BTM_Pix

I remember a similar thing came up a couple of years ago and a fix that apparently worked was to rotate it a couple of times around its axis.
It might be worth a go.
 

 

I believe it only offers a S35 crop. Due to the compression methods from the 6K sensor, some say that the S35 crop is superior... but I didn't buy a FF camera to shoot in S35. And the difference is probably minimal and I don't care about minimal.
But as usual, I'm probably the weirdo here, because I still prefer good 1080p over run of the mill 4K.
For instance, I mentioned earlier that I think some lenses shine with certain cameras. After thorough testing, most lenses look pretty good in 4K. By that I mean, most vintage lenses have a certain level of sharpness that is good enough due to the 4K. In fact, I think vintage lenses help to tame the sharpness... resolution of 4K.
Now with my 5D3/ML Raw, some of those same lenses just don't work. But with a more modern lens, the image looks really good, in my opinion better than the FP.
Here's a shot from the 5D3 with the older non-Art Sigma 50mm 1.4...

 
And here are a couple shots of the Takumar on the 5D3...

Obviously, they're different shots so in some ways they're incomparable...
And here's a B&W shot with the Tak on the 5D3 that's a lot more interesting...

So what's my point...
I have way more options than I need and B&W makes everything look cooler.
That is all. 

YouTube link is now up
 

Here's another shot from the Tak/FP combo. I don't know about anybody else, but I have been noticing some major disparities between the image in my computer and what the image looks like posted to different sites/devices, so this is also a test of that for me.

Either way, I really like this lens with the FP. I've been saying for years that some lenses just work better with certain cameras. I was about to sell this lens, now I'm going to dig through my closet and find my 35/3.5 Tak.

In other news, I finally had a chance to get out and shoot some stuff yesterday with the FP. For this outing I brought along an oldie, but a goodie... the Super Multi-Coated Takumar 50mm 1.4.
Here are a couple shots that didn't turn out terrible...


I'm still using my old MB Air from 2014, so I can't always say the image posted looks exactly like my graded image. I hope to upgrade my computer soon enough.
That said, I'm in the middle of a test for a short film I am hoping to make this summer.
But to stay on topic, I forgot how amazing the Tak 50mm is and I really like it with the FP.

Picked this up second hand at a good price as my introduction to anamorphics. Here's some tests shot last night.
 
 

The camera itself can’t be powered over USB but that hub does allow the zoom on demand to be used simultaneously with SSD recording so that is a positive, albeit that BM doesn’t specify it in the manual.
He reports no issues with doing it so that’s all we have to go on and it might well be that BM doesn’t specify it because there are a LOT of USB hub/SSD combos that people could use that would make it a support nightmare.
The zoom on demand handle is very much a sledgehammer to crack a nut to get that external control though as it certainly takes away the Micro element and its primary function is only compatible with a few very average lenses.
The hub usability (difficult to refer to it as compatibility until BM official support it!) does open up the possibility of them making a more appropriate form factor interface for some external control.
Or maybe someone else will if there is sufficient demand from people buying the Micro as a cinema camera…

I think the closest that you're going to get with that will be the Sigma contemporary range.
They are behemoths compared to what you can get in MFT but, actually, when you line it up against an MFT package of actual equivalence (or slightly less in this case) then the story changes.

Its just that with MFT you have the option and thus far in L mount then you don't.
Unless....
You don't mind sacrificing a daft amount of money and going APS-C and picking up the Leica range that they made for the TL and CL which are very compact indeed.

Leica have abandoned APS-C and Panasonic seem content to sit either side of it with their MFT and L mount so it might be a place that Sigma could carve a niche for themselves with an APS-C body, particularly as they have an excellent set of fast primes and a zoom for it.
With the trials and tribulations of them trying and thus far failing to make a full frame Foveon, it could well be that it would find a home for an interim APS-C version in a rehoused Fp. 
Realistically, though, the only current way to get pancake-ish full frame in L mount is to go for the manual focus route of using M mount on them like I've done on mine here with a 35mm f2.

