newfoundmass

Might the B4 lens cover the entire M43 censor in ETC mode?

Viltrox has been good about releasing firmware updates too.

There's an awful lot of people that rely on Lumix cameras for their professional video work and businesses, so I'd have to disagree. "Serious video work" shouldn't be based on the size or scope of the work. Certainly wedding filmmakers are doing serious video work? Or the indie filmmakers that shoot their films with Lumix cams.

It's obviously a nice lens, but can't justify buying it until Panasonic shows that it's still committed to M43. Even then, it's still a hard sell for me. The Sigma 18-35 covers a lot of what I'd use this lens for.

Because Canon knows that there will always be a huge segment of the market that'll buy whatever they put out, because they're invested in Canon lenses, etc. or have bought into the Canon PR machine. It's why I get frustrated when my Canon friends constantly complain about this stuff but put up with it.

I've used both Metabones and Viltrox focal reducers and I noticed minimal differences between the two in terms of image quality, certainly not enough to justify the price difference anyway. The only issue I had with my Viltrox, and it was an easy fix with the supplied tools, was adjust the back to focus better with the Sigma 18-35. I haven't used it but I've also heard good things about the Commlite focal reducer.

I personally went the mirrorless route because of the versatility and flexibility it gives me, even though for sports a camcorder is probably more ideal. But I shoot interview, corporate, wedding and commercial video too, so investing into camcorders just didn't make sense for my personal work. I did, however, go the camcorder route for the pro wrestling live streaming company I co founded, because they were only going to be used for sports.

Yeah, that's not an issue in sports venues that have people in spandex throwing each other around and fans hooting and hollering?

We rarely find out in real time what cameras are being used on major film projects. So yeah, it takes time to hear about it. Again though, I don't think you actually care, given your overall argument is dumb when you've got Soderbergh using iPhone's to shoot multiple features in 2019. Perhaps @John Brawleycan share some info on the Pocket4K's usage, given I believe he has been using it?

Again, you only brought up "A-cam" in response to my original response, re: these cameras being used on professional productions. Literally no one has argued that it's being used as an A camera on projects. You're now just being willfully dishonest, adding qualifiers to your statement that weren't originally there. Given its still relatively new, and the time it takes for the information to get out, there's little info outside of what's on BMD's website, as far as the Pocket 4K is concerned. However here major productions that used the original Pocket, which was $999 (under your $1250 threshold): Don’t Breathe (2016) Jason Bourne (2016) Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015) I imagine we'll see several films have been using the Pocket 4K before long. Not that any of this matters, given your arrogance and generally shitty attitude.

There's literally an entire section of the BMD site dedicated their press releases that discuss their cameras being used on projects.

You literally ignored every thing I wrote, including examples, that show you're wrong. In fact, your entire argument, which I reiterate is dumb, has changed from "no one will use these cameras for professional productions" to "no one will use these as A cams." What does "bigger budget" even mean??? That's such a blanket statement. $2,000,000 is "bigger budget" work for a lot of people. All you need to do is go through Blackmagic's old press releases to see the projects that used the original pocket, since BMD promoted pretty much every project that uses a product of theirs, to see that these cameras get used on major projects, including on an Avengers film, A cam or not.

It's funny that they'll have leap frogged everyone by ignoring full frame and instead bringing affordable medium format to consumers. By the time full frame becomes old hat and everyone starts looking at medium format, they'll already be ahead of everyone in the market.

Yeah, if the industry moves towards full frame it will do so because the camera and sensor companies have moved them in that direction as opposed to a genuine overwhelming demand. All the films that inspired us didn't need full frame. Heck a lot of them didn't need Super 35; The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of my favorite films of all time and is Super 16. Another favorite, 28 Days Later, was shot on a standard definition DV camcorder! It reminds me of this manufacturered need for 8K. Are there genuine reasons someone might need 8K? Absolutely. For visual effects, etc. the more resolution to work with the better. But when most of us are still exporting for clients / web use at 1080p, 4K is more than enough. And as I've said before, even 4K is overrated, given I don't think any of us have large enough televisions to actually truly appreciate it! ? If I'm not within 3 feet of my 55 inch 4K screen the difference is virtually impossible to see!

You're using falty logic to try and prove your silly point. No, the next Marvel film isn't going to use the Pocket4K as their A cam. No one is claiming otherwise. If you don't think there are productions going on right now that are using the Pocket4K, the GH5/GH5s, etc. then your definition of "professional" is incredibly narrow. Alex Ferrari shot a feature film last year on the original pocket. Hell Soderbergh has used an iPhone to shoot two feature films! But yeah, professionals aren't going to use smaller sensor cameras for professional projects. You're talking out of your ass. Again. Unless you're on that set you have no idea what is being used to shoot it.

The "need" for full frame is largely manufactured by camera companies looking to charge you a premium and people have bought into it. The profit margins are greater for full frame cameras and lenses, so it makes sense. But as this push for "bigger is better" unfolds, sensor technology has improved by leaps and bounds. While camera phones have hurt the camera market, that so much is able to be squeezed out of these tiny sensors tells me that there's still tons of more progress that can be achieved.

M43 isn't moving backwards, it's merely different. As long as there are cameras being made with smaller sensors there will always be people shooting with them. The success of the Pocket4K should tell you all you need to know on whether there's room for M43 cameras in professional productions. Because it's probably more than just the EVA with the new mount?

Honestly for me, it wasn't even something that I was considering buying (unless it was a must get!) as much as wanting to see a sign that Panasonic is still invested and committed to M43. The LS300 still serves me well. And a GH6 has more appeal to me anyway. I just want re-assurance that they're committed to M43 because the G95 didn't set my world on fire and aside from the new lense its been pretty mum.

That's disappointing, I was really hoping it'd be a M43 camera (but was probably being naive to even think that.)

They're saying is an L-Mount cine camera ?

These are among my favorite type of articles you write Andrew, thank you! I know people that still shoot with the hacked GH2! You can get them used these days for almost nothing. I still suggest it to people just starting out.

Lumix would seem to indicate M43, no?

I just won a second TM-2X on eBay. A total bargain! This pleases me

I just realized I probably could've just used one of my Zoom H1s as a stereo mic into my camera ? Oh well.

These releases always annoy me because all the usual suspects flood YouTube with glowing reviews in unison, allowing themselves to be used as the marketing arm of these companies.