mercer

Although it's not exactly what you're looking for, I'd have to second the Nikon Series E lenses. They truly are remarkable little lenses. I haven't been able to find a good copy of the 35mm 2.5 but the 36-72, 50mm and 100mm are nice little lenses, especially the size of the 100mm. Also the older non-ai lenses are pretty spectacular as well. One lens I hate to mention because it does get such bad reviews is the 35-70 3.3-4.5 ai-s lens. It's tiny and a lot better than the bad reviews give it. I mean, it isn't great, but there's something very Nikon in its not greatness. Another zoom lens I love, which I assume you're familiar with is the Canon FD 35-105mm 3.5. This lens is ALMOST parfocal. Obviously constant aperture. Internal zoom. Fairly compact. I've had a few copies over the years, then end up selling it because I didn't use it too often, regret it and seek another one. My most recent copy I put on the Sigma FP and here's a sample of it at 105mm wide open... No mind-blowing image by any means, but fairly sharp wide open and I like the way it handles the highlights. Of course it's a mess in direct light... as I found out last week during a shoot. However, there are rumors that Canon considered putting the L badge onto it because they were so happy with the lens. As far as primes, other than the Nikons, the Takumar lenses are a personal favorite of mine. I've heard people argue that the 28mm 3.5 is one of the best 28mm lenses they've used. I haven't used that one but the 35mm 3.5 is excellent. I've used a couple of the wide angle Tokina lenses from the late 70s, early 80s and they were decent, but I think they were f/2.8 lenses. Obviously you could get a cheap Neewer fixed ND to pop on the lens and leave there to give you that slower stop and to protect the front of the lens. Also check out the old Vivitar lenses, I have a set of mostly Tokina made ones in the m42 mount and I have always been very fond of them. The image instantly feels like an old 70s made for TV movie. I'm probably going to sell them though, not because I don't like them, I just have too much stuff and really need to scale back. I guess you could also look at some of the older Zeiss Jena lenses... even the MF ones would give you the slower apertures you were looking for wide open. Great thread! Wish there were more threads like this on here like it.

It was just a joke because @MrSMW has switched back and forth between systems (cameras) a few times in the past couple years. No offense intended.

You'll be back to Sony and/or Nikon by the fall.

I have it in my GH6 and I feel like it's a game changer for that camera. Didn't love the camera when I had it a couple years ago. Felt like vLog was only slightly better than CineLikeD. With LogC, the mapping of the DR seems way better and the images look higher end to me. YMMV.

I love that lens. Wish I didn't sell it.

I wondered the same thing. I noticed when I activated the code, I could also deactivate. And it states to keep the activation code handy in case I need to reinstall after a firmware update, so I think you may be able to use it for one device, but I'm not certain. The code may forever be tethered to that serial number.

I went with the GH6 again for for a few reasons... 1. Official Arri LogC profile - it's even embedded in the metadata, so FCPX reads it as Arri footage. For someone who will probably never shoot with an Alexa, I must admit it's a stupidly cool thing... 2. ProRes 3. IBIS 4. Flip up screen Honorable Mention - I didn't realize how good the preamps in it were going to be. With good mic placement, some of the audio is perfectly usable.

I've read that they are good. I had no problem with them the first time I owned one, I had a problem with the chroma noise that the DR Boost produced in the shadows. I bought it this time because it was so cheap and I wanted to be able use Arri LogC. It really is a phenomenal camera though. Now I just need to figure out my lens situation with it. I've been shooting full frame for so long, and I have a small(ish) collection of vintage lenses that the price of any good m4/3 lens annoys the hell out of me. I've been using a 7artisans 24mm that is pretty good for what I paid for it. But I need something else.

I love the colors on my cheap GH6... oh wait... I'm using the Arri LogC profile...

That would be amazing, thanks. And if anyone has seen any of my shots, they know I love a seaside town!

Man, my 50 years are starting to show. I now remember all of this. At least I didn't technically quote you to you. And I also remember how fantastic your focus module works. I need to stop buying cameras and lenses and send my money to you.

Picked up a used GH6 and got the LogC firmware and I am loving it. I have a Lens Turbo in FD mount and the underrated 35-105mm Canon lens, but am looking to keep this set up as native as possible. I picked up a 7artisans 24mm 1.4 on the cheap and am pleasantly surprised by the lens, especially since every review I could find of it, trashes it. Since almost every review was with the lens on an aps-c camera, I assume some of the goop is cropped out with m4/3. Anyway, I'm looking for a cheap zoom, probably a Panasonic kit, that is better than it should be. I intend on making it my Spielberg f/5.6 lens, but then I got to wondering if any of the kit lenses are accidentally parfocal? I'd love for the little 14-42 PZ to be that lens, but for some reason I doubt it. I assume I'll eventually give in and get the 12-35mm for the added IBIS, but the point of the camera is to keep it on the cheap. Here are a few frames from the 7artisans in case anyone is interested. These were my first few shots with the lens and the LogC profile. Other than the Arri LUT and an s-curve, no construction equipment was harmed with this set up...

