Based on a user comment, that possibly their favourite DZO Vespid prime (first version), was the 25mm, a lens I had not considered before.
It struck me that it might be the perfect lens for my 4 format kit*.
Bigger than most of the others, an impressive and impressing bit of kit. Could it be the one lens.
Lets look at the math;
On the S5 as a full frame it is a 25mm, the widest I would be comfortable using and ok without stabilising.
With a little E-stabe applied it would come in at about a 30mm, one of my favourite focal length (an IRIX 30 was always a favourite, but if I count the crop for stabilising, it is actually not one anymore).
With high stabe (1.6x) or APS-c crop mode (1.5x), which I have no fear of, it becomes a near perfect 37-40, my “one lens”. APS-c crop is one compromise of B-Raw recording in 4k/50, the S5 only does 5.9k/25 in full frame.
On the GH5s it is a 45, also a favourite and without any stabe that’s a fixed thing.
On the G9II, it runs from 50mm with no stabe to about 55-60mm with E-stabe applied. I am rarely interested in going longer than this and if I am, it is not in this type of shooting.
The last three also remove any failings of the furthest edges.
So, a useable wide to a short portrait lens, each focal length curiously aligning well with the camera it is mated to.
The other thing I like is there is room for a 40 or 50mm later (a full range of 40-100 or 50-110mm), or not as the whim and finances take me.
The lenses are generally considered to be poor-mans Cookes, gently soft wide open, then sharpen up to commercial level a stop or two in.
The Mk2’s are “better”, closer to a light weight Arles, but I am drawn to the middle ground the Mk1’s occupy.
I am currently hunting out more reviews. enough to know I am not compromising on this lens in some way (it is a wide angle after all), but this reviewer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iysvd1-86rM loved it most on the Red Komodo (about a 40mm equivalent S35 sensor).
Now, this is just one of the irons I have in the fire at the moment. Another is the BMPCC4k, mated with a more clinical lens like the Hope 25, for a 45mm with BM colours and rendering.
The Pocket 4k can also add the special something and other benefits, like 1080 B-Raw, full B-Raw control, no waste and lower costs (only needs a dummy battery), where the lens needs two EF or PL adapters, from $300 to $800 more.
Could I get as much of a boost to basic image quality from a camera that costs the same without other overheads, one that adds depth of options above that core benefit and one that empowers what I have instead of replacing it or do I need the “one lens” that lifts all my existing and future cameras?
Waste is on my mind as ever, the Spectrum primes in particular will suffer, but they cost me nothing, it’s the Hope primes that would hurt. Would it all be undone anyway if I need a multi cam setup, with only one lens of this quality, so I would compromise anyway?
Another iron is one of rationality. This one feels time pressured as the Mk1’s are being replaced by the Mk2’s, but if I ignore that, the reality of what I have now (several sets of cheaper lenses) hits home and to be honest, I have options**.
Example;
I shot a 2 cam set-up of a presentation recently in a crappy room, shotgun on camera (and LAV, except a user forgot to put theirs on, so I could not match all speakers), so a low visual and audio bar set, but I got decent enough results.
Camera 1 was the GH5s with the Hope 25 for the main shot, normal height, closer to the subject, the second cam was the S5 with a S-prime (35mm) shooting wide at a less nice angle and lower down.
This is not a fair comparison I know, but after two days of grading clips I noticed something interesting and I had by this time forgotten to care which camera was which.
The smaller sensor camera with the cheaper cine-prime just looked better. Simple as that, no tech to back it up, but it’s footage looked both sharper and smoother (with no filters added) and pleasantly warm. I found myself editing it less aggressively and that was from the “lesser” MFT camera.
Oddly and this is almost definitely an angle effected thing, the TV screen in both images (yep, that nightmare), was clearer and the edge fringing/flare around the subject was also cleaner. This is really speculative as the lighting was a horror story***, but it is what I took away from the project.
Ironically I was less bothered by the low light performance of the MFT camera (shot at T2.1) than the depth of field of the full frame combo (at f5.6).
*Full frame, APS-c, GH5s 1.8 and G9II 2x crop.
**Sirui anamorphic in two formats, 7Art full frame Spectrum (not so long ago considered ridiculously good for the money), MFT Hope and Vision primes (considered right now to be near perfect budget primes), my MFT stills glass (Oly in particular) and my S-series with a Sigma zoom as a bonus. Nothing premium here, but an awful lot of decent or best in class.
The anamorphics seem to be hitting a good place for me at the moment.
***A huge window/skylight directly above and behind the subjects with the morning sun drifting across it.