BTM_Pix

It certainly is, thanks for doing that.
Much appreciated.

I just remembered that the 17mm F1.4 has a strange filter thread size I don't have an adapter for, so I went with the Voigtlander 17.5mm instead, plus I also did the Voigtlander 42.5mm as well.  I took stills on the GX85 so you can see the full sensor readout, and the SOOC images below are the actual images from the SD card and 7.9MB each so pixel pee to your hearts content if desired.  I even remembered to set the taking lens to infinity and focus with the adapter!
Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, no adapter, SOOC:

Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, SOOC:

Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, de-squeezed (0.8x vertical size adjustment):

Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, no adapter, SOOC:

Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, SOOC:

Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, de-squeezed (0.8x vertical size adjustment):

Hopefully that's useful.
I took a shot of something round last week and pulled it into Resolve and rotated it 90 degrees and lined it up at 50% opacity to test the squeeze factor, which turned out to be just under 1.25x, but I suspect this might change depending on the focus distance.  I don't know if it might also change with the taking lens, but I'm probably not going to do extensive testing on all my lenses.  Also, for my purposes, it's meant to be a controlled degradation so nailing the squeeze factor for all focus distances isn't a high priority.
Let me know if you want any other tests, some of these are pretty quick to do.

Here at a camera store in Berlin we have the 3 musketeers.
2012 vintage RX1R OG, the one without the AA filter.
It's very nice and I can't understand why it only goes for $900 used. Because it's got a much better lens than the Leica Q.
No red dot though.
RX1R II, the one with the tilt screen, phase-detect AF and pop-up EVF. It also shoots 120p, albeit no 4K. It also has a further innovation - the AA filter can be switched on and off.
This was Sony when they felt they needed to catch up with Canon and Nikon by really pushing the boat out. 2014-2015 vintage Sony. The $2000 mint condition used RX1R II is reasonably rare but when you do find one, it's still cheaper than the Leica Q OG and closer to the Leica Q2 in terms of image quality.
The pop-up EVF is mechanically a thing of beauty and offers a big field of view. Although without a rubberised eye cup, it isn't the most ergonomic or comfortable.


So to the new one, the one with the 10 year gap.
Sony have made sure to price it so that nobody buys one, which is good because they want you all to buy E mount lenses.
Just to summarise the street prices:
RX1R: $800-900 used
RX1R II: $2k used
RX1R III: $5100 / 4900 euro
The lens is identical to the previous cameras.
Which is fine to be honest, but I had more issues with the AF in macro mode on the RX1R III vs II. Weird.
I also dislike the finish and build quality, doesn't feel as premium. It feels a bit like the A7CR. Not great and nowhere near a Leica and the RX1R II also feels more premium. I do prefer the buttons though on the new camera, they are raised for a more tactile feel.
Gone is the pop-up EVF, in place of it a smaller standard one. The resolution of the live-view feed is better, but the overall optic is worse and more pokey.
Gone is the articulated screen. Which is a really weird one.
In comes a fatter battery - very welcome.
4K is there with no crop in 24p/25p... However, there's no IBIS or even OIS, which is a downer.
The AEL button has changed to an AF-ON... Again a welcome change, because the first two models had no back-button AF at all. Well done Sony.
So if you're looking for a full frame compact, the first two models are a steal.
I got the RX1R II again.
I regretted selling it the first time out!

Yeah, I have a bunch of M42, but none wider than 28mm as it's all FF vintage.
I'll grab some shots.

Sirui first light....
I'm not 100% sure I've done everything correctly, so take these with a pinch of salt.  Also, the Sirui has a vND on it but the normal shots don't, so that might account for the WB and polarisation differences.







The advice I heard was to set the taking lens to infinity and then focus with the adapter (single focus setup) but the AF on the taking lens seems to work just fine and Uncle ChatGPT says that setting the taking lens to infinity is more likely to be an optimal setting rather than the only setting that will work.
Here's a shot where I set the adapter to minimum focus and then focused closer with the taking lens..  I don't think it's properly focused though, and the bokeh isn't squished much at all, so this is probably quite far from optimal settings, but also possible.

