joe12south
Veteran
Sometimes, if a Samsung T5 SSD is connected *before* powering on the camera, it won't be recognized. Connecting it after the camera is powered on works 100% of the time in my limited experience.
GH5 Game Over, Panasonic
- Thread starter Jim Simon
- Start date
joe12south
Veteran
There have also been speculation and reports that the sensor stack "issue" impacts speedboosters. I have not found this to be a big concern. There does seem to be some additional CA-like fringing wide-open, but it is gone even stopping down a little bit. For comparison, GH5 and P4k, same position, same adapter, same lens:
Stopping down to see difference:
Again, I don't see a meaningful difference. The lens is inherently softer wide open, and sharpens up nicely by f/2.8
Stopping down to see difference:
Again, I don't see a meaningful difference. The lens is inherently softer wide open, and sharpens up nicely by f/2.8
Last edited:
joe12south
Veteran
^^^ I think the Speedbooster offers micro adjustments to dial it in better, but I haven't messed with that yet. I don't own the Ultra or the PCC version, so I can't speak to them.
The sensor stack thickness problem shows up on a variety of wide angle lenses, large aperture at or near infinity focus. If you focus on the center of the frame, the edges are blurred. If you focus on the edges, the center is blurred. And the lens witness marks do not line up.
joe12south
Veteran
I've tested that, too:
Rokinon Cine 14mm f/3.1 (wide open)
P4K
GH5
It's true that the marks aren't accurate, but they aren't on the GH5, either. Again, I *think* it can be calibrated to get a tighter tolerance if that is important to you.
John Brawley
Well-known member
Let’s be REALLY clear.
The thickness difference only causes issues when trying to use fast 135 format (F1.2) primes and a speedbooster. You do all realise that you’re ADDING an extra optical element when you use a speedbooster yeah ?
There’s no problem with “fast” native MFT lenses.
And by the way, there’s no standard thickness. Panny and Olympus are both different to each other.
FFD (if lenses hit infinity) is a different issue.
JB
Last edited:
joe12south
Veteran
If Metabones wants to make a specific version optimized for the P4K, yippee. But if you have to go wider and faster than 14mm f/3.1 to experience a meaningful problem, then it's not a practical concern for me.
PS. That original poster concluded: "Thank you all for your contribution ! The samples provided by joe12south are very interesting ! There's obviously not much difference between the gh5 image and the P4K ! It's a good thing I guess... Even though both look very soft on the edges."
Joel12south thank you . You are great.
joe12south
Veteran
Please post images, Tom.
rsbush
Well-known member
Thanks, Joe.While maybe there is some possible theoretical issue, I have not seen one in practice. The fastest MFT lens I own is the Lumix 25mm f/1.7. Here it is mounted on the P4k, wide open:
Anyone who owns this lens knows that the CA you see is inherent in the lens, regardless of the camera.
Haaaaa. Too good.
filmguy123
Veteran
I think something we see a lot from early adopters and people with cams from different brands is super unhealthy. It reminds me of the "console wars" teenagers still argue about. PS4 vs Xbox vs PC. It's pretty silly as an adult... yet here so many people are (not referring to anyone here, just a very general observation on the market), feeling the need to either be all in and defend Panasonic or BMD for whatever reason. Part of that is probably the way other people jump on any perceived faults or admissions to bolster their side, as if there is actually a side to take here instead of just objective realities. None of us are defined by the cameras we choose, they are just tools, all of which have imperfections.
Ok, so this is interesting. The pocket 4k may have issues with wide angle lenses, which may be because the differing sensor stack size is very subtly warping the way the light from the wide angle glass is being pulled in. Is this only happening on adapted lenses? If so, a dedicated speedbooster would "fix" this issue. Not because it's a flaw but perhaps just because it's a different design than the sensor stacks by Panny/Oly. And depending on the user, this may be a non issue to them as it might be subtle enough or reserved for those extreme wides that some people might not use as much, thus meaning they could continue using the "unoptimzed" speedbooster for most things?
Am I understanding that correctly?
If so, the way I see it is we are waiting on an official speedbooster for the Pocket 4K sensor stack size and the bonus is, the current one works well for most things.
