Ranking My Video Cameras

Ranking gear can be interesting.

If I ask myself “what do I go to automatically when I…..” this is the hierarchy.

My best video cameras if limited to non RAW in-camera codecs, V-Log, V-Log-L, Flat, or Standard;

1. S5 has a slightly more natural look than the S5II with 14+ stops dynamic range.

2. S5II with full frame range.

3. G9II as a new generation MFT.

4. GH5s an older generation MFT (which has it’s moments).

5. BMPCC4k, an even older MFT camera, sharing the same sensor as the GH5s.

6. G9I (x3) which only has Natural or Standard with reduced contrast, V-LogL is a paid upgrade and I have not gone there.

Best camera exporting out to a RAW recorder ir recording internally;

1. BMPCC4k, because it not only records internally, but can also record ProRes RAW if needed (need to update the firmware, but easy enough). It needs to be used in 4k to retain its quality, but there is quality, tons of it.

2. G9II has the best integration with off board B-Raw and the best overall specs, but usually does not get used with a BMVA (see below). It lacks the dynamic range of a full frame but does get the benefits of later generation Black Magic support, like highlight recovery.

3. S5 is my most used B-Raw cam, simply because it is a great all rounder, but it’s output options are limiting (only 6k in full frame).

4. GH5s is enabled by B-Raw, it runs long and cool and lives in my “big rig” with the large 7” VMVA.

5. The rest cannot without paid firmware upgrades, but can export to ProRes.

Best static endurance camera;

1. GH5s which seems to handle 2 hours+ with no issues. Simple camera, low pixel count sensor, lower res screen, video centric design I guess.

2. BMPCC4k basically set the same as above.

3. S5 which does well with NP’s but better with V-Mount.

4. The rest. These all do ok and the S5II/G9II can run off external power with few issues.

Best camera for movement (camera and subject);

1. G9II MFT gives this a slight edge in depth of field (AF), stabilising and lens weight. The Leica 9mm is the enabler here.

2. S5II is very close, really only lens bulk is against it.

3. S5 is a hefty carry with my current rig, which with its very good (read better than most) stabilising is enough for professional results

4. G9I’s which are no slouch, just amongst strong company.

5. The BMPCC4k with its gyro stabe, which is ok, but no real threat to the cameras above and the body is very light and oddly shaped, reducing its effect.

6. GH5s has no stabe, although with the heavy V-Mount rig, it does that edgy “hand held” look really well.

Best camera for special effects and range;

1. G9II with All-i and high frame rates in camera is by far the best

2. S5II is good enough, just not a G9II (which is closer to a S5IIx)

3. BMPCC4k for its small sensor dynamic range, ProRes RAW and ISO performance.

4. GH5s with All-i and decent frame rates.

5. S5 is less happy here, but still capable

6. G9I is showing its dated hybrid pedigree, although it can do 4k/60 in short bursts.

Best Hybrid

• S5II is limited in many ways, but is by far my most relied on “fall back” video camera.

• G9I cannot be underestimated and are really only used this way. I shot a quick clip recently in Standard and if you avoid highlight clipping, the results are very decent out of camera, enough for me to carry a mic and ND filter for. The camera is capable of more, but not as used as a stills cam.

• G9II with SSD gives me better potential quality enabled for ProRes V-Log, but it is more fragile and bulky, not really a hybrid, because I do not use it (enough) for stills.

• S5 out of its rig is just ahead of below. De-rigging it is not an option in the field, but in an extreme situation, I might press it into service.

• GH5s, my most video-centric camera, was in part bought over the BMPCC4k because it could be pressed into service as a stills cam. 10mp, no stabe, but otherwise a perfectly capable option.

• BMPCC4k, which cannot take stills, so it fails here unless you lift frames from its 4k.

So, no clear winner.

The S5II is less used as a video cam, but my first choice to go “bare bones”.

The G9II is the most capable on paper and clear leader in several areas, but its superior capabilities in B-Raw are neglected in favour of its strengths outside of that.

The S5 is settled as my primary static-mobile video option, my BMPCC6k with perks and in its role as a B-Raw, cine lens platform, it is nearly ideal apart from limited RAW output options and that pesky little micro USB port.

The GH5s or my “mini full frame” in its big endurance rig is my ideal static camera. It is not as good in low light a s a full frame, but ahead of the G9II and in its role, it is safe and reliable.

The G9I’s, a pair of well worn and much loved stills cameras are the platform that launched me into video and with a few different choices, they might have carried me through (V-LogL firmware, RAW to off board recorders etc*). If needed, out of camera Standard with reduced contrast produce footage that will fool most.

The BMPCC4k was bought as a clearly better value option than another BMVA 5” off board recorder and to add better Resolve integration (and because I needed to know). I had all the many bits you need to make it work, but without those, I would have nearly doubled its second hand price, so a situational win.

Matching these together is possible.

The GH5s, G9II and S5 share a cooler colour palette, so they match decently, about the same difference as switching lenses and even when mixing B-Raw and ProRes V-Log, I can get a harmonious look.

The S5II is warmer rendering, but the differences in codecs and sensor are mostly irrelevant in its role as a hybrid and oddly, the footage matches quite well with G9I footage, it’s likely partner in that role.

The BMPCC4k in B-Raw is different to my other cams, but reasonably close in real terms and a good point of reference.

If I need to run all 5 cameras together, I will use a mix of V-Log, ProRes, or Standard profile, which tends to grade closely and in that codec, I can adjust the colours in camera to match close enough.

*The thing that mostly blunted this approach was information. I could not get clear direction about B-Raw, good V-Log examples etc and most users relied on its OOC capabilities. Turns out I can record ProRes on a BMVA, but as is, from only HLG, Cine-D or a Rec 709 codec.

An Interesting, If Possibly Flawed Quick Test Of G9II Noise

A question I needed to have answered and it is far from it, but early tests have opened the door, is whether I am silly not to use my G9II for more stills shooting, specifically low light sport where the full frames are ok, but lens limited and my MFT champions (EM1x for me) are stretched.

At higher ISO’s noise is not an issue, up to 6400 without extreme effort taken, higher with deep NR applied, but white balance is touchy. I cannot usually tell which ISO has been used by eye except that at 6400 white balance errors are harder to refine.

My tests was quick and rough, relying on my instincts rather than direct and scientific comparison, but this is my space most of the time and I know it well.

G9II with 40-150 f2.8 Olympus, the lens that will shoot most sports for me in poorer light.

AF was……. annoying to be honest (my bar is the EM1x and this was not that experience, my “worse case” is the G9 Mk1 with some Oly lenses, it was in between). There is decent tracking, but if it got lost, and it did get lost, I found the wait for the combo to catch up was longer than I could bare in the field.

To put it into context, using the S5II with 85mm S-prime took a little adjusting, but it worked fine when I did. This combo had no “warming in” period, it just would not do.

Mixing Oly and Pana gear can be like that, but that is what I have, simple as.

On top of that there is no way to set my preferred focus shape (a small-tall cluster in the centre, far too much reliance put on subject detection for my liking). It had a horizontal/vertical grouping, but it was full screen width. I want my focus to go where I put it, that is what works for me.

Noise and stuff.

I was hoping the newer camera would make a real difference in the high ISO space.

Noise is not the real issue these days, I get clean 6400 when I treat the cameras I use right, but dynamic range and white balance can be “twitchy”.

If I give the file plenty of light (always better to slightly over expose at 6400 than under expose at 3200), get white balance roughly right (blue-yellow WB, cannot fix magenta-green tone in cam), then I am most of the way there.

The G9II files had good white balance, looked decently sharp and were tonally alive, but they were noisy.

At 6400 this looks decent at first.

Closer in, I was surprised how noisy it looked.

