PannySVHS

Nice little test. If you want an upgrade from that Cosmicar try the Zeiss Tevidon 25mm F1.4. Covers full sensor and has all of the c-mount appeal for around $100.

The konica hexanon 40mm is really really sharp.
I used to use it as an anamorphic taking lens but the "dracula's coffin" bokeh is very distracting.
Wish it had more blades!

I hadn't heard that about the Miranda. Interesting. I know that some of the Yashica ML lenses were made in the same factory as the Zeiss Contax and supposedly Yashica used some of the Zeiss glass. I have the 50mm f/2 and the 28mm 2.8, but the 50mm 1.7 and the 24mm 2.8 are supposed to be the real jewels.
The Cosmicars are nice lenses... I have the 12.5, 25mm, 50mm and the 75mm. I was thinking about getting an FP and hoping that the 50mm would just cover the FF sensor.
I also have the 10mm Zeiss Tevidon in the bayonet mount. I bought the c-mount for it but haven't gotten around to installing it yet.
My new favorite lens is the older Sigma 50mm 1.4... the EX DG. I've never used the Art version but I hear it's even better. My only issue with it is that the focus ring is horrible. It makes you want to buy the cine version of the lens. Here's a couple test shots from it...


 

over here we have a small goods manufacturer named don
i'm just going to leave the slogan right here. by the way you need to enunciate that with the proper Italian accent.... and welcome back don 😀 
 
 

Improvement would have to be seen when heavily graded. The thin AVCHD codec with its low bit rate should show so much mare artefacts than ALL Intra. Also in movements more mushiness due to compression.

The lantern will spill light everywhere (unless you flag it).
An octabox will be more focused with the light throw.
Ideally, you would want an octabox (or round softbox) as a key light and maybe a lantern as a fill light.
If you want to light from overhead, then maybe the lantern is the best.

Cosmicar lenses were made by Asahi Pentax, so it's not that much of a surprise. These were probably made in the 70s, so right after the move from Takumar m42 to Pentax K. I have a full set of Cosmicar c-mount lenses I need to test on my BMMCC.

oOh  do tell us more... confession is good for the soul 

GX7 was a fav of mine.  
That had some great IQ mojo.  I like the image better than my GH5.
I'd shoot with that thing again without hesitation.  Still bummed I lost that camera.
It had the weirdest glitch though.  You can't do 60p with a 60shutter speed.  You had to set the shutter to 125 for the camera to legitimately record 60 frames per second.  60p/60ss would result in a 30p video...even though it would register as 59.97 in the meta data.  Damndest thing.

Here's some a7s color...
 

Welcome back Don and a happy new year from us!

Welcome back, dear Don! Now that sounds like a worthy phrase from cinema!:) Now I have to check out that Takumar 28mm F3.5!:)
Happy New Year, everyone!

No, I think you have that mindset... You know good POVs of other people contribute for deeper insights of ourselves : ) P4K is able of that contribution IMO : ) For some reason they've called it a Pocket camera! : D

Let alone, cinematography is definitely beyond lighting ; ) lensing calls for composition work and universe creation as you Marty fairly say, for sure :- )

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0347660

Ah, I see.
You need at least 2 hard drives and preferably 4 (or more).  The minimum recommended setup is:
Drive 1 - OS and NLE
Drive 2 - Project files, Scratch, & Media Cache
Drive 3 - Export and Storage
Some people further separate Project files and Scratch, etc.
 

Yeah I admit the colours are sort of wonky in todays standards but I think that is why I like it. Sort of like American West Coast Grunge Music. Gritty and great at the same time. A Modern OG BMPCC, well not that good but you get the point. But yeah to be honest I don't think I have ever tried BW on one so yeah I think you are onto something.
I just like how you can approach Photography, Video with a whole new mindset of doing both in low light situations you would never consider on a "normal" camera. Although I am not much into getting up before the sun rises LoL.
 

