JVC LS300 and covering the sensor

Fenster's down

New member
Hello there, I'm new to the forum and the new owner of a JVC LS300. I see there isn't much traffic here, but I come from a 2/3" ENG background and this large sensor shooting is new to me so I'll try some questions and see what happens.

I'm starting at scratch on lenses so I'm deciding between using the M43 mount or a speedbooster adapter and go with F mount. I know the JVC mount is M43, but the sensor is more APS-C. A Rokinon T1.5 cine lens came with the camera that seems to cover the APS-C sized sensor, where a true M43 lens has some vignetting that can be adjusted in the camera's scan mapping mode to fit. I was going to go with FF to cover the sensor, and that brings me to my first question -

1. If a lens covers the APS-C sized sensor, is there any advantage to "covering it more" with the FF lenses? or is just lens quality at that point? I don't know if I should go with an adapter and FF or the M43 mount lenses that can cover the APS-C sized sensor.

2. Any suggestions on low-to-medium priced shoulder rigs for this size camera would be appreciated. Again I shot shoulder mount ENG for a long time, which led me to use that HM700 cam that could be so cool with a bigger sensor, but I finally had to move past 1/3 chips.


Thanks for any thoughts, after shooting 1/3" and 2/3" ultra deep field forever, this little camera's image looks pretty cool to me.
 
The only advantage of using a full-frame lens is that you would be mostly using the center of the lens (which is the sharpest portion) to cover the entire Super 35mm sensor resulting in better image quality. That's at least the theory.

M43 lenses aren't supposed to cover the entire sensor. However, the image circle across lenses may differ resulting in various degrees of vignetting.

It's been a long time, but IIRC, when I used the camera with the Panasonic 15mm lens, I used more of the sensor than recommended and thought the vignetting wasn't too bad.
 
That makes sense, more of the center spot of the circle would be in involved even if both covered the sensor.

As far as M43 mount lenses, I know most don't cover the super35 sensor but it's my understading the some 'cine' lenses are made to cover the entire APS or S35 but just have an M43 mount. My thinking was using those would be better than using standard m43 and vignetting, but if a FF makes use of more of the sweet spot of the circle that might be the way to go.
 
I wouldn't choose FF lenses solely because more of the sweet spot will be used. Honestly, you probably wouldn't notice much of a difference.

Personally, if I didn't have any lenses at all, I would invest in full-frame EF glass because I like to use all kinds of cameras and they would be the best investment for me.

If I were interested in only using the LS300 and only manual cine lenses, I would definitely choose the Veydras (if I knew they covered the entire sensor).

You have lots of options out there and it's one of those questions that will ultimately be answered by you as you know what you like best, your shooting style, etc.
 
Thanks much for the input NorBro, and I meant to say the choice was between M43 and "EF" lenses as well, still getting good with the terms.
While I used nice broadcast 2/3" servo lenses on expensive ENG cameras for years, we never changed them and I don't have the practical experience on changing or using manual lenses so I've been in sort of a google crash course last few weeks and signed up here as well.

I understand what you're saying about using the EF lenses in the future that's why I'm leaning toward the metabones adapter and EF, but have gotten some nice early images from the Rokinon cine. I know I'm very late to the party and the JVC doens't have a stellar rep, but after shooting small chips forever not having to invent the bokeh DoF thing is pretty cool but coming to realize how much I relied on servo zoom for even small moves, and shooting action like sports is a whole other world.
 
If you invest in the Rokinon EF cine lenses, you can at least save some money on the adapter :)
 
Not sure what you mean, I'd need the adapter for the Rokinon EF lenses on the MFT mount, is there a bundle that includes the adapter or something like that?
 
Okay thanks, like I said I'm really learning this stuff. I'm not set on the Rokinon lenses, it came with the camera and I just discovered about covering the sensor and I don't know how many MFT mount lenses would cover the sensor.

I'm not set on anything or tied into a cost, I want to make an informed decision and I just got the camera and can still return the rokinon.


It looks like some Veydra MFT mounts do cover a s35 sensor, I'm not sure if the electronics is compatible but if it was and you were setting up with new lenses, would you go with Veydra MFT mount that covers the sensor or EF with a good adapter?

That was the basis of my question, I think we got sidetracked on Rokinon, but if both lenses cover the sensor would the MFT mount produce as good of an image as the EF/speedbooster with similar quality glass?
 
