Vintage Jimothy

2 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

I don't understand that supposed edge in native lens. From everything I have seen the adapted lens worked as good as they did on native F mount cameras. Have people not seen the video from Ricci Talk and BH, one was the 105mm F1.4 and the other 70-200 2.8. The 70-200 2.8 was tracking in very low light in the BH video. I dare to say that after the lens rental review of the build quality of the z7, that the z6 might be more weather proof with the FTZ adapter than Sony cameras. I personally don't know, but can someone tell me how many Sony, Pana or Fuji have in terms of video centric lens (silent, no breathing etc)

The second thing is that Nikon said they were dedicated to video now and the development of the S line of lens was from the ground up done with video in mind. We can already see it with the fast focusing , silent and zero breathing lens they have released. If you think that the treatment they gave to their 24-70 f4  kit lens in terms of video, you can be sure that they were not joking when they said that. Another thing, they already published lens roadmap, by next year we will get nearly the trifecta of Nikon 2.8 zoom and two new f1.8 prime lens plus the f.95 prime. Again I just saw a mock up of the F 2.8 Nikon zoom and it had a third ring. I guess we will have smooth step-less aperture control with this lens as the Canon, if I am not mistaken. So tell me how many Sony, Pana or Fuji are have thee type of video centric features to their lens line.

Where's the mockup of the F2.8 Nikkor zoom? Can't find a picture of that anywhere. 

As for the new Nikkor lenses being made with video in mind, I'd say most of that rings true. However there's a rather obvious elephant in the room with the lens design that needs to be adjusted before the new Z-mount lenses are top notch for video: linear focusing. The focus-by-wire design is still a hinderance for video shooters that prefer to use manual focus over autofocus. 

I have a feeling the Z6 will really shine once companies start making a bunch of adapters for vintage lens mounts to the Z-mount. Pretty sure @Andrew Reid said something similar about his Z7 awhile back when he adapted an older Leica to the camera, right?

3 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I'd suggest Lens Turbo, they might cost a tad bit more but its worth it. Pretty close to metabones as far as sharpness goes. If you are going the manual focus route that is, no electronic contacts. 
 

I might get another speedbooster down the line, but I already bought the Pixco for now. And again, I don't have much money- the thirty dollar difference between Pixco's usual $80 price tag and the $50 I spent for mine is what made me bother with getting a speedbooster at all right now. 

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Oh I half put the a7S there as a joke! Don't swap to it from a Panasonic G85 instead. 

Which one?

It is worth asking around which is the best Chinese focal reducer at the moment. 

I think it might be Viltrox?

Oh trust me, I won't be getting rid of my G85 anytime soon. If I get the a7S, I'll be keeping my G85 too for when I need a backup camera or if a gig requires me to shoot in 4K for some reason. 

I got the Pixco Focal Reducer. Cheap and I have no expectations of it being the best, but someone was selling theirs for around $50, which was actually in my immediate price range as opposed to other speedboosters typically priced $80 or more. Between the focal reducer and the Minolta, I spent around $130 total. A bit pricey for me, but reasonable enough for the moment. 

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Or a Sony PMW-F3 or Sony a7S etc which are already really clean at 1080 without needing downscaling ?

I'm keen on Nikon F mount lenses because of their good value / quality and maximal ability to be adapted to absolutely anything.

I assume you mean a Helios 58mm f/2

A 50mm f1.8 is barely faster at all, a teeny difference. 

While a 50mm f1.4 will cost quite a bit more (and a f1.2 will cost a *LOT* more!), but at least it will give you a whole stop more of light. However.. that is "only" one stop more of light. Would this be the smartest choice for your next lens? Or would getting say a 35mm f2 or a 135mm f2 be a more useful addition to your kit instead?
 

True. And I've been thinking more and more about the a7S as an option moving forward... but that'd probably be at least a good six months or more away from now if I go that route. 

That was my thought initially too...

