M_Williams

13 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

 

I still think you just don't get what I said but it's ok. You are focusing on the conversion process and I simply skipped to the end and was focusing on the end result. The end result is that you have a 50mm FOV with an F1.0 light gathering ability but with the 50mm equivalent DOF of F1.4 vs F1.0 when mounted to the C70.

The fact that the lens is converted to a 35mm lens wouldn't be relevant to me unless it was mounted to a FF sensor because the effective FOV on the C70 which is the camera being discussed is 50mm.

Then I just don't understand the problem here. It's like you want something that isn't physically possible. "with the 50mm equivalent DOF of F1.4 vs F1.0"... yes, because it's really a 35mm f/1.0. It's like you want the extra light but somehow also shallower DOF than you'd get on FF. That's not possible, because the two are inherently linked.

Like, the end result is exactly what you'd expect. You ARE getting the DOF of a F/1.0 lens. But not a 50/1.0.

And you seem to be missing the point of it being 35mm. A 35mm f/1.0 on FF has the same DOF (from the same position) as a 50/1.4 on full frame. With it being on the C70, it returns to a 50/1.4 (in DOF terms), which is exactly what the lens is. The speedbooster can't give you anything more than the lens is capable of natively.

13 hours ago, herein2020 said:

 

You are saying the same thing I said...all I said was the lenses gain a stop of light but without gaining the typical shallower DOF, regardless of how the math works out at the end of the day the 50mm gains a stop of light and is still a 50mm FOV without a shallower DOF at F1.0.  And yes, the 50mm is 1 stop brighter (F1.0) than if it were mounted to a camera without the speedbooster.

I refer back to the same video that I already posted that shows the exact same thing I said:

 

 

 

I have read that in a true lowlight situation that CLOG3 would be the better color profile, but I haven't shot at night yet with it so I have no idea. 

Yes, they gain a stop of light, but they ALSO give a wider FOV. That wider FOV reduces the DOF from the same distance-to-subject. So it's now a 35mm FOV (on FF) with an f/1.0 aperture, which is exactly the same DOF as a 50mm f/1.4 on FF (from the same distance).

A speedbooster DOES give shallower DOF. But it can't give you shallower DOF (or a wider FOV) than the lens is designed to render on a full-frame sensor.

I just don't understand the part of "without the typical shallower DOF." Like... a speedbooster DOES do that. It matches exactly what it would be on a larger sensor - it can't do more than that. 35/1.0 = 50/1.4 for DOF at the same distance.

14 hours ago, Django said:

it is until it hits the speed booster. a speed booster adds an extra glass element changing the optical design of the original lens. It demagnifies and hence concentrates light adding a stop when it hits the sensor. this article explains it better using the same 50mm example too:

I've already explained above that the entrance pupil does not change. However, given that we've now reduced the focal length (from 50 to 35), the formula for calculating f-number has changed. The entrance pupil is still 25mm in diameter, so it now gives us 35/25=1.4. So a 50mm f/2 lens, speedboosted, becomes (not effectively, but actually) a 35mm f/1.4. That's how Speedboosters 'magically' create an extra stop of light. To clarify, our 35mm f/1.4 will give you an exposure one stop brighter than the original 50mm f/2, whether that 50mm is used on full frame or S35.

https://www.alex-stone.com/2020/10/29/busting-speedbooster-myths/

 

That explanation is.... literally what I said. 50 -> 35, and f/1.4 (in the case we're talking about) becomes f/1.0. So, effectively, a 35/1.0. That's precisely what I said, and not what the OP said (he said 50/1.0).

Also, it is indeed still transmitting the same TOTAL light. Not light per area, but TOTAL light. The APS-C sensor in the camera (with a speedbooster) now collects as much light as a FF camera without the speedbooster. That's... how speedboosters work. They're essentially the opposite of a telecoverter.

On 3/4/2022 at 8:56 AM, Mmmbeats said:

You are both correct, as this is just a different way of describing the apparent DoF.

@herein2020 is technically correct (yes, yes everybody - 'the best kind of correct' 😉), and @M_Williams is correct for practical purposes.

DoF is in fact the same whether using the speedbooster or not.  However, in order to achieve the same framing on the 50mm lens example you would have to alter the distance between the camera and the subject, thus altering the DoF.

