GH5 Effect of high end FF glass?

[filmguy123]

Been trying the GH5 with Speedbooster on Milvus glass. Initial (very limited) impressions seem to be that FF speedboosted Milvus glass renders a noticeable cleaner image than native M43 glass. And I don't mean bad M43 glass. My native glass is the full voigtlander lens kit as well as Pana Leica lenses (leica 12 1.4, leica 42,5 1.2, etc.).

I need to run some more tests, but in your experience, does running a smaller sensor camera such as GH5 with very high end glass noticeably bridge the gap between higher end cameras? I am wondering how much of the perceived difference in larger sensor cameras has to do with the fact that they are also often running very good, larger, FF glass.

 

[jonpais]

No question the Milvus lenses are made to a very high standard indeed. May I ask, did you do direct comparisons between equivalent focal lengths, taking into account the speed booster? When shooting with a speedbooster, you’re getting a super 35 look, so perhaps that is what you’re observing? What is meant by cleaner? Sharper? Fewer aberrations? Less vignetting? I did one comparison only between the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART (another very high quality lens), and my Leica 42.5, and much preferred the look of the Nocticron. Of, course, they’re not exact equivalents, far from it! And what looks better is going to be subjective. I’ve seen lots of poor looking films shot on full frame and excellent ones with crop, and vice versa! FWIW, most films are not shot on full frame, but super 35, AFAIK. For me personally, lugging around full frame lenses is a chore, but I’m sixty years old already. Anyhow, unlike camera bodies, glass is a good investment; and buying full frame lenses ensures that you won’t need to trade in your crop sensor lenses when changing systems. Are there any videos online you could share a link to showing precisely the cleaner full frame look you are referring to?

 

[filmguy123]

This was a very quick test around home. After Christmas I will run more tests in detail. So, unfortunately, I can't be more specific in my personal answer.

I was wondering, perhaps, if one of the "crop sensor" looks comes from people using lower end glass when working with more budget end cameras. My first impression was that the Milvus lens on the GH5 looked pretty nice.

 

[sbrenner]

One of the benefits of the speedbooster is a more detailed image compared to the same lens used without it.
I’m not sure if that’s what you meant by a cleaner image though.

 

[Thomas Smet]

maybe what you are seeing is the lack of extra electronic done in the Panasonic cameras when using native glass. Adapted lenses cannot go through this process so they are an untouched and messed with looking image. Native lenses can go through a certain amount of edge enhancement and other forms of enhancement to make the lenses look better on m43 cameras. Perhaps that is part of what you are seeing. Some really do prefer adapted lenses for this very reason. That isn't to say they are superior over native lenses and there are others that prefer that cleaned up look better.

 

[filmguy123]

This may well be the case, and it was mentioned in another thread as well.

Zeiss FF and Leica M43 may just be a lot "cleaner" and higher resolving of glass than the manual voigtlander set. But I tend to favor the voigtlander set on m43 to avoid that electronic artificial sharpening. So, the jump from voigtlander m43 to zeiss FF looks more jarring than would say, my Leica M43 to Zeiss FF.

Good points.

I'll run some thorough tests when I get a day to shoot (just been squeezing in little pockets of time here and there).

Side note: I wish the GH5s/x whatever they call it would allow an option to disable the electronic sharpening of m43 native electronic glass...