Ultimately I went with a Minolta Rokkor PG 50mm f1.4. I also found a possibly affordable focal reducer adapter at a reasonable enough price for me to consider going that route, so that might end up being helpful too.

While the Rokkor 50mm is not a very different focal length compared to my Helios 58mm f2, I really want to make sure I have a lens that can help with low light conditions at least a bit on my G85. I'll inevitably pick up a 35mm of some sort soon, as well as an 85mm and 135mm... but with the massive crop on my G85 and the nature of my current gigs, I think sticking around the 50mm focal length is a decent option right now since the crop will give me a telephoto reach, even if I get the focal reducer. 

On 10/27/2018 at 2:08 PM, thebrothersthre3 said:

The really awesome thing will be 6 years from now when the XT3, A7III, EOS R, etc... are all outdated and much cheaper.

I am not really big on 4k, the bigger things for me are 10 bit log, and PDAF which aren't found too much in older cameras. I had the Sony F3, but found out I really liked the SLR form factor better and wanted auto focus.

Speaking of 1080 cameras with PDAF, the Canon 70d is a pretty good deal used these days. Tempting.

I dig 4K a lot because even if I don't typically need it, that extra resolution helps result in cleaner 1080p footage when I downscale to that. 

BTW, I'm in the process of debating on what lens to get. Initially I was thinking of getting a native M43 lens, but after my Helios ended up single-handedly saving my first video project for my gig I've mentioned in here before, I think it'd probably be better for me to look at other (and faster) vintage lenses on eBay to adapt to my G85 instead. Still looking at options under that $150-200 price range, preferably underneath $100 too if at all possible. 

So far I've seen a ton of fast Nifty Fifties like the Canon FD, the Nikkor Non-AI, the Super Takumars and various Minolta Rokkors... but I'm not sure which option would be the best overall. Can anyone provide feedback for that?

Since I don't have a speedbooster right now, I'm cool with getting another faster Fifty over my Helios so that I'll have a somewhat easier time shooting in low light for the upcoming videos. 

21 minutes ago, Pedro said:

Its a shame the xt3 does not have IBIS. For handheld shotting with adapting vintage, it won't cut it...
 

It is a bit of a shame, but IBIS is literally what the X-H line is for. All in all, I think the multitude of features that the X-T3 does have and its price outweigh its lack of IBIS. 

6 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah we have gained quite a few new members because of the Fuji X-T3, and the PK4, Z7, Z6, EOS-R, etc.. So I just wanted to "Inform" some who may not realize it can do 4K. There are a heck of a lot of cameras out now in the last 5, 6 years. And a lot of them amazingly good yet to this day. Especially if you Don't need 4K. Some real true Cine cameras buys out there Like your Sony PMW F3.

Definitely. Heck, one of my good friends from film school is still shooting with his old Canon T3i after all these years and another friend of mine is looking at getting the a6000 as his next camera. And admittedly I'm more the type to look at the latest cameras and what's coming out, so I probably don't think enough about older cameras as often as I should. 

For now, my camera is the G85. I don't plan on selling it anytime soon and even when the time comes that I do buy another camera (be it an old a7s, an NX1, a new X-T3 or Z6), I'll probably keep the G85 as a secondary/backup camera in case of emergencies.

That said, whatever my next camera will be, I don't think I'll be sticking with M43 after this. The sensor/mount definitely have their advantages and all, but I think I'd probably be wiser to look for something that's either APS-C or full frame for better low light performance overall. Whatever M43 lenses I get will just be for the G85. 

13 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Oh you don''t have to make any excuses about buying the G85. I would like to have one myself. They are a great film making camera for the money. It can do a lot more than you probably have skill to extract from it. Like I said it is not the camera. It is what is between your two ears that count. Skill, and that takes practice and time.

Mhmm, no arguments there. As I said earlier, a lot of this comes down to "wants vs needs." I'd want a camera that can handle better in low light. I don't necessarily need it though.