I much prefer herein2020's way of stating it, but I have come to acknowledge that endlessly explaining this introduces just as much confusion as it clears up. 

He's actually not correct at all. The speedbooster doesn't make it a 50 f/1 lens as he states it. It makes it (roughly) a 35mm f/1 lens. Which on APS-C gives you... a 50mm FOV with the DOF of a 50/1.4. As I said, you cannot get the extra stop of light without shallower DOF, or vice versa. A speedbooster can't make the DOF shallower than the lens would be on FF, which seems to be his issue with it. And the lens is still transmitting the same TOTAL light as a 50/1.4, and the sensor captures the same TOTAL light as a full-frame sensor, hence the DOF is the same.

If it made the lens a 50 f/1.0 then it would have the same FOV with and without the speedbooster.. obviously we know speedboosters widen the FOV. From the same distance, a 35mm f/1.0 will have about the same DOF and FOV as a 50/1.4 on FF.

On 2/20/2022 at 12:12 PM, herein2020 said:

• The Mount - the mount is without a doubt the strangest mixture of FF, crop sensor, RF, and EF that I've ever encountered. I bought the 0.71 Canon speed booster so that I can use my EF lenses but with it mounted I cannot use my EF-S lenses. For EF-S lenses I also need to buy the straight through adapter. I have no RF lenses and probably won't have any for years so EF and EF-S is it for me. I would like for the speedbooster to live on the camera so I bolted it on because I like the extra stability, but that means I can't use the Sigma EF-S at all unless I want to either leave the speedbooster unbolted or or fiddle with removing it while on set. 
• Speedbooster - Yes, the speedbooster gives you a stop of light with EF glass, but the DOF remains the original DOF. Additionally, I saw some sample videos where the speedbooster decreases contrast and saturation in strongly backlit scenarios due to the extra glass elements, it also decreases the AF area for EF lenses. Not sure if this is also the case for EF-S lenses. It is great for providing a FF FOV, but it still falls into the quirky category for me.

Why would you want to use EF-S lenses with the speedbooster? They... wouldn't work even if they could mount. The point of a speedbooster is to allow you to use FF lenses (which means not EF-S) along with an APS-C sensor and still have roughly the FOV/DOF of a FF sensor. Sigma EF-S lenses, like say the 18-35, only cover APS-C. You can use them with a speedbooster on M4/3, but not on a sensor of the same size or larger than they're designed for.

I'm not sure what you mean by "DOF remains the original DOF." It would be the same as if you mounted the lens on a full-frame sensor camera, but the DOF would be shallower with the speedbooster than if you used a regular adapter on the C70's sensor. The 1-stop extra light and shallower DOF go hand-in-hand; can't have one without the other.

I can't speak to the AF area, but since a speedbooster effectively projects a larger image and fits into a smaller area, whatever the focus coverage of the sensor is would remain the same.

19 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

The tests I've seen indicate 4 and 1/2 stops over and about the same under. Some of the highlight retention seems to be software based like davinci highlight recovery. So less color information but still retaining detail. 

Pretty much similar dynamic range to other RED cameras. 

Yes the Komodo does have built-in highlight recovery that uses other color channels to reconstruct clipped data, exactly like Da Vinci.

triple post sorry

triple post

4 hours ago, independent said:

Protecting the highlights is something you should do for every digital video camera. What kind of extreme situations or incompetent DP would make such gross exposure errors? Latitude matters much less than dynamic range and highlight roll-off, where the Komodo leads significantly. 

It's not just about recoverability or exposure errors or whatever.

HOW dynamic range is allocated is intrinsically part of that "film" look, as well as highlight roll-off. You don't get smooth highlight roll-off if most of your dynamic range is bunched up in the shadows.

1 hour ago, HockeyFan12 said:

How's the highlight dynamic range on the Komodo compared with S1H or C200 etc.

The Komodo footage looks really really good to me. I like slightly softer footage so I like the 4K crop.

I've heard about setting the shutter speed to 1/40th instead of 1/48th and underexposing and then pushing Red footage to get a more "organic" look.

The Komodo has pretty terrible highlight latitude. It's definitely a camera that's better to underexpose than overexpose. I think CineD found it was good with 7 stops of underexposure but only 1 stop over. It's quite extreme and the main reason I don't care for the camera. Exceptional highlight latitude is a hallmark of film (as in, actual film).

