REAL REVIEWS Long-term reviews of budget photo & video gear. KIT PLAN RECOMMENDATION: ADVANCED KIT Quantaray AF 70-300 4-5.6 LD This image is 100% REAL, and no A.I. (or Photoshop compositing) were used to make it, and I know because I took it myself. Quality? LIGHT USE OK Yes MEDIUM USE OK ? HEAVY USE OK ? Portable? POCKET No CAMERA BAG Yes BACKPACK Yes Affordable? AVERAGE NEW PRICE NA *Indicates SALE price. Amazon AFFILIATE LINK AVERAGE USED PRICE <$ 40 **Indicates BUY NOW price. Ebay AFFILIATE LINK Common? ON AMAZON Yes ON EBAY Yes Easy To Use? SKILL LEVEL DIFFICULT These reviews are just my opinion and are focused on my Q.P.A.C.E. packing method, so they're not comprehensive. I wrote these mostly to help me remember what items worked for my KIT PLANS (and which didn't). If I said anything negative I apologize, as these products still may work well for you in your situation, but they were not Q.P.A.C.E (Quality, Portable, Affordable, Common, Easy-to-Use) enough for my budget filmmaking KIT PLANS .

Test at "VLOG" proximity with a FURRY windscreen on the Saramonic SR-VM4 microphone at +20 MIC. BOOST, MIC. LOWCUT is OFF, plugged directly into a Zoom F1 audio recorder with REC. GAIN at HIGH-. One thing to keep in mind is the level is a bit lower with the FURRY windscreen. "VLOG" Proximity [22 inches / 55.5 cm] Zoom F1 (NO AUX. Amplifier) Saramonic SR-VM4 + Foam (Stock) WAV 24-bit/96kHz REC. SETTINGS OFF REC. LOWCUT OFF REC. LIMITER "HI-" REC. LEVEL AUX. SETTINGS AUX. BASS AUX. HIGH-LOW AUX. OUTPUT MIC. SETTINGS OFF MIC. LOWCUT N/A MIC. HIGH PASS +20 MIC. BOOST (RFI) RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE LESS THAN 1.1ft / 0.34m BETWEEN 1.1ft / 0.34m -2.2ft / 0.67m BETWEEN 2.2ft / 0.67m -3.3ft / 1m BETWEEN 3.3ft / 1m -4.4ft / 1.34m Published: May 3, 2022 at 7:15:59 PM REAL RATINGS After testing each microphone, I like to know if it sounds realistic (accurate lows/bass, mids, highs/treble) in combination with the recorder and/or AUX. amplifier, to see if it needs EQ. LOWS/BASS DO THE "LOWS" SOUND REAL? MIDS DO THE "MIDS" SOUND REAL? HIGHS/TREBLE DO THE "HIGHS" SOUND REAL? NOTES: Test at "VLOG" proximity with a FURRY windscreen on the Saramonic SR-VM4 microphone at +20 MIC. BOOST, MIC. LOWCUT is OFF, plugged directly into a Zoom F1 audio recorder with REC. GAIN at HIGH-. One thing to keep in mind is the level is a bit lower with the FURRY windscreen. Remember to always monitor your audio while you're recording (using accurate headphones) because good settings can't fix bad audio. Also, these settings will not establish the exact level you'll need for every scene, but the goal is to provide a good starting point that will become clean, after adjusting in post. Additionally, these "custom settings" are used to make the Microphone-Specific EQ files work (as they won't work as intended if any of they aren't used). The EQ files were created to correct any imperfections of the microphone and/or wind protection (FOAM and/or FURRY) and were made in Audacity (the free audio editor) to make them as affordable & universal as possible.