Obviously I have a lot of testing to do, but if I can still use the AF to fine-tune the focus then that's even better as I can sort-of zone-focus with the adapter and then shoot quickly with AF like I normally do!
Overall though, a very promising start..  despite it being so big and heavy!!

Do you have those clips that I did with it?
Because I’m fucked if I can find them anywhere !
I’ve got some frame grabs from them (with the base then the different ARRI LUTs applied) when I was moaning on here about the warpy IBIS on the S5ii but not the actual clips.
Not that they are a great loss to the world !

Nice is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
But if people don't mind log shots of mainly grey buildings under grey skies in Salford then have at it !

Do you have those clips that I did with it?
Because I’m fucked if I can find them anywhere !
I’ve got some frame grabs from them (with the base then the different ARRI LUTs applied) when I was moaning on here about the warpy IBIS on the S5ii but not the actual clips.
Not that they are a great loss to the world !

I was on a very, very slow internet connection this morning so YouTube was loading in instalments.
It loaded the titles but the thumbnails were a long time coming and it’s interesting how much more appealing a lot of the videos were to me when just looking at the title but how much less so they were when the thumbnails eventually loaded.
I’m probably missing out on a great deal of good content by my inner “oh fuck off you absolute tit” dialogue when I see the content creators stupid gurning shock faced bullshit.
Whether the narcissism that infects so many of them would allow them to just do a content relevant thumbnail is the big question.
I can hear the ”But the algorithm makes us do it” whining from here.

I was on a very, very slow internet connection this morning so YouTube was loading in instalments.
It loaded the titles but the thumbnails were a long time coming and it’s interesting how much more appealing a lot of the videos were to me when just looking at the title but how much less so they were when the thumbnails eventually loaded.
I’m probably missing out on a great deal of good content by my inner “oh fuck off you absolute tit” dialogue when I see the content creators stupid gurning shock faced bullshit.
Whether the narcissism that infects so many of them would allow them to just do a content relevant thumbnail is the big question.
I can hear the ”But the algorithm makes us do it” whining from here.

An update on my testing.
I was thinking about what I wanted - something low quality in the optical path to dirty up the image a bit, and then it struck me - what I want is a cheap wide angle adapter!  Then I remembered I had bought one years ago and went and found it and gave it a go.
It's too small for most of my lenses (it's 52mm but most of my lenses are 58mm) but is a cheap 0.45x wide angle adapter so I shot some quick tests.  Here are some direct with/without comparisons to give an idea of what does.  These are all SOOC so ignore the incorrect WB settings and mismatched exposures etc.  All lenses are wide open.
GX85 + 14mm F2.5 without adapter:

GX85 + 14mm F2.5 WITH adapter:

Very interesting and definitely makes the image wider.  If I use a zoom then I can match the framing and we can get a more direct comparison.
GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at 12mm without adapter:

GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at ~18mm WITH adapter:

GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at ~25mm without adapter:

GX85 + 12-35mm F2.8 at 35mm WITH adapter:

Very interesting results and in the direction I'm going for.  As a proof of concept it definitely has promise, but I'd need to buy one correctly sized of course.
BUT, then I put it on the TTartisans 50mm F1.2 and fully wide open (of course!) basically all hell breaks loose!
GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 without adapter:

GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 WITH adapter:

It's obviously not rated for F1.2 lenses!!
The bokeh is also heavily modified too, which the above images hint at, but check this out....
GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 without adapter:

GX85 + TTartisans 50mm F1.2 WITH adapter:

These are the sorts of things you can't do with plugins, so this is what I'd be chasing real optics to do.
However, the most interesting thing about a wide angle adapter is that it's basically a speed booster, so you get more light into the lenses and you also get a wider angle of view, which means that to get the same angle of view with the adapter you can use longer lenses, which can give shallower DOF for a given f-stop.  Double bonus for MFT!
So, I ordered the cheapest 58mm wide angle adapter I could find, and ordered the cheapest vND I could find to fit it (as the fronts are larger than the rear which makes it larger than my good vND.
Oh yeah, and I also watched a bunch of reviews of anamorphic adapters and after seeing the prices (wow!) I just ordered a Sirui 1.25x anamorphic adapter, which is the cheapest of the bunch by a long shot.  I'm not really that interested in the streaks but the softening and edge distortions should be great, and it's also like a horizontal-only speed booster so will let me use longer lenses for the same FOV.

There is a time for a clean aesthetic.  There is a time for a more timeless more filmic aesthetic.  There are times for a far grittier aesthetic too.
Those who have been following my other thread will know I've mostly got my travel / walk-around AF setup nailed.  
(GH7 and GX85 bodies combined with the 14-140mm zoom, 12-35mm F2.8 zoom, 9mm F1.7, and 14mm F2.5 pancake lens)
This setup will give a relatively clean starting point which can be graded to create a pretty wide range of looks.  
However, not everything can be achieved in post.
I have also collected a bunch of modern MF lenses and vintage lenses over the years and these might be useful in creating other looks that I can't do in post with the above kit.  So I'm trying to work out if I should just archive them or if they're still good for anything I want to do, and if so, what might that be?
I've looked through my continually growing collection of lens comparisons, but found nothing conclusive.  Thus begins a moderately sized lens / camera test...

The setups included in the test are below.  The details in brackets are the FF equivalents.  
OG BMPCC + 12-35mm F2.8 (35-100mm F8.0)
This setup is included as I think it will be a reference for the rest of the setups (at worst) and might end up becoming part of my standard kit (at best).
  GF3 + 15mm F8 (30mm F16)
This setup is included as it's essentially a modern Super-8mm camera, and considering it is absolutely tiny and takes the same batteries as the GX85 it's almost inconsequential to bring on a trip.
  GX85 with: Modern: Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 (24-70mm F5.6) Modern: Panasonic 14mm F2.5 (28mm F5) Modern: Panasonic 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 (28-84mm F7.0-11.2) Modern MF: TTartisans 17mm F1.4 (34mm F2.8) Vintage: Cosmicar 12.5mm F1.9 SB (36mm F5.5) Modern MF: Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 (35mm F1.9) Vintage: SB + Yashica 28mm F2.8 (40mm F4.0) Vintage: SB + Tokina 28-70mm F3.5-4.5 (40-100mm F5.0-6.4) Vintage: SB + Takumar 35mm F3.5 (50mm F5) Vintage: SB + Mir-1B 37mm F2.8 (53mm F4) Vintage: SB + Takumar 55mm F1.8 (78mm F2.6) Vintage: SB + Helios 44M 58mm F2.0 (82mm F2.8) Modern MF: Voigtländer 42.5mm f0.95 (85mm F1.9) Modern MF: TTartisans 50mm f1.2 (100mm F2.4) I haven't included all my lenses, but the ones I have omitted have been included in other tests previously and are broadly similar to ones I have included, so if they become interesting as a result of this test I have some more reference materials. 
I watched a doco on Netflix the other day called Attack on London, and was really inspired by the look of the 'recreation' images they have obviously filmed for the doc, and seem to have used one of the filthiest anamorphic lenses around (and potentially added more dirt in post as well).  Here are some screenshots..  These might not have been streamed at the highest bitrate available, but I don't care - they look great and have so much texture and feel.








This isn't the exact aesthetic I'm going for, but it's one that I saw recently that has a lot of texture and FEEL.  My hope is to work out what the ingredients are to getting this kind of feel and then work out when I would want it and then work backwards to what equipment and processes I'd use to get it.
My initial impressions (guesses) are that the ingredients are:
shallower DoF lower levels of sharpness decent amounts of grain film colours (especially having a tint and having subtractive sat) The above images have more elements to them than this, but I don't care much for things like CA etc, so I don't think they're part of the minimum required elements.
I plan to shoot comparisons with the setups above in a range of different scenarios and then see what I can see, before moving onto the post workflows and what role those play.