Yes, both could/would produce great images. It's all about the glass. Any lens you adapt to the camera will produce great images if the lens is a quality lens. It can be EF, Nikon, MFT, PL, etc. The mount doesn't matter.

Choosing a mount is a personal decision based on your career goals in life. However, if you'd always like to use the entire sensor then the MFT choices will be limited.

I myself would not go with the Veydras because I couldn't use them on other certain cameras. (P.S. There are no electronics in Veydras...all manual.)

I would instead choose an EF lens and an adapter because I could use the EF glass with other cameras (Canon - Sony via Metabones - Blackmagic - RED, etc). If you decide to check out EF lenses, check out the Sigma 18-35mm. It would be a great combo via an adapter with your LS300.

But like I mentioned (career goals)...if you're an operator that likes manual lenses with smooth cine rings, your options change.

The best advice I can provide you is to rent as much as you can and see what works best for you.
 
Last edited:
I really appreciate the info, thanks for the time.

I don't particularly like manual lenses, honestly I'd prefer something more akin to an ENG electronic servo zoom but it seems hard to know what's what with so many lenses and so little experience, it's a bit overwhelming.

I'm going to go with a shoulder rig, still don't quite underhand what people are doing with their hands on those handles when they aren't motorized, but that's another story. :)
 
Also NorBro are you saying that the Rokinon T1.5 cine lens that came with the camera isn't a quality lens? It retails about $500, I'm not defending it I honestly have no idea because I have no frame of reference and I'm still learning the camera to get the most out of the image.

And the prime zoom is a pretty cool feature to mix it up with short moves.
 
A lot of people use the Rokinon lenses. They are popular and I think they are fine for many people/applications.

Certainly a great low cost cine alternative. I think the LS300 comes with the 85mm, right? The 85mm cine version from Canon or Zeiss is $4,500 in comparison.

Once you have used really high-quality lenses, you'll think less of the Rokinons. There are worse lenses, but let's just say your camera is capable of better images with other options.

Lenses have to be one of the most complicated aspects of the business. There is a lot to learn like you mentioned...
 
It came with the Rokinon 35mm cine. Those comparable prices like $4500 are not in my budget, I've been thinking my top end would be $1,000. I know lens prices can get really expensive, I don't mean to imply price isn't an issue. I'm a small one man "production company" and just do events/weddings/corporate/youtube not cinema or big productions. It would be cool to shoot with a 5-20K lens, but I'm not in that ballpark.

And the jump from 1/3" CCD chips is impressive for me with any glass that fits I think at this point, but I think in the low-end price range it's even more important to find the standouts if there are any.
 
Yep I do, crash course in larger sensor interchangeable lens school, have learned a lot.

One thing that makes it tougher is the lack of widespread interest in this camera makes forums like this slow so there isn't a ton of information on it. The chatter I have found mostly says it's a well-priced entry into larger sensors, I'm looking forward to what I can do with it.
 
Q: If the EF to Micro Four Thirds speed booster is meant to cover a MFT sensor, does that mean there is vignetting using it with the super35 sensor and the VSM needs to be used?
 
Q: If the EF to Micro Four Thirds speed booster is meant to cover a MFT sensor, does that mean there is vignetting using it with the super35 sensor and the VSM needs to be used?

I would guess yes. MFT is sort of an odd choice for a Super35 sized sensor, as the MFT sensor is quite a bit smaller- licensing fees likely had a lot to do with that choice. I would think a simple straight, non speed booster adapter would work best.

EF to MFT is a most practical solution to start building lenses with. The flange focal distance is shorter on the EF mount, so you can adapt Nikon F, Leica R, Zeiss Contax/Yashica mount, M42 etc. to EF, plus several vendors can sell adapters to convert older Canon FD to EF mount. And of course PL mount lenses.
 
I'm went with the Veydra mini primes for now, liked the idea of covering the sensor without VSM and an adapter for now, read good things about them and seems they're a little sharper than the Rokinons. I'm going with the 16mm, 35mm and 85mm to get started, my thinking is the prime zoom will connect that range pretty well.

Now I'm just trying to get used to shooting in log, I kinda get it but it's still odd right now.
 
Last edited:
Anyone used a M42 speedbooster on the Ls300? Any problems with the protusion at the back of the adapter?
 
Back
Top