I am not looking for problems (or a fight), I am chasing solutions for a growing problem (new dull LED lighting in some venues), but at this point, I see little reason to push this camera into service in this role. The same money spent on a Panasonic lens for the old G9 would likely have the same benefit (and I am not buying both), or getting a decent longer lens for my full frame cams.

I sometimes feel the G9II is the “lost child” of my kit. It is my most powerful hybrid cam in many ways, but it does not get serious video treatment with a BMVA because it is the camera that is best suited to go it alone. It is not a preferred stills option because it has a video role to play and it is not noticeably better it seems in poor light than older MFT stills or dual ISO video cameras or any full frame option and it’s superior stabe and AF are only preferred over the S5II because of it’s other video features (ProRes and All-i).

The role best suited to the G9II (in my kit) it seems is light weight and small footprint run-n-gun video cam in AF and with hand held stabilising, matched to Pana glass and SSD mounted.

An OM-1 would be the better stills cam in this space, but I can pick up second hand EM1x’s for less and I like how those run.

The reality is, I have seen more advancement in software (and firmware) over the last few years than in hardware. Not to say hardware has hit a wall, but the differences have become less obvious in all areas other than video and even there, we are for all realistic needs, there.

You need to jump at least two generations (EM1x to OM-1) to see any difference in some areas and even then, I have seen at least that much improvement in Capture 1’s relevant processing capabilities over that time, so assuming AF is enough, what else is needed?

So, I Scratched That Itch Finally.

The BMPCC4k (short name), not bothering with more, we all know what it is, has been bought from Japan, second hand bare bones (don’t need the license etc), in good condition and cheap at $850au (with some sort of 15% off Japan and Korea special).

Why would anyone buy this relatively ancient and to be honest ugly little camera with few of the latest conveniences, when they already have several newer options at hand.

The reality of this camera is;

• It still holds up against cameras a lot newer and dearer in the one true measure, image quality.

• It will give me a BM base line to align other cameras to (and to finally see the difference). That itch needed to be scratched.

• It is a dead steal at less than $900au, not much can come close. If you buy new for $1350au you get a full Resolve license worth about 40% of the cameras cost, so probably a better buy, but not if you already have that.

• It has a mini XLR port, which my BMVA’s also have, but none of my other cameras do.

• It is one of very, very few cameras that can record in B-Raw and ProRes Raw internally, not that I will use the heavier format, especially with internal memory*.

• I have all the bits needed to make it work properly (universal cage, rails, 1TB SSD, a V-Mount battery). Turns out, all I needed was a D-Tap to BMPCC power cable ($30au).

• It is the same price as adding another BMVA 5” to an existing camera and keeps that camera (G9II) free for mobile use and stills. The G9II gets lots of use as a run-n-gun hybrid, my low stress gimbal in effect.

• It provides more Resolve integration.

The reality is, if I accept that all else I may need (AF, stabe etc) are covered by other cameras, then all that is really lacking is a lighter and cleaner B-Raw option. To be honest, I am struggling to see the relevance of anything else for me.

Newer Lumix mirrorless are great, but their improved internal capabilities require expensive memory cards, are in ProRes RAW format*, or cover ground I already have covered, so they would be over priced and spec-ed repeats.

ProRes Raw is nice to have, but its footprint is massive and unnecessary. Upgrading another cam to B-Raw would be another BMVA, so more cords and cables, the same cost and I would still not have true Resolve integration.

Another BM camera is going to give me the BM look, but what if I want a repeat camera to match it, do I spend another $3k+? Another BMPCC4k could be had for less than $1k, so I could even run three for less than any other option.

My need (want really), was for another B-Raw camera option to bring me up to three, preferably without messing up what I have put together already or costing a bomb;

1. A light weight movement camera (G9II in Log/ProResHQ with an SSD), usually on a short pole (ironically a gimbal extension pole, sans gimbal. This one could be upgraded to B-Raw, but at the expense of portability.

2. An endurance static rig (GH5s in a RigidPro rig with V-Mount and BMVA 7”).

3. A second option to either of those, or my hand held rig (S5 with BMVA 5”).

4. A handy hybrid (S5II in V-Log) used mostly for stills, but has shown itself to be very capable.

I have now added a second static B-Raw endurance rig, a third B-Raw option as well as a fun weekend creative camera.

The reality of video is this;

If you want to go beyond cameras that can record internally, not out to cost efficient SSD drives, that are not “limited” to 4k or 6k at a stretch, that shoot PR-Raw, not (just) B-Raw, then everything jumps up into places you had better be aware of.

Memory alone can cost more than cameras or lenses, but to what real benefit as many content hosts are themselves limited to 1080p or 4k output.

B-Raw into SD or SSD memory, even limited to 4-6k and 60p with output at 1080p does not need a PR-Raw camera work flow, but can match it with little extra effort at B-Raw 3:1 or Q0 for occasional use. Even at matching quality settings, B-Raw has the size edge.

If you go out of PR-Raw into ProRes HQ or lower formats, formats that do add better colour depth to Log (or non-log) footage, the sizes are comparable to B-Raw (4k 5:1 B-Raw is 81 MBs, but 4k PRHQ from Log is 117 MBs).

For more on this check this out;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaMJ27qIMS4

For rigging, not something I will be doing for run-n-gun handling, because I do have other cams for that (see above), I will use an old Camvate universal half cage, some rails, a V-Mount and SSD adapter plate and maybe a separate Portkeyes screen for focus, maybe not. The issue of where to mount the V-Mount and still use the original screen is not nothing, it is a common problem with Pocket Cams, but as it is only a static rig**.

The Frankenstein’s Monster that is my BMPCC4k rig. Only one thing bought for it apart from the camera, the rest sourced from excess bits. Cabling is a little messy, but not much more so than a Video Assist rig and the power cable, SSD and HDMI out are all actually optional (nothing stopping me from using an SD card, LP-E6 batts and its own screen unless long term endurance are needed). The cage is an old Camvate universal half cage, part of the top hot shoe mount removed and a rubber washer added for grip. It is stable enough for a top handle, the little top handle mounted on the side is to help stabilise and protect the cabling.

The camera has advantages over a Video Assist, one being the three function buttons on top for quick application of false colour etc, then having false colour on the main screen and a smaller and much lighter focus screen, an excess Portkeys PT5, is ideal.

The V-Mount does not obstruct the screen, but better still, it acts as a movable counter weight depending on lens used (the weight difference between my Pana/Leica 9mm and Vespid 25 are more than the camera body). I went with the direct to camera D-Tap cable for power, in hind-sight maybe the dummy battery option would have been cleaner and slightly more robust, but that is only $30 away from being done.

This rig is lighter than my others, about as power efficient and as robustly set up, which considering it is a static unit, makes it more than enough.

*The weird reality of video is many recording formats and colour codecs are large, including internal 4k Log All-i, or ProRes 422/HQ etc and do not offer the depth or flexibility of B-Raw. B-Raw is not only a better editing space (a no brainer in Resolve), but often actually smaller, easier on your computer (less compression to unpack) and more streamlined.

**Meaning tripod, moving rail, hand held.

I May Never Buy A New Camera Again

Ok, probably not, but I will need to be persuaded.

My need for new stills cameras is really more of the same, the G9 Mk1 and EM1x being favourites. Both do more than I need, so as good condition second hand ones come up, I will jump, well to a point as they are also reliable.

In video, there is also little I need past 4k/10 bit/422 inV-log, ProRes or B-Raw which several can handle*, often down sampled to 1080 anyway. Newer cameras would only add versatility in internal recording and memory options, not quality. Ed. A used BMPCC4k has been aquired, proving the point.

I remembered this today, a clip I meant to get back to and forgot;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wyj4d6fQ2U8

So, I have cameras, plenty of cameras and they do lots of cool things, but what do have in lenses?

Set 1

DZO Vespid 25 and 40mm with MFT and L-mount adapters and an L-mount IRIX 150 macro. These are my premium cine lenses covering 25-80mm and 150-225 in various formats. The Vespids walk the fine line between quality and character, the IRIX is just clean perfection with reach and genuine macro.

