Ok, testing has started.
First thing is, my testing processes are lax, but workable, especially if I work towards specific answers to specific questions in tight groups.
The still grabs are a little milky looking, not what my screen was showing but I guess a result of grabbing not properly exporting.
First question.
How sharp is my Hope 25mm (used as a test base line)?
Very sharp. I have not compared it to my stills glass yet, but super duper sharp (GH5s, 3.7k, 8:1, B-Raw). Lovely contrast, nice smooth sharpness and very well behaved in all other respects.
This lens has a lovely presence, separation and an ease about it. It is micro sharp, but not overtly hard-crisp looking (but can be made to be).
Second tests
Are the two Sirui 24mm Anamorphics as good?
Just a hair behind but still fine. The Hope looked a little cooler and more clinical, but smoother and less pushed. I did notice a very slight colour shift between the two from just warmer, the “Blue” (a sticker I use for ID) being the most neutral and “White” slightly more magenta (might change that sticker to Red), but like I said, not perfect processes.
The Siruis at minimum focussing distance needed 1.25x stretch not 1.33, something I was aware of from another reviewers comments. They are contrast-sharp, not bitingly detailed, which for video, especially anamorphic “cine” video is fine.
Test 3
Can ProRes HQ 422 stand its ground against B-Raw Q5 and 8-1. These tests were about movement (streamers blown by a fan) and the stills were far from useful, but yes, I could see no difference between the Q5, 8:1 and PR HQ or even the high bit rate All-i footage from the GH5s. All produced elements of detailed sharpness mixed with movement blur.
There were differences in colour and overall look, the PR files looking cleaner and more processed, because they were by nature, but I could get colour and overall look very close even with my rudimentary skills. This means I have three cameras of much the same standard, even if only two are shooting B-Raw.
Test 4
Which lenses stand out in my full frame kit.
The 35 Pana, even when cropped to a 50 is a cracker of a lens. The two Panasonics have an effortless and gentle sharpness and contrast filling their roles as stills-hybrid lenses perfectly.
Smooth sharp, delicate and well controlled. I really like this lens.
The Spectrum 35 did not impress. Apart from the 4-600k warm colour shift, it is less sharp, but is it useless? It cannot be mixed in with my other glass realistically, but it can be used for a more “stylised” project, something that might fit its warmth and slight softness.
The Panasonic 50 is much the same as the Pana 35, I felt slightly sharper, but it was also shooting full frame and the difference if any was minimal. It was very slightly warmer, but unlike the Spectrum 35, not by much.
At about 300% there is good detail.
The Spectrum 50 was a revelation. I have always liked it more than the Spectrum 35 mechanically and prefer a cooler rendering, but it is possibly even crisper than the Pana 50 and close to a match to the Pana 35. Ironically, this is possibly the sharper stills lens and the matching interview lens to the Hope 25 and 50.
This was in my testing space (5600k main light), about perfect and lovely to handle as well.
Test 5
Does 3:1 massively out resolve 8:1 in 6k?
I thought it did, then I realised the section of the 8:1 clip I was looking at was very focussed very slightly behind the same point on the 3:1 clip. When matched, the detail in the hat rim was nearly identical at 200% or more.
There is a small hair over the left eye that looked on very close inspection to be about the same at both resolutions.
Conclusions after round 1
My best lenses (so far) are the Hope 25, Pana 35 and 50, Spectrum 50, which can be used interchangeably, although the Spectrum 50 is probably the hard-sharpest, so it may be the one to put a stronger filter on.
Looking for my “one lens” for each format the Hope 25/50 and Pana 35/50 are a good matching set. I now need to test the Sigma and Olympus zooms in this mix.
The 35mm will be reserved for a special project, something warm, smooth and cinematic.
The anamorphic twins are equally good, with a unique look, strong contrast over pure sharpness and the slight colour difference between the two can be matched to different cameras (the neutral one on the GH5s). I have a 50mm coming in L-Mount, so the next raft of tests will look at the three in concert.
The visual difference between 4-6k, 8:1 and Q5, ProRes HQ, All-i and 3:1 is irrelevant for most of my needs, so 8:1 it will be used unless I cannot, then All-i or ProRes can be selected without fear of a noticeable quality shift. V-Log ProRes HQ needs to be used more in fact and even All-i Log for that matter.
I did do a clip of ProRes 422 vs HQ (forgot to do a still) and could see a slight difference in detail in the busiest areas, so HQ will be the minimum.