As @MrSMW has just posted, the E mount system is currently better served with compact FF lenses particularly in regard to 3rd party manufacturers like Samyang.
The closed shop nature of the L mount alliance (in terms of electronic lenses at least) is definitely a hindrance in that regard.

If you do go down the ATEM path then I think you might be interested in my new product as it addresses exactly this type of operation, amongst many other things.
 

Try PhotoJoseph’s complete 3 1/2 hour masterclass here:
The Mini Pro versions of the ATEM have the MultiView option for the HDMI output and the Extreme has the hardware macro buttons.
Audio delay is adjustable per channel.
If you can stretch to the ISO version of the Mini Pro or Extreme then each individual channel and the master are recorded to SSD along with a project file of all the cuts that you can then load directly into Resolve to re-cut it.
If you are using BM cameras then you can then automatically swap in the original camera media and there is now a workaround (see PhotoJospeh’s channel) to do this with any camera.
I have designed two products for the ATEM that will be released at the end of April and one of those will be of interest in terms of creating custom functionality for DVE etc as well as offering more direct control of existing functions that do not have dedicated hardware input on the control surface.

I’m not sure as a hardcore fan of any sport how you could be lukewarm about systematic cheating as, well, it doesn’t seem very, erm, “sporting”.
From my personal point of view as a pro sports photographer covering Tour de France in that era though I’m far from lukewarm about having sat in press conferences being lied to  by him and watching him ridicule and soil the reputation of David Walsh and Paul Kimmage.
Or Emma O’Reilly.
I’m also sore that in Armstrong’s case, unlike all the other ones I’ve covered, that I get zero residuals from my “winner of stage x” or “winner of TdF x”  images 🙂
I might be being old fashioned here but I’d give it to the highest placed cyclist that wasn’t using PEDs.
I have some sympathy with the “well they were all at it” aspect so, fine, let everyone do it and have a special event.
Just don’t call it sport when it’s only being used by some of the field.

London Camera Exchange. I’m still kinda thinking they accidentally put it up at the wrong price!
The ones on MPB at that price were a lot shabbier.

Not 100% of riders.
No, you’re trying to prove your own point that 100% of riders were using.
Floyd Landis’ TdF title in 2006 went to Oscar Periero just as Alberto Contador’s went to Andy Schleck in 2010 so that proves the point that they only had to go one place down to find a rider that they could give it to.
I’d venture that the Armstrong “asterix” years are more to do with UCI/ASO complicity and/or legal issues that are still ongoing.
Anyway, enough of cycling, I’ve derailed this thread enough so will politely withdraw from the sport vs spectacle conundrum.
 

Likely none.
The issue at hand is being lukewarm about when someone is caught.
That just doesn’t chime with me personally in terms of being sport.
Transparency?
Armstrong colluded with the UCI to cover up his positive tests FFS.

I’m not sure as a hardcore fan of any sport how you could be lukewarm about systematic cheating as, well, it doesn’t seem very, erm, “sporting”.
From my personal point of view as a pro sports photographer covering Tour de France in that era though I’m far from lukewarm about having sat in press conferences being lied to  by him and watching him ridicule and soil the reputation of David Walsh and Paul Kimmage.
Or Emma O’Reilly.
I’m also sore that in Armstrong’s case, unlike all the other ones I’ve covered, that I get zero residuals from my “winner of stage x” or “winner of TdF x”  images 🙂
I might be being old fashioned here but I’d give it to the highest placed cyclist that wasn’t using PEDs.
I have some sympathy with the “well they were all at it” aspect so, fine, let everyone do it and have a special event.
Just don’t call it sport when it’s only being used by some of the field.

Or, indeed, the sport vs a certain brand of sunglasses debacle? 

Not 100% of riders.
No, you’re trying to prove your own point that 100% of riders were using.
Floyd Landis’ TdF title in 2006 went to Oscar Periero just as Alberto Contador’s went to Andy Schleck in 2010 so that proves the point that they only had to go one place down to find a rider that they could give it to.
I’d venture that the Armstrong “asterix” years are more to do with UCI/ASO complicity and/or legal issues that are still ongoing.
Anyway, enough of cycling, I’ve derailed this thread enough so will politely withdraw from the sport vs spectacle conundrum.
 