This image took my breath away while testing. The 40mm shot as an 80mm on MFT.

Set 2

Sirui anamorphic 2x 24‘s in MFT and a 50mm in L-mount. The most “cinematic” lenses I have, anamorphic and still sharp. I rarely think of these, but to be honest, every time I use them I get a buzz. The matching 24’s were a deliberate choice to match a pair of lenses, the 50 was a whim that paid off and bought my L-mount cameras into play with a longer lens.

Anamorphic is not an every job option, but when you do commit, it adds so very much more.

Set 3

35, 50 and 85mm L-Mount Panasonic S-Primes , a Sigma 28-70 as well as my 9, 8-18 and 12-60 Pana-Leica and 12-40, 17 and 45mm Olympus MFT lenses. My AF and hybrid set, all very capable with stable and clean optics (but different looks). I use these more than I probably should, because they are just so convenient. I have no doubt I could do most of my commercial work with them, but I am also glad I have options.

Stills glass has its place. The Sigma 28-70 is possibly my most under used video and stills lens.

Set 4

MFT mount Hope 25 and 50mm, and Vision 12mm. My backup clean MFT cine lenses for more stable, less interesting performance. These three are all very stable, very consistent and handle nasties well. Whenever I want that cleaner, safer option especially with flare, I go this way over the Vespids.

In various tests compared to the Vespids, the Hope lenses performed well, sometimes even better especially when stressed.

Set 5

L-Mount Spectrum 35 and 50mm, my backup full frame cine lenses. These are more about character than the Hope glass. I see little space for these now, but will hang on to them rather than sell them cheap and regret it. The 50 is a clean and sharp lens with a cool lean, the 35 is more of a “dirty” and warm character lens. I picked these up for half price, so no harm, no foul.

Hard to discount these lenses, but the Vespids are a safer bet.

Set 6

My legacy glass including a F series 25mm half frame Olympus, Nikkor 28 f2.8, Pentax 50 f1.4 and possibly a Zeiss 85 f2.8, which is a loaner for now. I also consider my Olympus MFT lenses part of this set as they render a very organic, timeless look.

50 year old Nikkor and other glass still gets it done. There is an undeniable look to older glass.

Character(s), safe bets, some creatives, some spectacular and lots of versatility.

Do any stand out?

The Spectrum 50, Vespid 40, Hope 25, Sirui 50 and 35 Panasonic S-Prime are all favourites of their respective sets. If there could be only one, the 40mm Vespid would be it (with 2 adapters over 4 formats for a 40/60/70/80 range).

*Ed. Since writing this I have bought two cameras, one a second BMPCC4k, the second a G9 Mk1, combined age since release of about 15 years.

BBC Getting Too Much, But So Is Everyone

The BBC seems to be one of the lead offenders at the moment of “beautifying” their news.

I just watched a BBC story on heat in the UK, the reporter saying “as you can see it is beautiful here” and “as measuered by the facility behind me” while being shot at f1.4 (ish) on a longer lens. She honestly looked like she was being shot against a green screen background.

Apart from the unnecessarily shallow depth that avoids the first rule of news footage, which is context, the over beautification of serious subjects helps nobody. You have to wonder why she even went there if the depth of field makes the background irrelevant.

I watched the whole broadcast and pretty much every story was an exercise in shallow depth videography for its own sake.

Take a look at this set

https://documentaryfamilyawards.com/project/environmental-portrait-photo-awards-fall-2021/

Notice the common technique, which is deeper depth to tell a story.

We really have to stop folks, this is getting ridiculous.

Rare Air, The Mysterious World Of Deep Depth Of Field

Wide open apertures are on trend at the moment, so much so, I have started to hear the term “Bokeh fatigue”, which is a misnomer as Bokeh is present in almost every image ever taken to some extent, so lets just say wide aperture, shallow depth imagery.

The look, once discovered can be addictive and for a while, it might seem you have the “magic sauce”. In the World Cup, there are a lot of fan closeups with Sony G-master primes wide open, the background only a smeared hint, but totally unnatural looking. It’s a thing if that is what you are into, but fashions come and go.

There are genuine advantages to this style, like the cleaning up ugly backgrounds, the glow it adds and hero-ing the subject, but it does not tell a story, it does the opposite in fact. We live in Narcissistic times no doubt, everyone obsessed by their self image, their 15 seconds of fame, but I feel there is still room for some context, some grandeur.

This one subject only thing is small, limited, overly intimate, it is also quite lazy.

Most of the images that move me from the long history of photography have depth. Very few have an obvious termination point, let alone an exaggerated one. Deep depth of field is tougher to get right, it has more elements, there is more to go wrong, but isn’t that the challenge, the reward for effort?

Look at all early street photography, some National Geographic documentary work, even most portraits of the 1990’s or earlier and the super shallow depth thing is absent, but ironically with slow film and a reliance on prime lenses, shallow depth would have been easier and safer.

This is because depth is often better.

Depth is not the enemy, it is not a punishment, it is the making of many of the great images of our history. Without depth these would lack story, relevance and staying power.

Sam Abel, one of my favourite photographers of the last 50 years uses depth not only as a tool, but a necessity. He shoots back-to-front, with the background anchoring his foreground compositions. Without depth, he has no voice.

Even at f1.8, MFT format can render a natural looking image without calling attention to its in-to-out of focus transition. You find yourself looking around the frame, it has depth in more ways than one. The modern trend is a sharp line of focus on the bike rider, everyone else blurred out. That does not appeal on any level.

My main stills format, Micro Four Thirds has a secret.

Deep depth of field is easier to find, it is almost always accessible, because the format adds over two stops more depth for its equivalent magnification to full frame. A 17mm lens sees like a 35mm, but with the depth of a 17mm, so i f5.6-6.7 depth at f2.8 or f2.8-3.4 at f1.8. Many see this as a negative, but I do not.

At f2.8, this image has some “snap” on the main subject, but he is still in context. This is story telling balance leaning on the shallow end, but it is a good and safe threshold.

F4 in full frame would have made the focus point very important. In MFT, it is basically a landscape aperture.

Shooting wide open at night, I still get enough depth to create a story image.

The two girls in front are the anchor for this image, but you find yourself drawn to other stories, even the mans turned head between theirs. I could have shot this at f1.8 on a full frame, but to what purpose?

Many images only work with depth. I could have made the central man the only sharp element, but that would have felt like chasing an on trend gimmick, not capturing what was important.

Personally, I am finding an obvious transition point less and less appealing. My 17mm Olympus lens is a favourite, because it almost always hides the transition point even at wider apertures.

This image has equal emphasis on all of its layers. Looks natural to me.

Maybe it is time for this shallow depth for its own sake thing to be shifted away from?

Are We Over It? I Am.

Realism or Escapism?

The super soft, amber-teal look is starting to be noticed by even the most un-aware of viewers and I think the bubble is about to burst.

Some things creep up on us, we absorb them and float along accepting this slow change, oblivious to their effect until one day they are seen and cannot then be unseen.

The soft focus trend, a reaction to over-sharp and digital looking footage seems to have settled in mainstream TV anyway as full strength Black Mist as its base. The BBC and ABC (Australia) are there, some cameramen are pushing back slightly, but the new generation coming through are there boots and all.

I can understand it and even accept it to some extent, because it has come from a need, into a habit, then a preferred look until we forget what things looked like before it. Even re-runs are getting the “glow” look.

This can be achieved also with old glass, but even then, the “vintage” look is augmented with filters.

It does seem odd though, that in an attempt to emulate film or the very best digital cameras like the ARRI 35 that do a good job of that, we seem to be falling well short in our mimicry, mocking our goal with our clumsy and simplistic techniques.