Fair enough.
Perhaps my reaction was to your rather polarised stance on a few of these issues.
I'm not against AF at all and I do agree that when you have one face in a static shot that it's a mechanical task and not an artistic one.  However, I find that AF picks the wrong thing to focus on when given multiple subjects, and I also find that the speed of AF is an artistic attribute, at least in some situations.  Maybe not for the content you're creating though.
I was also suggesting that there might be a depth of field that was somewhere between F4 and camcorder/smartphone.   For reference, the DoF of a 70mm lens at F4 at 10ft is 1.47ft, which I can understand a subject *might* move out of.  The 70mm equivalent on a 1-inch camcorder (a larger size camcorder sensor, as I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here) is a 23mm lens, which at f2.8 (once again, benefit of the doubt) at 10ft gives a DoF of 12.7ft.  
So you said you wanted a DoF deeper than 1.47ft, and when I suggested that you could stop down slightly, you leapt to the assertion that I was suggesting 12.7ft.  In my book there's a reasonable range between 1.47ft and 12.7ft.  Especially if you're willing to recompose, or try some other tricks, like maybe going to a wider lens, having the subject sit slightly closer, and therefore increasing the blur on the background.
I am also familiar with forums, and sadly that means that almost every question has a faulty premise, usually due to lack of knowledge on behalf of the OP who is almost always asking how they can buy their way out of their poor results, and frequently using shallow DoF to cover up for poor quality content.  I didn't immediately assume that you were in this situation, but as your statements also lacked nuance (eg, anything larger than 1.47 is at least 12) and didn't mention that you needed shallow DoF to cover up poor content that you weren't in control over, so that was what caused me to question your approach.
Anyway, now I realise that you're in the unenviable position to be trying to sell video production to people who want videos to be great despite being dull as dishwater and who have swallowed the latest marketing hook-line-and-sinker with the usual "more resolution / sharper footage / shallower DoF".
All the best with your search for great AF, great colour science, great codecs, small form factor, modest price - we're all waiting for the perfect camera too, come join the queue 🙂 

I knew a professional photographer (think Sports Illustrated covers) who switched from Nikon to Canon back when Canon F-1 was their top of the line camera.  He said he could only afford the switch because Canon sponsored him.  He also did a USA television commercial for Canon.
So, I think pro photographers will wait until it is absolutely necessary to switch. 

Nikon will make out like bandits then. There are pro photographers who will never switch away from a reflex finder. My father is a landscape and wildlife photographer, he switched a couple years ago from Canon to Nikon, and has never looked back. For some, these two brands are basically the only two they’d even consider, specifically because of full pro full frame reflex models, and one of the two just end-of-life’d all their reflex bodies. 
 
I’d love to see Oly step into that second slot, or even better, Fuji GFX. Sony and Panasonic will never, it’s just not their style. 

Incredible... I have my 5D2 in pristine condition (like new actually and we got an entire feature film shot* with a couple of them directly to the big screen) since 2009 and still rocks especially matched when coupled to the ML booster ;- )
* shot in the early years of the previous decade:
 

We've been in touch through private messaging during this pandemic period but we haven't seen his posts so much over this family more recently ; ) However seems he's restarting to make our days better with his thoughts available to all once again : ) Love this guy!
@webrunner5
 