I’m not sure as a hardcore fan of any sport how you could be lukewarm about systematic cheating as, well, it doesn’t seem very, erm, “sporting”.
From my personal point of view as a pro sports photographer covering Tour de France in that era though I’m far from lukewarm about having sat in press conferences being lied to  by him and watching him ridicule and soil the reputation of David Walsh and Paul Kimmage.
Or Emma O’Reilly.
I’m also sore that in Armstrong’s case, unlike all the other ones I’ve covered, that I get zero residuals from my “winner of stage x” or “winner of TdF x”  images 🙂
I might be being old fashioned here but I’d give it to the highest placed cyclist that wasn’t using PEDs.
I have some sympathy with the “well they were all at it” aspect so, fine, let everyone do it and have a special event.
Just don’t call it sport when it’s only being used by some of the field.

First finished piece using the FS7, first live band video.
This was a bit of a nightmare, to be honest, but it taught me 4 very valuable lessons for next time:
1. Get to the venue before the soundcheck. Set up and crucially...
2. Get the band to do a run-through of the song you're covering, ideally with the stage lighting as it will be later.
3. Get a second static view that you can just leave rolling.
4. During the gig, start rolling and don't stop until the end.
You can probably guess from the above that my major problem wit this piece was lack of coverage, which is why some of the cutaways don't quite fit.
Having said all that, it was a great experience and the band are happy; so on to the next one!
 

Well he certainly did know very accurately didn't he !

Well he certainly did know very accurately didn't he !

I think I droned out these exact same thoughts in the G9ii or some similar thread about MFT but I'll repeat them anyway 🙂 
In terms of a new camera, I honestly think its time to give up on Panasonic producing that specced up GX85 that everybody knows they could make if they wanted to.
In the absence of the "new" Olympus not doing anything to move the MFT story along either in terms of a compact then something like the A6700 is that camera now.
As well as being a larger sensor, it ticks every box of what is being asked for in terms of being dual native ISO, 10bit 4:2:2 internal, IBIS, class leading AF, LOG and a very good out of the box profile in S-Cinetone.
Very flexible mount in that it can even take your MFT manual focus lenses and has very good options like the Meike EF>E which will give you full AF of Canon lenses with the bonus of variable ND.
In terms of native lenses, there are a lot more E mount options now compared to when, say, the GX85 launched and it is seeing more releases every month unlike MFT which is slowing now.
The writing was on the wall when Sigma expanded their compact f1.4 prime lineup with the 56mm and didn't release an MFT version. 
Their two compact contemporary f2.8 zoom lenses are also not available in MFT of course.
Size wise there isn't anything in it from the front and the GX85 is actually a fraction bigger.

The A6700 is deeper but most of that is attributable to the chunky grip which, to me, is no bad thing as the GX85 is not chunky enough for me and the A6700's incorporates a dial too.

Price wise, it is a lot more expensive than the GX85 was on launch but so is everything else now and it is significantly cheaper than Panasonic's latest MFT camera, the G9ii.
The virtual shark jumping price of the G9ii makes me suspect that even if Panasonic did produce a new specced up GX85 that it would likely be at least as expensive as the A6700.
If you want to be closer spiritually to a combo of the GX85 and OG Pocket then, if you embrace the quirks, the Sigma Fp is well worth a consideration particularly as the used prices are dropping.

Personally, I'd add the EVF-11 as it is so much nicer to shoot with whilst at the same time you can remover it and leave it in your pocket if you need to go smaller. The tilt action of the EVF enables you to press the camera to your chest to offer a lot more stability when handholding.
That is important because you lose IBIS of course but you gain RAW and, as with the AF of the Fp, the internal 8 bit 4K is far more serviceable than people give it credit for and if you only need HD then its 12 bit internal. 
As with the EVF, the modularity means that if you want more capability in terms of bit depth then you can add it easily and discreetly.
The Fp has largely been forgotten/written off by an awful lot of people around the world but in Japan, in particular, there is some absolutely lovely imagery being uploaded to YouTube every week from it.
 

