GH4 after all my gear got stolen

[flexcube]

Finally after all my gear got stolen I'm buying a new set-up. Going for the GH4


Purpose: - EDM style Festival Aftermovies - Interviews - (Slow-mo) Beauty shots - Run and Gun - 4K Total Budget: around 2500 euro
So far:
GH4 + 2.8 12+35mm € 2,000.00
Glidecam HD-2000
€ 400.00
Batteries, SD Cards etc.
€ 100.00 Rode Videomic
€ 100.00 Polarizer / UV filter € 100.00

Looked at: Metabones Speedbooster 600 euro Sigma 18 – 35 700 euro
To expensive and no stabilization

Lens: 12-35 mm (Which is a 24-70 equivelent) 2.8 Only downside is a lack of DOF, I dislike the flat look but it is still the best option I think

What do I miss in this setup?
Especially at festivals it can be hard to get close without disturbing the action sometimes so I need a zoom lens

• Zoom/Close – up lens so I can film people more naturally
• A lens with DOF for some beauty more film like look

My question: Can you recommend me a lens to fill in the gap or make a suggestion to this set-up?

Mayeb something like the rokinon 85mm f/1.4

 

[David W. Jones]

I'm not a big fan of native M4/3 lenses, but thats just me. If it were me doing events, I would likely do something like a 3 zoom set to cover all my focal lengths. Say an 11-16mm, 18-35mm or 16-50mm, and then a 70-200mm. I would also get a lens adapter without optics for when I needed the reach, as well as a SpeedBooster to get me back into S35 range.

 

[unadog]

If you go with native M 4/3 lenses, the Panasonic 12-35 2.8 and 35-100 2.8 are a natural pair. The 35-100 is "equivalent" to the Canon or Nikon 70-200 2.8 II, which I always have in my kit along with the 24-70 2.8 for stills. I have both the 12-35 1nd 35-100 in my M 4/3 kit.

+++

You could also go with a Canon 70-200 2.8 version I, version II, or the Canon 70-200 4.0 IS or non-IS. I actually have both the 2.8 II and the 4.0 non-IS (I will probaly upgrade to the 4.0 IS, a newer lens, at around US $700 or less used.) I use the 4.0 for more casual/ lighter work off of a tripod. But I still need the 2.8 for low light.

+++

There is also the Sigma 18-35 1.8 and 50-100 1.8 that are looking pretty attractive. For stills, if I sell my Nikon D810 full frame, I might buy a Sigma 50-100 1.8 to get me close to the same ISO with an APS-C sensor. Also with an eye to adapting that for video, with and without a Speedbooster.

+++

One last idea. I have the Sigma 50 1.4 non-ART that I am using as a portrait prime. I have been thinking of going with a prime kit of a Sigma 24 mm (ART, or pre-ART), 50 mm, and 85 mm 1.4. The Sigma are nice, big chunks of glass taht have a nice rendering on smaller sensors (and on my Nikon D810 too.)

Good luck! It is sometimes hard to decide. It is nice taht we have so many options!

 

[Tim Sewell]

I used an OM fit soligor 135mm f2.8 with a flat plate OM-EF adapter, going on to a no-name non-SB EF to M4/3 adapter. Very nice results paired with the GH4 and an old-fashioned look to it that would go well, I suspect, with the kind of imagery you mention. Total cost was around £100(GBP). Sounds a bit tortuous, but the most expensive element was the EF to M4/3 adapter, while the OM to EF was about a fiver - I figured EF would be the most versatile! (plus I have a 35 year love affair with the OM system)

 

[Greg_E]

I would have just gone m43 to OM and skipped the other adapter.

But as mentioned, there is a lot of decent OM mount glass out there that is nice. Lots of FD stuff too and you can go with or without focal reducer.

 

[Bruce Foreman]

• A lens with DOF for some beauty more film like look

• 
  

I assume what you mean here is "shallow Depth Of Field" or "selective focus". All lenses have "DOF". Depth Of Field is a label for "zone of acceptable focus". Wide angle lenses will appear to have somewhat "deep" DOF, and longer lenses will appear to have more shallow DOF, but in actually the DOF at same apertures and working distances is essentially the same. It is in the specific lens focal length and field of view, the way spatial relationships are rendered that make the apparent differences.

DOF, or the zone of acceptable sharpness, is determined by lens focal length, aperture, lens to subject working distance, and to some extent subject to background elements distance depending on how "selective" you want the zone of acceptable focus to be.

Mayeb something like the

rokinon 85mm f/1.4

This one could work for what you want, providing you get a good copy. I had one in Nikon F mount that I tried out with an adapter on my GH3's and GH4. It tested out kind of OK...I guess. In low light situations it seemed to be vulnerable to more unwanted flare than what I wanted to deal with. Sharpness was OK but nothing great, image tonal quality seemed weak to me but it's subjective. I sold it after a month and then found an "open box special" on an Olympus m.Zuiko 75mm f1.8 which runs circles around the Rokinon in every way.

But that's an expensive lens, however it could be worth watching mu-43.com "buy sell" section for a used copy.

One lens a lot of wedding guys are starting to use is the Lumix 42.5mm f1.7 with IS in the lens. Manage your distances well and you can get the look you need with it and it's not too expensive.

 

[stabwound]

For me the single most compelling reason is Anamorphic x2!

It's the only camera that will give 4:3 aspect movie mode.

I'd think about getting the SLR Magic anamorphic lenses.... and instant cinematic magic!

 

[David W. Jones]

For me the single most compelling reason is Anamorphic x2!

It's the only camera that will give 4:3 aspect movie mode.

I'd think about getting the SLR Magic anamorphic lenses.... and instant cinematic magic!

Not the only camera capable of 4:3, but at any rate you then need to invest in an external monitor with the GH4 which will de-squeeze your image for proper framing which adds to the overall expense.