Do you have those clips that I did with it?
Because I’m fucked if I can find them anywhere !
I’ve got some frame grabs from them (with the base then the different ARRI LUTs applied) when I was moaning on here about the warpy IBIS on the S5ii but not the actual clips.
Not that they are a great loss to the world !

I was on a very, very slow internet connection this morning so YouTube was loading in instalments.
It loaded the titles but the thumbnails were a long time coming and it’s interesting how much more appealing a lot of the videos were to me when just looking at the title but how much less so they were when the thumbnails eventually loaded.
I’m probably missing out on a great deal of good content by my inner “oh fuck off you absolute tit” dialogue when I see the content creators stupid gurning shock faced bullshit.
Whether the narcissism that infects so many of them would allow them to just do a content relevant thumbnail is the big question.
I can hear the ”But the algorithm makes us do it” whining from here.

Do you have those clips that I did with it?
Because I’m fucked if I can find them anywhere !
I’ve got some frame grabs from them (with the base then the different ARRI LUTs applied) when I was moaning on here about the warpy IBIS on the S5ii but not the actual clips.
Not that they are a great loss to the world !

Not AI but this will significantly speed up the manual process and is a good all round productivity booster in general.

For this task (and you can have multiple presets for other tasks) I’d have the left and right inner buttons assigned to the Première Pro keyboard shortcuts for previous and next clip respectively, the centre button to play/pause, one of the outer ones for the export shortcut and the jog shuttle for the jog shuttle.
Workflow would be hit the button to move to next clip, play/pause button and jog/shuttle to locate and then export key to capture.
Rinse and repeat moving to the head of the next clip each time.
Nothing you couldn’t do with mangling your fingers to do the shortcuts but far, far more ergonomic for such a repetitive task.
As I say, they are just generally useful devices for everything editing related.
And not a bank balance drainer at £65 either.
Also, as it’s based on driving keyboard shortcuts it can move with you to different applications.
https://contour-design.co.uk/products/multimedia-controller-xpress

It also benefits from having IS.
 

I have this lens and this is a simple range example from one spot that  I did with it for someone on here many moons ago.

It is actually more like a 70-200 f2.8 size wise for carrying but that is down to it being a push pull design which isn’t exactly great for smooth continuous zoom shots.
But is ideal for practising the trombone.

Another range example I did with it here, this time on a GX80.

 
Its a very powerful combo but, despite the 35-350 being compact for what it is, when it is mounted on the GX80 it is all a little bit ... 

I have this lens and this is a simple range example from one spot that  I did with it for someone on here many moons ago.

It is actually more like a 70-200 f2.8 size wise for carrying but that is down to it being a push pull design which isn’t exactly great for smooth continuous zoom shots.
But is ideal for practising the trombone.

This was introduced last week and offers a raft of new features but the one that seems to be catching everyone's eye is the (paid for) ARRI LogC3 option.
https://www.panasonic.com/uk/corporate/news/articles/panasonic-introduces-extensive-new-firmware-updates-for-its-lumix-s-series-cameras-s1rii-s1ii-and-s1iie.html
Surprised there hasn't been a discussion about this already on here.
I'm guessing that could be that no one has yet bought those camera types or is too busy wondering why they are spending so much effort looking after a cat that isn't their cat but has just turned up and convinced itself that it is now indeed their cat to be discussing camera firmware updates.
Or, in my case, both.
A bit of a caveat is that it doesn't work in RAW...
 

It also benefits from having IS.
 

Another range example I did with it here, this time on a GX80.

 
Its a very powerful combo but, despite the 35-350 being compact for what it is, when it is mounted on the GX80 it is all a little bit ...