2 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Also the original A7s has some of the nicest looking 1080p out there. A C100 is probably better with it's CS. But I don't know what to tell you.  It is tough shooting conditions no mater what you use. I would get on Vimeo, You Tube and see if you can find some plays shot and see what they are using if it looks pretty good. Maybe it is not as hard now with these newer cameras as I imagine??

I mean, it's not like I'll be getting an a7s (or any new camera for that matter) by springtime anyway, unless I apply for another job to get more income faster. But ultimately I might opt to look into changing to a different camera so that I have something more geared to my needs as a filmmaker right now. We'll see.

6 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Heck, I've shot stages performances on my GH1 when I first got it! 
Even remember ages ago shooting a stage performance with a SD ENG camera!

At a certain point you need to just accept you're getting $$$ for a project and you're giving the client $$$$$$ worth of deliveries, so stop throwing your own money at it!

Except in this case the person is only getting ¢¢¢ for the project!  Not even $$

Thus the G85 is already waaaay overdelivering for the project's requirements. 

No arguments there. I love my G85 and I still think I made the right call in picking that as my first camera. But it's been a bit of an eye opener to get a feel for its weaknesses and how that impacts a lot of my personal needs as a filmmaker.

Got back earlier from the first night of shooting for the first gig. Overall, I'd say it went quite well. It wasn't at a traditional theater, so the lighting was a lot better (albeit also probably plainer looking) than future videos will be. 

Having said that: Thank God I had my Helios on me, because that lens saved my life tonight! Unfortunately I couldn't get close enough to the actors and stage as often as I'd have liked (it's a bit of a weird stage in layout), so I mostly had my G85 placed on my tripod with the Helios and pulled focus manually as the actors rehearsed the play and I moved my tripod across the room from time to time to get a variety of shots from different angles. 

Seriously, never imagined that I'd (mostly) enjoy shooting at a 116mm (plus) focal length, but that extended reach helped immensely tonight. Just had issues from time to time with the tighter framing and messing up my focus pulls, though the latter is on me and not the lens. 

EDIT: That said, I'm starting to think more and more about @webrunner5's suggestion of picking up a used Sony a7s. It's hardly my dream camera and normally I'd flinch at the thought of buying an even older camera than the G85 to replace it as my main workhorse.

But realistically, it does seem like an ideal option within a reachable price range: Higher dynamic range, vastly superior low light capabilities and shooting in 1080p isn't the worst thing in the world. Plus if I need to get back to shooting 4K footage again, I can pick up an Atomos Ninja V to get dat 4:2:2 4K footage externally. 

Either way, that's a transition I won't be able to move towards for awhile now anyway. There's other gear I need to pick up rather fast too and it'd take awhile to save up the $800-ish needed to buy a used a7s and whatever additional money needed to pick up one or two vintage lens adapters and a couple more vintage lenses. 

Any chance you'll upload some video footage of the Z7 + Noctilux combo, Andrew? The photos obviously look stunning, but I really want to see just how cinematic these new Nikons can be when paired with the right lenses. 

3 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

The Nikon Z7 looked the best to me. Better than the DPAF of the EOS--R. Best overall I think.

Agreed. I was surprised by how often the EOS-R and A7iii would lose focus on a subject for a bit, whereas the Z7 seemed to stick to its subjects like glue. 

12 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Well the original A7s like I have is going for like 750 dollars. But yeah you would have to change a lot of gear to make that happen. You will just have to do the best you can do. Pretty much like it always ends up being. No one Ever has all they need for video work. ?

Or so we tell ourselves! I've got enough for tonight and mostly everything I need for these gigs from now to spring. The only real necessity I need is a faster prime lens. I've got my wits, a tripod, an external mic and a camera. Those are necessities. I've also got a gimbal for my iPhone 8 Plus, which isn't an awful camera in its own right either, so I'll likely use that quite a bit tonight for my "exciting B-roll footage" for Video #1. After all, I shot a whole commercial with just that iPhone and gimbal this past summer and it turned out quite well.