The cheaper the camera it seems, the stronger the reaction, although it seems there is nothing stopping cinematographers using 100k+ cameras, with $50 flea-market lenses and stacked filters.

Seems counter-intuitive.

Film does look different and the way many emulate this is……. with film or at least a film based technique. The last Indiana Jones movie as an example had a film grain overlay added to its digital capture to match the past films. It does not look exactly the same, but it is close and apart from the extra effort taken, probably a good work around, but the best one could have been to “just use film”.

Worked for a century.

The other half of this is the teal-orange look or lately the “no colour-colour” look.

This is getting out of hand. It seems the difference between mainstream TV and “cinematic” series or movies is either a highly compressed and dark colour palette (Harry Potter series, The Odyssey, Wicked II, basically everything on Netflix) or the strong but weird colour camp, where skin turns orange, shadows look like they are filled wth blue neon and it is hard to tell whether you are watching daylight or night. There are of course examples of both.

The final link in the chain, unnaturally shallow depth of field enabled by full frame AF digicams and super bright lenses (both old and new), which exaggerates both of the above and creates a look that is so far from natural, it must be accepted only as an on-trend “gimmick look” over-serving a habit developed from a perceived need.

An antique super fast Canon 50mm set wide open on a Red Monstro with I assume some BM filters and graded with the “there are only two colours, dull and duller” LUT. Looks natural…. not.

Mix these together and you get something that would have been once used for a”dreamscape” sequence.

Seriously, ever been in a plane that looks like this or with people this colour?

Way to date your work.

Pushback against the new Harry Potter* and Odyssey** releases seems to be zeroing in on the “no colour”, “too dark”, “flat and weird” or “more Hollywood dross” vibes, and this following the fallout from Wicked II, a movie with sumptuous and colourful sets, which were then blurred into de-saturated, out of depth of field oblivion and that coming from audiences that have either been unaware of this trend or are finally realising it is getting out of hand.

So maybe the end is near, or as things can go, maybe we are only just getting started.

Maybe the reality is I am being unkind, that this is the modern equivalent of early film escapism, designed to distract us from other issues, but maybe we should not let it enable our self destructive ignorance?

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHpw7q0tm6U&t=463s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqqXGfvjqU0

**Other issues with this one are common across any “historical” work, too many American accents, over done action scenes, and generally speaking liberties taken. Names like Matt Damon in the lead are often a key indicator here (remember The Great Wall?).

Getting In The 25mm Vespid Habit

The Vespid 25mm in its 45-50mm role on MFT is a thing.

Very happy.

It has the same character and feel as the 40mm, maybe better controlled under stress, maybe not.

In the name of not giving a lens a decent chance, no hood, and a Glimmerglass 1/8 filter on.

Foreground and background Bokeh, crucial for a cine lens, is very settled.

Off axis flare wide open is easy enough to tame.

Stright into the sun, the blobs are mostly from filters, so I might take them off for this type of shot, were I to try it in real situations.

Lovely video coiour and contrast, keeping in mind the GG filter..

Yep, happy to call this the MFT standard or optional full frame wide.
I am slightly tempted to get another Vespid, but to be honest, covering 25-80 across my cameras, I cannot think what camera I would like.

What do you want from a cine lens?

• High levels of sharpness without hard sharpness

• Bokeh and focus breathing that support front and back transitions, make the lens invisible.

• Contrast that can adapt to the needs of the shoot, punchy when needed, smooth and mild by default.

• Consistency across a set (of 2).

• Cinematographer grade handling.

Stills glass can give oyu sharp and contrasty, but lack subtlety and gentleness. They call too much attention to themselves. The Vespids have all of these characteristics in balance.

Maybe a Simera for a different look?

The Triple Triptych

A three by three of Japan’s Meiji Temple. Camera EM10.2, lens 40-150 Olympus kit.

The 2x4 Video Micro Kit (+ 1)

With the arrival of the 25mm Vespid, my multi format kit has been fully realised.

Most people would run four lenses with two cameras, but I am flipping that.

With four formats available, MFT 2x, MFT 1.8x, 1.5x APS-c and 1x full frame and two multi format (PL mount) lenses, I have effectively 8 focal lengths from 25 to 80.

Three cameras can feed RAW out to two BMVA 12G’s, giving me multiple levels of RAW capture and provide the formats above.

It’s an odd kit, more cameras than lenses, but achieves the same results as a couple of cams and more lenses, has more depth, maximises the glass I own, while keeping the consistency of rendering intact.

True wide.

25mm (full frame). Ideal for establishing and close-wide shots. Interesting angles and creative thinking. This is the lens at full stress, but also maximum character.

Standard-wide “invisible” lenses

37mm (APS-c). My 40mm for an APS-c format camera allowing me to use 4k RAW output formats on the S5II (full frame is 6k only). Cropping in on any lens, using the “sweet-spot”, always cleans up softer corners and mild distortions.

40mm (full frame) The most natural of lenses, the core “invisible” frame shape.

45mm (1.8x MFT) A third natural lens length bringing a MFT camera into the equation. This allows me to mirror the S5 with a normal focal length.

Natural looking portrait lengths (mild compression).

50mm (2x MFT) A slightly tighter lens than the neutral 37-45 range below, the subtle tightening of the frame is welcome for close-ups and the 25 on MFT has excellent close focus and this is the most “corrected” form the lens can take using it’s sweet spot.

60mm (APS-c) The flip side of the 40mm on the S5, this is the perfect normal-long to compliment that lens.

72mm (1.8x MFT) The start of a tight frame look and a well behaved lens with this crop. This partners with either a 25 or 37mm on the S5.

Lenses with compression effect.

80mm (2x MFT) The longest option available before cropping, this is the tight head shot, small detail focal length. Like the 25mm on this format, the strongest close focus effect is gained and the camera (G9II) has the most effective stabilising, allowing for a strong movement camera.

If the L-mount IRIX is added to the kit.

150mm (full frame) A lens that transcends the ones above for tight framing and reach. The more technically correct nature of the lens leans into this type of image.

225mm (APS-c) A decent reach telephoto, the IRIX now goes into true compression and super shallow depth rendering.

Macro (either) adds a whole raft of close focus and strong transitions to the game.

Other lenses in the mix, lenses that have proven themselves as solid performers, just not as interesting as the Vespids are the Vision 12, Hope 25 and 50, the Panasonic S-prime 35, 50 and 85 and the Pana-Leica 9mm for G9II movements. The Panasonic’s in particular have a little of the same juice, so intermix well enough when AF or a lighter kit is needed.

Happy Now.

Waited patiently for a decent day to test the 25 Vespid.

The light has finally been good enough to have some chance of replicating the conditions I tested the 40mm in. The garden is quickly heading towards it’s “sleeping” stage, but there are still glimmers.

I am impressed by the sharpness, which I feel may be slightly higher than the 40mm wide open, the overall rendering sharing that beautiful transition.

Lovely forward Bokeh, smooth transition and a feeling of three dimensionality. Your eye tends to fall on startlingly sharp elements.

Even flat light can produce a very nice file.

Yep, happy with the second Vespid.

Time to move on.

The S5II For Sport, Interesting Times.

Recently I found myself at the new sports Hub, a Netball and other sport specialist space, sorely needed.

Expecting better light than the Silverdome, the massive bike track space that did house the sport, I was surprised to find it was actually worse. 1/1000th of a second could be managed, but at f1.8 ISO 6400 only.

I can handle this in MFT, the lenses are the key. I can cover 18 to 150mm at f1.7/1.8 and ISO 6400 is ok as long as I expose well and nail my white balance.

It did prompt me to try the S5II with the 50mm f1.8 just to see, as I was using it for team photos as well.

The exposures were better, sharper, cleaner and colour better as well, but the camera did not fill me with confidence. Rolling shutter, banding, smearing in the view finder, nothing seeming to be as reactive as I was used to from my Olympus cams.