For the m4/3 shooters, Pan/Leica 15mm 1.7 or Sigma 16mm 1.4?

Think you mentioned the C500 II... on B&H Deal Zone today for $4999. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1633519-REG/canon_3794c002_eos_c500_mark_ii.html

Exactly, the worst part of the P4K is the body, one of the best parts of the OG is the body. With a different comparison, I saw a video today of the BMMCC6K held up next to the Pyxis and I couldn't believe how big the FF 6K is... it looks bigger than a 1DX and other than form factor, not much smaller than the Pyxis. The Pyxis seems like the obvious choice between the two. I sure do, that's one thing I do know. Ha, I know that even more. I feel like there are so many good cameras out now that you almost can't go wrong, but like always, the best camera is right around the corner and we're just in a betweener stage. Maybe you just need the Z mount Komodo X... problem solved. Canon should just buy BM, and then I can hate them both together.

If cost isn't an issue and your intent is narrative filmmaking, then why not get an Alexa Classic?

It has the same sensor as the P4K, right? How do you like it compared to the original? Did you order a Komodo yet?

I assume you'll be able to navigate the menus through the monitor?

In that case, why don't these companies just do that? A 2.5k or 3k raw image from a 6K sensor would look amazing, need less storage, have better rolling shutter? Higher frame rates, and be closer to the OG Alexa resolution. Why do they have to force crappy versions just to keep the resolution higher?

Was excited to hear about the internal raw recording in the Z5ii and then a little less excited when I watched the Gerald Undone video... and then when he started showing real world footage, he was literally wearing a Sony Alpha jacket while recording a Nikon review... why are these competing companies sending him these cameras? That said, the review was fine, raw implementation in an IBIS body, with decent AF, at this price has been a dream of mine, but it seems like there are so many gotchas that I am left bewildered why these companies even use raw? If your'e going to add NR, then what's the point of a smoothed over raw file? I shoot raw because I prefer the gritty textures that feel like you could reach into the frame and touch it. I said in the Komodo price drop thread that I wouldn't be a customer, but at the current price, maybe I'd be better off saving up for a Komodo. Theoretically, that camera could provide a viable image for the next 5-10 years for me. And with all that said, it is still exciting to see raw video to an internal SD, with these features, at this price point. When I read this post, I had already thought about posting my FP up for sale and preorder the Nikon, now I'll wait to see how it does with more serious shooters in the coming weeks/months. The FP lives to see another day.

Now I am in no way comparing the 5Diii with ML Raw to your more expensive cinema cameras, but I do agree. The first time I looked at the screen after installing Magic Lantern onto my 5Diii, I saw something a little nicer than anything I had seen on an LCD before. With a few very minor tweaks in post and I was able to get images I had no business getting with my skill set. When I tried the same thing with the FP, I didn't see it and I wasn't able to get the same level as easy in post as it was with my 5Diii. Weirdly, I noticed it more with the 4K 8bit cDNGs than I did with the 12bit... although I admit that the 12bit is a superior image... if only Sigma would turn off the damn NR in their raw files. Anyway, it was definitely easier to see than any run of the mill mirrorless I have used since, though. Although the R7 amazes me in some ways. From what I have heard from various people online, @Mattias Burling included, that quality is there with Redraw, Redcode... whatever it's called. That doesn't mean that modern mirrorless cameras aren't capable of creating amazing images. They obviously are. With the advent of raw codecs and post workflows, I agree that the gap is getting smaller, but... That said, I have no business owning a Komodo, so it doesn't mean much to me and more than likely, depending on what the R6iii looks like, I'll probably buy a Z6iii next... of course I have been tempted by the FX30, so I may give that a shot in the meantime.

Except not all raw video is the same. Most people I have heard that used Redraw have specifically stated how nice it is to work with. I think Andrew has confirmed that? To compare it with another raw would require someone who has both.

Idk, cinema cameras cost a lot for a reason. As far as mirrorless cameras have come, they're still not proper cinema cameras. In a lot of instances, the benefits of mirrorless may outweigh the benefits of cinema cameras, but at this price point, it's hard to argue against the Komodo if you intend to shoot certain types of projects. If not, then it's a simple pass. I will say it makes it a bit harder to justify a few other cameras at a similar price point. But this price will go away once they run out of the bins of RF mounts they have in stock. The questions is, what will Nikon do next? Will they replace it with a similar camera at a similar price?

And Arri may have mapped it.

What's interesting about the LogC license is that it was probably mapped for that specific sensor. The vLog could have just been tossed in. Maybe. Either way, cool camera and shots.