Thanks Frank, I just realized something happened on the upload. The blacks are awful and crushed! Vimeo has been acting up so uploaded here. Looks way different even on HQ.
One question: with the flare tests did you change the lighting? (Dropped backlight?). Just wondering what all accounted for the drop in saturation as well as overall brightness(?)
Thank you. The aputure is known to get stuck or slip. From what I’ve been told there is a tiny screw that engages for the aputure and that easily gets worn out.
This is rad! First time shooting handheld with a bigger rig was a few weeks ago at an all-day dirt track event two days in a row and was like "Man, why is my arm so sore??" lol My first thought was having a 12" plate mounted to the top to bring the camera over, but this makes way more sense. I could almost see a belt loop-style system so you can adjust in 1/2" or 1" increments!
Honestly the 28mm was one of my favorites until I got the 35 f2. I don’t have issues with softness and CA as now a days they are fairly easy fixes in Davinci.
Cheers for the response mate. I'm enjoying the 50 1.4, despite its softness and CA wide open - so I will probably dig the 28mm with all its imperfections too.
I just picked up a full set and I'm testing them now. They seem to sing and sharpen up at f4. Wide open they seem a little soft. Is that your experience?
@@thereeljohnsteele so I finally got around to testing my set and I found they perform very similar to yours. What I did find interesting is that if you close each lens down a hair from full open to just where the blades start to come in (able to do that because of de-clicked aperture rings) you instantly gain quite a bit of center sharpness with nice fall off to the edges. As in your tests 2 stops down across the board really sharpens things to the edge.
It’s the red MC but the white lettered ones are from the later years. Optically they are the same and if any difference, it’s from aging or how they’ve been kept over the years.
@@thereeljohnsteele Thank you. The flare of the 35mm likes amazing and cinematic. The minimum focus is great as well. I was so impressed and decide to hunt one.
@@skynifilms No problem. They are excellent lenses. Just be aware the 35mm has some quirks with the aperture blades occasionally getting stuck over time. This is a common issue with the 35.
@@thereeljohnsteele Well, it's a common issue with the 20mm too, even worse than the 35, the blades tend to bend and get stuck. Even taking the lens apart, cleaning it for both sides doesn't solve the problem, it's a nightmare. But on the optical side, all this lens are just great, hope one day I can buy the pancolar 80mm, it's getting crazy expensive. I have also the biometar 80, but it's pretty soft and more on the bluish side of the spectrum. The biometar gets better on a full frame sensor, on a super 35 it's just a useless lens. Thanks for the test!
The Pancolar has more of a punch and pop while the Planar falls a little short. It was recommended as far as a better match however when it comes to the 80s the 80mm Pancolar has a slightly different style of bokeh (swirl).
Thanks for the review, John! Quick update - we've released a version for Premiere Pro and After Effects. If anyone wants to test it out, welcome to our website for a two-week trial.
This was a really good intro video for your channel, and I hope you keep it going. Caught your video on the Aivascope as I've been eyeing one of those for awhile since I love the anamorphic look. Very honest and down to earth review, I appreciate the lack of "hype." We all can get caught up in the gear, but if I look at my favorite films- the films that inspired me to even want to make films- rarely am I ever thinking "I wonder what camera they used." If I am thinking that, it's probably not a very engaging story. This video was a good reminder to focus on trying to create a great story first. Even more importantly, create something that's real and that matters to you. Otherwise, it really is just all surface with nothing underneath.
Thanks for sharing. Question: what is the biggest diameter (of the taking lens) you can fit behind the Aivascope? I ask because it seems, according to this video that is 77mm but I thought by specs that it was 52mm by clamp
why the extender? don't you want to place the rear element of the Aiva as close as possible to the front element of the taking? essentially having them almost kiss? also, thanks for this detailed report. i was contemplating procuring a big rear amber one, but there seems to be a lot of concessions made....
I cannot get it to install on a M1 Silicon Mac. Even though the download 4.01 says it is compatible? Anybody get this to work with an M1 Mac, Davinci 17.2.2?
