Super Members BTM_Pix Posted October 12, 2019 Super Members Share Posted October 12, 2019 3 hours ago, Kisaha said: Tried a lot of things, 3 adapters (the 2 Viltroxes and the Lens Regain) no EF(-S) AF on any of them. Iris works fine. Unless there have been firmware updates for the other manufacturer's adapters that specifically enable it, it is only the Metabones adapters that have any type of focus control from the Pocket4K. Kisaha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yannick Willox Posted October 12, 2019 Share Posted October 12, 2019 I posted before, the pl 12-60 is passable at 12mm if there are no important vertical lines in the frame. My old 14-50 4/3 lens is better at 14mm than the new 12-60 at 14 mm. Even my 4/3 14-150 mm is better at 14 mm. Glad I kept my old glass. i am planning to get aMeike12mm for those wide shots. however, the 12-60 is parfocal, and the old lenses certainly not ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonim Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 On 10/12/2019 at 7:23 PM, Kisaha said: There is definitely an issue here with the native m43 lenses. We pay top money for the best zooms, and the performance is not adequate not even for prosumer use. For the case you maybe missed it (I sold 12-35 and 35-100 and preorder 10-24)... Actually, IMO it seems that with such newcomers m43 cine-usage case becomes even more attractive http://en.dzofilm.com/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kisaha Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 42 minutes ago, anonim said: For the case you maybe missed it (I sold 12-35 and 35-100 and preorder 10-24)... Actually, IMO it seems that with such newcomers m43 cine-usage case becomes even more attractive http://en.dzofilm.com/index.html Interesting. Very good prices. Are they any good? It is just not a run n gun solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaconda_ Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 To be fair, it doesn’t look any bigger than the Sigma 18-35 on a booster. And since you don’t need f1.8 for low light on this camera, it’s potentially more versatile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonim Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 3 hours ago, Kisaha said: Interesting. Very good prices. Are they any good? It is just not a run n gun solution. IDK... To me the most or even only important is precise/smooth manual handling and focusing, and I'm expecting that aberrations will be enough well controlled. But, to be honest, although I understand problem of, say, distorted image at wide focal length, I didn't find that it is so important or distractedly noticeable in moving pictures and movie making for average spectators. What extremely bother me with Panasonic zooms is totally unusable (even for my pretty tolerable criteria) manual focusing. (Granted, I found that 12-35 II has pretty impressive stabilization.) Is it something improved with 10-25 and clutch mechanism, I don't know. Dzofilm's constructors are promising true parfocal design, and, all in all, true cine lens experience for relatively modest price. I guess that even for such newcomers price for FF or APSC counterpart lens will be more similar to Fujinon MK zoom 18-55 (which, of course, doesn't have such UW range). That's why I think that, contrary to death-prediction or afraid by many, it is gold time for m43 movie make aspiring shooters. Simply because of the most important thing - lenses. As much as I've found that Voigts 0.95 lenses are unique regarding value/specs/usability/affordability between all lenses on Earth, it might be that these Dzofilm zooms will match that mark. And as Anaconda already mentioned, they are actually pretty small, about 15cm and 1kg what is ideal for run/gun, considering way that I'm using it - combining handheld and quickly shoulder mounting rig. (I simply couldn't stand gimbals, although I tried them, bought and sold several times.) Kisaha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IncriminatingPictures Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 This might be an ignorant question, but the above conversation about lens distortion had me wondering, is correcting for the wider lenses something that BM can correct in a firmware upgrade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaconda_ Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 In theory they could, but in practice I don't see them doing it, especially for Braw recordings. It is something you can very easily fix in post, and is one of the default panels in Resolve, so it's not a huge issue. TurboRat and IncriminatingPictures 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IncriminatingPictures Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 Fair point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anonim Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 6 hours ago, IncriminatingPictures said: This might be an ignorant question, but the above conversation about lens distortion had me wondering, is correcting for the wider lenses something that BM can correct in a firmware upgrade? To be more precise - look at "Lens Correction" tab at the bottom of Inspector panel in Edit page of Resolve. And to be even more precise - and I apologize if you already did it - take a look just at most cinematography-wise acclaimed movie from last year production, The Favorite by Yorgos Lanthimos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IncriminatingPictures Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 3 hours ago, anonim said: To be more precise - look at "Lens Correction" tab at the bottom of Inspector panel in Edit page of Resolve. And to be even more precise - and I apologize if you already did it - take a look just at most cinematography-wise acclaimed movie from last year production, The Favorite by Yorgos Lanthimos Ha. I guess my question did come across ignorant. As I’m aware lens correction in post is possible. I guess I was more asking if it being in done in camera was something possible and “better” than the process in