Most of the time the view finder was not keeping up with the focus (area with eye detect) and the shutter button, on single frame as I use the EM1x’s, was not responsive enough, especially for multiple fires.

It turned out though, most of the images were in focus.

I fiddled a little, using the burst mode on medium setting to overcome the shutter lag and tried single point focus, which fixed the lagging screen and felt more like the EM1x.

After a short while, it actually started to feel responsive, or maybe I adjusted, becasue when I went back to the EM1x with the 75mm, everything seemed to be moving slower in front of the lens, meaning, at the camera end it was quicker.

Responsive enough to get most of these, but the AF options were not as clean for a congested court.

So, would I use this regularly for sport?

No, I will use the EM1x’s, then EM Mk2’s and finally try the sleeper the G9II or this cam if needed, but only when shooting in light this gloomy. The EM1x’s can handle ISO 6400 cleanly as long as I expose well and I nail white balance, but it is their limit. ISO 3200 is more comfortable, so if I hit the f1.8, 1/800th at ISO 6400 threshold, or anything past that, then I can call on the S5II and 50 or 85mm (used the second night) to do the job.

Nice to have options.

First shots from the Vespid 25 (Not Much Of A Day)

The Vespid 25 arrived today.

Braving driving rain and very dull light I gave it a run on an EM10.2 (most other kit is committed to a bunch of upcoming jobs.

Wide open, I missed focus, but when I found it, there was that same snappy micro sharpness and smooth transition.

The water droplet, the stem junction, the Bokeh, all good. A polariser wuld have added some clarity and contrast, so I am not going to be too critical.

Same crop at T2.8. There it is.

Lovely clarity.

Corners wide open are fine as well.

The 25 gives me a few things.

A well controlled standard lens for MFT (45-50), a true wide for full frame and a 35-40mm equivalent in APS-c, which allows me to use all of the S5’s RAW-out options. Character varies, the larger the format, the greater the variety.

Something I need to do is try not to test lenses on the worst of days.

Rain And Praise For Gear That Works (And Some That Does Not)

The last couple of years in my home town of Launceston Tasmania have not fit the stereotype.

Know for green hills, regular rain fall, four seasons in one day events, we have had a very dry couple of years. The term “Launceston Umbrella” even emerged recently to roughly explain the phenomenon of huge fronts of weather driving our way, then managing to slew to either side of us, leaving us relatively un-affected.

Yesterday I had a pair of AFL games, at the fairly high VFL level, so big games especially with the state on the verge of entering the senior national competition. Rain was forecast, but to be honest, on recent experience it is hard to take it seriously.

All last year I shot from the northern end of any ground with brilliant sun over my shoulder, Nice weather, but lacking in angle choices and often at odds with my desire to shoot towards the crowd (usually in the Northern stand for that reason). It was also forecast to be a mild high teens (C), so not cold even if it was wet.

It is human nature to forget how it rains in winter and the annoying blow flys in summer.

Did I prepare?

I had a rain coat, inadequate as it turned out.

My gear is rated as weather sealed (2x EM1x, 300f4, aging 40-150 f2.8, G9, 12-60 kit), but it had never really been tested.

My bag was the Crumpler Muli, chosen because of its reassuring heavy PVC top flap to house my laptop (shooting for a paper, so I needed to process at half time at the ground).

Ok, cutting to it.

15mm of horizontal rain in three hours, with no cover except to process up in the stands, wet from about half an hour in, then the cold set in, driven by some forceful, funnelling wind. You forget how large buildings like stadiums can create micro climates, especially with ours being improved, leaving big holes this year.

The lights came on at 1 in the afternoon, creating a weird night-not night dynamic. Things were grim. AFL is an all weather sport so play was assumed, the rest of us did not get the luxury of running around to stay warm.

My files were flat to say the least, the long lens in particular compressing so much rain fall, sometimes the focus fell short!

A bit of dehaze and added saturation and many were decent, but only just. Story telling in the extreme. I appreciate my little sensors handling high ISO’s and still resolving detail with decent colour and contrast in this space. Tough gig for any kit.

Like some kind of smug “told you I was coming” scenario, it came down most aggressively in the second and fourth quarters, then the first quarter of the women’s match, probably the heaviest of the day.

It seemed to clear during their warm up, but I did not warm up, just waited the 45 minutes in the cold and feeling sorry for my self, not even processing because I did not want to risk my laptop to wet hands.

Oddly, getting wet again seemed more comfortable than just being wet before this second game. Remember, this is mid afternoon, not a night match and that’s not sunshine on her shoulder. The exposures were actually darker than night games I have covered here.

What worked.

The EM1x’s and attached lenses were sodden for over three hours straight. I was wiping away water constantly just so I could see and function. I neglected to bring a towel, but to be honest it would have been wet from minute one and another thing to worry about.

The files were mostly usable unless distance compression became too much,

ISO’s range from some brighter periods at 800 with the f2.8 lens to long periods of 6400 with the f4 300mm. Nothing to worry about, except for the rain itself.

At one point I thought one screen had given out, but it was water on the eye sensor. Sometimes shooting half blind sometimes, water from from eye piece to subject, I got the shots that mattered just trusting the camera to find something.

The rain swirled enough to catch me a couple of time, my 300 copping some rain on the lens front late in the day, which I just had to shoot through as I had no chamois.

The game was surprisingly high scoring, a testament to the quality of the teams and the ground holding on decently. A country game would likely have been a mud-fest.

The Muli bag held on most of the day, protecting my laptop and the G9 until water running down my back soaked into the pack panel of the bag and the base started to get wet. No harm done.

My coat was great for half the first game, then it just gave up, became a wind sheet, cooling me more than protecting me. I clearly need something that allows hours of static protection like an oil skin or heavy PVC fishermans jacket, not one of those hiking coats with a “range” limit. The limit was exceeded.

Shorter lens work was noticeable more contrasty.

What remained the same was my mobility, although the other togs, welded to chairs with heavy lenses were better protected by ponchos etc.

One quarter of play.

Ed. After a day to dry out all seems fine except for water trapped inside the 300mm’s hood, a slightly musty smelling bag and a filter that fogged up inside.

Gear I Really Appreciate

I have had a few jobs lately that have reminded me what gear makes a difference by turning up time and time again.

Lastolite/Manfrotto 2.1x1.5 Walnut and Pewter collapsible backdrop.

When looking for these quite expensive backdrops, the only two patterns I really liked were the “old peeling wall in a cottage” Walnut and “not quite plain grey” Pewter. Fortunately, or more accurately miraculously, they came together as opposite sides of the same unit and for no reason I can explain, a local stockist had $50 off just that one.

Fated?

Maybe.

The Pewter side is basically grey, but it has a mild self pattern of a deeper texture than flat, a feeling of a slight metallic texture. I was after basically a not-mottle, trying to get away from the “brush stroke” look, but not wanting just plain grey (which I have).

The Walnut is basically anything I want it to be. More or less texture, any colour, dark or light.

I have found colour is irrelevant in these days of layer masks, but texture is still important if you want a natural looking finish. This backdrop has been used as colours ranging from steel blue, woodland green, fiery orange and muted grey, more or less textured and lighter or darker, all from the base you see above.

Godox 860 flash (Olympus/Panasonic mount)

This was bought so I might be able to use high speed fill flash in bright light with some hope of consecutive or group shots as it packs a massive battery.

It does that.

What it also does is handle three large social events on a single battery charge. We are talking maybe 3-4000 fires, no issues, no waiting, no power drops, no misfires. I usually get home from a job with 3 of 4 bars left.

I shoot with it set to manual, usually set between 1/16th to 1/8th power, ISO 800, F1.8-2.8* using a small white bounce panel of my own making (hair band and a soft foam cut out).