INDOOR test shot, need OUTDOOR. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Nikon 18-55 ADAPTER: Viltrox NF-M43x (.71x) Panasonic G85 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -3 SHARPNESS -3 NOISE +1 SATURATION -1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW Standard iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE 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). NOTES: INDOOR test shot, need OUTDOOR. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

RFI WARNING: The Zoom H1 (v1) has noticeable RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) when used at less than 5 FEET from an iPhone 13 Pro max. This is a major limitation, especially for LAV use, because if the recorder is in the pocket of a groom, and they have an iPhone somewhere in their coat, this is going to cause RFI. This newer, and smaller mic from Takstar is outputting a higher signal level than the older SGC-598. What is really interesting about this microphone at this "CLOSE" proximity is, while it didn't need the MIC. LOWCUT for reducing BACKGROUND noise, it quite amazingly CORRECTED the excessive bass response issue a close proximity almost always creates (which I normally remove with the EQ). "CLOSE" Proximity [ 3.5 inches / 8.89 cm] Zoom H1 (NO AUX. Amplifier) Takstar SGC-600 + Foam (Stock) WAV 24-bit/96kHz REC. SETTINGS Off REC. LOWCUT Off REC. LIMITER 37 REC. LEVEL AUX. SETTINGS AUX. BASS AUX. HIGH-LOW AUX. OUTPUT MIC. SETTINGS On MIC. LOWCUT N/A MIC. HIGH PASS +0 MIC. BOOST (RFI) RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE LESS THAN 1.1ft / 0.34m BETWEEN 1.1ft / 0.34m -2.2ft / 0.67m BETWEEN 2.2ft / 0.67m -3.3ft / 1m BETWEEN 3.3ft / 1m -4.4ft / 1.34m Published: April 16, 2022 at 5:02:55 PM REAL RATINGS After testing each microphone, I like to know if it sounds realistic (accurate lows/bass, mids, highs/treble) in combination with the recorder and/or AUX. amplifier, to see if it needs EQ. LOWS/BASS DO THE "LOWS" SOUND REAL? MIDS DO THE "MIDS" SOUND REAL? HIGHS/TREBLE DO THE "HIGHS" SOUND REAL? NOTES: RFI WARNING: The Zoom H1 (v1) has noticeable RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) when used at less than 5 FEET from an iPhone 13 Pro max. This is a major limitation, especially for LAV use, because if the recorder is in the pocket of a groom, and they have an iPhone somewhere in their coat, this is going to cause RFI. This newer, and smaller mic from Takstar is outputting a higher signal level than the older SGC-598. What is really interesting about this microphone at this "CLOSE" proximity is, while it didn't need the MIC. LOWCUT for reducing BACKGROUND noise, it quite amazingly CORRECTED the excessive bass response issue a close proximity almost always creates (which I normally remove with the EQ). Remember to always monitor your audio while you're recording (using accurate headphones) because good settings can't fix bad audio. Also, these settings will not establish the exact level you'll need for every scene, but the goal is to provide a good starting point that will become clean, after adjusting in post. Additionally, these "custom settings" are used to make the Microphone-Specific EQ files work (as they won't work as intended if any of they aren't used). The EQ files were created to correct any imperfections of the microphone and/or wind protection (FOAM and/or FURRY) and were made in Audacity (the free audio editor) to make them as affordable & universal as possible.

TESTING. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Sigma 18-35 1.8 ADAPTER: Viltrox NF-M43x (.71x) Panasonic G7 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -4 SHARPNESS -5 NOISE +3 SATURATION +2 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -0+3 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE CUSTOM Sigma 18-35 1.8 VILTROX Panasonic G7 NATURAL -4-5+3+2 HS-0+3 CUSTOM Sigma 18-35 1.8 VILTROX Panasonic G7 NATURAL -4-5+3+2 HS-0+3 CLICK FOR ADDITIONAL SHOTS 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 B IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS B IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE A IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR B 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). NOTES: TESTING. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

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. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: UV (Promaster HGX) Canon 70-200 2.8 ADAPTER: Metabones XL (.64x) Panasonic GH4 CineLike D "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -0 SHARPNESS -5 NOISE +5 SATURATION +1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -2, +2 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE 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). NOTES: 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. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

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. Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Sigma 17-50 2.8 ADAPTER: Viltrox NF-M43x (.71x) Panasonic GX85 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -4 SHARPNESS -5 NOISE +3 SATURATION -1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -0+3 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE DEFAULT Sigma 17-50 2.8 VILTROX Panasonic GX85 NATURAL -0-0-0-0 HS -0-0 CUSTOM Sigma 17-50 2.8 VILTROX Panasonic GX85 NATURAL -4-5+3-1 HS -0+3 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 D IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS C IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE F IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR D 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). NOTES: 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. The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

[TESTING...] Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None Tokina 11-16 2.8 ii ADAPTER: Viltrox NF-M43x (.71x) Panasonic G7 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -5 SHARPNESS -2 NOISE +5 SATURATION -1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 16-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE LENS @MID-ZOOM LENS @FULL TELE 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). NOTES: [TESTING...] The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.