5 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

You never used the old Sony menus, huh?

Oh absolutely, a6000 was my first mirrorless camera. There are some ways Olympus menus are certainly better than the old Sony menus, but they really needed to be reorganized. It's just a result of the sheer number of features the cameras have.

7 minutes ago, kye said:

They wouldn't be the first people in history to end a relationship and get closure by bringing something new into the world, but I'd imagine it's frowned upon by their future partners....

I have a feeling it has to be an agreement with Olympus, that they were allowed to use it one more time and no more after that. They still retained the Zuiko name, though.

Who knows though. I am very curious what the future cameras will say on the front of the EVF hump.

I've been using it for about 5 days now (should have gotten it over a week ago, but Fedex + snowstorm decided to spit on that idea).

In short, I preordered as soon as it Adorama last night. The autofocus is incredible, the handheld AI features are incredible, build quality is exceptional (I put it in my shower for ten minutes).

The new 40-150/4, which they loaned me too, is fantastic as well (wish it had a focus clutch, but not a big deal).

My full review will be coming later at Petapixel but paired with the grip and the Olympus 100-400 and this thing is a wildlife photographer's dream.

Image quality is certainly at least one step above the former 20MP sensor, though I have not spent much time messing with the files so far. Where I'd limit my E-M5 III to 1600, maybe 3200 in emergencies, I'm comfortable going to 6400 here. And with the even better IBIS (which is the best out there), rarely do I need to. The auto ISO options are still the same, which is to say that they suck.

Menu has been redesigned and is SO MUCH better, thank god. I love Olympus cameras but they always had the worst menus.

23 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Why's it got an Olympus badge??

I can tell you that this will be the last camera to feature the Olympus name. I cannot tell you why they didn't just drop it to begin with or the reasoning behind this (since I just don't know). But it's the last camera that will feature it.

22 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Unless the new company does not have the rights to use the brand name?

No, they certainly do have the rights. Unless they have an agreement with Olympus that stipulates some pretty odd things. Can't really say more.

57 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:

That’s good because they had so many other good things to come up with other than f’ing “OM SYSTEMS”

It's a terrible, terrible name.

1 hour ago, hoodlum said:

Based on the latest rumor it looks like the name “OLYMPUS” will still exist on the front of the EVF on the OM-1.  So the Olympus name will live for a while longer.  But I guess you know this already. 😉

I can't say anything without violating NDA but let's just say I am not happy about the direction OM System is going with the naming scheme in some ways (in other ways it is better - OM-1 is much cleaner than OM-D E-M1).

I'm currently testing the new OM System OM-1 and all I can say right now is to expect some pretty great video features, some of which exceed the GH5 (no idea yet about the upcoming GH6).

Olympus IBIS has always been the best in the industry. Still is. OM System has done a great job with this camera. I am thoroughly impressed (but I hate the name "OM System").

3 hours ago, SMGJohn said:

Nikon Z6/Z6 Mark 2 looks like good cameras but, to record LOG or RAW video, you need external recorder bolted on somewhere, and these are not small sadly. 

Fujifilm X-T4 feels ergonomically like trash its also ironically heavier with the 16-55mm F2.8 than the NX1 with the 16-50mm F2-2.8 setup.

I been looking a little over a month now for a camera to replace the NX1, but looking at countless of review samples, testing the cameras out in the store, none of them just feels or perform like the NX1, there always a quirk that bothers me.

Its kind of annoying really, if we had Magic Lantern on the Canon 90D it would be the perfect camera since it has a good sensor to match the NX1. But as usual, crippled by Canon. 

Yeah I agree about the X-T4 being ergonomically awful - I'm not sure how people pretend it isn't unless you're just using a small Fuji prime like the 35/2. Even with the vertical grip it's bad.

That's why I recommended the X-S10 or X-H1. Proper grip like most other cameras, so you can actually hold the thing and not have to contort your hand and fingers awkwardly to reach the shutter button.

Both the X-S10 and X-H1 will do F-Log internally, but it's 8 bit only. X-H1 can output 10-bit. X-H2 should be a killer camera.

From what you want, it sounds like the X-S10 is the way to go, unless you want the 10-bit output ability of the X-H1.

