SEARCH  WEBSITE

Almost done testing this one...I may need less COLOR (but that is because of the issue with VLC displaying more color on a MacBook Air, I sure wish companies would prioritize color ACCURACY. Same issue with Nvidia updating their display driver on my Dell XPS17). FILTER: Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8 Panasonic G85 Panasonic 25 1.7 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" -1 CONTRAST -5 SHARPNESS +5 NOISE -0 COLOR -5+4 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT 44 RADIUS 5.6 THRESHOLD 100 REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: April 29, 2025 at 10:29:20 PM Almost done testing this one...I may need less COLOR (but that is because of the issue with VLC displaying more color on a MacBook Air, I sure wish companies would prioritize color ACCURACY. Same issue with Nvidia updating their display driver on my Dell XPS17). My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

Something most people don't tell you about LUTS & camera settings is they need to be specific to each sensor-lens combination. Therefore, state the exact camera and lens combination used to create each LUT. FILTER LENS SENSOR MODE NOTES [UNFILTERED] 7artisans 35 1.4 ii Panasonic G85 Natural Difficult lens to get to render a scene accurately (my goal) but with these CUSTOM SETTINGS it looks decent enough. You'll have to increase the SHARPNESS in post-production though, and I will try to get those settings figured out as soon as I have time. FILTER: Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/4 Panasonic 25 1.7 Panasonic G85 Natural Okay, I like this. Starting out, this was a lot different than figuring out the settings for this same combination with the BPM18 (Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8) but after a few hours of work, I am liking the results. This will need a LUT for sure, but I think the settings are a good starting point. FILTER: Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8 Panasonic 25 1.7 Panasonic G85 Natural Almost done testing this one...I may need less COLOR (but that is because of the issue with VLC displaying more color on a MacBook Air, I sure wish companies would prioritize color ACCURACY. Same issue with Nvidia updating their display driver on my Dell XPS17). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 17-35 2.8 D Panasonic G85 Natural This lens is legendary, and I have been wanting to test it for a while. I did rent it many, many years ago (when using a Panasonic G5) but I did not know about custom (lens-sensor specific) camera settings. This combination is going to need a LUT to finalize, for sure. [UNFILTERED] Tamron 10-24 3.5-4.5 LD Panasonic G85 Natural There is not much SHARPNESS in this lens to start with, so on this sensor I have to add some in the settings, and it will certainly need some post-production SHARPNESS added as well. It will also need more COLOR, but after working with this a bit I think it is at what I consider a good place for footage you are capturing to start (though I prefer settings be so good they can be used SOOC, of course). I started out with custom settings that had a little bit too much COLOR, but I had to tone it down as it is a strange lens to find a good place to set the COLOR settings to, as the COLOR is not very accurate (which makes even the white balance hard to figure out). [UNFILTERED] Rokinon Cine 85 T1.5 Panasonic G85 Natural Wow...this works, without many corrections (on the G85 sensor). This is probably the 3rd easiest lens-sensor combo I've ever calibrated on the Panasonic G85 (the others were the vintage Vivitar 70-210 3.5, and the Nikon AF-D 50 1.4, both of which could be used, in the NATURAL picture profile, with no settings adjustments). To me, success is when the final image looks REAL, and with these settings, this lens makes a really good image on this camera. All I had to do was add a bit of NOISE REDUCTION (to help highlight rolloff, not for noise issues) and then to add a very slight HIGHLIGHT SHADOW correction, but you could go without it (if you want a slightly more contrasty shot than the scene really was). The only issue might be that it needs a little bit more SHARPNESS added during post-production, but I think these settings are a pretty good starting point. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 85 3.5 DX VR Panasonic G85 Natural For this camera (Panasonic G85) or on ANY Micro Four Thirds sensor camera, I don't really like this focal length for a MACRO lens, and I am starting to lean towards either a 40 or 60mm MACRO lens, or even a 50mm with a HELICOID adapter. The working distance of 85mm on this lens sometimes seems too close or too far away (based on where I can stand) at times. Also, I am getting to the point where I really appreciate making things look REAL, so this focal length of 85mm is introducing too much telephoto compression to look realistic, especially when used for MACRO images (where you are closer to the subject, etc.) Additionally, while the bokeh (out of focus background) is smooth, there is not quite enough blur, even wide open...but that is only f/3.5 so you can see what I mean (and an f/2.8 is where I want to be on M43 sensors when I want to create enough background blur). Lastly, there is not enough SHARPNESS in this lens (even with the compensation set to MAX +5) to work on this sensor (which means that this sensor does not have enough resolution to make the limited sharpness of this lens look realistic). Therefore, I don't think this lens is a good fit for this camera (Panasonic G85)...and maybe not for this M43 size of sensor overall (though the G9 or GH5 or other higher-megapixel M43 sensors might be okay, but I won't say until I test those). [UNFILTERED] Promaster 100-400 4.5-6.7 Panasonic G85 Natural I don't know what to say about this lens yet. On this M43 camera (the Panasonic G85) the focal length has enough reach to pretty much take care of any TELE shots you would ever want to get (with a few exceptions) but the combination of the low optical quality of this lens and the sort of lower pixel count of this sensor (16MP) produces an image that is probably not good enough for professional use. The obvious yet expensive alternative is the (native mount) Leica 100-400...but that's about $1000 US used, and this lens was $30 US. So, for the price I'm not saying this isn't a good tool to have around (though it's much bigger than a 70-300 as far as portability goes). It does really make me appreciate how much better the similarly-priced 70-300 lenses (also from the 1990s) are than this 100-400. Many of the 70-300 lenses I've tested produce professional results (see the lens notes) and they're just much better optically (probably because of the shorter zoom range) and certainly easier to fit into a camera bag. So, I probably will not recommend this inexpensive 100-400mm lens, unless you really need that extra telephoto reach. My custom, lens-sensor settings do improve the SOOC image (Straight Out Of Camera) but the final result is still not too good. Again, this really makes me go towards those 70-300 lenses I've tested, especially the ones with 1:2 MACRO. [UNFILTERED] Koah 50 1.4 Panasonic G85 Natural Still testing, but using the same settings as the Koah 35 1.2 is working pretty well. [UNFILTERED] Koah 35 1.2 Panasonic G85 Natural If you have never heard of Koah Artisan Series lenses (I know I had not) then you are might be pleasantly surprised. If you have heard of them, you may know they were created/distributed by Focus Camera.com (one of the New York photography stores) and that they are super affordable. However, I was not expecting much when I ordered this lens, not only because of the price, but because it was an f/1.2 lens (and every affordable f/1.2 lens I've tried...made me want to buy a 1.4 instead, because they were not any good at 1.2). Yet, I went ahead with the purchase not only because of the the f/1.2, but also because it was the focal length I needed (35mm) but the part that made me not expect much was the 1.2...but I was surprised. I started by testing the lens on a bright, sunny day (a good test for controlling dynamic range) and I began experimenting with the (in-camera) tonal curves using the HIGHLIGHT SHADOW menu (Panasonic G85). It didn't feel as difficult to correct as a lot of the other lenses I have worked with and I got custom settings dialed in pretty quickly. I actually had to ADD SHARPNESS (I usually remove some) as well as do other things in the (Natural) photo style/picture profile. I usually do about 10 tests before I get the settings right, but not for this one. The lens was amazingly consistent at almost all aperture values, and even at f/1.2, which was what surprised me. At f/1.2 it was certainly softer, but it did not show a lot of distracting red and blue color fringing that I've seen in a lot of other low-light primes (even f/1.4 lenses). I like the results with these custom settings enough to say I am going to keep this lens, and I am certainly going to recommend it to people. It creates sort of a vintage feel, but it still realistic, even if that sounds like a contradiction. I will also say that these settings provide a little bit too much COLOR, but overall (with these settings) this is looking REALLY good for a budget f/1.2 lens. FILTER Tiffen BPM18 Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic GH5 Natural Adding the Tiffen BPM18... FILTER Tiffen BPM14 Sigma 30 1.4 Panasonic G85 Natural WOW. I did not expect to get results that were as good as this (because this lens WITHOUT the Tiffen BPM14 did not work very well with this camera sensor). So, the custom settings I ended up using include a really strange HIGHLIGHT SHADOW curve (see settings) in conjunction with just a few small adjustments to the picture profile settings (see settings also). What I am really liking is how the combination of this filter and these settings is not only producing a pretty REAL looking image, but is also a little bit filmic too (with a little bit more SATURATION than one might want). Plus, it works pretty well in both INDOOR and OUTDOOR situations (with both low and high amounts of light...from shade to sun, etc.) P.S. I tried testing this combo with the BPM18 (1/8th strength Black Pro Mist) and it did not work as well (for a number of reasons)... [UNFILTERED] Sigma 30 1.4 Panasonic G85 Natural So far, I cannot recommend this lens WITHOUT adding a Tiffen BPM14 (Black Pro Mist 1/4)... It is true that this lens has a lot of SHARPNESS and CONTRAST, but when used with this sensor (the Panasonic G85) it does not render a realistic scene. The corrections I am applying (to the NATURAL profile) include an interesting Highlight Shadow curve, but the shadows are still being rendered too dark, but it's the best I can do without making it obvious there was a curve applied. The result is still not as realistic as I would like, and this means it will be difficult to match the shots from this lens to a lot of the other lenses I use (and therefore the imperfect "Real Rating"). All of this makes me understand why people tend to use diffusion filters (such as the Tiffen Black Pro Mist series) on this lens...which explains why the person I bought it from INCLUDED one with it! I hope to test it with that filter, next. I will say that overall this lens is a very consistent performer as it was difficult to see the difference in quality at different aperture values (unlike like many vintage lenses). The downside of this is that it does lack what some call CHARACTER which is typical of Sigma lenses of this type, but adding the HIGHLIGHT SHADOW compensation does kind of add a bit more character to it (and if you've used the in-camera curves, you know what I mean). Also, a lot of people talk about how the skintones on this camera are too RED, and they certainly are with this lens too...but keep in mind it is the combo of BOTH the lens and sensor that render colors a certain way (I might actually go back to trying an old Minolta MD 50 1.7 with this sensor again, as that has a GREEN bias, which may compensate for this issue). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic GH5 Natural NOTE: This is my first test of the GH5... (Template) Panasonic GH5 Natural [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-35 1.8 Panasonic G7 Natural TESTING. [UNFILTERED] Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 Panasonic G7 Natural This lens is a 1990s vintage "TELE" kit lens (for Nikon mount). One interesting thing is it seems to be exactly the same as the Quantaray (of this same focal length). I started the test using the exact same custom settings, and the resulting images look almost identical. Also, both lenses have a 1:2 MACRO spec in the same exact focal length range (the macro lock engages between 180-300mm on both lenses). [UNFILTERED] Quantaray 70-300 4-5.6 LD Panasonic G7 Natural [UNFILTERED] TTArtisan 35 1.4 Panasonic G7 Natural FINAL NOTE: I don't recommend this lens for professional work. At first, I was guessing the f/1/.4 maximum aperture and the fact that it's a prime lens would make this lens a good option (at the low price it comes in at). However, after testing it and working with custom settings for a few days, I can say I do NOT recommend this lens, as it has a number of different optical problems that make it very difficult to capture a realistic, professional-looking image. I could go into more detail, but of the 50+ lenses I've tested, it is one of the top 5 worst (and I would never take it on a professional shoot...which is the requirement for each of the lens-sensor settings recommendations on this website). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 D Panasonic G7 Natural Wow...the final results on this lens-sensor (and speed booster) combo are great! All of the properties of contrast, sharpness, noise and color all look REALLY good (even though they're not perfectly realistic). Since the color from this camera is almost always more saturated than my other cameras (currently testing GH4, G85, GX85) I knew it would be a bit on the vivid side and turning it down any more can leave too much work for the LUT to do accurately (in post-production). Another thing I'm considering, is that while the Panasonic G7 seems to produce a lot of color saturation, it may be good to leave my settings a bit on the colorful side if you're going to upload straight to YouTube. However, most of the time I would have to run these through Davinci Resolve (to assemble multiple clips) anyway, so I could easily just add a LUT (or my "YouTube color bump" settings) to deal with the color saturation. FILTER: None Leica 25-400 2.8-4.0 Panasonic FZ1000 Natural IMPORTANT: If you publish your videos to YouTube, use the below settings (for Davinci Resolve) to make it look REAL (YouTube strips out CONTRAST AND COLOR as of the date of this note). YouTube SHADOW DIP (for Davinci Resolve): This helps make SHADOWS more accurate on YouTube: 1. Create a new node 2. Go to Primaries 3. Enter -12.30 for Shad (Shadow) YouTube COLOR BUMP (for Davinci Resolve): This helps make COLOR more accurate on YouTube: 1. Create a new node 2. Go to Sat vs. Sat. (In Curves) 3. Drag shadows (left) dot to 1.23 4. Drag highlights (right) dot to 1.23 NOTES: I’ve been working on getting my FZ1000 to look realistic, using SOOC (Straight Out of Camera) settings, and I’m pretty happy with what these settings now (and it’s REALLY EASY TO REMEMBER). These settings are mostly for 4K PHOTO mode use, so I'm also doing this so I can either use 4K PHOTO mode to grab stills, or to shoot video and be able to use it without doing color grading (though it may need a little sharpness adding in Davinci Resolve, my video editing software of choice…also super good for color grading). Note that the smaller sensor on this camera produces a little bit more NOISE than I would consider perfect, but it's not bad if you look at it as kind of an organic "film look". IMPORTANT NOTE: One setting that you have to be careful to not forget, is to set the "Luminance Level" to 0-255 (not the default setting of 16-255). The easy way to set it to 0-255, is simply to switch to 4K PHOTO mode (which will default to 0-255). You can set it without doing that, but it's a lot more difficult (I don't remember the exact sequence). SHARPENING SETTINGS (Davinci Resolve): @Full "WIDE" = .47 @Mid "TIGHT" = .46 @Full "TELE" = .43 I should also note that I've found ISO 200 to create the most real-looking image (maybe it's the "native ISO"?) So, if you can use ISO 200, I do recommend it (even over 125 and 160, even though they're lower, etc.) Also, the image degrades noticeably above ISO 400, though I sometimes go up to ISO 800 when needed but be aware that it's going to look like it has more "film grain" (which isn't always bad, but it won't match your other footage, if the other footage was shot at a lower ISO). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 12-32 3.5-5.6 Panasonic GX85 Natural IMPORTANT NOTE: I may go back to figure out the custom settings for this lens, but I don't recommend this combination FOR VIDEO use because the GX85 body does not have a manual focus dial, or an autofocus/manual focus switch (like the GX9) so you can quickly turn off AF. The reason you need this for video use, is that the AF is not reliable so it will "hunt" if you leave it on while recording. For instance, if you're in a documentary/interview/talking head situation it may switch from foreground focus to focus on the background, and that can ruin an interview (because you can't just make a person say something over, etc.) The workaround is to set the focus (on a person's nearest eye, typically) and then turn off AF. However, to do this on the GX85, you have to use the menu system instead of a physical switch (as on GX9). This takes too long and doesn't work in real situations. So, because the lens doesn't have a manual focus dial (or an on/off switch, I don't recommend this specific (lens-sensor) combination for video/filmmaking use (it's decent for still photography). FILTER: Tiffen Warm Soft FX 2 Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural IMPORTANT: This test is being done for a friend, for still photography use only (and I don't recommend it for video use). FILTER: Tiffen Ultra Contrast 1 Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural NEW NOTES: ... (BELOW IS FROM TIFFEN BPM18): (These new settings are for using the lens with the Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8.) I started this test because I wasn't able to get this lens-sensor combo (or with G85) to work very well UNFILTERED (see my older notes below). So, while testing I noticed a number of interesting things, including that this filter (with the specific settings I use) is reducing the compression artifacts that were occurring in video (when using it UNFILTERED). Also, no surprise, but using this filter makes this lens more prone to flare (need a lens hood or matte box) and though this can reduce the contrast in certain lighting situations (i.e. pointing toward a light source) the flare doesn't look that bad. So, while I didn't like the results of this lens UNFILTERED, I now feel pretty good about using it with these settings (which include the Tiffen BPM18/Black Pro Mist 1/8). OLDER NOTES (from UNFILTERED test): When I started this test, I was surprised, as I had heard so many people say good things about this lens, but when compared with a lot of the vintage lenses I've been testing, this thing isn't very good...so let me explain. When I started this test (at -0-0-0-0 using the Natural profile) what immediately jumped out at me were the outlines on the edges of objects, which I'm pretty sure is due to over-sharpening...yet at the same time, the image was soft and needed sharpening! This is a problem, because to remove the outlines on the edges of things, you have to REDUCE the SHARPENING...but doing that will mean the image needs even MORE sharpening during post production, so I may have to see how far I can take the sharpening in post production (using Davinci Resolve). [UNFILTERED] Novoflex 105 4 AUTO BELLOWS Panasonic GX85 Natural DAMAGE WARNING: The copy of this lens I tested had fungus on the inside of the second element. So, these settings may not work on your copy of the lens (unless your fungus is identical...but does that ever happen?) Even with the fungus, I can see this lens had (even in a clean state) trouble with chromatic aberration, though it's not too extreme, and mainly shows up as RED and YELLOW fringing (and not the super-distracting, yet 3-D looking blue and red of some other lenses). [UNFILTERED] Novoflex 105 4 AUTO BELLOWS Panasonic G85 Natural DAMAGE WARNING: The copy of this lens I tested had fungus on the inside of the second element. So, these settings may not work on your copy of the lens (unless your fungus is identical...but does that ever happen?) Even with the fungus, I can see this lens had (even in a clean state) trouble with chromatic aberration, though it's not too extreme, and mainly shows up as RED and YELLOW fringing (and not the super-distracting, yet 3-D looking blue and red of some other lenses). [UNFILTERED] Minolta MD 50 1.7 Panasonic GH4 Natural (Sold GH4, so only did a preliminary test...if you try, let me know what you think!) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 35 1.8 G DX Panasonic GH4 Natural I don't like this lens-sensor combination. I am using the Viltrox NF-M43x (Nikon mount) speed booster for this test (and that is part of it) but this booster looks really good on other lenses, so I wouldn't blame it on that. It just always comes down to the combination of all the things put together, kind of a synergy if you will...and this combo looks BAD (not good). So, while I think my custom settings do help create a file that is an okay starting point, the image it produces is very un-inspiring, and I hope to make the images into something better with a custom LUT (but I really don't even want to work with this lens!)... [UNFILTERED] Nikon 35 1.8 G DX Panasonic G7 Natural POST-PRODUCTION NOTES: This lens-sensor combination will need some post-production work (these are my recommendations): 1. Add SHARPNESS (in Davinci Resolve) 2. Create/add a LUT (see notes above) 3. Add my "YouTube COLOR Bump" (if you're uploading to YouTube) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 35 1.8 G DX Panasonic GX85 Natural OVERVIEW: This lens, similar to its brother the Nikon 50 1.8G, is not easy to work with on this sensor (the Panasonic G85). When I started the test (at -0-0-0-0, HS -0-0) it had the same deep shadows that the 50mm had, and the same weird color rendering. I think these final settings make this into a lens that is a decent tool, but it will need both sharpening and color added in post-production (to look "REAL"). I might be able to correct some of the strange tonal range problems with the LUT, and I it's easy to boost the SATURATION of the color, but I don't know if I will ever get the color HUE to look accurate. This color issue is hard to describe, but it renders colors with a deeper tone than they really are, and some may like this, but my goal is realism (so this is not one of my favorite lenses). POST-PRODUCTION NOTES: This lens-sensor combination will need some post-production work (these are my recommendations): 1. Add SHARPNESS (in Davinci Resolve) 2. Create/add a LUT (see notes above) 3. Add my "YouTube COLOR Bump" (if you're uploading to YouTube) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 35 1.8 G DX Panasonic G85 Natural OVERVIEW: This lens, similar to its brother the Nikon 50 1.8G, is not easy to work with on this sensor (the Panasonic G85). When I started the test (at -0-0-0-0, HS -0-0) it had the same deep shadows that the 50mm had, and the same weird color rendering. I think these final settings make this into a lens that is a decent tool, but it will need both sharpening and color added in post-production (to look "REAL"). I might be able to correct some of the strange tonal range problems with the LUT, and I it's easy to boost the SATURATION of the color, but I don't know if I will ever get the color HUE to look accurate. This color issue is hard to describe, but it renders colors with a deeper tone than they really are, and some may like this, but my goal is realism (so this is not one of my favorite lenses). POST-PRODUCTION NOTES: This lens-sensor combination will need some post-production work (these are my recommendations): 1. Add SHARPNESS (in Davinci Resolve) 2. Create/add a LUT (see notes above) 3. Add my "YouTube COLOR Bump" (if you're uploading to YouTube) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 2.8 D Panasonic G7 Natural (NOTES FROM BOOSTED TEST): This lens is too sharp for this sensor, as with the SHARPNESS turned all of the way down (to -5) plus the NOISE REDUCTION turned all of the way UP (to +5, which I do to reduce sharpness even more when needed) the image still has a lot of aliasing. This sensor also renders more compression-related artifacts when a lens is too sharp (which adding NR can help with) but since we've maxed out those 2 settings, we're left with a lens-sensor combo that is bound to be a problem in certain lighting situations. This used to be a top-of-the-line telephoto zoom (it was the first AF 80-200 2.8 Nikon produced) and the build quality is excellent. However, the "focus breathing" is not good for video (image changes size as you focus, etc.) and lenses such as the Promaster 70-300 I've been using, are MUCH better for video (even though the aperture is not constant, but with this breathing, you can't zoom while shooting ANYWAY!) it's also heavy and slow to operate. It's slow because of the push-pull zoom, and because of the focus (there is a focus limiting feature that helps with that). Optically, it's a great lens, and though each lens-sensor combo usually needs some work to look its best. NOTE: With a non-optical adapter, I set the contrast to -2 (instead of -1). [UNFILTERED] Vivitar Series 1 70-210 2.8-4 Panasonic G85 Natural CAMERA-SPECIFIC NOTES: If you need to upload the video footage to YouTube SOOC, use +2 on the in-camera SHARPNESS. If you're planning on adding sharpening in post-production, then use +1 on the in-camera SHARPNESS. CAMERA-SPECIFIC NOTES: After first testing this lens on the Panasonic GH4 (and writing most of the notes in the "LENS-SPECIFIC NOTES" section below) I was amazed at how much better this lens looked on the Panasonic G85 sensor! I was able to cover up that "glowy, purple fringing" easier, and it was much easier to make the color turn out looking "REAL" (the NATURAL profile in the GH4 is not super neutral, but the CINELIKE D is a lot worse). I like using this lens on the G85, and I highly recommend it...though it still does have some "character" (the purple glows are still there, somewhere). LENS-SPECIFIC NOTES: I will say this lens has really nice bokeh (out of focus areas) yet the glowy, purple fringing (or chromatic aberration) is very noticeable on light-colored subjects, and it shows up as mystery purple patches all over. If you WANT that effect, this is a good lens for that, but 'm trying to find lenses that retain what I call a "sense of reality" so this one isn't high on my list. In terms of overall usefulness, the push-pull zoom is surprisingly easy to use even for video, as it sort of sticks in whatever position you set it because it has an angular groove in the motion travel that keeps it from slipping too much. The copy I have was a little bit loose, but that made it fast to focus or zoom with (which I liked). I'm not going to comment much on the corrections I performed, because the lens differs so much from one aperture value and focal length to another. Let's just say "It has character" and is full of lots of surprises. In comparison to the older Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f/3.5, I prefer the optics of the older one, but the ergonomics (zoom and focus feel) of this newer one are better. [UNFILTERED] Minolta AF 50 1.7 ii Panasonic G85 Natural Not sure if test for v2 was done. [UNFILTERED] Kiron 28-85 2.8-3.8 Panasonic GX85 Natural UPDATE: I'm happy with the how my final Highlight Shadow compensation worked, but the notes below about lack of realism still apply. If your goals for a lens-sensor combination include either realism or accuracy, this combination isn't good. If you're going for a vintage look however, this might be worth a try. I do add the word "might" though, as what I'm struggling with is the overall CONTRAST of the lens (it's good, it's a bit too much FOR THIS SENSOR, resulting in too wide of a dynamic range being covered; more than this sensor can handle). I'm still experimenting with Highlight Shadow compensation to see if I can remedy this, but so far doing this undercuts certain other positive traits of the lens in the process (it tones down the pretty red and blue fringing/chromatic aberrations). [UNFILTERED] Vivitar Series 1 70-210 3.5 Panasonic G85 Natural This lens is pretty amazing, because it's one of the few lens-sensor combos out there that actually looks really good at 0-0-0-0 (using the NATURAL photo style). I did do some minor adjustments, but they're not essential. This lens does have some issues with glowing purples (i.e. chromatic aberration) which can be distracting. Also, be aware that it's a really heavy lens (for its size) and I think it needs to be supported by the sort of adapter that has an integrated tripod mount on it (so it doesn't strain the lens mount on the camera). I didn't have a tripod mount on the adapter I used on my initial tests, and it wasn't very ergonomic, but then I found one on Ebay (Minolta MD mount) and it works much better! [UNFILTERED] Vivitar Series 1 70-210 2.8-4 Panasonic GH4 Natural I will say this lens has really nice bokeh (out of focus areas) yet the glowy, purple fringing (or chromatic aberration) is very noticeable on light-colored subjects, and it shows up as mystery purple patches all over. If you WANT that effect, this is a good lens for that, but 'm trying to find lenses that retain what I call a "sense of reality" so this one isn't high on my list. In terms of overall usefulness, the push-pull zoom is surprisingly easy to use even for video, as it sort of sticks in whatever position you set it because it has an angular groove in the motion travel that keeps it from slipping too much. The copy I have was a little bit loose, but that made it fast to focus or zoom with (which I liked). I'm not going to comment much on the corrections I performed, because the lens differs so much from one aperture value and focal length to another. Let's just say "It has character" and is full of lots of surprises. In comparison to the older Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f/3.5, I prefer the optics of the older one, but the ergonomics (zoom and focus feel) of this newer one are better. [UNFILTERED] Vivitar Series 1 70-210 3.5 Panasonic GH4 Natural BELOW IS REVIEW ON OTHER CAMERA This lens is pretty amazing, because it's one of the few lens-sensor combos out there that actually looks really good at 0-0-0-0 (using the NATURAL photo style). I did do some minor adjustments, but they're not essential. This lens does have some issues with glowing purples (i.e. chromatic aberration) which can be distracting. Also, be aware that it's a really heavy lens (for its size) and I think it needs to be supported by the sort of adapter that has an integrated tripod mount on it (so it doesn't strain the lens mount on the camera). I didn't have a tripod mount on the adapter I used on my initial tests, and it wasn't very ergonomic, but then I found one on Ebay (Minolta MD mount) and it works much better! [UNFILTERED] Quantaray 70-300 4-5.6 LD Panasonic G85 Natural (I will be doing 2 different tests here: One for sports action (stills) for printing to an 8x10 printer, and the second is my normal test for video purposes...starting to test now.) PHOTO Settings: (More SHARPNESS is needed the printing process reduces the apparent sharpness due to the substrate, inks, etc.) TEST #1 = NATURAL -0+2+3-1 HS -2+2 (Needs more SHARPNESS, more NR, more COLOR) TEST #2 = NATURAL -0+4+5-0 HS -2+2 (Not sure yet) TEST #3 = NATURAL +4+5+4+1 HS -2+3 TEST #4 = NATURAL +4+4+4-1 HS -2+3 (FINAL) VIDEO Settings: [UNFILTERED] Sigma 75-300 4-5.6 DL Panasonic GX85 Natural The rubber "ZEN" coating is now so sticky I can't use the push-pull zoom/focus! (It got worse after I cleaned it, note to self.) I did finish my testing, but it doesn't zoom anymore, so it's no longer useable! Other than that, this lens is sort of impressive optically, and I stopped testing some of my other old Sigma AF lenses of a slightly newer vintage (mid-1990s) because they weren't good enough optically, but THIS one is a little bit older, and I'm impressed. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 75-300 4-5.6 DL Panasonic G85 Natural The rubber "ZEN" coating is now so sticky I can't use the push-pull zoom/focus! (It got worse after I cleaned it, note to self.) I did finish my testing, but it doesn't zoom anymore, so it's no longer useable! Other than that, this lens is sort of impressive optically, and I stopped testing some of my other old Sigma AF lenses of a slightly newer vintage (mid-1990s) because they weren't good enough optically, but THIS one is a little bit older, and I'm impressed. [UNFILTERED] Canon FDn 50 1.4 Panasonic GX85 Natural WARNING: This lens doesn't focus to infinity with this adapter! CONCLUSION: Due to the fact this specific lens doesn't focus to infinity when used on this speedbooster, I'm going to use this INDOORS at for the TIGHT interview shot. These custom settings also work OUTDOORS, but its usefulness is very limited because you can't focus to infinity (i.e. you can't focus on distant objects...hence, this is truly a tool for blurring the background, etc.) ATEM Mini NOTES: The ATEM Mini seems to increase the CONTRAST, so I may need to reduce this when using the ATEM Mini. [UNFILTERED] Pentax Super-Takumar 50 1.4 ii Panasonic GH4 Natural CONCLUSION: Overall, I don't like this lens-sensor combination. WITHOUT this speedbooster, this lens both has a lot of character AND a lot of integrity, but WITH this (Pixco) speedbooster, it feels like one of the cheap vintage lenses that nobody likes. I do like this speedbooster on other lenses though, so it's just this lens-sensor combination that is uninspiring. ORIGINAL NOTES: So, after testing the original (non-BOOSTED) settings with the speedbooster ON, I can certainly say that they DO NOT WORK, so I'm starting this test from scratch. (Sometimes starting with the non-BOOST settings works, but in this case, it isn't working too well). NON-BOOST NOTES: This was a VERY difficult lens to come up with the set of recommended settings for. My goal is simply to make it easy to get the best original capture as possible (at all aperture settings) and that was difficult because of how inconsistent this lens is at different apertures (in terms of how it renders light, etc.) [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 50 1.8 M42 Panasonic GH4 Natural OVERVIEW: My first impression of this lens-sensor combination wasn't too good, but after getting these custom settings worked out, there are some good things to say about it. Overall, it's got a lot of character, and the strange thing is that it renders the image MUCH differently at different F-stops (in more ways than depth of field and sharpness). It's hard to put in words, but it just kind of makes the image look like it's from different film stocks at different aperture values. This made it difficult to decide on one set of settings, but what I'm using is working pretty well (see the above settings). WIERD NOTES: There's a lot of "weird notes" for this lens-sensor combination, because it behaves so differently than most of the other lenses I've tested. One thing is that it gets MORE contrasty at f/2.8 and LESS at 5.6 or f/8 (most lenses become more contrasty as they stop down). As normal, the SHARPNESS increases as it gets closer to f/8, but I find it weird that the CONTRAST is greater at 2.8. In general, I like using this combination (this lens + PIXCO speedbooster) at f/2.8, as it has just the right amount of bokeh, as well as good sharpness, and contrast as mentioned. Also, focus pulling is really nice at f/2.8, with a short focus throw, and infinity focus being pretty much right on (in my experience). The sharpness isn't good enough below f/2.8 either, so needless to say, I use it at f/2.8 almost all of the time. SHARPENING SETTINGS: This is a very difficult lens to give SHARPENING settings for because the sharpness changes so much at different aperture values! However, I'll start working on figuring this out after I've gathered enough footage to run it through tests (in Davinci). FIRST IMPRESSION (OLD NOTES): The #1 thing I'm starting to notice with this focal reducer/speedbooster, is that it causes a big flare ball (not hair ball) in the middle of the frame, no matter what lens is used. I tried shielding the lens (I put my hand about 6 inches in FRONT of the lens, and slightly above) and it removed the flare, but it's pretty bad without this. The only solution would be to use a BIG French flag above the lens. The lens flare does the normal bad things to the lens really bad flare does (reduces the contrast and color saturation) and in this case, it almost totally destroys the image. So, for now I'm not going to recommend this lens-sensor +BOOST (speedbooster) combination (and I might look into some other speedbooster brands for M42). FILTER: Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8 Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic GH4 Natural UPDATE: I changed the Highlight Shadow settings (from -3+3) to -2+2 and now it has the same HS settings as the UNFILTERED version. This is interesting as it means that, while the LUT will still need to be different for this version (which is using the Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8) because of tonal range, but what's interesting is the SHARPNESS settings are the only difference (2 points less when using this filter). I know, it would be nice if this pattern was the same for ALL lens-sensor combinations (and I could just apply that logic, and not have to TEST each one) but I know better than to do that by now, LOL! I came back to this test after some time, and I think the old settings looked okay SOOC (Straight Out of Camera) but I think the image would fall apart if any post sharpening was to be added, so I increased the NR (Noise Reduction) to tone down sharpness. This helps to get the image to a better starting point (before adding a bit of sharpening in post). I also increased the COLOR setting by 1 (because adding NR reduced the color saturation too). I need to test the post-production sharpening settings in Davinci Resolve (I will publish them below). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic GH4 Natural Wow. These settings are working really well SOOC (Straight Out of Camera) but are not what I expected at all. I will still make a LUT, but the video from these settings alone looks great. On the first day of testing, I wasn't enjoying myself and didn't know if there was hope for this lens-sensor combo. So, I switched over to the tests using a diffusion filter (Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8) because things weren't working. Strange enough, the place where I left off was a GREAT place to start with the filter on (I used the same settings) and I got the test WITH the filter done first. Then, when I returned to finish these UNFILTERED tests, I finally got these to look good too, but the settings are way different than the ones for when you're using a Tiffen BPM18. The filtered and UNFILTERED versions will need different LUTs and SHARPENING settings for post-production for sure, but I'm pretty happy with how good of a "starting point" these two sets of settings are providing. Check my YouTube channel for some of the tests. [UNFILTERED] Canon FDn 50 1.8 Panasonic GH4 Natural THE SHORT STORY: I'm super happy with the results coming from these settings (the lens-sensor combo, including the Pixco speed booster)! What was super surprising was that these settings not only look good on the final files, but they also look good on the Panasonic GH4 flip-out screen (while you're shooting) and that doesn't always happen (it's a really good thing!) THE LONG STORY: I just tested this lens-sensor combination on a Panasonic GX85, so I had some expectations for this test...but I must say that it turned out a lot better than I expected! Not only does this turn the very affordable Canon FDn 50 1.8 into a great low light tool (a 35mm 1.2) but it renders quite a filmic look on this GH4 (a super affordable camera nowadays)! I say it looks a lot like film because it's doing a really good job controlling the highlight rolloff, midtones and shadow detail, and it even renders a sort of film grain look by having a bit of digital noise (but it's not too much that it's distracting). The NOISE REDUCTION settings are what I'm using to control how the "film grain" look is rendering, and the final settings I'm using are a result of a lot of back-and-forth trial and error, so I'll have to say that it's important to use these specific settings (try it and I think you'll like it). In regard to the optical quality of this speed booster, it has flaws and imperfections, but I think what's really important is how the image it renders looks, etc. It has issues with lens flare which some people actually like, and has other issues that could normally be considered a negative (such as sharpness reduction, etc.) that are working well with this lens-sensor combination. In the end, I think using this Pixco speed booster with this Canon FDn 50 1.8 is a very cost-effective way to turn this 50 1.8 into a 35mm F/1.2 low light tool. The aperture control is stepless (i.e. de-clicked) though it does have a couple places it seems to catch slightly. GH4 NOTE: One problem with the GH4 is that the sensor seems to render too much BLUE. So, the workaround I use is to shoot in "Cloudy" white balance when it's sunny outside. My "REAL" ratings rate "COLOR" as being pretty accurate, but it's when using this workaround. [UNFILTERED] Canon FDn 50 1.8 Panasonic GX85 Natural IMPORTANT: After having a camera's sensor get scratched (after dropping it with a speedbooster on) I don't recommend using speedboosters anymore on cameras with sensors that have IBIS (In-Body Image Stabilization). The reason is that the optic sticks into the lens mount (more than an OEM lens) and if the camera is dropped, the extra force and motion of the IBIS sensor can cause the two to collide (thus scratching the sensor). This is not only a review of this vintage lens, but also a review of the Pixco focal reducer (specific to this camera) and so far, I like it! This speed booster is inexpensive, and though it DOES create lens flare, it doesn't look too bad, and can be controlled (with a lens shade) if needed. This lens-sensor combination (of the Lumix GX85, the Canon FDn 50 1.8 + Pixco speed booster) is a pretty good way to get an F/1.2 lens, for a low price. What's really weird about this lens-sensor combination is that, even with a LOT of NR (Noise Reduction) added, it is still producing a lot of NOISE. You might wonder how a specific lens could produce MORE noise than another lens (with the same SENSOR) but I think it comes down to what was done to the light before it reaches the sensor, and then the interaction of the sensor and the light affects how the sensor displays things. It sounds really simple, but each lens-sensor relationship is a little different. So, because the digital noise is not going away, what I'm attempting to do is to make it look like film grain (as much as I can). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 14-42 ii Panasonic G85 Natural UPDATE 2: I just finished the updated settings! I think it still could benefit from doing some tests with some kind of diffusion filter (like the Tiffen GG or BPM) but I have to note that this is my last test with this camera because the shutter speed dial completely stopped working (when I turn it, it only goes HIGHER). The problems with this camera started after using a Viltrox EFM2ii (Canon mount focal reducer/speedbooster) during which the screen glitched, then the camera froze. Since then, it has gotten worse, and now I can't use it at all. (I love the Nikon mount version of the Viltrox focal reducer, the non-electronic version, but now I'm going to warn people about using the Canon mount version (because it has electrical contacts, and tries to communicate, and pull power from, the camera). One thing that is really interesting about these settings, is that the SOOC JPEG (in still photo modes) looks really good (and, in fact a bit more accurate than the video footage, because the video footage is still a LITTLE bit over-sharpened). UPDATE: I recently talked with another photographer about this lens (as well as talking with others in the past) and most people don't like it much. I've been working to figure out CUSTOM SETTINGS that help each lens look its best (specific to each camera sensor) and haven't been able to get this combo to look realistic (it looks too "digital"). I've started testing some lenses using Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8 filters and may try that here. What the filter does is smooth the transition of light from the highlights to the shadows, keeping the light projected onto the sensor within the dynamic range of the camera. This also causes SHARPNESS to decrease, but I have it turned all of the way down right now, so I can then turn it up on the custom settings, and it should make the image look less digital. FILTER: Gobe ND8 Leica 25-400 2.8-4.0 Panasonic FZ1000 Natural IMPORTANT: If you publish your videos to YouTube, use the below settings (for Davinci Resolve) to make it look REAL (YouTube strips out CONTRAST AND COLOR as of the date of this note). YouTube SHADOW DIP (for Davinci Resolve): This helps make SHADOWS more accurate on YouTube: 1. Create a new node 2. Go to Primaries 3. Enter -12.30 for Shad (Shadow) YouTube COLOR BUMP (for Davinci Resolve): This helps make COLOR more accurate on YouTube: 1. Create a new node 2. Go to Sat vs. Sat. (In Curves) 3. Drag shadows (left) dot to 1.23 4. Drag highlights (right) dot to 1.23 UPDATE 2: Now testing with Gobe ND8...and it's again interesting how it really changes things. The first thing I'm trying to fix is that the ND8 filter punches the shadows in (at any exposure) and is making them relatively darker than they should be (though this can be a good thing, if you're uploading directly to YouTube with the current compression scheme they have). Still working on these settings... UPDATE: I’ve been working on getting my FZ1000 to look realistic, using SOOC (Straight Out of Camera) settings, and I’m pretty happy with what these settings now (and it’s REALLY EASY TO REMEMBER). These settings are mostly for 4K PHOTO mode use, so I'm also doing this so I can either use 4K PHOTO mode to grab stills, or to shoot video and be able to use it without doing color grading (though it may need a little sharpness adding in Davinci Resolve, my video editing software of choice…also super good for color grading). Note that the smaller sensor on this camera produces a little bit more NOISE than I would consider perfect, but it's not bad if you look at it as kind of an organic "film look". (FIRST) NOTE: This current test is for when you're NOT using a filter. The settings I had posted before were for using a B+W F-PRO UV filter, and I really prefer the tests with that filter (settings still available by searching on my website) but then it occurred to me today, that some people may not be able to easily get that filter. So far, this test is coming out worse, because using the filter was improving the micro contrast (it smoothed the highlight rolloff and did other good things). These settings are pretty good, but if you can get a B+W F-PRO UV filter, I think this camera works better with