REAL ANSWERS Answers from REAL people with REAL experience (not from A.I.) What cameras and lenses are good for wildlife photos & video? Most wildlife shots are taken outdoors, so you can actually benefit from using smaller sensor cameras (and smaller lenses) to get the same cropping of larger sensor cameras (this works as longs as there is enough light). < Back to ANSWERS Benefits of Smaller Sensor Cameras for Wildlife Photography Wildlife photography often requires mobility and versatility, and using smaller sensor cameras can offer several advantages: Lightweight Equipment: Smaller sensors and lenses are typically lighter, making them easier to carry during long outdoor shoots. Crop Factor Advantage: Smaller sensors have a crop factor that allows for greater effective focal lengths, which can help in capturing distant wildlife without needing excessively long lenses. Depth of Field Control: Smaller sensors can provide a greater depth of field, which can be beneficial for keeping both the subject and its surroundings in focus. Considerations for Using Smaller Sensor Cameras While there are advantages, there are also some considerations to keep in mind: Low Light Performance: Smaller sensors may struggle in low light conditions, so it's important to ensure there is adequate lighting. Image Quality: Larger sensors generally provide better image quality, especially at higher ISO settings. Dynamic Range: Smaller sensors may have a limited dynamic range compared to larger sensors, affecting the ability to capture details in highlights and shadows. Ultimately, your choice of camera should align with your specific needs and shooting conditions, as both small and large sensor cameras have their unique advantages and disadvantages in wildlife photography.

REAL REVIEWS Long-term reviews of budget photo & video gear. KIT PLAN RECOMMENDATION: [NOT IN KIT] Samsung U28E590D This image is 100% REAL, and no A.I. (or Photoshop compositing) were used to make it, and I know because I took it myself. Quality? LIGHT USE OK Yes MEDIUM USE OK Yes HEAVY USE OK ? Portable? POCKET No CAMERA BAG No BACKPACK No Affordable? AVERAGE NEW PRICE NA *Indicates SALE price. Amazon AFFILIATE LINK AVERAGE USED PRICE $76 **Indicates BUY NOW price. Ebay AFFILIATE LINK Common? ON AMAZON No ON EBAY Yes Easy To Use? SKILL LEVEL MEDIUM OVERVIEW: I started testing large, low-budget 4K monitors (including both computer monitors and TVs) and this was the first test. This monitor has been super popular for a number of years (especially for gaming) and it was the only budget 27-inch, 4K monitor available for some time. MAIN POINTS: PART 1: IS IT PORTABLE? PART 2: IS IT AFFORDABLE? PART 3: IS IT COMMON? PART 4: HOW’S THE QUALITY? PART 5: IS IT EASY TO USE? PART 6: NEEDS ADD-ONS? PART 7: WHERE DO I BUY? PART 1: IS IT PORTABLE? It's not portable as far as carrying in a backpack or something, but it's easy enough to carry out to a car, and buckle it up with a seat belt (to protect it)...but it's not a field monitor. PART 2: IS IT AFFORDABLE? Yes, and it's still going down in price (on the used market). PART 3: IS IT COMMON? In around 2017, this used to be the main affordable 4K gaming screen that was available, so my guess is there are still a lot of them on the used market...but I couldn't find it on Amazon recently. PART 4: HOW’S THE QUALITY? So, the screen can produce a pretty good image (especially with my custom settings, which I may publish later) but it has a few issues of important note. The first, and worst, is the viewing angle issue. The visible brightness/darkness changes drastically when you move to a different viewing position. I know, you're supposed to stay in one spot, which does work in the case of a workstation/static desk use. However, I sometimes like to use the monitor to swivel and view from a comfortable chair or couch away from my office desk...but this image changes so much with a viewing angle change, that it's really only good for use for a desktop workstation. Related to that is the lack of rotation or swivel, and that makes the previous use case not really a case at all (there are no adjustments for swivel or any movement). Then, the last problem is that most reviews say the color is not very accurate. I should have just listened to those reviews and stopped there...but it was a really good deal, and I did get it to look pretty good with the custom settings I used. PART 5: IS IT EASY TO USE? It's pretty easy to just plug in and power on, but I had to work with the settings to get the picture to be more accurate (I may publish the settings later). In terms of flexibility of use, it doesn't have any movement (no swivel or rotation on the stand) so it's really only good when sitting on the desktop of a computer workstation. PART 6: NEEDS ADD-ONS? It needs an HDMI cable, but that's not a problem. PART 7: WHERE DO I BUY? I bought it from a local seller through OfferUp. RECOMMENDATION: I don't recommend it, mostly because of the viewing angle issues. It can produce a pretty good image, but the viewing angle makes the image change so much if you change the viewing position that it will be nearly impossible to use it for color-critical work, which is what I need. These reviews are just my opinion and are focused on my Q.P.A.C.E. packing method, so they're not comprehensive. I wrote these mostly to help me remember what items worked for my KIT PLANS (and which didn't). If I said anything negative I apologize, as these products still may work well for you in your situation, but they were not Q.P.A.C.E (Quality, Portable, Affordable, Common, Easy-to-Use) enough for my budget filmmaking KIT PLANS .

