Panasonic 14-42 feather weight lens on GH3
- Thread starter Droider
- Start date
Vojec
Member
What about non flat terrain? Have you adjustable legs for table?
You do realise that if your stabilisation is good enough that you are supposed to have Image stabilisation turned off?
The same way if you are on a tripod you turn it off to stop the stabilisation "hunting" to stay stable.
It is a GH3 you have isnt it, if you like I can send you over my 25mm to try out if you pay for shipping/return before you decide to buy.
Shooting at 14mm on the GH3 is like 28mm on Full Frame, still pretty wide if you are high up.
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
We just get as level as possible.. looking for table with telescopic legs that does no weigh a ton..
Dave
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
The 20mm 1.7 lens was the goto lens before, although I do not have it.
It is only 100 grams, and very fast @1.7
It does not have a lens hood, but reading about it, you get very little lens flare even when pointing at the sun (some people see this is good, others bad) just depends on what you like.
There's nothing wrong with it at all, its a pretty good lens on the panasonic cameras, but may not be so good on non panasonic.
40mm full frame equivalent is geting close to what the eye sees as "normal", it would be around 58mm on a Black Magic Pocket Cinema Camera if you ever went that route at a later stage.
It is always best to try a lens out yourself though and see what you think.
As long as a lens is fast (low aperture number) anything 2.8 and below is pretty fast, then a lot of people wouldn't really to be able to tell the difference in video quality tbh, its all about what you like in the size/angle of a lens.
DxOMark is a great site for objective comparison of lenses (and cameras) - they even test the same lens on different bodies (where appropriate).
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...on-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH3___1105_842_742_842
Also interesting to compare equivalent focal lengths on, for example, M43 and FF:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...EF28-70mm-f-2.8L-USM___1105_842_742_842_168_0
- firmly answering the question "is FF really better than Micro Four-Thirds?"
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...on-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH3___1105_842_742_842
Also interesting to compare equivalent focal lengths on, for example, M43 and FF:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...EF28-70mm-f-2.8L-USM___1105_842_742_842_168_0
- firmly answering the question "is FF really better than Micro Four-Thirds?"
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
The BIG QUESTION HERE QUNITON is how the bloody hell we going to get all this kit on the road trip!? I was planning on Transporter but now I may ask SpeedyGonzales to come in his long wheelbase!
Dave
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
DxOMark is a great site for objective comparison of lenses (and cameras) - they even test the same lens on different bodies (where appropriate).
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...on-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH3___1105_842_742_842
Also interesting to compare equivalent focal lengths on, for example, M43 and FF:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compa...EF28-70mm-f-2.8L-USM___1105_842_742_842_168_0
- firmly answering the question "is FF really better than Micro Four-Thirds?"
Thanks Jes for the links.. very interesting and always good to have other place to get opinions but in this day and age my head cant take anymore info, the internet is great but we all need to grow another brain to store all the bloody info in!
Objectively my way of thinking is small has got to be good for profit. BIG means more STUFF and MORE expense.. IF you can sell good quality, well flown footage through piloting skills then that is the way to go. I aint going to be clambering for the massive lift rigs anymore. Ben Roland has seen the light, fast nimble and precise footage makes killer shots, big lumbering reveals is not my cup of tea.
The GH series and the Sony BOSS is where I am sticking for now..
Just wish I could get out of this cabin and fly but yet another white out!
Dave
This is all great for photography, having the sharpest lenses etc, but its a different ball game for video.
At the end of the day HD video is only 2MP of the sensor and 4K is only 8MP, I have never watched a film and went omg look at the chromatic aberration on that lens.
People these days spend thousands of dollars/pounds on a lens that is extremely sharp right out to the edges, then they go and add a vignette to it .. doh!
I also believe small is the way to go, thats why I just got a new parcel delivered today for flying, weighing in at only 2.8KGs (with 8 motors ESCs, props and retractable landing gear)
I just need to add lipos and the A2 FC which comes later today
At the end of the day HD video is only 2MP of the sensor and 4K is only 8MP, I have never watched a film and went omg look at the chromatic aberration on that lens.
People these days spend thousands of dollars/pounds on a lens that is extremely sharp right out to the edges, then they go and add a vignette to it .. doh!
I also believe small is the way to go, thats why I just got a new parcel delivered today for flying, weighing in at only 2.8KGs (with 8 motors ESCs, props and retractable landing gear)
I just need to add lipos and the A2 FC which comes later today
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
This is all great for photography, having the sharpest lenses etc, but its a different ball game for video.
At the end of the day HD video is only 2MP of the sensor and 4K is only 8MP, I have never watched a film and went omg look at the chromatic aberration on that lens.