Hi Sir! Excellent review and very nice images. I'm planning to buy this adapter very soon but I had a couple of questions you may be able to help me with: First, did you finally found out if the front element was made of glass or plastic? Since I heard your comment I was shocked a $3000 adapter made of metal could have a plastic front element... that is just unacceptable. Second: Is there a way to put some grease on the focus ring to stop it from making noise? I'm concerned it could be picked up by a microphone nearby. Also, does the focus ring turn the Canon or Nikon way? It's not really specified anywhere. And lastly, do you know if the new helicoid design is strong enough to support a small light weight clip-on Matte Box? (like the Tilta mini Matte Box) since I'd like to be able to cut unwanted flares and glare. Again, thank you SO MUCH for this video, you have given us so much information that is nowhere to be found and made my decision way easier. Good job on that ;) Keep the videos coming and good luck!
Thank you 🙏🏻 yes I did contact them and they said it is glass and not plastic. They said it was not a special coating either. It may not be plastic but it definitely feels odd. It feels like those plastic protectors you peel off when getting new electronics etc. As far as greasing the focus I’m not too sure. Lenses for de-clicked aperture and focus use a special type of grease so a breakdown would need to happen to find out. It focuses the Canon way (what most would consider the normal way) and I have used a clip on mattebox but you would need lens support as with everything you are looking at a heavy system. I’ve been using the smallrig lens support on the sim rings and it’s been working great. Smaller matte boxes would work fine but anything larger like the standard Tilta or larger bright tangerine I would use the mattebox rail system with a donut. I appreciate all the kind words and I’m definitely finding out how I like to structure these videos. My earlier ones were terrible 😂. Thank you again
@@thereeljohnsteele Hi again John! thanks again for answering so quickly and in full detail. I´d love to see some more nice footage from you using the Aivascope 1.5x in a proper test-scenario and in "real world" scenarios as well, to test minimum focusing distance, how wide you can go on the taking lens, how does it perform wide open... of course, it's a lot to ask and I imagine you have better things to do but it would make for a killer follow-up video. Keep it up! Thanks.
@@manuelbustamante2664 challenge accepted! I have a very busy schedule coming up but I may toss something together today! I’ll try to get to it but can’t promise. Either way I’ll get you and others a more thorough video 😊
Hey John, excellent review. Thank you for sharing both the positives and negatives of this lens. I've been on the fence about it for a little while, and it's refreshing to hear an honest assessment. One question for you; do you notice any vignetting when using those extenders? The reason I ask, I'm considering using this adapter with my Mitakon 50mm f/0.95, which has a front filter diameter of 67mm. I thought maybe using a 52 to 67mm step-down ring might work, but I worry about it causing vignette. Any insight on that would be greatly appreciated.
No problem and thank you! I haven’t noticed any vignetting at all but I haven’t used a 35mm yet so that’ll be my next test (28mm vignettes a good bit though). Honestly 50mm is great. It produces for most a wide enough image for most scenarios. In the short at the bathroom sink I was only about 1-2’ away at the most and it still was considered a “medium shot”.
@@holdmedear absolutely! I need to make a new video where I’m not shooting in such low light to show how well of an image it produces. I will also use a nice sharp lens with it.
A couple of questions: what did you shoot this video on? Also, what is your background? You mentioned you are a cinematographer - what kind of work? Commercial/corporate, indy filmmaking/documentaries, Hollywood? Thanks! +Sub
Hey Alex! Thanks for the sub 😃 I shot this on the Bmpcc4k with the lumix 12-35 f2.8. I began with a cell phone 2 years ago shooting random content and started getting small job offers. I had to save up and eventually got a camera so I could look actually official ha. I started shooting weddings and whatever I could. Mostly run and gun. I wasn’t truly happy doing what I wanted to do but I got picked up by clients for my “eye”. I rebranded as a cinematographer and have been recently shooting for larger clients. Mostly documentary work and a few small shorts coming in 2021.