First off, there are a number of lenses with a similar external physical design to this lens, and so far this one is the best (both optically and in other ways). I tested one of the similar versions, a Quantaray with with almost identical lens markings, but printed in green. The Quantaray version did not have the MACRO function, nor did it have the APO designation, though there is more than one version of the Quantaray out there (and one with an LDO designation, which might be the same as the Sigma APO designation, but I need to test that). Second, even though I have not tested (at the time of this writing) all of the other versions, so far this is the best one (of this vintage). So, I am referring to just this physical, external lens design, not earlier or later versions of the lens. The main reason I like this version, is the optics are better (on my test with the G85) and because it has the MACRO function. One thing I was really impressed by was how the CUSTOM SETTINGS were able to render an image that has enough SHARPNESS to accurately pull focus manually (yes, the back screen on this camera is pretty accurate too) so that's good! Overall, these CUSTOM SETTINGS bring the image (video or JPEG stills) to a good starting point, but it will need a LUT to finish it, and can't be used SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera). Any links below are affiliate links. FILTER: None LENS: Sigma APO Macro 70-300 4-5.6 ADAPTER: Minolta AF (Sony A) to M43 Panasonic G85 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" LENS-SENSOR LUT CONTRAST -1 SHARPNESS +3 NOISE -0 SATURATION -1 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW -2+3 iDYNAMIC OFF LUMINANCE LEVEL 0-255 Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT ? RADIUS ? THRESHOLD ? Blur / Sharpen DAVINCI RESOLVE POST-PRODUCTION LENS @FULL WIDE ? LENS @MID-ZOOM ? LENS @FULL TELE ? 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). NOTES: First off, there are a number of lenses with a similar external physical design to this lens, and so far this one is the best (both optically and in other ways). I tested one of the similar versions, a Quantaray with with almost identical lens markings, but printed in green. The Quantaray version did not have the MACRO function, nor did it have the APO designation, though there is more than one version of the Quantaray out there (and one with an LDO designation, which might be the same as the Sigma APO designation, but I need to test that). Second, even though I have not tested (at the time of this writing) all of the other versions, so far this is the best one (of this vintage). So, I am referring to just this physical, external lens design, not earlier or later versions of the lens. The main reason I like this version, is the optics are better (on my test with the G85) and because it has the MACRO function. One thing I was really impressed by was how the CUSTOM SETTINGS were able to render an image that has enough SHARPNESS to accurately pull focus manually (yes, the back screen on this camera is pretty accurate too) so that's good! Overall, these CUSTOM SETTINGS bring the image (video or JPEG stills) to a good starting point, but it will need a LUT to finish it, and can't be used SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera). The goal of our camera settings is to improve what we call the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color to create an image that looks less digital and more organic (more like film, etc). Therefore, the first step is to apply the custom settings while shooting, and the second is to add a lens-sensor LUT, to finalize the image.