AF tracking will be better on the X-S10 but still inferior to the Nikons.

Panasonic S5 also another option if you are *heavily* into video. That's a no brainer if you really want great video specs. No hybrid out there offers that level of features at that price. But autofocus tracking in video is terrible (it's fine for photos). The Panasonic lenses are very good too, though some are quite expensive, but the 20-60 kit lens is a real gem, as is the 85/1.8. Plus you have all the Sigma lenses available.

The Panasonic S5 will definitely be the closest ergonomically to the NX1, with a lot of similar features except massively better. Panasonic's IBIS is fantastic too.

2 hours ago, And1 said:

I guess Ill be getting the Pocket 6k, and save up (instead of going for the Pro), with an extra lens or equipment (extra lights, better mics, etc). 

Thank you for your replies

Why would you choose the Pocket 6K over the 6K Pro at this point? $500 for internal NDs, tilt screen, larger battery, and the ability to add an awesome tilting EVF.

3 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Just remembering that the dial custom modes on the X-S10 just work for stills, not for video.

Not uncommon, but I believe you can still separate the stills and video settings in the menu, so that when you flip to movie mode you have those settings already set up. That's basically it's own custom mode.

What I meant by preferring a PASM dial being better for heavy video users is simply because aperture and ISO dials are useless for that kind of stuff.

One reason I could never totally get on board with Fuji was the lack of a high-end camera with a PASM dial. The X-H2 might fit that bill. Granted, I used to have to deal with not having custom modes on the high-end Nikon DSLRs (even though the mid-ranges one did have them.... never made sense), but ever since going mirrorless with the Z system, I can't live without custom modes.

(the GFX 100S also has a PASM dial and a bunch of custom modes, like 6 I think, which is awesome)

I just have no use for aperture/ISO dials on my workhorse camera. It's fine (and great) on something like the X100 or a Leica Q or whatever, because those are generally always used in one way.

I only used a borrowed NX1 for a few weeks and that was a long time ago, so I can't recall a lot of real specific details about the colors.

My recommendation based on what you want:

• Fujifilm X-S10 or used X-H1: all the great colors and profiles, internal Eterna and f-log (but 8-bit internally on both, 10-bit externally on the X-H1), and IBIS. The deeper grip of both is much more similar to the NX1 and the top panel display is on the X-H1. The X-S10 also has the flip out screen, which may be preferred by you, the X-H1 has the 3 way tilt like the X-T4.
  
  X-S10 pros: newest sensor and autofocus, likely a little better IBIS, better battery life, PASM dial like NX1 which I prefer myself especially because you can do custom modes (C1, C2, C3) just like the NX1 has. I also think it's better if you do a lot of video work.
  
  X-S10 cons: single UHS-I card slot, no vertical grip, no 400mbps output, maybe worse EVF but I don't remember.
  
  X-H1 pros: cheaper (used, no longer available new), vertical grip compatibility, 10-bit out, top panel LCD.
   
• Nikon Z6/Z6II: (Z6II is worth the extra $500 if you buy new - better AF, dual slots, vertical grip)e
  
  -- Pros: Higher dynamic range, better RAW colors, full frame, amazing lenses that are leagues above Fuji's, superior autofocus to Fuji (some people may argue about this but I returned my Fuji X-T4 after finding its AF (in both S-AF and Continuous) to be extremely underwhelming. Nikon is fast, quiet, and locks on accurately every time. C-AF is great too, even in video mode (better than Fuji, not as good as newest Sonys or Canons). Best ergonomics of any mirrorless cameras, except for maybe the Panasonic S1 which has a beefier grip and more external controls, but at the expense of significantly more bulk and weight. Also, ability to use Sony FE lenses with autofocus using the two adapters on the market. No other system can do this. 12-bit ProRes RAW and BRAW output.
  
  -- Cons: more expensive, bigger and pricier lenses (price you pay for full-frame), no internal LOG profile but Andrew does sell his own faux-LOG profile for the Z6/Z7 here and it's quite good. 4K video is limited to 30fps vs. 60fps on Fuji. MUCH better IBIS. The best of any APS-C or FF mirrorless system along with Panasonic L and the much more expensive Canon RF cameras. Worse JPEG profiles compared to Fuji.