post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kisaha Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 What is the point having a run n gun lens and have to correct every shot in post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaconda_ Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 36 minutes ago, Kisaha said: What is the point having a run n gun lens and have to correct every shot in post? Well, if you're shooting stuff that can't be reshot and you need flexibility on location, but you have more time in post. Or what about then you need very wide and tele shots within 10 seconds of each other? What other option is there for MFT users? Sure it's not ideal, but I'm fairly sure 12-100 is the only option, and the downside is 45 seconds of extra time in post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kisaha Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 3 hours ago, Anaconda_ said: Well, if you're shooting stuff that can't be reshot and you need flexibility on location, but you have more time in post. Or what about then you need very wide and tele shots within 10 seconds of each other? What other option is there for MFT users? Sure it's not ideal, but I'm fairly sure 12-100 is the only option, and the downside is 45 seconds of extra time in post. 45 seconds for how many shots? And what about 12-13-14-15-16-...100mm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaconda_ Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, Kisaha said: 45 seconds for how many shots? Copy - paste the effect to all you clips at any given focal length. I agree, it's less than ideal, but doesn't stop it being a run-and-gun lens. You can shoot fast with it, and then fix it up later... isn't post work what this camera's all about anyway? If you need a corrected lens and have no time for editing/grading, perhaps there's a different camera out there that's more suitable to your needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kisaha Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 13 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said: Copy - paste the effect to all you clips at any given focal length. I agree, it's less than ideal, but doesn't stop it being a run-and-gun lens. You can shoot fast with it, and then fix it up later... isn't post work what this camera's all about anyway? If you need a corrected lens and have no time for editing/grading, perhaps there's a different camera out there that's more suitable to your needs. Maybe a firmware update with lens profiles for the most popular lenses will add that angle to the camera and make more people happy than less people. I am 100% sure that I am not alone on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaconda_ Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 Right and uncropped 1080p Braw too - but then there's the argument that it's no longer raw video... same as uncropped 4k Braw on the 6k camera... fixing the lens distortion in camera will no longer be a raw image. I can't say it enough, I do agree with you, however I don't see BMD implementing lens profiles into this camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members BTM_Pix Posted October 16, 2019 Super Members Share Posted October 16, 2019 7 hours ago, Kisaha said: What is the point having a run n gun lens and have to correct every shot in post? If you are looking for a single lens allrounder that can be alternative to your Olympus then adapting a Tamron 16-300mm f3.5-f6.3 might be worth thinking about. On a speed booster it becomes slightly wider on the short end (and has a lot more range on the long end obviously ) and a few stops faster. The speed booster also brings the f6.3 long end back to f4 as well so you won't be losing out there either and can just run it as a constant f4 if you want. I've just done this quick comparison on the P4K for you between it and the Panasonic 12-60mm f2.8/f4 (which is typical of the uncorrected wide end of the native lenses) so you can see the difference in the distortion at the wide end with walls and edges. EDIT>>>SEE POST FURTHER DOWN FOR RE-SHOT TEST Whilst the Tamron isn't exactly distortion free either, it shows far less than the Panasonic. Also, if you go in by a fraction (17-18mm unboosted versus 16mm unboosted) then it improves quite a lot more. Size and weight wise, its a bit less than the Olympus. https://***URL removed***/products/compare/side-by-side?products=tamron_16-300-3p5-6p3&products=olympus_12-100_4p0_is_pro It also has pretty decent stabilisation and the big kicker of course is the price as they can readily be found used for under £250. Its not without its faults (it isn't particularly sharp at the very long end but the speed booster does alleviate that somewhat) but as a run and gun all rounder it is a decent alternative. Kisaha 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kisaha Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 59 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said: Size and weight wise, its a bit less than the Olympus. https://***URL removed***/products/compare/side-by-side?products=tamron_16-300-3p5-6p3&products=olympus_12-100_4p0_is_pro Its not without its faults (it isn't particularly sharp at the very long end but the speed booster does alleviate that somewhat) but as a run and gun all rounder it is a decent alternative. How strange a humble Tamron to perform like this! The 12-60 is a bit better than the Olympus in the wide end, but the big issue in general is the 12-17mm. The 18mm Canon's I tried were a lot better. Thank you very much for the recommendation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members BTM_Pix Posted October 16, 2019 Super Members Share Posted October 16, 2019 1 minute ago, Kisaha said: How strange a humble Tamron to perform like this! The 12-60 is a bit better than the Olympus in the wide end, but the big issue in general is the 12-17mm. The 18mm Canon's I tried were a lot better. Thank you very much for the recommendation. Mmmm.... I've flawed that test a little bit. Give me 20 mins to fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now