find was nearly $1200 and it wasn’t in that great of shape. Good copies were listed for $1600... I don’t think I’ve seen a lens raise in price so quickly. 
I saw another FD-K35 lens comparison on IG last week but I can’t seem to find it now.

You should do a test after this on the L versus the peasant models ? . From my tests the L simply aren't worth the extra over the slightly slower models, most the time the Ls aren't really sharp enough to use wide open anyway and at the same apertures both lenses are so close it's hard to pick them apart, sometimes the slower is even better ? . I have a set of nFD, I really like them.

The FD 50 1.2 L has an aspheric hand ground element.   I don't think the 55 FL/FD does (the older aspheric lens is a 50 1.2  as well).    That makes me think the K35 55 might be a little bit of an odd man out compared to the others (if they are based on FD L's) since both the 24 1.4 and 85 1.2 have hand ground front aspheric elements as well.    Just seems a bit strange to me that they would do that.      I sold my 50 1.2 L FD (wish I hadn't) but still have the 24 1.4 L and 85 1.2 L  and all three (along with the 80-200 f4 L also sold) were/are some of the nicest old lenses I have used.     I really should get my 24 1.4 converted to EF.     My 85 1.2 still needs fixing as it has the dreaded dissolving bearings issue that certain FD lenses can get (very loose focus throw now) but I can not use them at present.       Still keeping them for when I CAN use them again.

I heard that the Canon K35 glass, some of the most desirably vintage cinema glass in the world was based off the Canon FD L series glass.
 
I heard that the Canon K35 glass, some of the most desirably vintage cinema glass in the world was based off the Canon FD L series glass. I couldn't find anything on the web that showed these comparisons so I made the test myself. Results of what lenses are what are below. 
Results of what lenses are what will be answered soon!!!!

I bought one used.  it's about 1.5 stops better in the shadows than the c300 ii and same in the highlights (3.5 stops over key) - https://cinematography.net/CineRant/2018/07/30/personal-comments-on-the-2018-cml-camera-evaluations/
which makes it almost as good as any camera - well better than the alexa in shadows but, still alexa is the king in highlights.
it shoots pro res.  it does everything you wish the c300 ii would do.  well not raw light - i don't know why it doesn't do that - maybe I should ask them.
here's some stills with a zeiss 28mm standard speed - doesn't quite have full frame coverage.
i'll post a video soon to show more tests with it.

I think the 24-55-85 K35 are based on the FD but the versions before the L line was introduced.
I did read that the Aspherical elements were hand polished, I guess the L version industrialized the process more and got more consistent.

But then the K35 are a full and fast super 35 set, the 18mm 1.4  don t have a FD close equivalent.

I don t know how much better the mechanics are on the original K35, compared to a FD, and I wonder what the initial cost of a set was,  but I think the cost is over inflated today for what they are.
I considered getting the 24-55-85 FD and convert them to e-mount but after watching a lot comparison I found them barely more interesting than a set of samyang .

There is a lot of marketing BS for this kind of things, when the K35 are warm, low contrast and soft it s cool and fancy, but when you get the same thing with a cheaper option is a defect and its not desirable anymore.

I bought one used.  it's about 1.5 stops better in the shadows than the c300 ii and same in the highlights (3.5 stops over key) - https://cinematography.net/CineRant/2018/07/30/personal-comments-on-the-2018-cml-camera-evaluations/
which makes it almost as good as any camera - well better than the alexa in shadows but, still alexa is the king in highlights.
it shoots pro res.  it does everything you wish the c300 ii would do.  well not raw light - i don't know why it doesn't do that - maybe I should ask them.
here's some stills with a zeiss 28mm standard speed - doesn't quite have full frame coverage.
i'll post a video soon to show more tests with it.

Great test, thanks! I recently learned the same thing about these lenses, which led me to buy an FD 50mm 1.2 L. Of course, the K-35 version is a 55mm and most likely based off the FL/FD SSC version since the 50mm wasn’t even released when the K-35s were released... but I prefer the 50mm focal length over the 55mm, especially since it’s supposed to be closer to a 45mm.
I’d love the 24mm, but it seems the prices on that lens have went up almost a grand in the past year or two. 
To add, I’m on the fence and almost prefer the FD version due to the extra bump in contrast. They both flared fairly dramatically so for the difference in price... the FDs are a great substitute. 
I look forward to your real world test. 
Also, the old FL 55mm is a nice little, low con lens that has a really smooth look. It can be had for peanuts. Edmika does a mount conversion to EF through Simmod.

I heard that the Canon K35 glass, some of the most desirably vintage cinema glass in the world was based off the Canon FD L series glass.
 
I heard that the Canon K35 glass, some of the most desirably vintage cinema glass in the world was based off the Canon FD L series glass. I couldn't find anything on the web that showed these comparisons so I made the test myself. Results of what lenses are what are below. 
Results of what lenses are what will be answered soon!!!!

Thanks Ed!
I think with this particular focal length and aperture the difference in price is not worth it, though there is a difference and I believe more money in the instance equals better flares / less flaring which I like better.

Unless you are deliberately throwing in red herrings, you might want to check 1:03 and 2:59 mate  

I heard that the Canon K35 glass, some of the most desirably vintage cinema glass in the world was based off the Canon FD L series glass.
 
I heard that the Canon K35 glass, some of the most desirably vintage cinema glass in the world was based off the Canon FD L series glass. I couldn't find anything on the web that showed these comparisons so I made the test myself. Results of what lenses are what are below. 
Results of what lenses are what will be answered soon!!!!

I bought one used.  it's about 1.5 stops better in the shadows than the c300 ii and same in the highlights (3.5 stops over key) - https://cinematography.net/CineRant/2018/07/30/personal-comments-on-the-2018-cml-camera-evaluations/
which makes it almost as good as any camera - well better than the alexa in shadows but, still alexa is the king in highlights.
it shoots pro res.  it does everything you wish the c300 ii would do.  well not raw light - i don't know why it doesn't do that - maybe I should ask them.
here's some stills with a zeiss 28mm standard speed - doesn't quite have full frame coverage.
i'll post a video soon to show more tests with it.

I bought one used.  it's about 1.5 stops better in the shadows than the c300 ii and same in the highlights (3.5 stops over key) - https://cinematography.net/CineRant/2018/07/30/personal-comments-on-the-2018-cml-camera-evaluations/
which makes it almost as good as any camera - well better than the alexa in shadows but, still alexa is the king in highlights.
it shoots pro res.  it does everything you wish the c300 ii would do.  well not raw light - i don't know why it doesn't do that - maybe I should ask them.
here's some stills with a zeiss 28mm standard speed - doesn't quite have full frame coverage.
i'll post a video soon to show more tests with it.