The issue is what I have looks embarrassingly "starter-ish" (which I am) and there's always that itch of "Oh wouldn't it be great if I had this piece of gear so I can do this shot more easily?" in the back of my head. 

Besides this is the first time this theater group has opted to enlist someone to make promotional videos for their plays. I'm not getting paid this year (they don't have the money for it and its my first gig, so I think that's fair). At the end of the day, these videos are for experience and to help build my portfolio and reputation. If things go well this year and they want to work with me again next year, then I think I'd be in a better spot to talk with them about money.

22 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Man you Need a Sony A7s using Slog 2. The DR on that G85 is just not going to get the job done. And if you light stuff it is not going to look realistic. All stage programs have crazy lighting challenges. But if you modify them they look like something that is not natural looking, foreign. That is sort of the draw of the Stage, it takes you somewhere that is not part of normal life, pretend stuff, dream like. And it is sort of done on purpose to draw your attention to the Actors, not the backdrops. The actors look more 3D. Lighting would ruin that effect.

Think about it, bigger productions always have people up in the balcony using lights, spotlights to highlight the actors. They are not lighting up the background. Maybe at most the areas where the actors are, but they rarely are at the back of the stage. I have been to a bunch of stage shows. I have no clue how you would be able to ever, with any camera, capture it like it is in real life.

Yeah, it's a tricky gig to say the least. Unfortunately for your suggestion about getting an A7s, I don't have the money right now to buy a new camera. Maybe in a year or two, but at the moment I have to work with what I've got and can afford to pick up for the sub-$200 price range (per item) from now until springtime. That includes lenses, LED lights, cage, monitor and slider. 

This first video in the gig that I'm doing in a few hours is going to be shot at a different location than the rest, so the lighting environment will be at least a little more forgiving (still a bit dark though). I'm aiming to go with a "mini-documentary" style video for that one by doing quick interviews with the cast and crew in a decently lit area for quick soundbites and gather up various (and hopefully exciting looking) shots of B-roll to edit all together. I might opt to just shoot it in 1080p instead of 4K tonight though for a quicker editing process (have to have this first video done by Saturday/Sunday), plus my client is only planning to release these promos on Facebook and Instagram.

I'll be sure to keep everyone here posted on this gig as I continue working on them.

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Even with an Arri Alexa it is a pretty extreme scenario if you've got deep dark shadows vs brightly light actors in the center of the stage. 

I'd think more about your framing so you don't go nuts with extremes.

 

That makes sense. I might also opt to pick up a couple of LED lights to bring with me to help lessen the extreme lighting contrasts, since my promo videos for these plays are going to be shot during rehearsals and not the actual performances. 

3 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Then your greater worry is the dynamic range, as if the well lit actors in the scene are also in your shot.... that could be trouble to expose for the shadows as well.

 

Do you have any advice on how to handle that on a G85?

At the moment I'm working with a very limited rig. Just my G85, kit lens, Helios 44-2, tripod, Zhiyun Smooth 4 and my iPhone 8 Plus.

3 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

But what do you actually want to capture? 
As it doesn't matter how dark the sides are, if what you want to capture is on the stage itself (which is well lit).

 

Yeah, I'm not too worried about the actors on stage, since they should generally be well lit. I'm more concerned about the props and stage that aren't as well-lit on stage.

18 hours ago, IronFilm said:

If you're working from the sides of the stage, perhaps consider the Panasonic 42.5 f1.7?

Depends on how much reach you need. Might go with some manual lenses, like a cheap Nikon 50mm f1.8?