I find any mistakes after a few years of using this kit, rarely fall too far out of salvageable range (the trick is to keep some things the same like lens aperture and distance), so guess-shoot then sometimes adjust and re-shoot seems to work and manual is significantly easier and quicker on the battery (no pre-flash).

Relying on TTL is less than perfect anyway and can be inconsistent.

I keep a 685 handy as backup, but so far, it has just been dead weight.

Olympus 17 F1.8 Mk1.

Travel, events, walk around, backup in low light, this just tends to be the one I turn to. Sharp wide open, long transition from sharp to out of focus, lightning fast and accurate AF, an organic tone that softens Panasonic sensors, handles flare very well, small, light,….. have I missed anything? Ok, not weather proof and mine is quite worn so it sometimes fails to engage manual focus, but otherwise, excellent and it has even managed to fend off excellent lenses like the Pana/Leica 15, Oly 17 f1.2 and remain the top one for me.

This lens has a secret ability. It is sharp wide open and can ‘cut-out” a subject even though it is a MFT wide angle, but it also has the ability to transition from sharp to out of focus invisibly, backgrounds are natural and coherent. In the image above, shot at f1.8, the subjects are sharp (thanks in part to a fast f1.8 aperture) and the they “pop”, but the people in the far background are still recognisable. The 15mm Pana/Leica for example, would render a more sharp/soft look, a more modern look, but at the expense of environmental context. It is a great story telling lens.

Panasonic G9 Mk1

I have plenty of great cameras, but the G9.I’s are a little special. I have two of these, one of them dropped no fewer than three times (unlucky much?).

Not my first (second or third) choice for sport, not my smallest or lightest option, they tend to band easily in silent mode, in fact they not a lot of things, they are nearly perfect ergonomically, better than the new one in fact, they also show nearly mind reading surety in close with a wide lens (Pana or Oly), are obviously tough, I have tested that, can match the EM1x for low light performance and produce a lovely image in most light.

I also have to give them credit for starting me out in video (why I got one in the first place, it’s hybrid nature). I settled on Standard setting with contrast down, producing lovely clean and colourful footage, then I pondered Log, extended recording etc* and went into a S5 (a bargain) and the G9’s fell away. They are still employed as the 5th and 6th cams for large jobs, but are otherwise unfortunately neglected.

Something that has been a surprise to me lately, something i had not really tried based on others opinions regarding AF speed etc, is body and face detect continuous focus with the 9 and 15mm, which rocks!

I find it hard to walk away from a second hand or clearance one, even though a few cameras I have are technically better. To put this in perspective, I would choose one over the S5II for wide lens stills and do, almost every day.

Olympus EM1x

These cameras (I have three these days) are most likely the most powerful second hand buy on the market today. Not only are they cheap for MFT, in part thanks to their size which to many defeats the purpose of MFT, but they are also incredibly cheap for second hand sports cams.

Designed for the Olympus anniversary and Olympic games that were unfortunately postponed for COVID, they are a EM1 Mk2 with dual processors and as for size, it is perfectly laid out for a professional sports camera.

The reality with size is, a pro sports camera has to be tough, cleanly laid out, responsive, weighty enough to balance with a long lens and fit any sized hand. Smaller is not always a benefit.

As for its “Achilles heel”, the small sensor, well lets just say I regularly and confidently shoot at ISO 6400 with a hand held 600 f4 (a 300 f4 with 2x MFT crop) and get results that people comment on positively and based on content, not technical short comings.

AF is a quick as I can be, rarely missing a shot unless I do and the cameras learning ability has made each one a specialist with the lens it is mated to. I was sceptical here until I switched bodies and found I lost a half step.

One environment that troubled me in the past was the local swimming baths. Poor light, murky even, bad colour, difficult access all conspiring to undo my best efforts. These days I can easily hand hold a 600mm equivalent at ISO 6400 and shoot between the legs of officials standing on the blocks if needed to get these shots and I remain nimble enough to get out of the way when needed.

Olympus 75, f1.8, 300 f4 and 40-150 f2.8

Part of the story above, these three lenses are the MFT advantage personified (there are other lenses, but these are the ones I have).

They have all had a lot of use and are showing it, but considering their lifestyles, they are doing well.

This has to be balanced with the two big selling points.

For the range of (in full frame terms) a 150 f1.8, 600 f4 and 80-300 f2.8, in a kit that I can carry all of at the same time and all mounted on a camera body, I paid about $5500au and second hand I could probably replace them all for $4000au or less.

I have a fully replaceable, easy to carry kit of lenses for dingy indoor sports like basketball at the local gym, shooting Hockey under weak lights or long range field sports like AFL. Throw in a light weight wide angle and you are set.

AFL is played on one of the biggest grounds of all field sports, so a range of 80-600 is ideal.

Black magic Video Assist 12g (7 and 5 inch)

My video journey has been swift and sometimes difficult.

The breakthrough for me was going into B-Raw. This not only improved my overall quality, but it closer aligned my video and stills work flows.

The Video Assists are compatible with all six of my Panasonic cameras more or less. With three I get B-Raw with various levels of support, three others can output over HDMI to ProRes for deeper colour depth and one of those could be upgraded to RAW-out.

I only have two units, which may change, but plenty of options for their use.

The 7” in particular is very quiet and has excellent HDMI pre-amps, so it is often my main sound recorder. The screens on both are brilliant (literally), intuitive and quite resilient, although I have caged both.

It is true that the overall rig is a slave to some cables and connectors, it is slightly messier than say a BM Pocket Cinema camera, but these have their own down sides. Usable AF, in camera stabilising, screen placement, battery life, form factor and weather sealing are all sacrificed for the saving of a few cables. If you run a separate screen, power solution or microphone, you cannot avoid some cables anyway.

Sure I missed something, but I give thanks to these items, they make life easier and often help me reach my potential.

*The MFT advantage of gathering f1.8 light and rendering f2.8 depth of field.

*Turns out all of these were available with an off board recorder, but information on that was sparse at the time. The happily plug into my BMVA12G’s for ProRes colour.

Things That Shaped My Video Journey

My video journey has been a series of stepping stones. These stones, a little like in an Indiana Jones flick, have been treacherous, occasionally disappeared or even proven to be illusionary, but they needed to be taken for better or worse.

The big ones, the ones that made a real difference were few and memorable.

Resolving to learn Resolve.

There were a few editing choices in front of me, but the free licence for a the bulk of DaVinci Resolve helped me make up my mind, even though I was aware of the steep learning curve, because even if I had to pay for it totally, it was still the right choice for my journey.

My copy of Studio Resolve came probably the way most do, through a purchase of another B product, so I either got it free with my Speed Editor Panel or the other way around, but either way, both were worth buying.

Asking the question “is there another way”.

Bogged down in a world of follow the leader, a world of Lut’s, Log and hazy grading, I kept thinking along the lines of, “is there another way”, “what do professional colourist do” and “why is what I like, not what others do” which lead me to find some more aware and professional voices coming down from professional training, not up from the bottom like me.

Cullen Kelly has been the main one, chosen as much to “pick a ride” as any other motivation, but so far his channel has answered all of my questions with clear, logical and efficient work strategies with a feeling of constant evolution and “my Resolve is mine”.

Going RAW.

I am a stills shooter who shoots RAW, I always have (in digital anyway, it was mono or slide in film). In video I felt a slave to “the dark side” of Lut presets, pseudo-RAW codecs, doing things a very technical way, as those who came before me said I should. Everything seemed to rely on presets. I don’t like presets unless I make them myself to suit a specific job.

When I bought my first 12G BMVA recorder, it literally changed my video perceptions.

I was suddenly in a world of genuine comfort, a world of power grades and self-controlled processing. Shooting became easier, even lighter on my system as B-Raw 8:1 is actually a lighter load on a system than 4k/ProRes/422/HQ and it edits more easily (RAW shoots bigger but edits lighter as their is no or little compression for your computer to unpack).