one. SHARPENING SETTINGS (for Davinci Resolve): @Full "WIDE" = .47 ? @Mid "TIGHT" = .46 ? @Full "TELE" = .43 ? I should also note that I've found ISO 200 to create the most real-looking image (maybe it's the "native ISO"?) So, if you can use ISO 200, I do recommend it (even over 125 and 160, even though they're lower, etc.) Also, the image degrades noticeably above ISO 400, though I sometimes go up to ISO 800 when needed, but be aware that it's going to look like it has more "film grain" (which isn't always bad, but it won't match your other footage, if the other footage was shot at a lower ISO). [UNFILTERED] Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC Panasonic G85 Natural Need to add COLOR with a LUT but have to keep it low during capture to reduce both noise artifacts and the chromatic aberrations (light green blue and red fringing). I'm noticing those aberrations at the WIDE end (17mm or so) but it's pretty clean around 50mm in this respect. It's also sharper (too sharp) at the wide end, and less sharp (but just about right with these settings) at the long (50mm) end. FILTER: Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8 Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural (These new settings are for using the lens with the Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8.) I started this test because I wasn't able to get this lens-sensor combo (or with G85) to work very well UNFILTERED (see my older notes below). So, while testing I noticed a number of interesting things, including that this filter (with the specific settings I use) is reducing the compression artifacts that were occurring in video (when using it UNFILTERED). Also, no surprise, but using this filter makes this lens more prone to flare (need a lens hood or matte box) and though this can reduce the contrast in certain lighting situations (i.e. pointing toward a light source) the flare doesn't look that bad. So, while I didn't like the results of this lens UNFILTERED, I now feel pretty good about using it with these settings (which include the Tiffen BPM18/Black Pro Mist 1/8). OLDER NOTES (from UNFILTERED test): When I started this test, I was surprised, as I had heard so many people say good things about this lens, but when compared with a lot of the vintage lenses I've been testing, this thing isn't very good...so let me explain. When I started this test (at -0-0-0-0 using the Natural profile) what immediately jumped out at me were the outlines on the edges of objects, which I'm pretty sure is due to over-sharpening...yet at the same time, the image was soft and needed sharpening! This is a problem, because to remove the outlines on the edges of things, you have to REDUCE the SHARPENING...but doing that will mean the image needs even MORE sharpening during post production, so I may have to see how far I can take the sharpening in post production (using Davinci Resolve). IDEA: I may try decreasing the NR (Noise Reduction) by 1 (to +3) and increasing the SHARPNESS by 1 (to -4) to see if I can get a little bit more film grain look (the NR is wiping out all of the texture, and you could add it in post, but I prefer to save TIME). FILTER: Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8 Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic GX85 Natural (These new settings are for using the lens with the Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8.) I started this test because I wasn't able to get this lens-sensor combo (or with G85) to work very well UNFILTERED (see my older notes below). So, while testing I noticed a number of interesting things, including that this filter (with the specific settings I use) is reducing the compression artifacts that were occurring in video (when using it UNFILTERED). Also, no surprise, but using this filter makes this lens more prone to flare (need a lens hood or matte box) and though this can reduce the contrast in certain lighting situations (i.e. pointing toward a light source) the flare doesn't look that bad. So, while I didn't like the results of this lens UNFILTERED, I now feel pretty good about using it with these settings with the Tiffen BPM18/Black Pro Mist 1/8! OLDER NOTES (from UNFILTERED test): When I started this test, I was surprised, as I had heard so many people say good things about this lens, but when compared with a lot of the vintage lenses I've been testing, this thing isn't very good...so let me explain. When I started this test (at -0-0-0-0 using the Natural profile) what immediately jumped out at me were the outlines on the edges of objects, which I'm pretty sure is due to over-sharpening...yet at the same time, the image was soft and needed sharpening! This is a problem, because to remove the outlines on the edges of things, you have to REDUCE the SHARPENING...but doing that will mean the image needs even MORE sharpening during post production, so I may have to see how far I can take the sharpening in post production (using Davinci Resolve). [UNFILTERED] Kiron 28-85 2.8-3.8 Panasonic GH4 Natural While I'm still testing this lens-sensor combo, it looks pretty nice so far. Not only does it have a really nice vintage look, but it's also pretty accurate in terms of COLOR and CONTRAST. [UNFILTERED] Kiron 28-85 2.8-3.8 Panasonic G85 Natural UPDATE: I'm happy with the how my final Highlight Shadow compensation worked, but the notes below about lack of realism still apply. If your goals for a lens-sensor combination include either realism or accuracy, this combination isn't good. If you're going for a vintage look however, this might be worth a try. I do add the word "might" though, as what I'm struggling with is the overall CONTRAST of the lens (it's good, it's a bit too much FOR THIS SENSOR, resulting in too wide of a dynamic range being covered; more than this sensor can handle). I'm still experimenting with Highlight Shadow compensation to see if I can remedy this, but so far doing this undercuts certain other positive traits of the lens in the process (it tones down the pretty red and blue fringing/chromatic aberrations). [UNFILTERED] Kiron 28-85 2.8-3.8 Panasonic G85 Natural [NOTE: The settings with the +BOOST (Viltrox NF-M43x) added are a LOT different (you might expect it to be predictable, but every optical situation is different) and needs custom settings.] This is a really amazing vintage lens! It is very vulnerable to lens flare (so if you want to control it, use lens shade, etc.) but it matches this sensor pretty well and it needed very few changes. The adjustments were important though, as it really helped adding a little CONTRAST, SHARPNESS and NOISE REDUCTION (each of them for controlling the micro-contrast and reducing the digital look of the image, etc.) While the final result is not perfectly "REAL" (especially the inaccurate color) I think it looks very "cinematic" and that a lot of people (who like the "film look") will really, REALLY like the image this lens-sensor combo creates. [UNFILTERED] Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC Panasonic GX85 Natural So far, I really like the type of lens flare this lens produces. I'm noticing chromatic aberration (red and blue fringing) at the WIDE end (17mm or so) but it's pretty clean around 50mm in this respect. It's also sharper (too sharp) at the wide end, and less sharp (but just about right with these settings) at the long (50mm) end. I would say this lens looks similar to the older Sigma (EX series) zoom lenses (in regard to the red & blue fringing) at the WIDE end, but a lot cleaner and more "REAL" looking at the long end. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 25 1.7 Panasonic G85 Natural (v2) This test is revised (from the original which didn't use Highlight Shadow compensation) and while it's a lot BETTER, I still don't really like this lens, because the color (and contrast) fall apart in non-standard, high contrast light. (When I say I "don't like" it, I'm comparing it to the other lenses I've tested, many of which are vintage lenses.) I think this could benefit from a diffusion filter, because it lacks "micro contrast"...but I will need to test it in the future. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural The final settings here work pretty good, but this lens-sensor combination still has some issues...These include maybe the strangest Highlight Shadow settings I've ever used...and it still has too much contrast. When I started this test, I was surprised, as I had heard so many people say good things about this lens, but when compared with a lot of the vintage lenses I've been testing, this thing isn't very good...so let me explain. When I started this test (at -0-0-0-0 using the Natural profile) what immediately jumped out at me were the outlines on the edges of objects, which I'm pretty sure is due to over-sharpening...yet at the same time, the image was soft and needed sharpening! This is a problem, because to remove the outlines on the edges of things, you have to REDUCE the SHARPENING...but doing that will mean the image needs even MORE sharpening during post production, so I may have to see how far I can take the sharpening in post production (using Davinci Resolve). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 12-60 3.5-5.6 Panasonic GX85 Natural The final settings here work pretty good, but this lens-sensor combination still has some issues...These include maybe the strangest Highlight Shadow settings I've ever used...and it still has too much contrast. When I started this test, I was surprised, as I had heard so many people say good things about this lens, but when compared with a lot of the vintage lenses I've been testing, this thing isn't very good...so let me explain. When I started this test (at -0-0-0-0 using the Natural profile) what immediately jumped out at me were the outlines on the edges of objects, which I'm pretty sure is due to over-sharpening...yet at the same time, the image was soft and needed sharpening! This is a problem, because to remove the outlines on the edges of things, you have to REDUCE the SHARPENING...but doing that will mean the image needs even MORE sharpening during post production, so I may have to see how far I can take the sharpening in post production (using Davinci Resolve). [UNFILTERED] Tokina 12-24 4 Panasonic G85 Natural (NOTE: Color should be reduced -1 if not uploading to YouTube...as I'm learning YouTube sucks the color, out of images. I'm planning on making LUTs that compensate for this, but this will work in the interim). Overall, I am liking the Tokina 11-16 2.8 a lot more, but this one is workable OUTDOORS if needed. INDOORS, you really need an F/2.8 + BOOST (speed booster) for it to gather enough light FOR THIS CAMERA. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 14-42 ii Panasonic GH4 Natural This latest test was in the NATURAL profile (first test was in CINELIKE D). I'm trying to get away from using CINELIKE D (when it's possible) because the colors don't look too "REAL". Also, I decided to use Highlight Shadow compensation instead of reducing the CONTRAST excessively, for a better image. This sensor produces a lot of noise and so I added a lot of NOISE REDUCTION as I usually do (for this sensor) but could not max it out because I needed to leave a little bit of definition in it's image. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-70 Panasonic GH4 Natural I think it may need a LUT, because I need to turn the color down to remove some fringing, but it's going to make the image have too much color overall. I'm going to need to experiment with this, but if you use the current SETTINGS and are making your own LUT, you might be okay (but if you're going for SOOC, these SETTINGS may not work without a LUT). Also, I had to push up the NOISE REDUCTION quite a bit, because this sensor produces a lot of noise, but the CONTRAST looks pretty good (and realistic) as a result of this, as NR tends to reduce not only the SHARPNESS but CONTRAST as well (which this lens needed). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-70 Panasonic GX85 Natural This is a decent lens because it has enough sharpness to be able to turn NOISE REDUCTION up a bit (helpful with the small sensor) and still be sharp enough to look "REAL". It's also a nice lens because the contrast isn't so intense that I have to turn it way down (for this camera). I don't like the color, but I think this lens is just not very color accurate, and I noticed this when testing on other cameras (sensors) as well. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-70 Panasonic G7 Natural This is a decent lens-sensor combo, but the propensity of this sensor to oversaturate color (in combination with a lens that's not super balanced or accurate to begin with) makes color accuracy a difficult task, which makes it tough to match other lenses/sensors to. FILTER: B+W F-PRO UV Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 Panasonic GX85 Natural I started this test using the settings from the Panasonic G85 + BOOST (Viltrox NF-M43x) and all I have had to change so far was to add 1 positive point to the CONTRAST (because the Viltrox focal reducer lowers the contrast a bit). [UNFILTERED] Vivitar Series 1 70-210 3.5 Panasonic GX85 Natural This lens is pretty amazing, because it's one of the few lens-sensor combos out there that actually looks really good at 0-0-0-0 (using the NATURAL photo style). I did do some minor adjustments, but they're not essential. This lens does have some issues with glowing purples (i.e. chromatic aberration) which can be distracting. Also, be aware that it's a really heavy lens (for its size) and I think it needs to be supported by the sort of adapter that has an integrated tripod mount on it (so it doesn't strain the lens mount on the camera). I didn't have a tripod mount on the adapter I used on my initial tests, and it wasn't very ergonomic, but then I found one on Ebay (Minolta MD mount) and it works much better! FILTER: Neewer MRC CPL Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX Panasonic G85 Natural (NOTE: Test turning OFF Highlight Shadow for HDR still photos.) (Also, these settings are for WITH the Neewer CP Circular Polarizer filter, and WITH the filter I think NOISE REDUCTION should be set to +4, but WITHOUT, I'd put the settings at +5 because there is too much SHARPNESS without the filter). I had never heard of this lens until recently when I saw it at a local camera store (for a good deal). I've tested the Sigma 17-50 2.8 EX and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART, but I didn't know this one even existed! It isn't as "good" as the 18-35 1.8 ART (in a technical sense) but WITH THE CUSTOM SETTINGS I think it's doing a good job (and that's WITH a CPL/circular polarizer attached!!) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 4 AIS Panasonic G85 Natural [Vintage lens, and the condition may vary.] This is the "push pull" type of lens, and so I was initially not too excited to test, or recommend it, but this copy didn't have any issues with zoom creep (even when I was pointing the camera upward at birds!) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 4 AIS Panasonic G7 Natural [Vintage lens, so condition may vary.] (If you want SOOC, add +1 SHARPNESS, but if you're sharpening in post, leave it at -0.) When I started this test, I wasn't sure if I liked this lens, but after getting these SETTINGS right, I'm starting to like it. What was interesting was that the copy I am testing was NO WHERE near as good as my Nikon Series E 70-210 F/4 at the default settings (-0-0-0-0). This lens has problems with too little sharpness, a LOT of chromatic aberrations (blue, red and purple glows) and inaccurate color rendition, but again, after figuring out these corrective settings, I'm liking it! [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 4 AIS Panasonic GH4 Natural [Vintage lens, and the condition may vary.] When I started this test, I wasn't sure if I liked this lens, but after getting these SETTINGS right, I'm starting to like it. What was interesting was that the copy I am testing was NO WHERE near as good as my Nikon Series E 70-210 F/4 at the default settings (-0-0-0-0). This lens has problems with too little sharpness, a LOT of chromatic aberrations (blue, red and purple glows) and inaccurate color rendition, but after figuring out these corrective settings, I'm kind of liking it! FILTER: Tiffen CP (Circular Polarizer) Nikon 18-55 Panasonic GH4 Natural NOTE: This test was using a Tiffen CP (Circular Polarizer). Also note that this filter is prone to flare (so use lens shade when possible). FILTER: CPL (Neewer) Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX Panasonic GX85 Natural I'm really enjoying using this lens on a SHIFT adapter (on the Panasonic GX85. The shift adapter doesn't work on the G85 (because of the obstruction of the popup flash over the lens mount) so that's something to keep in mind. I had never heard of this lens until recently when I saw it at a local camera store (for a good deal). I've tested the Sigma 17-50 2.8 EX and the Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART, but I didn't know this one even existed! It isn't as "good" as the 18-35 1.8 ART (in a technical sense) but WITH THE CUSTOM SETTINGS I think it's doing a good job (and that's WITH a CPL/circular polarizer attached!!) FILTER NOTE: This test was with a Neewer CPL (Circular Polarizer) and while I think the filter is pretty good, Neewer has so many versions of their CPL that it's hard to say which one it is in writing. For this reason, I'm going to try to stick to filter brands that make it easy to identify exactly which filter it is. [UNFILTERED] AUTO Mamiya-Sekor 55 1.4 Panasonic GX85 Natural [UNFILTERED] AUTO Mamiya-Sekor 55 1.4 Panasonic G7 Natural It's amazing that this lens-sensor combination is almost useable at -0-0-0-0 (default settings) but I worked with the settings further because it has a strange problem of rendering a lot of colorless black in the mid to shadow areas (I know, it seems like it would just be the shadows). I'm not completely happy with these settings, and I don't know if this lens is something I'd recommend. (It also has a sharp aperture coupler that has almost cut my hand a few times). [UNFILTERED] AUTO Mamiya-Sekor 55 1.4 Panasonic GH4 Natural This lens started out looking pretty good, because it's a lower contrast lens that still has good sharpness. It had a bit too much CONTRAST, but after correction the details are rendering really well. I did reduce the SHARPNESS a bit, and now it looks more "REAL", less "digital" though it's as technically sharp as before correction. One of the big problems of this lens-sensor combination was that it revealed a lot of noise (which is typical with the GH4) but the lens had enough sharpness to start with that I could turn NR to +5 (pretty high) and it creates an image that is MUCH easier to work with in post (not the normal Swiss cheese you normally get from the GH4). [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX Panasonic G7 Natural [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-50 2.8 EX Panasonic GH4 Natural (For HDR, Turn Highlight Shadow OFF) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 G Panasonic GX85 Natural Strange, super sharp lens, but it also has a strong bias toward making the shadow regions stay dark (my final, corrected settings even include a -0+4 Highlight Shadow correction, something I have never done before. I will need to create a LUT to finish these settings, and I'm not looking forward to it, due to the complexity its issues)! [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 G Panasonic G7 Natural While I still need to make a LUT (for final adjustments) these SETTINGS make this lens-sensor combination (including the Viltrox NF-M43x speed booster) produce very useable results. It could use a little sharpening and color added in post... [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 D Panasonic G7 Natural Wow...the final results on this lens-sensor (and speed booster) combo are great! All of the properties of contrast, sharpness, noise and color all look REALLY good (even though they're not perfectly realistic). Since the color from this camera is almost always more saturated than my other cameras (currently testing GH4, G85, GX85) I knew it would be a bit on the vivid side, and turning it down any more can leave too much work for the LUT to do acurately (in post-production). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 AIS Panasonic GX85 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Tokina 11-16 2.8 ii Panasonic G7 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 AIS Panasonic G7 Natural This lens-sensor combo is a little bit contrasty when used in the middle apertures, but because this speed booster looks pretty good with this lens wide open (and at 1/2 click down) I chose to err on the side of too much contrast, so it can be more accurate when used wide open. Also, adding a filter (or not using a lens hood) can also reduce contrast... [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 D Panasonic GH4 Natural I was going to add +1 more color, and if you want a little more "character" and a more film grain look to the noise, try that, but I am stopping here, and it needs a LUT to finalize it (add color and remove a bit of contrast). I tested this lens-sensor combo WITHOUT THE BOOST previously, and those settings were in CINELIKE D. I'm trying the NATURAL profile out this time because it works both for stills and video...Also, I just tested the same vintage 50 1.4 D, and that lens has much better bokeh than this one. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.4 D Panasonic G85 Natural Wow! Except for adding the -2+2 "Highlight Shadow" compensation, this is looking pretty good at -0-0-0-0 in the Natural color profile! [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.4 D Panasonic G7 Natural This is my 2nd test of this lens, the 1st was on the GH4, and it's interesting that I've been able to get a really accurate image without using a focal reducer, but when I tested WITH one, the image wasn't so good. So, should I even continue on to test this lens WITH the +BOOST next? Oh, the only thing that isn't getting a super good letter grade for being "REAL" is the NOISE; this lens-sensor combo has a bit too much digital noise (although it looks pretty close to film grain, which is okay). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.4 D Panasonic GH4 Natural The corrected (lens-sensor specific) settings get this lens pretty close to a perfect "REAL" rating (realistic/accurate contrast, sharpness and color). The only thing that's not real about this lens is the chromatic abberration (glow) at (the max) 1.4 aperture. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.4 D Panasonic GX85 Natural Wow! Except for adding the -2+2 "Highlight Shadow" compensation, this is looking pretty good at -0-0-0-0 in the Natural color profile! [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 G Panasonic GH4 Natural I think this could benefit from some kind of diffusion filter (test to come later) but for now it looks acceptable. The "REAL" ratings are going to be pretty low, but I think it's the best I can get it for now... [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 G Panasonic G7 [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 G Panasonic GX85 [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 G Panasonic G85 Natural Strange, super sharp lens, but it also has a strong bias toward making the shadow regions stay dark (my final, corrected settings even include a -0+4 Highlight Shadow correction, something I have never done before. I will need to create a LUT to finish these settings, and I'm not looking forward to it, due to the complexity its issues)! [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 50 1.8 M42 Panasonic GX85 Need to buy an M42 adapter. [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 50 1.8 M42 Panasonic G7 Need to buy an M42 adapter. [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 50 1.8 M42 Panasonic GH4 Natural I NEED TO TEST MORE (and I really need to be using a Pixco speed booster on Micro Four Thirds, because it's only an F/1.8) I was hoping this lens would share the settings of the Vivitar 135 2.8 M42 (that was in the camera case with it when I bought) but it doesn't (I may go with using Highlight Shadow adjustments because the CONTRAST is still too great, and the COLOR is not accurate). [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 135 2.8 M42 Panasonic GH4 Natural REALLY needs a LUT to fine tune the image further. I think these SETTINGS are a good starting point, but it's going to need more contrast and less color to look "REAL" and the only clean way to do that is by adding a LUT (Coming Soon!) [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 135 2.8 M42 Panasonic G7 Starting to test [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 135 2.8 M42 Panasonic GX85 Starting to test [UNFILTERED] Pentax Super-Takumar 50 1.4 ii Panasonic G7 Natural I am amazed at how differently this sensor (camera) handles this lens (compared to the GH4). As I mentioned in other reviews of this lens, it is inconsistent in terms of how it renders light. It's really interesting how much I was able to push the COLOR with these settings, and while you could tone it down a bit, I did it to show what the lens is capable of. It's a very different type of color than newer lenses usually produce, but some tend to like the more vintage feel. If you want to start with less color, go +1 (not +2) but if you upload to YouTube, you may still need that extra color (as of 2022 anyway). [UNFILTERED] Pentax Super-Takumar 50 1.4 ii Panasonic GH4 Natural [Needs a "REAL" LUT to finish it.] This was a VERY difficult lens to come up with the set of recommended settings for. My goal is simply to make it easy to get the best original capture as possible (at all aperture settings) and that was difficult because of how inconsistent this lens is at different apertures (in terms of how it renders light, etc.) [UNFILTERED] Pentax Super-Takumar 50 1.4 ii Panasonic GX85 Natural [Note: This also is using an M42 screw mount to Nikon F adapter, in addition to the Nikon F to M43 SHIFT adapter noted.] I will have to admit this lens has a lot of character but it, like so many of these vintage lenses, is inconsistent in terms of how it renders light. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 2.8 D Panasonic GX85 Natural This used to be a top-of-the-line telephoto zoom (it was the first AF 80-200 2.8 Nikon produced) and the build quality is excellent. However, it's heavy and slow to operate. It's slow because of the push-pull zoom, and because of the focus (there is a focus limiting feature that helps with that). Optically, it's a great lens, and though each lens-sensor combo usually needs some work to look its best (this one did) I think these settings are rendering a pretty nice image, one that is "REAL" in almost every respect. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 2.8 D Panasonic G7 Natural This lens is too sharp for this sensor, as with the SHARPNESS turned all of the way down (to -5) plus the NOISE REDUCTION turned all of the way UP (to +5, which I do to reduce sharpness even more when needed) the image still has a lot of aliasing. This sensor also renders more compression-related artifacts when a lens is too sharp (which adding NR can help with) but since we've maxed out those 2 settings, we're left with a lens-sensor combo that is bound to be a problem in certain lighting situations. This used to be a top-of-the-line telephoto zoom (it was the first AF 80-200 2.8 Nikon produced) and the build quality is excellent. However, the "focus breathing" is not good for video (image changes size as you focus, etc.) and lenses such as the Promaster 70-300 I've been using, are MUCH better for video (even though the aperture is not constant, but with this breathing, you can't zoom while shooting ANYWAY!) it's also heavy and slow to operate. It's slow because of the push-pull zoom, and because of the focus (there is a focus limiting feature that helps with that). Optically, it's a great lens, and though each lens-sensor combo usually needs some work to look its best. NOTE: With a non-optical adapter, I set the contrast to -2 (instead of -1). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 2.8 D Panasonic GH4 Natural This used to be a top-of-the-line telephoto zoom (it was the first AF 80-200 2.8 Nikon produced) and the build quality is excellent. However, it's not super good for video because the "focus breathing" is so bad (the image changes size as you focus, etc.). Lower cost 70-300 lenses such as the Promaster I've been using, are MUCH better for video, as some are even parfocal. (One thing to note about those, is that even though they don't have a constant aperture, you don't normally zoom while shooting.) This lens is also heavy and slow to operate. It's slow because of the push-pull zoom, and because of the focus (there is a focus limiting feature that helps with that). Optically, it's a great lens, and though each lens-sensor combo usually needs some work to look its best. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 80-200 2.8 D Panasonic G85 Natural This used to be a top-of-the-line telephoto zoom (it was the first AF 80-200 2.8 Nikon produced) and the build quality is excellent. However, it's heavy and slow to operate. It's slow because of the push-pull zoom, and because of the focus (there is a focus limiting feature that helps with that). Optically, it's a great lens, and though each lens-sensor combo usually needs some work to look its best (this one did) I think these settings are rendering a pretty nice image, one that is "REAL" in almost every respect. [UNFILTERED] Canon 50 1.8 ii Panasonic GX85 Natural It works pretty well to just set the "Highlight Shadow" to -2, +2 and call it good, but I added NOISE REDUCTION to keep the sharpness (and contrast) looking more "REAL". As I mentioned in the other reviews of this lens, it has a pretty decent close focus distance, and while the manual focusing ring is very thin (probably too narrow for focus gears to be added) it's easy for me to use by hand. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 75-300 4.5-5.6 Panasonic GH4 Natural This lens is AMAZING...it delivers so much contrast and color that I had to tone those down (to get a "REAL" image) and the SHARPNESS is almost a perfect match for this sensor (not to sharp, etc.) though I had to use some NOISE REDUCTION to keep things looking real. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 75-300 4.5-5.6 Panasonic G7 Natural This lens is AMAZING...it delivers so much contrast and color that I had to tone those down (to get a "REAL" image) and the SHARPNESS is almost a perfect match for this sensor (not to sharp, etc.) though I had to use some NOISE REDUCTION to keep things looking real. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 75-300 4.5-5.6 Panasonic GH4 CineLike D This lens is AMAZING...it delivers so much contrast and color that I had to tone those down (to get a "REAL" image) and the SHARPNESS is almost a perfect match for this sensor (not to sharp, etc.) though I had to use some NOISE REDUCTION to keep things looking real. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 75-300 4.5-5.6 Panasonic GX85 Natural This lens is AMAZING...it delivers so much contrast and color that I had to tone those down (to get a "REAL" image) and the SHARPNESS is almost a perfect match for this sensor (not to sharp, etc.) though I had to use some NOISE REDUCTION to keep things looking real. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 75-300 4.5-5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural This lens is AMAZING...it delivers so much contrast and color that I had to tone those down (to get a "REAL" image) and the SHARPNESS is almost a perfect match for this sensor (not to sharp, etc.) though I had to use some NOISE REDUCTION to keep things looking real. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 D Panasonic G7 Natural [NEW] [UNFILTERED] Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 D Panasonic GX85 Natural [NEW] [UNFILTERED] Pentax Super-Takumar 50 1.4 ii Panasonic G85 Natural These settings are not as "REAL" as I would normally prefer, as the color is more saturated than normal, but I did this to capture the unique color this lens can render. It's also a bit light in the shadows, but this forces you to underexpose a little, which protects the highlights and just seems to bring out the magical properties of this lens. As I've said before about this lens, it has a lot of "character" and it can be inconsistent in terms of how it renders light (from aperture to aperture). FILTER: Promaster HGX UV Canon 70-200 2.8 Panasonic G85 Natural In the future I may try adding a Tiffen GlimmerGlass or Black Pro Mist filter to attempt to control the dynamic range, etc. [UNFILTERED] Minolta MD 50 1.7 Panasonic G7 Natural I had to resort to using the "Highlight Shadow" corrections (-2 Highlights, +2 Shadows) to make it work, because this is a very CONTRASTY lens, and it renders a very unique image (that is not "REAL" and therefore will not match my other lenses easily) before correction. This lens-sensor combination is rendering a lot more GREEN than it should, and therefore receives negative "REAL Ratings" because of it. [UNFILTERED] Pentax Bellows-Takumar 100 4.0 SMC Panasonic GX85 Natural [Note: This also is using an M42 screw mount to Nikon F adapter, in addition to the Nikon F to M43 SHIFT adapter noted.] I don't (normally) like to review lenses that are rare (because I want you all to be able to try them out) but since I found this for a good deal online at shopgoodwill.com, I thought I'd better test it. While it was difficult to figure out, I think it is looking pretty good with these custom settings. (The only thing that is off a bit is the color, and it's not bad, but is just not "REAL" and therefore won't match other lenses that get a better rating for that attribute, etc.) [UNFILTERED] Canon FD 50 1.4 Panasonic G85 Natural I feel like these settings are working okay for capturing what this lens is capable of, but as I mentioned in the GX85 review of this lens, the lens has optical imperfections (that give it an interesting character) but it's so inconsistent from one aperture value to the next (the contrast, sharpness and color intensity change quite a bit) that makes it difficult to come up with a single settings recommendation (as I can with most optics). [UNFILTERED] Canon 50 1.8 ii Panasonic G7 Natural Known as the "plastic fantastic" this lens is a decent optic, for a not much money. It has a good close focus distance, and though the focusing ring is very thin (probably too narrow for focus gears to be added) it's somewhat easy for me to use when focusing by hand. I don't think the color rendition of this lens is very accurate. [UNFILTERED] Canon 50 1.8 ii Panasonic GH4 CineLike D After getting these settings figured out, the lens is rendering a pretty realistic image, yet I will need a LUT to increase the contrast a bit. This lens has a pretty decent close focus distance. The manual focusing ring is very thin, and while it's easy for me to use by hand, it may be too narrow for focus gears to be added. [UNFILTERED] Canon FDn 50 1.4 Panasonic GX85 Natural These CUSTOM SETTINGS will need a LUT to finalize the image (it needs more CONTRAST and COLOR saturation) but I feel like they are a good starting point. In the future, I may try to get this closer to SOOC, but I think these settings match the lens to get the most dynamic range out of this sensor (my goal). However, I think these settings still preserve and showcase the flaws so many people love about this lens (a diffused but sharp and dreamy rendering). Initially, I was disappointed in this lens because of how inconsistent the COLOR and SHARPNESS are when changing aperture values, and I had a difficult time figuring out a single set of settings that would work for it. [UNFILTERED] Canon FD 50 1.4 Panasonic G7 Natural This was my second test of this lens (the first was on the GH4) and while I was not impressed with this on the GH4, on the G7 I am starting to see why some people like this lens (and I suspect they're using it on sensors with a lot more sharpness, such as Sony full-frame sensors). It is still an inconsistent and difficult lens to work with though (as the optical properties change so much when varying the aperture). [UNFILTERED] Canon FD 50 1.4 Panasonic GH4 Natural I've heard a lot about this lens, but after testing (this copy) I'm not too impressed. It looks "dreamy" (wide open of course) but even stopped down, it doesn't render a realistic-looking image, something that is central to my goal of Realism. FILTER: Promaster HGX UV Canon 70-200 2.8 Panasonic G7 CineLike D It looks pretty good, but there is still a little bit too much contrast, which makes it difficult to stay within the dynamic range capabilities of this camera. In the future I'd like to try a Tiffen GlimmerGlass or Tiffen Black ProMist to see if it will help. [UNFILTERED] Kalimar 500 8 MIRROR [M42] Panasonic G85 Natural This lens doesn't seem to have much hope. It just can't render a sharp image, and this is the second copy I've tested (first one had haze, but this one is clean). FILTER: Promaster HGX UV Canon 70-200 2.8 Panasonic GH4 Natural Use -0 COLOR for sports photography shoot... FILTER: Promaster HGX UV Canon 70-200 2.8 Panasonic GX85 Natural I don't like these results so far. When using this lens on a Canon DSLR, it always produced excellent results, but something about this lens-sensor combination (maybe the METABONES speedbooster) is making this look pretty bad (not realistic looking in a lot of ways). The SHARPNESS is good, but the CONTRAST and COLOR are strange. The CONTRAST makes it difficult to achieve realistic looking dynamic range, and the COLOR either looks fake when turned up, or drab when turned down. In the future I may try adding a Tiffen GlimmerGlass or Black Pro Mist filter to attempt to control the dynamic range, etc. FILTER: Promaster HGX UV Canon 70-200 2.8 Panasonic GH4 CineLike D I'm not really liking the results of these settings yet, but what's funny is I tried these settings (as of 2022-05-25) on the Panasonic G7 and they LOOK GREAT. On the GH4 there's still a little bit too much contrast, and it's difficult to maintain highlight detail in sunlit conditions. [UNFILTERED] Canon 50 1.8 ii Panasonic G85 Natural It works pretty well to just set the "Highlight Shadow" to -2, +2 and call it good, but I added NOISE REDUCTION to keep the sharpness (and contrast) looking more "REAL". As I mentioned in the other reviews of this lens, it has a pretty decent close focus distance, and while the manual focusing ring is very thin (probably too narrow for focus gears to be added) it's easy for me to use by hand. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-35 1.8 Panasonic G7 CineLike D For some reason, this lens-sensor combination, while not a "PERFECT MATCH" works really well together. Normally, this has been a REALLY difficult lens to work with (on the GX85, G85 and GH4) but this camera just has the right properties (whatever they may be) that create a very accurate image with smooth gradations through the 11 steps of the Zone System. I don't like this lens for field use (because it's too big and heavy to carry around on my multi-camera rigs) but I think it can be a great lens for INDOOR, STATIC use (for low light reasons as well)! This test was done with a straight (non-optical) adapter, but I hope to test this with a speedbooster/focal reducer in the future. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-35 1.8 Panasonic GH4 Natural +3 SHADOWS (Highlight Shadow) Sigma 17-50 2.8 [UNFILTERED] Sigma 17-50 2.8 Panasonic G85 NATURAL The Panasonic G85 and GX85 tests almost always come out identical, but I tested this lens on the both just to make sure (again) and yep, they both work well with these settings (for this lens). Remember that it's always "lens-sensor specific" but because the G85 and GX85 keep coming out the same (test after test) I am going to start interpolating the results to either one (I'll explain more later). [UNFILTERED] Sigma 17-50 2.8 Panasonic GX85 Natural WARNING: This test was using a Viltrox EF-M2ii focal reducer/speedbooster which (in conjunction with this old lens and the noisy, high-powered AF pulling too much power) resulted in damage to my Panasonic GX85 camera. The camera started glitching and freezing up during the test, then electronics of the camera stopped working within a couple of months. NOTES: I got this lens because having the constant f/2.8 aperture was appealing, but this lens has a lot of problems. This lens in particular had a lot of chromatic abberations (which showed up as red, blue and purple fringes) and the overall CONTRAST and COLOR rendering are really weird (the contrast is not smooth in the transitions from shadow to highlight, and with this sensor the COLOR is not only inaccurate but incomplete). This is also the second pro Sigma lens that needed a +3 SHADOWS correction (using Highlight Shadow) because the lens is too contrasty (which is a bad thing with this sensor). All I can say is that I struggled to make the lens render a REAL-looking image, which is my goal. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 17-50 2.8 Panasonic G7 CineLike D This lens-sensor combination was difficult to work with because the contrast and sharpness of the lens is so strong (and the sharpness isn't very even in terms of smooth gradation from highlight to shadow noticeable in detailed areas). So, I had to be quite dramatic with the settings I chose, and resorted to using a +3 SHADOW (under Highlight Shadow) which I don't normally like doing. Overall, I don't really like the result because my goal is almost always to render a real-looking image, and I think this lens-sensor combination falls short in this area. P.S. The Canon mount Viltrox EF-M2ii froze the camera several times, and I like it even less than I did before (but I highly recommend the Nikon mount version of the Viltrox focal reducer for this camera (the Viltrox NF-M43x). [UNFILTERED] Sigma 17-50 2.8 Panasonic GH4 CineLike D INDOOR test using Metabones ULTRA .64x speed booster. [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-35 1.8 Panasonic GH4 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-35 1.8 Panasonic G7 CineLike D ...Still testing (not happy with settings yet). [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-35 1.8 Panasonic GX85 Natural While these settings create A GOOD STARTING POINT, they do need a LUT (on my website) to perfect the shots. What I did with the settings was I added +3 SHADOWS (by creating a custom curve within the "Highlight Shadow" menu) and this is very important, in addition to the adjustments to the "Photo Style" settings (adjustments to CONTRAST, SHARPNESS, NOISE and COLOR). [UNFILTERED] Sigma 18-35 1.8 Panasonic G85 Natural I wanted the Sigma 18-35 1.8 for quite a long time, but after testing it (this time with a speed booster, instead using the shift adapter). Even with the .71x speed booster/focal reducer, it isn't wide enough for a lot of situations, and because it doesn't need the 1.8 max. aperture OUTDOORS, I'm not sure I recommend this. It's also too big and heavy for my DUAL-CAMERA RIGS. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-55 Panasonic G7 CineLike D Test looks decent (so far) but I need more sample footage to get a better feel for this lens-sensor combo. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-55 Panasonic GX85 Natural NOTE: For use with ATEM Mini, I'm adjusting the settings slightly: CONTRAST: -5 SHARPNESS: -5 NOISE: +3 COLOR: -0 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW: OFF [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 45-150 4-5.6 Panasonic GH4 Natural Initial tests good. Starting to test filters... [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 25 1.7 Panasonic GH4 NO LUT CineLike D Test (v2) looks good (almost good enough with no LUT, but could use a bit more contrast for FINAL). [UNFILTERED] Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 Panasonic GH4 Natural Initial test done, but need more footage... [UNFILTERED] Minolta AF 50 1.7 ii Panasonic GH4 [NEW] [UNFILTERED] Minolta AF 50 1.7 Panasonic GH4 Natural [TEST STARTED, but not complete] [UNFILTERED] Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 LD Di Panasonic G7 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 14-42 ii Panasonic GH4 CineLike D Test is done (but may need to use Highlight Shadow compensation instead of reducing CONTRAST, for a better image). LUT is needed either way. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-70 3.5-4.5 Panasonic GX85 [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Tamron 75-300 4-5.6 LD Panasonic G7 Natural [NEW] [UNFILTERED] Tamron 75-300 4-5.6 LD Panasonic GX85 Natural Looks good so far... [UNFILTERED] Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 D Panasonic GH4 CineLike D Initial tests done. Need a LUT. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 28-80 3.3-5.6 G (Silver) Panasonic G7 [UNFILTERED] Nikon 28-80 3.3-5.6 G (Silver) Panasonic GX85 INDOOR test started...OUTDOOR needed. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 55-200 VR Panasonic GH4 CineLike D Test looks GOOD! May need LUT... [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 135 2.8 M42 Panasonic G85 Starting to test [UNFILTERED] Vivitar 50 1.8 M42 Panasonic G85 Need to buy an M42 adapter. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 25 1.7 Panasonic GH4 CineLike D Works good with LUT (but want to figure out settings that DO NOT require a LUT)... [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 D Panasonic GX85 Natural Started test with macro helicoid adapter (no optic in adapter). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 D Panasonic G7 Natural [NEW] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 70-300 4-5.6 D ED Panasonic G7 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 70-210 4 Series E Panasonic GH4 Natural While these settings may be a good starting point if I add a LUT, they are not good SOOC (not enough CONTRAST, SHARPNESS, COLOR). I used to shoot this way a lot (because it's pretty easy to color grade) but now that I'm shooting for SOOC, these settings aren't good enough anymore (though they do help to avoid overexposure, etc.) [UNFILTERED] Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 Panasonic GX85 Natural [Needs a LUT to finalize, if I add this Highlight Shadow compensation. The highlights were a little bit too bright without the B+W F-PRO UV filter, so I'm trying to compensate with Shadow Highlight, to -1-0. This test used the settings from the Panasonic G85 + BOOST (Viltrox NF-M43x) and all I had to change was to add 1 positive point to the CONTRAST (because the Viltrox focal reducer lowers the contrast a bit). [UNFILTERED] Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 Panasonic G7 Natural [NEW] [UNFILTERED] Tokina 11-16 2.8 ii Panasonic G7 Natural POST SHARPENING (Davinci Resolve): (Needs sharpening, but settings not tested yet) This test has been a real struggle, because this lens isn't that sharp when used with this sensor (Panasonic G7). The reason is that it's from the time period when the Panasonic sensors still had anti-aliasing filters over them, and that makes them less sharp than those without them. One of the problems it causes is that I usually turn the SHARPNESS down, both to reduce the contrast to help smooth the transition from shadows to highlights, and to remove the look of digital aliasing (the pixels seen in angled lines). I also turn UP the NOISE REDUCTION to reduce the sharpness more yet doing this with this lens-sensor combination doesn't create a super sharp image. So, in the end what I had to do is to err on the side of having less sharpness VIA in-camera settings, and then recommending settings for sharpening in Davinci Resolve (in post-production). [UNFILTERED] Minolta AF 50 1.7 Panasonic G7 Natural Tests shot. Needs LUT [UNFILTERED] Minolta AF 50 1.7 ii Panasonic G7 Natural Tests shot. Needs LUT [UNFILTERED] Tamron 75-300 4-5.6 LD Panasonic GH4 CineLike D Test done, and the tones are good, color is a little inaccurate... [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 45-150 4-5.6 Panasonic GX85 Natural These settings do not work SOOC, and it will need a LUT to finalize the image. The CONTRAST and SHARPNESS are looking pretty realistic (with these custom settings) but a LUT is needed to add a bit of the COLOR (saturation) back to the image. I think this (using these settings) is a much better starting point than the default (-0-0-0-0) settings as the CONTRAST was so intense it was not easy to get a realistic image, and the COLOR was too saturated and not very accurate. These custom settings should make it much easier to capture a more realistic image (and it should be really easy to color grade in post). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 45-150 4-5.6 Panasonic G7 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 LD Di Panasonic GX85 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 LD Di Panasonic G85 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Tamron 70-300 4-5.6 LD Di Panasonic GH4 CineLike D Test done, but needs a LUT. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 14-42 ii Panasonic GX85 Natural UPDATE 2: I just finished the updated settings! I think it still could benefit from doing some tests with some kind of diffusion filter (like the Tiffen GG or BPM) but I have to note that this is my last test with this camera because the shutter speed dial completely stopped working (when I turn it, it only goes HIGHER). The problems with this camera started after using a Viltrox EFM2ii (Canon mount focal reducer/speedbooster) during which the screen glitched, then the camera froze. Since then, it has gotten worse, and now I can't use it at all. (I love the Nikon mount version of the Viltrox focal reducer, the non-electronic version, but now I'm going to warn people about using the Canon mount version (because it has electrical contacts, and tries to communicate, and pull power from, the camera). One thing that is really interesting about these settings, is that the SOOC JPEG (in still photo modes) looks really good (and, in fact a bit more accurate than the video footage, because the video footage is still a LITTLE bit over-sharpened). UPDATE: I recently talked with another photographer about this lens (as well as talking with others in the past) and most people don't like it much. I've been working to figure out CUSTOM SETTINGS that help each lens look its best (specific to each camera sensor) and haven't been able to get this combo to look realistic (it looks too "digital"). I've started testing some lenses using Tiffen Black Pro Mist 1/8 filters and may try that here. What the filter does is smooth the transition of light from the highlights to the shadows, keeping the light projected onto the sensor within the dynamic range of the camera. This also causes SHARPNESS to decrease, but I have it turned all of the way down right now, so I can then turn it up on the custom settings, and it should make the image look less digital. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 14-42 ii Panasonic G7 Natural FOR ATEM MINI [UNFILTERED] Olympus 50 1.8 OM Panasonic GX85 [NEED ADAPTER] [UNFILTERED] Olympus 50 1.8 OM Panasonic G7 [NEED ADAPTER] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-55 VR Panasonic GH4 CineLike D WOW! So far, -0-0-0-0 is working GREAT! Take a little color out with LUT. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 55-200 VR Panasonic GX85 Natural While I think the CUSTOM settings are a better starting point than the DEFAULT (-0-0-0-0) settings, the custom settings aren't good SOOC (Straight Out of Camera) because they'll need more CONTRAST and COLOR added (this is the reason for the low REAL Ratings). The reason I think the CUSTOM settings are still good to start with though is that it captures more dynamic range and smoother gradients when there's less contrast in the file...and in this case I would prefer it because it looks too fake at default settings (plus adding a little CONTRAST and COLOR in post isn't very difficult). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 55-200 VR Panasonic G7 Natural LOOKS GOOD but need more sample footage to create and test the LUT. [UNFILTERED] Olympus 50 1.8 OM Panasonic G85 [NEED ADAPTER] [UNFILTERED] Tokina 11-16 2.8 ii Panasonic GX85 Natural Adjusted settings are much better than -0-0-0-0. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 AIS Panasonic GH4 Natural It is totally amazing how, when you get the settings right, it can almost transform a lens from something that is just okay, to being able to create an image that is really excellent. These settings make this lens awesome (with this specific camera). [UNFILTERED] Tokina 11-16 2.8 ii Panasonic GH4 CineLike D This lens-sensor combo is too contrasty (and may need a filter). [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 D Panasonic G85 Natural Nice...This lens looks a LOT better (with this camera) on the Viltrox NF-M43x focal reducer (even though it "reduces" the optical quality, ha, ha!) [UNFILTERED] Nikon 70-300 4-5.6 ED Panasonic GX85 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 70-300 4-5.6 D ED Panasonic GH4 CineLike D This even looks good without the LUT... [UNFILTERED] Tamron SP 70-210 3.5 [NEED ADAPTER] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 18-55 Panasonic GH4 Natural NOTE: In CineLike D, THIS LENS IS A PERFECT MATCH at -0-0-0-0. I am testing now in NATURAL because I need to be able to test still photo modes... [UNFILTERED] Sigma 28-90 MACRO Panasonic G85 Natural So far, this lens is not able to render a "REAL" looking image, because it has too much contrast, the color is weird, and when compensating for these things, the image becomes too soft...and is STILL too contrasty. In the future I may test this again with some sort of a filter (maybe a Tiffen GlimmerGlass?) but for now, this lens is going to look a bit off, but it's interesting if you don't mind that. [UNFILTERED] Sakar 70-300 5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural This lens was a surprisingly good performer (for such an old lens) and showed little to NO color fringing or chromatic abberation (something present in most 75-300 lenses). I added +2 contrast to compensate for the lack of contrast you normally see at the long (telephoto) end of this type of zoom, and added +1 sharpness to improve the lens at the same focal length (around 300mm). I really like the idea of a constant aperture 75-300 zoom lens. It really makes things easier for video production compared to having the standard F4-5.6 variable aperture (which means you need to adjust exposure when you zoom). [UNFILTERED] Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural It is really strange how these settings are similar to the settings for the native mount Panasonic 45-150. [UNFILTERED] Nikon 70-300 4-5.6 ED Panasonic G85 Natural I'm not liking these settings yet (so will keep testing). I think it needs more SHARPNESS (to preserve the "REAL" feel, even though that can blow out the highlights) and it may need more contrast (at the expense of the same)...the low contrast is actually exposing the noise in the shadow areas (due to the detail being visible) so it's still not looking "REAL". [UNFILTERED] Nikon 55-200 VR Panasonic G85 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 55-200 Panasonic G85 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Panasonic 45-150 4-5.6 Panasonic G85 Natural [TESTING...] [UNFILTERED] Nikon 50 1.8 AIS Panasonic GX85 Started INDOOR test. Need OUTDOOR. TIFFEN UV Nikon 18-55 ii Panasonic GX85 Natural [TESTING...] ALWAYS CHECK THE "USED" MARKET!

Difficult lens to get to render a scene accurately (my goal) but with these CUSTOM SETTINGS it looks decent enough. You'll have to increase the SHARPNESS in post-production though, and I will try to get those settings figured out as soon as I have time. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic G85 ADAPTER: None (Native Mount) 7artisans 35 1.4 ii Natural "PHOTO STYLE" -1 CONTRAST -3 SHARPNESS +5 NOISE -0 COLOR -3+3 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST C IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS D IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE D IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR C IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: May 5, 2025 at 9:41:57 PM Difficult lens to get to render a scene accurately (my goal) but with these CUSTOM SETTINGS it looks decent enough. You'll have to increase the SHARPNESS in post-production though, and I will try to get those settings figured out as soon as I have time. My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

OVERVIEW: If you want quality, but don't want to spend a lot of money on cameras for budget filmmaking ($300-$600/each) these are the cameras I recommend. These don't have good AF (autofocus) so you'll have to get used to manually focusing, but they can adapt almost ANY vintage lens (ever made) and they have good IBIS, which means you'll get stabilized footage even with manual focus lenses. Oh, because 2 of these are Micro Four Thirds cameras, there's a number of tricks you'll be able to do, that you can't with full frame (the GX85 can even take a TILT/SHIFT adapter #ad ...something very few cameras can do). ABOVE: The Panasonic G85 #ad and GX85 #ad are great budget filmmaking cameras because they have great IBIS, and can adapt almost any vintage lens available. The FZ1000 is also a good deal because it has a built-in Leica telephoto lens! WHY BUY A SINGLE CAMERA? The first thing I say when people ask which camera they should buy is "Don't buy a single camera; buy 2". The #1 thing I teach about budget filmmaking is " Always shoot with (at least) 2 cameras ". The reason is, I'd rather shoot with 2 cameras and have 2 angles to choose from (when it comes to editing). The question is "How can I possibly afford 2 cameras, when I'm struggling to find a deal on just one?" You might be excited to find out, you can probably buy all 3 of these cameras, for the same price you'd pay for JUST ONE of those most YouTubers recommend! MY CAMERAS: CAMERA #1: Panasonic G85 CAMERA #2: Panasonic GX85 CAMERA #3: Panasonic FZ1000 CAMERA 1 PANASONIC G85 ($300-$500 used) If I could only buy one camera (for budget filmmaking) and didn't have much money, this might be the one I'd buy. The only reason it might not be my favorite camera EVER, is that I like using a TILT/SHIFT adapter #ad and you need the Panasonic GX85 for that (the adapter can't move up and down on the G85). WHY I LIKE THE PANASONIC G85: The low price ($300-$500 used ) It has excellent IBIS (In-Body Image Stabilization) It produces a good image (with most lenses ) It shoots in 4K (with no record limit) It has weather sealing (on the body, but not every lens) It matches the GX85 perfectly (same color science, sensor) It has a flip-out screen (but I actually like a flip-up at times) It has a microphone input (but I use an external audio recorder ) WHAT'S NOT TO LIKE? The AF (autofocus) is not good (I manual focus with vintage lenses anyway) You can't use TILT/SHIFT adapters on it (it hits the popup flash ledge) No headphone output (I monitor with an external audio recorder ) *I always shoot with 2 cameras, and my 2nd favorite budget filmmaking camera is the GX85. ABOVE: My "Minimal Kit" consists of a Panasonic G85 + a GoPro (HERO4 Silver or newer). This captures two shots in one take (makes things much easier during editing). ABOVE: The Panasonic G85 is the first camera I would buy, but because the price is so low, I'd actually add a GX85 as well to use the TILT/SHIFT adapter I love #ad . CAMERA 2 PANASONIC GX85 ($300-$500 used) As I mentioned, this is probably my favorite camera for budget filmmaking (but I always shoot with 2, so I'm using a G85 with it). The main reason I like this camera, is that I can turn almost any (Nikon-mount) lens into a TILT/SHIFT lens with a special (~$125 US) adapter #ad . I had always wanted a TILT/SHIFT lens, and I actually rented one at times, but they have been SO expensive, I never thought I'd own one, until now. Now, I shoot all of my WIDE shots with this camera and this TILT/SHIFT adapter #ad and I just can't imagine not shooting without one (it adds so much realism to each shot). WHY I LIKE THE PANASONIC GX85: It's also very affordable ($300-$500 used) It also has excellent IBIS (even better than the G85) It also produces a good image (almost identical to G85) It shoots in 4K (and has no record limit, same as G85) It matches G85* perfectly (same color science, sensor) It allows the use of TILT/SHIFT adapters (G85 does NOT) WHAT'S NOT TO LIKE? It doesn't have a microphone input (but you only need it on 1 camera) The battery life isn't very good (I use a dummy battery + power bank) *I always shoot with 2 cameras, and my 2nd favorite budget filmmaking camera is the GX85. ABOVE: My favorite thing about the Lumix GX85 is that you can use a TILT/SHIFT adapter (the rangefinder style design means there is no pop-up flash to block the up/down travel). This turns this camera into a really good tool (I don't like shooting buildings without it!) ABOVE: Here is an example of using a TILT/SHIFT adapter #ad with the Panasonic GX85 (I have tried a few brands, and so far the one I like is this one #ad on Ebay). CAMERA 3 PANASONIC FZ1000 ($300-$500 used) I have a dedicated post about the Panasonic FZ1000 , which I recommend reviewing if you're thinking about this camera, but I'll try to give the shorter, condensed version here. Overall, the FZ1000 is a really good tool, with a (built-in) 25-400mm equivalent lens (which you can control using the Image App) and a pretty good 4K image (in sufficient light, i.e. OUTDOORS) it's a super-convenient #3 camera to be able to pull out of your bag and set up quickly. It needs a camera cage to be sufficiently stable (even though it has OIS/Optical Image Stabilization in the lens) and it's not good in low light (INDOORS) but other than that, it's a camera that I really like having for adding a 3rd, close-up (or wide angle) shot, without a lot of fuss. It does have a 30-minute record limit, so it will be the camera that you have to "babysit" for longer events, but I've done it, and it's not too much of a problem (especially since the other 2 cameras, the G85 and GX85 will just keep on going after you press record). WHY I LIKE THE PANASONIC FZ1000: It's also a really good deal ($300-$600 used) It has a great (built-in) telephoto lens (25-400mm 2.8-4.0)* Focus AND ZOOM can be controlled with the app It shoots in 4K (and looks good with custom settings ) It takes the same battery as the G85 #ad (and G7) WHAT'S NOT TO LIKE? It's not good in low light (I use only OUTDOORS) It needs ND OUTDOORS (I use a good ND8 filter #ad not a variable ND) It has a 30-minute record limit (you'll need to hit record again) *If you were to purchase an equivalent telephoto lens, it would be more than this camera! ABOVE: The Panasonic FZ1000 is a great tool for the price. You can check out my blog post about it here: Is the Panasonic FZ1000 Good for Budget Filmmaking? CONCLUSION: So, if you want to buy a 2 or 3 camera system FOR LESS THAN $1000, I highly recommend these three cameras. There are certainly limitations to using the smaller Micro Four Thirds (G85 and GX85) sensors, and even more limitations when using the 1-inch sensor on the FZ1000, but I think they can do the job in most situations, and having 2 or 3 camera angles is a great way to create a professional look...way better than having a single camera angle, and using "jump cuts" throughout your production. Anyway hope this helps, and make sure to use my custom settings for CAMERAS and AUDIO to get "REAL" looking footage from of your cameras, and "GOOD" audio from your mics.