Oh.... also the c7adapter that I linked to and mentioned.... it does have a foot with a 1/4" and 3/8" threaded holes, so you could easily fasten it down to something to provide a similar level of support. It would just be nice to have something that could be use on the mount all the time, with native MFT lenses. Just like the Z Cam MFT mount.

But anyway, if anyone knows other places with EF -> MFT locking adapters, please let me know!

I found what you're talking about - they made for the FS5 and FS7. Yeah I mean that's not precisely what I mean but it does serve the same ultimate goal. So yeah, even something not quite like what I'm thinking but still gets the job done.... doesn't matter. Though I think it would be very cool to make what I'm thinking of, but I'd have to draw up diagrams and pictures because it's hard to explain. I doubt anyone makes anything like it.

But if there are similar options to this Wooden Camera support.... I can't use it like you said because its for different cameras. But anything like that.

Ultimately I will probably end up just coming up with something myself because I doubt anything exists. But thanks for that, that gives me some goods ideas for something that might be easy to rig.

Hi,

"First time" user here. I used to read this site and engage on the forum many years ago but I stopped checking in to all the usual photo/cinema sites for a while, or at least not as frequently. I didn't remember my old account, hence "first time" user.

I remember years back Andrew posting about a positive locking adapter for Canon EF to, well, tons of mounts. Sony, M4/3, etc.

That was the c7adapters EF to MFT positive lock adapter (https://c7adapters.com/en/product/ef_mount_-_micro_4_3/43). Now they support tons of other mounts (to be expected given what's changed since he posted about it). Fuji X & GFX, Nikon Z, Canon RF, Kinefinity, RED Komodo, etc etc.

Anyway, I thought it might be beneficial to mention that for those who don't know about this since its been a while since he talked about it.

My question though:

Actually I have two.

1) I'm looking for an EF to M4/3 adapter just like this, and this one is great and will work. But I wanted to know if there are any others out there that anyone knows of to look at as well. Metabones Cine Speedboosters have the same kind of lock, but they don't have a straight cine adapter without the speedbooster part. So, if anyone knows of any aside from c7adapters and the Metabones, I'd really appreciate the info!

2) The reason I'm looking for this is obviously partially because positive locks are much stronger and don't allow for any play between the lens and the mount. But, two, I'm especially looking for an EF to MFT adapter because the M4/3 mount is often not of sufficiently precise and tight tolerance or strength for cinema use. My Pocket 4K has a small amount of play when you mount a lens of any decent size (I primarily use SLR Magic's Microprimes - the m4/3 versions, on that body anyway). They're not huge but the play is there and it can be problematic pulling focus - plus I'd rather have some more strength their for when I use a lens like the DZOFilm Linglung 20-70 T2.9 on the camera - or when I use adapted EF lenses like my cine-modded Contax Zeiss lenses or full-frame SLR Magic APO Microprimes.

So what the hell am I talking about you're obviously wondering. Does anyone know of anything kind of like a positive lock adapter (I guess you'd call it that) for the mount of a camera's body? Like a support adapter that fits around the mount to take some weight off the actual mount and keep the lens/mount play at a minimum. Take the Z Cam E2 S6, E2 F6, and E2 F8. All of those have interchangeable mounts, with options for PL, EF, and M4/3. (photo below of the Z Cam M4/3 Active Lock Mount). And actually if you choose the Z Cam E2 S6 in M4/3 mount, you get the camera with both EF and M4/3 mounts (since M4/3 mount can support S35 sensors, contrary to popular belief). You basically get this $100 adapter for free, which is cool.

I understand, obviously, that this is something that's swapped out on these cameras. But the idea of what I want is the same - a camera mount that has an active lock like that... except a third-party add-on. Ideally, I'd have the EF -> M4/3 Positive Lock Adapter and mount it to an active (or positive, whatever) locking mount on the camera (such as I could with the Z Cam). The next best thing would be an adapter around the lens mount that serves functionally the same purpose.

I'm assuming there's nothing like this out-there, which means I have a new project - bring on the 3D printing and CNC machining!

I'd prefer if someone does sell something like that already, though.

Thanks for any help you can offer with either of these questions and I hope everyone has a nice week and stays cool. Now I'm going to read some threads here....