I can now deal with reasonable errors in white balance and exposure, get smoother and cleaner footage, better colours, more features and cleaner in-out processes. I have a base RAW Node tree that I apply (thanks to Mr Kelly’s guidance, but one of my own making) and with little effort I get clean, sharp and clear, non video looking footage.

It also came with an awareness that clean, sharp and clear is actually ok.

Video that can now produce good enough quality for stills lifted out with a stills-like work flow, fine by me.

Embracing cinema glass.

There is no burning need to buy cine glass. Panasonic S-primes and many other stills lenses are perfectly fine for video, but that’s the main reason why Black Mist and similar filters are so popular. Cine glass, even cheap cine glass changes a few things.

You get good at manual focus and its much better implementation, you rely less on filters and more on the lens itself, you learn to use a prime lens over a zoom, you get big forearms (they are heavy), you take the whole thing more seriously and sometimes (especially with anamorphic lenses), you get more “cinematic” results easily.

Like a lot of things, it is easy to dismiss a particular method when you don’t have the right tools.

The Vespid and Hope cine and Sirui anamorphic lenses have all been genuine quality shifters for me, not because they are necessarily sharper than some stills lenses, but because they are designed with a more wholistic approach to image capture.

Moving stock requires more than just high sharpness and contrast with acceptable Bokeh. It requires the ability to render contrast, blur and sharpness harmoniously to suit the medium, to be able to transition focus without breathing or other strange behaviour, to look good while shooting, not relying on post processing salvation.

After using real cine glass, I have become aware of just how specialised to the point of being flawed in many ways, some otherwise good stills glass can be.

Power to the people.

Finally going into V-mount and NP batteries to remove the 1hr limit for recording. Not much point having a camera with no recording limits, if other things limit you. The 1hr-ish cut off from the internal battery (highly conditional) is so very often just too short for many projects or at least tenuous enough to distract.

For example, the other night I shot a 75 minute performance that I had to shoot stills for and leave two unattended video cams to do the rest, both shooting 4 or 6k out to the BMVA’s one on a V-mount (powering the camera as well), the other on an NP-970 to the BMVA, the camera running on its own.

At the end of 75mins continuous recording, I still had 70% left on the V-Mount, 2 out of 4 “dots” on the NP adapter and I can only assume thanks to the NP doing the heavy lifting, the internal camera battery was still on 2 of 4 bars. I had batts and occasional dead spots to change them, but I did not have to.

Holding Firm On Gimbals.

I could have gone this way, it would have been a relatively small investment, but I held firm and avoided the gimbal thing. They have their uses, they are a crucial part of many cinematographers arsenal of tricks, but they can also be, especially when starting out, a crutch and worse, an addictive habit.

By rejecting them, I am slowly improving my hand held technique (make easier by my choice of Panasonic cameras), or to think of other non camera specific methods, like the noble tripod, slider or boom.

Many of the best shots in cinematic history were shot on sticks or hand held. Gimbals are only one method of capture and not always the best.

Choosing Panasonic Cameras.

This was a given I guess as MFT was my stills format of choice and the G9 MkI my first serious video maker, so as soon as I grew in this space, a mix of full frame and MFT cams, with Black Magic video assists as my upgrade of choice, everything made sense.

Panasonic tends to give you more of the real stuff quicker and cheaper, like waveform, red frame indicator, Log, 10/422 colour, epic stabe etc in a sub $2000au camera. AF needed some improving and they did, but even my first cam, the stills hybrid G9 mkI, without optional firmware, could shoot 4k/422/10bit in short bursts. With firmware, it could shoot Log and record out over its full sized HDMI.

Creating a dedicated video work space.

I have been happily working from a pair of M1 Air laptops for the last few years, but for video, especially the crowded work space that is Resolve, they were not cutting it. Speeds were fine, surprisingly so, but not screen size or handling.

I came into a video windfall that paid for a base model M4 Mac Mini, 29” screen, some fast off board storage and BM Micro Colour and Speed Editor panels. The speed editor in particular was basically free with a copy of Resolve Studio license (either are the same price), and the jog wheel has help immensely.

I do not use all or even most of their options, but the tactile nature of the controls gives added control and connection to the process.

With amble storage, including a small high speed dock accessory, my work flow is not faultless or instant, but I am not clogging up the works with unwanted stills and video work competing for the same space.

There have been other factors that have empowered my journey, but these are the ones that stand out to me, the real and I hate to use this term “game changers”, but they actually have.

The Two Lens, Four Format Kit

I have a 25mm Vespid series 1 lens coming to compliment my 40mm.

Same look, same strengths and weaknesses, same feel and handling and by all accounts, a close match in colour and lens performance, both leaning on the sharper-cleaner end of the range.

My camera options give me a special feature using any adaptable mount lenses, in that I effectively have four lenses from each lens across my formats, so buying the 25 had to be balanced with what the 40mm offered on these formats and what I needed.

A normal wide lens

25mm (the 25 on full frame) is the wide angel. Not a crazy wide, just a true wide, something you can use for a natural look with a wider coverage, or you can exaggerate it by pushing in, adding angles etc. I looked at wider, but the reality is, apart from extreme sports and action (covered by several other more practical, i.e smaller and cheaper options), I have little use for a super wide.

The “un-opinionated” standard lens

37mm (25 on APS-c crop/Super 35) See below. This is particularly handy for me right now as I cannot access full frame B-Raw on the S5 at smaller than 6k output, which is just really big files, so it is in effect the 40mm lens I bought originally, but with that in mind.

40mm (40 on full frame) is the “perfect” one lens option, the not compressed, not wide angle distorted ground zero lens that could, if needed, be the right choice for a one lens only project (you know something little like 1917).

45mm (25mm on 1.8x MFT). The GH5s and BMPCC4k use a larger than normal MFT sensor. This along with low pixel count and dual ISO performance give it near full frame low light performance with all the benefits of MFT format. The 45mm is close enough to the perfect standard, just pushing in to the very last of the neutral compression focal lengths. In reality it is not much different to 40mm, more in the mind than results, so another “one lens” lens, but this one is for the smaller format.

Mild compression standard lenses

50mm (25mm on 2x MFT). The G9II and most other MFT cams turn the 25mm into the nifty fifty, the accepted standard lens, even if it is mathematically or practically not that at all. A little compression helps with interview setups, so the difference between 40 and 50 can be significant.

60mm (40mm on APS-c crop). The 60mm is fully in the mildly compressed portrait range. It is the perfect companion to 40mm , both straddling the normal 50mm. You could make a movie with any of these focal lengths and my kit will allow me to mix 40 + 60, 40 + 50 etc.

The portrait lens range

70mm (40mm on 1.8x MFT). The 70mm is a curious lens. It is obviously more compressed than a 50mm or similar, but still very easy to use for most things. The ideal interview lens with a little included background, it can also be ideal for closeups and tight shots.

80mm (40mm on MFT). The longest this kit will give me, unless I crop 4 or 6k down to 2k, the 80mm is starting to get more telephoto looking. The 40mm has already proven itself here, taking some brilliant stills on a G9 Mk1, so I will be using this along with the wide.

Yeah, the sweet spot effect at work.

The four format-two lens kit is not all I have at hand, but if I choose to be consistent, I have all the focal lengths I would consider to be fully usable and within the range of normal working range. Any wider and the wide look takes over. Any longer starts to show obvious compression, so all the focal lengths fall into a broad “natural” range.

Full frame stresses the lens coverage the most, more less slightly softened corners being the price, but it also allows the lens to resolve more easily across the whole frame. Soft corners are irrelevant to me, part of the cinema look and not even a real issue with these lenses anyway.

APS-c crop on a full frame is often derided, but the reality is on Panasonic cameras, there is no inherent quality loss, just a closer look at existing image issues like noise, it being a little bigger as the frame is cropped in closer. I will use this Super 35 format a lot, seeing it as equal partner and the S5 forces it if I want C4k/B-Raw out.