OVERVIEW: I used to think the story about lens fungus was a lie crafted by desperate camera salesman in an attempt to sell the latest (and most expensive) lenses. To me it all made sense: They don't want me saving money by buying vintage lenses BECAUSE THEIR COMMISSION WOULD BE LESS! Not only so, if they could convince me that putting (infected) used lenses into a camera bag with new lenses could potentially ruin the new ones, it might make me scared enough to buy an entirely new system (including a new camera!) Now, I am not against buying new cameras (which I do from time to time) but only when the "effect" outweighs the cost (i.e. it will make me money). So, I remained skeptical about this story of lens fungus for quite some time. Then something happened to my trusty, old vintage Nikon 80-200 f/4 AIS. Vintage lenses (especially old 80-200 optics) are becoming difficult to find without fungus. So, when I find one the last thing I want to do is introduce fungus myself! MY NIKON 80-200 THAT ALMOST DIED My Nikon 80-200 f/4 AIS, when used on a Panasonic Micro Four Thirds body with a .71x focal reducer, was an excellent low light tool, that didn't cost me anywhere near what the f/2.8 version would have. I used it for indoor photography (meetings and conferences) quite a bit, and I was happy with the quality and results. But, when I cleaned the Nikon 80-200 with a LensPen (following the instructions to BREATHE on the lens) immediately put the lens cap on and put it away (for what would become 3 months of storage) something bad happened. After three months of non-use (due to having switched to a Panasonic FZ1000 for most of my indoor telephoto work) I pulled the old "beer can" lens out of storage and was shocked to find the front element "frosted over" with lens fungus. I HAD USED LENSPENS SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE... At first, I had no idea why the fungus would have grown so quickly, when I had used a LensPen on it SEVERAL times before and had no problem. You may be saying the same "I've used a LensPen for YEARS, have ALWAYS breathed on my lenses AND HAVE NEVER HAD a problem with lens fungus!" I had too, and had in fact I had learned about breathing on lenses (to clean them) by watching camera salesman do it at a local (long since closed) camera store. I wondered "Why did my lens suffer lens fungus when many other people have not experienced the same issue?" When I was a kid, I remember seeing a camera salesperson breathe on a lens, and then use a lens cloth to clean it. I thought it was weird...but even the LensPen manual says to do it...but DON'T DO IT! IS LENS FUNGUS IS REAL? My question as to whether lens fungus is real has been answered, but not in the way I would have wanted. I almost lost one of my favorite vintage lenses. Because of the risk of the fungus spreading, I sprayed quite a bit of 70% rubbing alcohol on the face of the lens (not recommended)...followed by doing the same with the lens cap and then letting them sit until completely dry. Then I did it again, and this time used a clean lens cloth to try to wipe the rest of it off. The good news is, the rubbing alcohol removed the frosty layer of fungus on the front element. I felt sure I had damaged the multicoatings on the front of the lens in the process though...but I figured it was worth it to sterilize the lens (and keep it from spreading). The questions that remained were: "Will the fungus come back?" and "Should I continue to use a LensPen?" Here's a little inspiration to motivate you to keep fungus from growing on your lenses (i.e. cleaning them is no fun...sometimes there's no going back). WHERE DID THE FUNGUS COME FROM? As I thought about what to do, I remembered reading about how our mouths can be pretty dirty and contain a lot of bacteria and/or pathogens. I formed a theory that what may have contributed to the growth of fungus on the 80-200 lens was a dirty mouth (because it seems that a little of it may come out each time you breathe on a lens.) Also, if you follow up breathing on a lens by using a LensPen that had been used several times before (and put back into the wet and dark environment UNDER THE LENSPEN CAP) I figure that you may be introducing both old and new bacteria onto your lens each time you use that LensPen. DO I STILL USE LENS PENS? My answer is: sometimes, but I don't breathe on my lenses any more as the LensPen instructions say. I do my cleaning with Zeiss Wipes  #ad and sometimes I do finish it off with a CLEAN LensPen, (that I've never breathed on). CONCLUSION: In the end, the difference in my tests may have been that I put the lens immediately back into storage (after using a LensPen) while it was still moist, instead of going outside and shooting (perhaps in bright sunlight) soon after. Going outside may not only help a lens to fully dry out, but also would also expose it to UV light (which can help deactivate pathogens). I'm very thankful I was able to learn my lesson on a budget vintage lens, and not on a really expensive lens (not that I have any of those). If I would have lost the Nikon AIS 80-200 f/4 lens I would have only been out $60 or so, but I wasn't looking forward to going through the whole process of finding a rare copy WITHOUT lens fungus (which is becoming more and more difficult to do). If, however, you experience this loss with a more professional and more expensive lens (especially one you depend on) it could make or break your career. Therefore, don't do what I did with the 80-200 (breathe on it, use a LensPen and put it directly into storage for a period of a few months.)

OVERVIEW: First of all, I think each sensor size has strong areas and weak areas...and some areas where they just can't compete. Yet, for some reason, in the world of media production, filmmaking and "content creation" this battle between camera formats (sensor sizes) has often involved heated debates. The horrendous insults and peer pressure of this battle have pressured people to take "sides" (and most have found themselves firmly aligned with one format or the other). To remedy this, I'm considering using both formats. If you've seen my lens-sensor settings tests of budget CAMERAS , you'll know I've been using M43. However, the lenses I use are usually old, full-frame Nikon F-mount lenses...so using those on full-frame won't be an issue (unless I need autofocus). Other than the cost, I'm kind of excited about this approach, as I think it can not only make people argue less (because we can experience the benefits of both formats) but it will also help us be better prepared to handle any shooting situation we may face. There have been so many arguments about what the best sensor size is, but why not just use BOTH? As far as lenses go, I use a lot of full-frame glass (adapted) on M43, but each has advantages and disadvantages. WHY NOT USE BOTH? In my opinion, if you're just starting out (or are just on a limited budget and/or just want to travel lighter) Micro Four Thirds makes a lot of sense...especially if you want to " always shoot with (at least) 2 cameras " like I prefer to. The price of the cameras and lenses is much cheaper than full-frame, so you can build a budget 2 or 3 camera kit  for MUCH less. Yet, there are some things smaller sensors just cannot do. They can't blur the background as easily (when you really need to) and in low-light, Micro Four Thirds sensors NEED a 1.4 lens. The good thing is micro 4/3 cameras are often more compact and lightweight, making them ideal for on-the-go shooting. They also provide a crop factor that can be advantageous for telephoto work. Conversely, full-frame cameras excel in low-light situations and offer a wider field of view, which can be crucial for certain types of storytelling. Comparison of Formats WHY MICRO 4/3? WHY FULL-FRAME? A DUAL CAMERA SETUP? LENS DIFFERENCES... A GOOD LEARNING EXPERIENCE? WHY MICRO 4/3? THE LENSES ARE SMALLER AND... Micro 4/3 cameras, such as the Panasonic GX85 or G85, are particularly appealing for beginners and those on a budget. They offer a range of affordable lenses and accessories, making it easier to build a versatile kit without breaking the bank. Additionally, the crop factor of micro 4/3 cameras can be beneficial for sports and wildlife photography, where a longer effective focal length is often required. For example, using a budget 70-300 lens (from the 1990s) on a micro 4/3 camera provides an equivalent focal length of 600mm, which is perfect for capturing distant subjects. That is one of the main reasons I like using Micro 4/3 (because the optics of a 70-300, for example, are a LOT smaller and lighter than an equivalent crop on full-frame). A Micro Four Thirds camera and a 70-300 can provide decent framing of almost any shot, even from a distance! Keep in mind that for TELE shots especially, it's important to have a camera with good IBIS, which many of the popular M43 cameras is do (the GX85, G85, G9, GH5, etc.). Having said all of this, I really do like using a Micro Four Thirds body with a wide angle lens on a TILT/SHIFT adapter  (see that post)! NOTE: Filmmakers should be aware of the optical differences between formats. While a 300mm lens on a micro 4/3 camera provides a 600mm equivalent, the optical characteristics differ significantly. The depth of field and compression effects can vary, impacting the overall look of the footage. Understanding these nuances is crucial for achieving the desired aesthetic in your projects. M43 Positives: You can adapt almost any lens, ever (for real) Lenses are usually less expensive (except for Leica) Lenses are usually smaller and lighter (more portable) A telephoto lens is effectively longer (good for sports, wildlife, etc.) IBIS is better on Micro Four Thirds (especially on Panasonic) TILT/SHIFT Adapters are available (no other format can do this as well) Good M43 camera bodies are cheap (G85, GX85, G9, GH5) M43 Negatives: 1. Worse in low light 2. Wide Angle shoots look more distant (due to shorter focal length) 3. Some older bodies have bad AF (pre-phase-detect Panasonic) WHY FULL-FRAME? THE LENSES ARE BIGGER AND... Full-frame cameras aren't really affordable for me (yet) so they're not really a viable option, and full-frame  lenses are not only more expensive, but also bigger and heavier most of the time. So, what are the advantages of full-frame? Full-frame sensors do typically deliver superior image quality (especially in low-light) and the ability to blur the background more (i.e. shallow depth of field) is appealing to many people. (I think the blurred background trend has been leveling out, thanks to the video about bokeh addiction and the follow-up historical tutorial ) because people are realizing most real, professional movies don't always blur the background. it's really still photographers who still believe it's a good idea. The truth is, you can actually get a blurred background using smaller sensor cameras...and not just with an F/1.4 (or a TELE lens). It also depends on the subject distance, etc. FULL-FRAME IS BETTER (FOR THE WIDE SHOT) Are there any unique strengths of full-frame sensors then? I think there are, but it's in something not many people are talking about: less-distortive WIDE shots. The reason is, full-frame cameras don't require as short of a focal length to capture a wide angle image. Therefore, a wide angle can be closer to that magical, non-distortive focal length of 42.5mm (where there's the least distortion from optics). If you go wider than 42.5mm, you'll introduce wide-angle distortion characteristics (and there are a variety of them) which range from being almost non-noticeable to looking like a full-on fisheye lens. The benefit of full-frame is that you can use a moderate wide angle lens (such as a 35) and capture enough of the scene...and it still look pretty realistic (and accurate). If you're creating a WIDE shots on a Super 35 (1.5x crop) sensor however, it's not going to look as real. (Super 35 is perfect for TIGHT or or medium shots, but not so much for the WIDE shots.) The worst format for WIDE shots would be Micro Four Thirds (2x sensor crop) then, because you will need the shortest focal length to project the image onto a smaller (2x crop) sensor. NOTE: I REALLY like using a 50mm prime on a Super 35 (1.5x crop) sensor, as it is probably the #1 shot that most of us recognize from "REAL" Hollywood films. I also like it because good vintage 50mm lenses are easy to find on the used market, and are a great low light tool. Full-Frame Positives: Superior image quality (especially in low-light conditions) It's easier to blur the background (if you need to) Less distortive WIDE shots (provides a more natural perspective) Full-Frame Negatives: Camera bodies are more expensive (they are going down though) Most lenses are bigger and heavier (than M43) Lenses are often more expensive (than M43) Telephoto lenses are REALLY huge (and SUPER expensive) A DUAL-CAMERA SETUP? As I delve deeper into the advantages of both formats, I recommend that filmmakers consider a dual-camera setup. For instance, pairing a micro 4/3 camera with a full-frame camera can provide the best of both worlds. One camera can be mounted on top of a rig, and the other on the bottom. This configuration gives you greater flexibility as it prepares you for a lot more shooting scenarios (and it also makes people think you're weird, but we need to stop caring about that anyway, right?) One advantage of smaller, lighter cameras, is you can mount multiple cameras ON ONE CAGE! Also, keep in mind that it really helps if the cameras have good IBIS (especially for the top camera/cameras). Two Cameras On One Cage: Helps you get two shots (WIDE & TIGHT) using just one tripod! I usually put the camera with the WIDE shot on the bottom, and the TIGHT shot on the top If you're trying to get your TELE (telephoto) shots, full-frame is not the best option. TELE lenses are much heavier, larger and more expensive on full frame. I learned this first hand when I had this old Nikon 80-200 2.8.  CONCLUSION: Which ever way you go (either all full-frame, all M43...or some of both) I'm thinking it might be good is to embrace the learning experience that comes with using both formats. By experimenting with micro 4/3 and full-frame cameras, we can actual experience with the strengths and weaknesses of each format. Hey, maybe by stepping outside of our comfort zones and exploring different sensor sizes, we can learn why people are so loyal to the other? Each format really does offer unique advantages and when used together, they can really enhance your content creation capabilities. This blog post was taken from THIS PODCAST  (so check it out for more info).