I think the closest that you're going to get with that will be the Sigma contemporary range.
They are behemoths compared to what you can get in MFT but, actually, when you line it up against an MFT package of actual equivalence (or slightly less in this case) then the story changes.

Its just that with MFT you have the option and thus far in L mount then you don't.
Unless....
You don't mind sacrificing a daft amount of money and going APS-C and picking up the Leica range that they made for the TL and CL which are very compact indeed.

Leica have abandoned APS-C and Panasonic seem content to sit either side of it with their MFT and L mount so it might be a place that Sigma could carve a niche for themselves with an APS-C body, particularly as they have an excellent set of fast primes and a zoom for it.
With the trials and tribulations of them trying and thus far failing to make a full frame Foveon, it could well be that it would find a home for an interim APS-C version in a rehoused Fp. 
Realistically, though, the only current way to get pancake-ish full frame in L mount is to go for the manual focus route of using M mount on them like I've done on mine here with a 35mm f2.

As @MrSMW has just posted, the E mount system is currently better served with compact FF lenses particularly in regard to 3rd party manufacturers like Samyang.
The closed shop nature of the L mount alliance (in terms of electronic lenses at least) is definitely a hindrance in that regard.

The new 28-200 is roughly the same size and weight as the 20-60mm so it is a lot more balanced to the Fp.

It has a a great range and having the OIS offers an interesting proposition of it turning the Fp into a very compact Cinecorder.
However, it is very, very slow on the long end though, particularly for only 200mm.
Not that ultra shallow depth of field is the be all and end all of course but f7.1 is a bit of a stretch.
Of course the swing to that particular roundabout is that you don't have to worry so much about the camera not having sentient AF !

I think I droned out these exact same thoughts in the G9ii or some similar thread about MFT but I'll repeat them anyway 🙂 
In terms of a new camera, I honestly think its time to give up on Panasonic producing that specced up GX85 that everybody knows they could make if they wanted to.
In the absence of the "new" Olympus not doing anything to move the MFT story along either in terms of a compact then something like the A6700 is that camera now.
As well as being a larger sensor, it ticks every box of what is being asked for in terms of being dual native ISO, 10bit 4:2:2 internal, IBIS, class leading AF, LOG and a very good out of the box profile in S-Cinetone.
Very flexible mount in that it can even take your MFT manual focus lenses and has very good options like the Meike EF>E which will give you full AF of Canon lenses with the bonus of variable ND.
In terms of native lenses, there are a lot more E mount options now compared to when, say, the GX85 launched and it is seeing more releases every month unlike MFT which is slowing now.
The writing was on the wall when Sigma expanded their compact f1.4 prime lineup with the 56mm and didn't release an MFT version. 
Their two compact contemporary f2.8 zoom lenses are also not available in MFT of course.
Size wise there isn't anything in it from the front and the GX85 is actually a fraction bigger.

The A6700 is deeper but most of that is attributable to the chunky grip which, to me, is no bad thing as the GX85 is not chunky enough for me and the A6700's incorporates a dial too.

Price wise, it is a lot more expensive than the GX85 was on launch but so is everything else now and it is significantly cheaper than Panasonic's latest MFT camera, the G9ii.
The virtual shark jumping price of the G9ii makes me suspect that even if Panasonic did produce a new specced up GX85 that it would likely be at least as expensive as the A6700.
If you want to be closer spiritually to a combo of the GX85 and OG Pocket then, if you embrace the quirks, the Sigma Fp is well worth a consideration particularly as the used prices are dropping.

Personally, I'd add the EVF-11 as it is so much nicer to shoot with whilst at the same time you can remover it and leave it in your pocket if you need to go smaller. The tilt action of the EVF enables you to press the camera to your chest to offer a lot more stability when handholding.
That is important because you lose IBIS of course but you gain RAW and, as with the AF of the Fp, the internal 8 bit 4K is far more serviceable than people give it credit for and if you only need HD then its 12 bit internal. 
As with the EVF, the modularity means that if you want more capability in terms of bit depth then you can add it easily and discreetly.
The Fp has largely been forgotten/written off by an awful lot of people around the world but in Japan, in particular, there is some absolutely lovely imagery being uploaded to YouTube every week from it.