MFT 1.8x is a rarity, only found on a couple of cameras, the GH5s being one of them and falls into the broad Super 35 camp. With acceptable low light performance thanks to a dual ISO sensor and low pixel count, semi MFT depth of field and the sweet spot advantage exaggerated, the lenses have to resolve at their best as the smaller format uses less glass for more detail, but corners etc become irrelevant.

MFT 2x is the normal MFT format, doubling the magnification and the same effects as above. The Vespid’s will act like 50 and 80mm lenses respectively, making the G9II the long lens cam, always natural looking with some or more compression. This role will more than most be applied to other glass I have, but it is a real option.

An Example Of Contemplative Videography

I stumbled over this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-4knCZ0EMQ these https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOaste4bsC4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xev4ZAMujPQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkGh0uHH7lg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5V9_UDOzIpM and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TqDIWfymh4 by Guido Pezz, a travel documentarist I assume he would call himself.

Based in Italy, I kept stumbling across his work when researching Black magic cameras and Vespid lenses (separately). One video was even filmed in my home state (An Island off an Island), only hours from where I live.

The elements are;

• Considered observance, an eye for detail and what defines.

• Consistent colouring and look, “Nostalgia” Lut same cameras and matched lenses.

• Voice over with intent and feeling, music to accompany and set the mood.

• Creative angles, basically photographic frames (each could be lifted as a still).

• Sublime editing, with minimal gimmick effects, well done when used.

• Natural light usually or always, if artificial is used, it is subtle and invisible.

• Basic but solid gear (BM cams, Vespids or Leica R’s), noting flash, good docco gear.

• Time and patience invested.

The lessons learned are ones that I appreciate being presented.

Less is more when more of the good stuff is exemplified.

Patience, quiet, humility, reverence all play their part.

Go for real and natural first, only add artificial elements when you have to and even then invisible is key.

Effort is rewarded.

A Good Example Of Over Thinking And Resolve In The End

This lens thing has been over the top.

I have been known to spend more money and less time on solving lens issues, but I guess as time moves on, my real need is diminishing, fear of failure and waste is increasing, so these choices are harder to make.

I am also aware, that more than most purchases, this is for me, not clients.

The impulse buy of the 40mm was providential, it opened a door I may never have opened without a push, I now need to enter the room, take stock and finalise the process.

At the end of the day I was after;

A Vespid Mk1 lens to match my windfall 40mm that is a normal lens in APS-C (37) and MFT (45/50) formats and a wide in full frame (25), something that has been simmering for a while. The Panasonic 24 always seemed too dear for what it was going to add to an occasional wide user (compared to my excellent kit 20-60 and 28-70 Sigma anyway).

The Vespid 25mm has been ordered for what I would consider below average professional lens cost, all things considered. You can get lost in all this but really, a sub $1200au professional cine (or any) lens these days is a win.

It does all that along with many glowing recommendations from Vespid Mk1 users and any more hair splitting would serve nobody.

Mostly, I want more of this look

Delicate, nuanced, harmonious and f%#king sharp!

I was tempted to wait for an even lower price, but I doubt it would come in any substantial form, they are already at “run out” pricing. The company I purchased from sometimes do great deals on in -stock lenses***, but they have no Vespids on inventory after selling their last 40mm (to me) and I felt that a purchase before tax time made sense.

The 21 was in the mix, but it felt risky as it is considered a softer and warmer lens than the rest and limited in best use case scenarios as a 21/30/38/42 (and I have those covered*).

The 18 or 24 MkII’s were there also, but the reality of price and possibly not matching the Mk1 40mm any better than the 21 pushed them away. If I were given a budget to shoot a real docco, I would get a few of these, Thypochs, or maybe just complete my Mk1’s.

Everything else (Infinte, Thypoch) became too much brain juice to process.

I now have over four effective formats, a complete range of 25-80**, almost unbroken in matched lenses as well as a set of MFT Hope/Vision and a full frame IRIX 150 macro of similar quality. Add to this a set of Panasonic S-primes, Spectrums, Sirui anamorphic and others and I can handle most things.

*If I am going to try something with wide angles that is a little risky, I will not be using an expensive and heavy full frame cinema lens to do it.

**stabe crop and 4/6K-2K conversions aside.

***My half price IRIX, Spectrums and the 20% off Vespid.

A Word On Bokeh (It's That Time Again)

I have been looking at a lot of lens videos lately, too many I know, but Bokeh has once again risen to the top as my pet peeve.

It’s not that I am not a believer, I was there at the beginning (have the original Photo Techniques mag that started it all) and it is certainly not that I don’t subscribe to the need to balance the quality of Bokeh with sharpness and other elements of a lens.

I am there, full noise, total commitment, I buy glass with it as a major consideration.

I do feel though that there is a lot of science being applied to something that simply is and should be appreciated for that.

Even Gerald Undone has something to say here (about 71/2 mins in) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwUg3XWZttI

Bokeh to me, is an art form. It is a perception of a reality, an impression, something that cannot be quantified mathematically, just appreciated or not.

To me there are only three types of Bokeh.

1. Good Bokeh, the Bokeh that lifts an image to another level. Like distracting Bokeh below, it is part of the image, but in an exceptional way.

2. Bokeh that does no harm, or “invisible” Bokeh.

3. Bad or interesting Bokeh that distracts, intentionally or not, from the main subject of the image, making the rendering part of the experience.

This is when Bokeh is a neutral element of the image, not distracting, but also not as perfect as it could be. You are drawn to the sharp elements in contrast to the soft.

The same lens, Bokeh just being itself, not good or bad. In the past, the draw of the lens would only have been worthy of comment in comparison to another lens.

The Sigma 28-70 is a safe bet. Everything about that lens is safe and reliable, just not my style sometimes.

A kit Olympus telephoto can provide Bokeh and good blur at that. I often shoot through things with this lens, responding to the quality of the foreground. This happens, we all do it, responding instinctively to lens rendering strengths and weaknesses we see, but don’t notice.

The Bokeh in this shot is ok, but not perfect. The slightly nervous look causes me some mild concern and awareness of the lens used. This was taken with the Olympus 45 f1.8 at f2, usually reliably excellent.

The 28mm Thypoch, a special lens in many ways.

My Spectrum 50mm is a cheap cine lens, but one thing they did well was Bokeh rendering. It is less interesting and delicate than the Vespid, but no less beautiful.

Good Bokeh can come from funny places. This is my excellent 20-60 Panasonic kit lens.

Some old school funky stuff from an antique Nikkor 28mm. The price paid for a sharp bit of legacy glass. A little Ni-Sen maybe.

The Japanese have a saying “weather is”, meaning it is going to be in some form, like it or not, just accept it.

Bokeh is the same.

Some Bokeh makes you want to avoid it, some times draws you in like flies to honey (no law what type of honey you are after), some elevates, some distracts, some goes by unnoticed, some intrigues.

It always is, you just have to decide how you want to control it and whether you like it or not and even before the phenomenon was named up, we reacted to it.

Science is not a good measure of Bokeh, instincts are better.

I remember reading the original article by John Kennerdell and Mike Johnson in Darkroon and Creative Camera Techniques magazine back in the early 90’s with wondrous eyes https://www.ppa.com/ppmag/articles/the-art-of-the-bokeh.

The whole edition of the mag was dedicated to this mysterious term from Japan, the only bit I was less enthusiastic for, and I don’t think I ever read it, was the technical break down.

Bokeh is not just the shapes of highlight blurr-balls in wide open night time photos, it is present in every image ever made to some extent, any image where one part is slightly less in focus than another.

Both Kennerdell and Johnson championed deeper depth of field Bokeh in later editions of that and other mags or Johnson’s The Online Photographer blog and went to great lengths to explain that it is a universal phenomenon, not just an extreme gimmick.