Now, I am also confused as some mentioned native MFT exhibiting these issues as well. Well, I guess this makes sense - the huge market share is Panny/Oly, so Laowa for example would have designed their UWA lens to perform optimally on these cameras and their associated sensor stack size. And I suppose you would notice the difference here much more so than standard focal lengths. Well, if so, the way I see it is - that's ok.
Perhaps one compromise with the BMD Pocket 4K is we don't use native UWA lenses on that camera unless we are willing to purchase and use a yet developed lens correction plug in that someone will probably make and live with the results. Or, we just use UWA on adapted lenses only ONCE the official speedbooster dialed to the proper sensor stack width is released.
Unfortunate, sure, but really this all makes sense. It is too bad BMD didn't factor this in, if it truly is resultant of just the sensor stack, and try to match what the existing mass market share currently is (sure, there's no official standard - but unofficially...).
Ok, so this is interesting. The pocket 4k may have issues with wide angle lenses, which may be because the differing sensor stack size is very subtly warping the way the light from the wide angle glass is being pulled in. Is this only happening on adapted lenses? If so, a dedicated speedbooster would "fix" this issue. Not because it's a flaw but perhaps just because it's a different design than the sensor stacks by Panny/Oly. And depending on the user, this may be a non issue to them as it might be subtle enough or reserved for those extreme wides that some people might not use as much, thus meaning they could continue using the "unoptimzed" speedbooster for most things?
Am I understanding that correctly?
If so, the way I see it is we are waiting on an official speedbooster for the Pocket 4K sensor stack size and the bonus is, the current one works well for most things.
Now, I am also confused as some mentioned native MFT exhibiting these issues as well. Well, I guess this makes sense - the huge market share is Panny/Oly, so Laowa for example would have designed their UWA lens to perform optimally on these cameras and their associated sensor stack size. And I suppose you would notice the difference here much more so than standard focal lengths. Well, if so, the way I see it is - that's ok.
Perhaps one compromise with the BMD Pocket 4K is we don't use native UWA lenses on that camera unless we are willing to purchase and use a yet developed lens correction plug in that someone will probably make and live with the results. Or, we just use UWA on adapted lenses only ONCE the official speedbooster dialed to the proper sensor stack width is released.
Unfortunate, sure, but really this all makes sense. It is too bad BMD didn't factor this in, if it truly is resultant of just the sensor stack, and try to match what the existing mass market share currently is (sure, there's no official standard - but unofficially...).
Cary Knoop
Veteran
All the claims listed in this forum refer to the 2k pocket camera.
Right now it seems nothing more than wild speculation to suggest the 4k pocket has the same issues.
Last edited:
Bern Caughey
Veteran
On a related note; I wonder why Panasonic & Olympus chose to use such a thick Sensor Stack?
Perhaps is was to minimize the appearance of dust on the sensor, especially as the sensor is relatively small. My first dSLR was a Canon D60 (APC-C 6 megapixel CMOS) & I never had an issue with dust. About a year later I switched to the Canon 1D (APS-H 4 megapixel CCD) & suddenly dust was a huge issue. Supposedly the D60’s Sensor Stack was relatively thick to counter the appearance of dust, but that may just be a rumor.
Perhaps is was to minimize the appearance of dust on the sensor, especially as the sensor is relatively small. My first dSLR was a Canon D60 (APC-C 6 megapixel CMOS) & I never had an issue with dust. About a year later I switched to the Canon 1D (APS-H 4 megapixel CCD) & suddenly dust was a huge issue. Supposedly the D60’s Sensor Stack was relatively thick to counter the appearance of dust, but that may just be a rumor.
Couldn't they just move the filter away from the sensor to achive this ?
Ultra wide angle lenses tend to have noticeable geometric distortion, approaching that of fish-eye lenses. It's not surprising to hear of focus field distortion as well, particularly at the fastest apertures. But with their inherently broad depth of field, shouldn't it be easy to find a sweet spot where both center and edges of the cropped lens circle are in focus?
joe12south
Veteran
There's actually someone who has tested several lenses on the P4K. His results:
Have issues
Laowa 7.5mm f/2
Samyang 12mm f/2
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
Do not have issues
Panasonic 20mm f/1.7
Panasonic 25mm f1/7
Mitakon 25mm f/1.4
7Artisans 25mm f/1.8
Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.7
Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8