Timotheus

I just bought the EF-MFT version without focal reducer to use my Sigma 18-35 on my G7...will try and report back when I get it. The speedbooster version is coming soon, from what I understand. Compare versions here and here.

Hey guys, just a shoutout for this pretty impressively featured iOS app. Was surprised to learn about it through Caleb Pike's video below, as it had been released for a while. Sure it doesn't replace a true monitor, but you get a whole lot of professional functionality to practice with (waveforms, vectorscope, anamorphic desqueeze, LUT support). If you would like to see an Android version, just drop the developer a line to let him know there is interest. Homepage here https://www.adamwilt.com/fieldmonitor/

I guess it depends on you priorities. Both combo's give you roughly the same field of view, both are sharp. The Nikons + SB will give you al lot more light and more shallow DOF. But they will be a quite lot more expensive, and the whole package will be significantly larger/longer/heavier than when using the Sigma lenses. (BTW, the Kowa needs to be well aligned to be able to perform at wide open apertures, see Tito's video on the sharpness fix).

Well as we're talking about a compact camera, a compact lens solution seems fitting and so: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1334046-REG/slr_magic_slrac_40133_anamorphot_1_33x_40_adapter.html 1.33 though. And mounting will be an issue with any lens on the RX100 There is also the AIvascope, 1.75x

Thanks! Large front optic seemed promising concerning wide-angle coverage, but alas.

Hey @au8ust, @Hans Punk and @Phil, sorry to dig up this old thread but a copy of this lens was up for auction. How did you end up liking it? Any good? Or is the unresolved nature of this thread indicative of it's meager performance? ;-)

I think the first two are the same actually (although the price differs significantly at B&H, must be a mistake, same type number). The third one is the new, compact one.

The new 5" smallHD Focus is a monitor only (so no recording) but it has different desqueeze options.

Don't discard some mighty fine APS-C glass you can use, and that DPAF is great.

Insightful: "Complete Guide To Image Sensor Pixel Size" (note: this piece is photography oriented, for noise performance in video more/other factors are also at play). https://www.ephotozine.com/article/complete-guide-to-image-sensor-pixel-size-29652#APS-C-Sensor

I like it, should be possible on the touchscreen also (touchscreen-focus-tracking might actually be possible in some models...M5?).

Ouch...that test video you shared is no good, too many differing variables between shots. So, what @tupp said. Newer, cropped sensors often can perform perfectly fine in low light nowadays. Things get even better with a Speedbooster. Having said that, a larger sensor will gather more "total light". So in theory, when using two sensors with the exact same parameters (MP, exposure triangle) except size, the larger one will perform better in lower light (as in producing less noise). For stills, this is pretty obvious. In video, things get less straightformward because other factors play a part (such as method of downsampling, see @Inazuma's examples). But there is a reason why cinema camera's use s35 or larger sensors...

@PhilipV I'm somewhat confused as you ask for a 35mm, but then the widest possible. So do you mean 35mm focal length or a wide lens used in analog 35mm photography? If we're talking 35mm focal length, I can also recommend @Bioskop.Inc's Mir 24N (nice flares also). Furthermore check Super Takumar 35mm/F3.5 (compact and sharp), or the 35mm/F2 (more expensive and longer). For 35mm/F2.8 there are many, many options. Well known are Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon and the Mir-1 (which is actually 37mm).

@Andrew Reid Just wanna say I am enjoying your current editorial output...on a roll man.

For anyone looking for a great monitor/recorder, the BM Video Assist is on sale AND has finally got an anamorphic desqueeze through firmware. Check https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/support/readme/e4e05190041545a7933378d614ddbfd4 No details yet on desqueeze ratios, though.

^ I love how this never gets old. As for Canon, sure there will be a rational, clinical, business explanation for their choices. I also believe that the negative vibes people get from them are going to hurt them in the longer run. No fullframe 4k option without crop, no 4k over hdmi on the 5d4, no 4k on the 6d2, no c-log on flagship 1dxii, no basic video functions as peaking, 45 AF points on the 6d2 but all in the center, no middle codec on the c200, only 9 AF points on the 200d... All this considering Canon pricing. And that it is 2017. It just feels like pure calculation and/or cynicism. I don't like that. Now why would you make potential customers feel this way?

Congratulations on removing the step ring! Glad it worked out. But that second ring...no, I left that on haha. Can you put it back? Does it have a screw thread as well? What does the RF look like without it?

Mmm, tricky...mine got loose after unscrewing a rather tight fit. It then required little effort to remove and just soms acetone to clean the glue rests from the threads... Perhaps you could try and wiggle with some filter wrenches? Or try to get acetone on the threads to dissolve the glue :-/ It sure evaporates quickly, so even if you spill a little on the glass it shouldn't be too bad.

Well this promo suggests that any concerns over the film's looks might be premature. Amazeballs. Do hope that Gosling shows a bit more range in the final product though

Yes! (only requirements £800 and waiting a few weeks / months) :-p

Heads up to users of the 72mm version of the SLR Magic Rangefinder (the discontinued one without distance markings)... The rear 72mm attachment ring on mine had some rotational play. I decided to see if I could remove it. I succeeded, turned out the connector was a step ring glued on! Underneath a 77mm thread, just like the one with distance markings. See pictures. Trying to remove the step ring (at your own risk ;-)) might be worth it as it brings the RF closer to the attached anamorphic glass, benefiting vignetting. Conclusion: both versions of the Rangefinder are mechanically the same. The budget version just misses distance markings and got a step ring tacked on (!).

...and a follow up Sigma suggestion: the 10-20mm, in two versions: f4-5.6 and a more expensive but constant f3.5.

@Christina Ava Can confirm this. Can also confirm this lens deserves all the praise it gets. Buy used for even more of a steal (although a small investment in the Sigma USB dock is recommended). Suprised no-one mentions the very cheap Canon 10-18mm with IS. You gotta mod the EF-s mount, but that should be easy. See below.

Daaamn Kees...brilliant combo. You got a good deal on that Bolex?

Wth is that about then?