Andrew Akada
Forum Replies Created
-
To Peter & Matt,
So, for instance, when the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 ZF2 is listed as having,
“…support for all-important operations such as the automatic exposure for shutter priority, aperture priority and program modes…”
Does this mean that the passive will not work on it? The spec details go on to state that “…the CPU also supports manual exposure settings, including those for camera casings that are not AI-compatible…”
I just wanted to clarify…
https://www.adorama.com/ZI5014PTZF2.html
-
As much as I’d love to dive into products like that, I don’t think I’d have the budget for that. Still working the day job 🙂
-
Matt,
Thanks for weighing in! I guess I’m just a little flustered by the variety and variability of the choices.
On another M43 forum I had someone mention that I wouldn’t even be able to use regular M43-designed lenses on the passive BMCC without aperture rings – going so far as to suggest that they can’t take M43 lenses period (I think he meant to say that it couldn’t take active lenses but I could be mistaken).
And just to clarify between the signals I’m getting from Pete and from you, there are lenses that can function both as manual and AF that are compatible with a passive M43 body (like the BMCC) but this will be explicitly stated within the design specs, correct? Meaning that if it can be manually focused, I can opt to do so rather than relying on the electrical contacts?
You mentioned ZF and R mounts, specifically.
For instance, I can go along with something like this–
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002ZQE4XQ/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=A17MC6HOH9AVE6
–and, theoretically, it should work just fine.
PS: I know it seems pretty prosumer of me to be shopping thru Amazon but as far as pricing goes (via Adorama) – is $725 a decent price for something like a Zeiss. I know it’s quality glass and I’m seriously considering pulling the trigger on it.
-
Thanks Pete! As always, you’ve ridden to my rescue!
So, if I understand correctly, even if I only intended to use the lens manually, any MFT glass that even has the option to be used with electrical contacts in an active way is out of the question for usage on the passive 2.5K MFT?
Is this the case even for lenses (M43 or otherwise) that have the option to be used in either AF or manual modes?
And what about purchases for ready-made M43 glass?
(or)
I’m just so used to seeing things getting snatched up and I’m really a target-of-opportunity buyer when it comes to these kinds of things so I just want to make sure my tempered approach is correct and my patience isn’t for naught.
I also have a couple of old Soligor lenses (150 & 200mm) plus a 50mm Nikkor fixed for an old FE series SLR. I’ve been looking around online and from what I can tell – that camera is compatible with an F Mount. Would these be adaptable for the passive M43 or am I just chasing my tail on this one?
-
@ Peter:
Appreciate the input! I feel like I’m making a more informed purchase already! As far as the pre-order goes, I still have time to cancel so I’ll talk it over with the rep I arranged it with @ the shop later this week when I have some time off of work.
Thanks again, Peter! You’ve been bearing with my questions for some time now and I can assure you that you’re definitely enabling my inquisitive side!
As far as my level of experience goes, if I had the passion to stick to the learning curve, would I be ‘biting off more than I could chew’ if I went 4K right out of the starting gate?
I’m quite familiar with DSLR filmmaking and I think I’m ready to graduate to something more dedicated like the BMCC. But I still keep feeling like I won’t have the know-how to keep up with the workflow and that might actually be more of a hindrance for me. Figure cutting my teeth on something a little simpler might actually do me good. Or am I just being too wussy about this?
-
@Nikolas Baurle
I don’t have my own solid collection of lenses at the moment so I’m sort of starting “tabula rasa” here.
I have a couple of old Soligors that my mom used during her time as a photographer in the early ’70s but short of that, I’m in-the-market (which is probably the reason I was so open to the MFT in the first place).
Honestly, at this rate, if BMD keeps churning out products like this every year – I might be better off just ponying up for both the passive MFT and the PCC and call it even.
As long as the accessible 4K technology doesn’t go anywhere – I think my anxieties can be put to rest 🙂
PS: Great movie. If I’m having a down day, that song always cheers me right up!
-
@ Bill Bruner:
My ultimate ambition is to aim for a theatrical release but as far as budget and resources (camera notwithstanding) I’m probably not ready for that yet.
I made my first short film last year with a rag-tag cast and crew of about 20 folks and this year I’ve been working mostly as a producer. But my hope is that by mid-to-late Summer I can have a camera in my hands and continue work on a couple more projects slated for Winter.
That said, distribution will probably lean more towards an online demographic but the plan is to start aiming for competitions and festivals in a year or so.
As per your advice, what kind of advantages/disadvantages could I plan to expect when using the PCC?
Image quality aside, what it be sturdy or durable enough to handle more extreme conditions? Would I be able to modify/accessorize it as extensively compared to the full BMCC rig?
The light weight and simplicity almost seem too good to be true. But as long as versatility of lenses carries over then I can see your point.
In the words of the great John McClane, “Thanks for the advice!”
-
My ultimate ambition is to aim for a theatrical release but as far as budget and resources (camera notwithstanding) I’m probably not ready for that yet.
I made my first short film last year with a rag-tag cast and crew of about 20 folks and this year I’ve been working mostly as a producer. But my hope is that by mid-to-late Summer I can have a camera in my hands and continue work on a couple more projects slated for Winter.
That said, distribution will probably lean more towards an online demographic but the plan is to start aiming for competitions and festivals in a year or so.
As per your advice, what kind of advantages/disadvantages could I plan to expect when using the PCC?
Image quality aside, what it be sturdy or durable enough to handle more extreme conditions? Would I be able to modify/accessorize it as extensively compared to the full BMCC rig?
The light weight and simplicity almost seem too good to be true. But as long as versatility of lenses carries over then I can see your point.
In the words of the great John McClane, “Thanks for the advice!”
-
So it looks like we’ve hit another snag.
I spoke again with my editor just now and in order to export a straight CMX3600 EDL we need this (https://xmil.biz/EDL-X/EDL-X.shtml).
I did a little more scrounging and found that apparently the EDL import/export was an early issue with FCP X but was later fixed via these add-ons (see “Myth No. 6” in link: https://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/fcp-x-busting-the-myths).
That said, is there still any way to work around shelling out for the former XMIL software linked above?
The latter link mentions that DaVinci Resolve will “roundtrip” with FCPX directly. What does this mean?
-
Thanks for all the great advice! I’ll keep you posted if there are any further anomalies but I think we’ll be in the clear after this!