People these days spend thousands of dollars/pounds on a lens that is extremely sharp right out to the edges, then they go and add a vignette to it .. doh!
I also believe small is the way to go, thats why I just got a new parcel delivered today for flying, weighing in at only 2.8KGs (with 8 motors ESCs, props and retractable landing gear)
I just need to add lipos and the A2 FC which comes later today
You tinker what u got now?
Dave
I agree I'm (strongly) biased towards stills but I don't believe it's much different in the video world. Film makers are just as obsessive about "glass" - perhaps even more so, based on dollar spend. As a stills photographer I've always worked on the basis that you can't have too much IQ but you can certainly have not enough.
Anyway, I'm not blindly advocating "bigger is better" - only that, as a professional, one invariably needs to meet (or exceed) a paying client's expectations. And, like it or not, those expectations often include the size and apparent cost of your gear as well as the objective and subjective quality of the output. I've seen that look of "satisfied confidence" on a client's face as I'm setting up my Gitzo tripod, Manfrotto geared head, Canon 1Ds, tilt/shift lens, light meter and so on. If I just whipped a P&S out of my pocket they'd freak! For AP, it's legitimate to field a Panasonic GH3, for example, not because you say that the quality is "great" but because the client has seen many other film makers saying so. But you probably wouldn't get away with the same claim for, say, a Canon S100, even though the results may be indistinguishable. Go smaller - yes, lot's of benefits... but be mindful that you can go too small. Just saying...
Anyway, I'm not blindly advocating "bigger is better" - only that, as a professional, one invariably needs to meet (or exceed) a paying client's expectations. And, like it or not, those expectations often include the size and apparent cost of your gear as well as the objective and subjective quality of the output. I've seen that look of "satisfied confidence" on a client's face as I'm setting up my Gitzo tripod, Manfrotto geared head, Canon 1Ds, tilt/shift lens, light meter and so on. If I just whipped a P&S out of my pocket they'd freak! For AP, it's legitimate to field a Panasonic GH3, for example, not because you say that the quality is "great" but because the client has seen many other film makers saying so. But you probably wouldn't get away with the same claim for, say, a Canon S100, even though the results may be indistinguishable. Go smaller - yes, lot's of benefits... but be mindful that you can go too small. Just saying...
kloner
Aerial DP
in video, because we gotta run the frame rates at certain levels so everything is right, it takes faster glass to get in the dark and not look dark.... in photography you can tweak the camera out to do so many different affects or to bring the light up, flashes to fake a moment in time to be lit, in vids, your locked in and need the fast lenses..... i kinda like em slow for sunrise and sunsets, low dynamic range, makes it look rad. Dark silos, bright colors behind it, but do that in a fast lens so you can see the subject like we film it has to be usable and to do that takes a fast lens.... That's the obsession
My red lifter is barely 4kg, lifts 23 lbs payloads at 43% throttle to hover....
My red lifter is barely 4kg, lifts 23 lbs payloads at 43% throttle to hover....
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
Without pack I presume... I aint saying BIG does not have its place but in my world right now small is beautiful and is earning money where BIG is not.. just guess its horses for courses and what happens your way.
Jes I respect what you are saying and IF you saw us turn up on a shoot I hope you, if u where the DOP would be impressed. Especially with our sweety box!
Dave
Droider
Drone Enthusiast
Definitely
I just seen your location.. I thought you where in Portugal?
Dave
Got myself a Cortex, at the moment it seems to be against everything I have learnt here, but know what, the more I look and think about it the more it makes sense.
I just hope it flies as well as its designed.
As for the other comments regarding glass, I would challenge anyone on here to put up a video, one with cheap glass and one with expensive glass at the same settings, and see who can figure out which one is which.
In a controlled environment, possibly..but flying in the air, I don't think so.
I would do it, but I have a Zenmuse, and we all know what that means.
kloner
Aerial DP
I'd take you up on that but nothing here was less than $600, and that one looks the sharpest, but not in the dark..... or twilight
just because were in the sky doesn't mean all we do is typical tall aerial shots, were low altitude close quarters needs quality glass to mate with epic footage..... show up with a $100 lens you aint getting invited back. for us, that's the only people that'll pay for a service
just because were in the sky doesn't mean all we do is typical tall aerial shots, were low altitude close quarters needs quality glass to mate with epic footage..... show up with a $100 lens you aint getting invited back. for us, that's the only people that'll pay for a service
Thats lens snobbery from people who couldn't tell you what ISO meant
Its not the glass that mates with Epic, its the colourist who is struggling with the crappy compression depending on what camera was used for the recording.
Ill hold you to that challenge as long as you don't tell people before hand what was used, let them vote.