Another consideration is say a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 in Nikon F mount (or any of the many other mid range f2.8 zooms for DX) with a Viltrox focal reducer? I think they're the best Chinese focal reducers at the moment. (and of course, also just get a normal Nikon G adapter as well)

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Viltrox-NF-M43X-Nikon-D-G-Mount-Lens-to-Micro-4-3-Panasonic-Adapter-Speedbooster/153113297914

 

Well, I'm not going to be working solely from the sides of the stage. I'm sure I'll be getting quite a bit of stuff from the front and elsewhere in the theater. I was just using the sides as an example because that's the spot I'm most worried about lighting (they're quite dark, presumably to help hide crew and cast members from audience view when they don't need to be onstage). 

Besides, as far as reach goes, I already own one vintage lens- a Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.0. Unfortunately my adapter for the lens isn't a focal reducer, so it acts as a 116mm lens instead. I'm sure that will see a fair bit of mileage, but right now I need a fast lens that's either a wide or standard focal length. So I'm pretty sure I'm getting the Panny 25mm f/1.7 for now, since that's within my current sub-$200 price range and doesn't require a focal reducer.

I'll probably pick up the 42.5 f/1.7 (or a similar lens of its ilk) in due time though, since it does seem like a great lens. My main lens priority after getting the 25mm though will probably be the Olympus 17mm f/1.8, since I typically prefer 35mm focal length over 50mm. I just don't have the extra money to pick up the Oly right now and I need to get a fast lens quick.

Looks like my G85 is gonna start seeing a lot more work now. I just landed my first series of videomaking gigs for a client! Basically I'll be doing promotional work for a series of plays from now until the springtime. I know from my own experiences in the past that the theater stage can be quite dark, especially from the sides of the stage, so I'm thinking I need to pick up a fast and relatively affordable f/1.7-ish type lens soon. 

Would the Panasonic 25mm f/1.7 work for now? I still really want to get that Olympus 17mm f/1.8, but it's out of my immediate price range for the moment.

2 hours ago, Nikkor said:

The thin coverglass is great news if you want to use fast vintage glass.

I feel like it's only a matter of time before we see people slapping on various vintage M42-mount lenses on these cameras. 

BTW, @Andrew Reid, can you comment at all on the camera's battery life? I've seen some wildly opposite reports on the performance there and would love to have a better idea of what's going on there.

I'm still pretty green to filmmaking and cinematography, but I love pretty much every option between the 18-40mm range of focal lengths for various purposes. Typically though, I think I tend to lean more towards 35mm, due to its sheer level of versatility. 

20 minutes ago, BasiliskFilm said:

I am not worried about hundreds of lenses. I am happy mounting adapted lenses for special purposes, and obviously all my manual focus lenses will be fine. If the F mount lenses focus at native speeds, there is not even any need for long wildlife lenses; a Z mount version of those is hardly going to be much more compact.
What I really need though is an affordable, practical, compact, lightweight f2.8 run and gun standard lens like the Tamron 28-75. We know it can be done.

Yeah, something like the Tamron would be a great boon for either Nikon or Canon's new mounts at this point. 

16 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Same feeling here. That's an amazing tool. But people here are more focused to always discuss when not pixel peeping codec bit rate the same camera sensor mantra.

A glance on a fair comparison tells it:

https://***URL not allowed***/zhiyun-tech-weebil-lab-for-mirrorless-cameras-announced-at-photokina-2018/

Without mention I find 4.2kg vs 2.5kg payload for the MOZA Air 2 comparing with the Zhiyun Crane Plus much more interesting than the slight pricing difference.

Actually I was referring more to reporters on YouTube that were at Photokina. Plenty of folks took the time to go look and report on the two new Zhiyun gimbals (and to be fair, the Weebill Lab seems like a masterstroke), but the only videos out there so far on the Air X are either all from Moza's official YouTube channel or are just a general video sharing basic details Moza already gave out.

That's actually the Moza Air X. The Air 2 is basically Moza's version of the DJI Ronin-S. 

But yeah, I'm stoked about the Air X. Seems more versatile to me than the new Zhiyun Crane 3 Lab, so I was surprised to see hardly anyone talking about it while Photokina happened.