I'm still digesting the images but thought I'd share some background to this test, and my lenses in general.
I shoot a few different scenarios, short outings with family (eg, a walk on the beach), events with friends and family (eg, state fair or other kind of event), holidays with family (domestic and international), and the kids playing sports.
The aesthetic of what I shoot is quite specific as it's about what happens, which means:
The camera represents me and my POV most of the time, so how I hand-hold it and compose images, what I focus on and how fast I do so (manual focus), is part of the videos I make. I have one aesthetic - sentimental.
I don't film when my wife is tired, we get lost, the kids are grumpy, someone is getting yelled at for misbehaving, etc.  These are the videos of memory, the people who we are, where we went, what we did, the experiences we had.  It doesn't have to be rosy, but it's either near the neutral point or on the positive side of the spectrum. I have one subject - family and friends interacting with each other and the situation.  Environmental portraits really. I have four fields of view.  These correspond to (FF equivalents): 35mm which gives environmental portraits from the distance I normally find myself when travelling with friends/family, which lines up nicely with the subject/location interaction.  This is most of my shots. 16mm which gives those WOW shots for architecture and large vistas. 85mm which is the perspective of seeing little moments that other people are sharing that I'm not part of (eg, my wife interacting with the kids while they don't know I'm watching / filming). telephoto (150mm+) which is the experience of looking at animals at zoos or safaris, people playing sports, or detail shots of large panoramas (eg, lookouts over cities etc). I shoot what happens, I don't direct, I get no second chances.  We experience life first, shooting comes second, always. This also means I want to attract the least attention, because being surrounded by people who are looking at the camera isn't my idea of a great holiday. I am moving from representing what happened to how the experience felt.  This is a fundamental shift and pushes me in the direction of softer renderings, playing with time, elements of non-linear editing, more creative colour grades, and essentially going the exact opposite of the video look.  A pretty good compass is that if someone with a P4K or P6K and Sigma 18-35mm says I should do something, I should do the opposite! I don't yet know what lenses will best give this aesthetic, but I do know that I don't want to shoot RAW as my shooting ratio is high and file sizes become ridiculous, and due to compressed files always being sharpened I don't want overly sharp lenses.
I find myself in so many different scenarios that trying to separate things out in this way doesn't quite work, so I'll start with the equipment and work backwards.
I have three main cameras, and these naturally pair with certain lenses, and suggest suitability for different things:
GF3, which has good colour but poor 1080p codec, so really needs to be paired with super-sharp lenses.  It also lacks IBIS and any control in video mode at all, but has pretty good AF. GF3 + 15mm F8 'lenscap' lens - truly pocketable, fixed focus, has the 30mm FOV, but rubbish low-light so it's day only GF3 + 14mm F2.5 - still pocketable (just), but can do low(ish) light GF3 + 12-35mm f2.8 - not pocketable, has OIS, flexible zoom range GX85, which has good colour, good codec, IBIS, but is quite sharp (even on a 1080p timeline).  Best paired with vintage lenses to avoid the video look. GX85 + 12.5mm F1.9 - ~35mm FOV, sensor coverage isn't 100% even with EIS enabled, so composition trips me up sometimes. GX85 + 28mm F2.8 + SB - 44mm FOV (not too far away from 35mm) and shallower DoF than the 12.5mm (even at F4) GX85 + 28-70mm + SB - 44-110mm FOV, potentially a great walk-around combo GX85 + Helios + SB - 90mm FOV, lovely images GH5, which is great at almost everything, but is large and doesn't have great low-light.  This is almost always paired with primes. I currently shoot MFT, obviously, but may eventually go FF.  This lead me down a line of thinking where I realised that a FF F1.4 lens is only one stop slower than my F0.95 Voigtlanders, and if I put them on a SB then I can get the same exposure into the GH5 (which doesn't have great low-light).  
Also, because the DoF is so much shallower on FF lenses, if I matched the DoF to get the same amount of background defocus as I have now (which is useful for subject separation in the very busy environments I shoot in), then I'd only need to sacrifice one stop of light, which would be fine in most situations.
This leads to the following:

So, I would need:
15mm F8 (or faster) 24mm F2 (or faster)* 35mm F4 (or faster) 60mm F2 (or faster)* 85mm F4 (or faster) * = lenses to be used with SB on MFT prior to moving to FF.
One massive con to the whole thing is that I'd be throwing away the huge advantage that MFT has had over FF until very recently, which is the ability to gather a huge amount of light but not pair it with unusably shallow DoF.  MFT has a two-stop exposure advantage over FF for the same FoV/DoF, which I really need with the poor ISO performance of the GH5.
I suspect that this advantage will become nullified in future due to Dual-ISO, and there's no way I would buy a FF camera without that - trying to focus an 85mm at F1.4 when that exposure-level is required would be ridiculous and not show enough subject and environment so is basically a non-starter for me.
I realise that I have significant demands on my equipment that many others don't have, but I compensate for it by working really hard (as these forums give a taste of - I shoot lots of stuff no-one here sees, except maybe @mercer) and I temper my expectations too.  
Also, and this is a big one, I don't expect 4K.  Many many things become easier when you're publishing in 1080p rather than 4K.  Resolution hurts in ways that people are't willing to discuss because those that have bought into the idea don't want to hear the alternative views, despite the fact they don't jump on anyone who wants to buy a 2K Alexa...  All testing I do is "what is visible on a 1080p timeline?".  If the Alexa looks great on a 1080p timeline then why would I want more?  It's ridiculous to even contemplate, but people do.  Anyway.
Some thoughts....  @Emanuel even asked for them!
To provide some context for people that haven't seen these images already, here are some samples of the kinds of things I'm shooting.  Most of these are basically ungraded, so don't judge my colour grading 🙂 

The Takumars for the money I think are pretty hard to beat. If you win the Lotto the Voigtlanders are probably top of the pile, not counting the best at low light. Most other older stuff tops out at f2.8.
Don't rule out the old Olympus film Zuiko's. Their size is hard to beat. Poor mans Leica lenses.