Blackmagic Forum

Hi. New to this forum... I just purchased the new 6K cinema camera and paired it with a Panasonic 24-105 (FF Leica mount) and I'm getting four corner vignetting in all 6k modes. Anyone have this issue? Thanks

From the DXOMARK review of the lens:

Vignetting (corner shading)

Vignetting is low in the mid-focal length range from 35 mm to 85 mm, but it’s relatively high at 24 mm, though only really noticeable in the extreme corners. The lens has similar behavior at the other end of the zoom range as well, but the Sigma and Canon have higher levels overall. It’s worth looking at the shape of the slope of the fall-off in exposure in our vignetting profiles (per below), where a gradual curve is usually preferred to a steep one.

https://www.dxomark.com/panasonic-lumix ... performer/

So the steep falloff of illumination is expected at the widest focal lengths.

You might want to return the lens if this alternative S-Pro lens better suits your needs:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1501345-REG

https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2021/07/ ... ns-review/

This review is geared more to the videography purposes and the 24-70mm 2.8 S-Pro excels:

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews ... 2_8_review

Thanks, Rick. I’m coming from Sony (fx6) and I’ve never had a vignetting issue with any of their FF glass. The issue seems to be in 6K.. In any case I’m picking up the Sigma 28-70 2.8 which I hope is OK. Returning the Panasonic to Adorama, which is having noise/banding issues on top of the vignetting. I’ll take a look at the Pro Panny lens you mentioned. Thanks

See my last edited post for the photography blog review of the 24-70mm before going with the Sigma. When newly introduced it was almost $2,800 but at B&H Photo is now under $1,700!

scorsesefan wrote:Thanks, Rick. I’m coming from Sony (fx6) and I’ve never had a vignetting issue with any of their FF glass. The issue seems to be in 6K.. In any case I’m picking up the Sigma 28-70 2.8 which I hope is OK. Returning the Panasonic to Adorama, which is having noise/banding issues on top of the vignetting. I’ll take a look at the Pro Panny lens you mentioned. Thanks

Banding and noise? Caused by a lens? With a 12-bit codec!? Nah, a lens can’t just cause banding in an image unless something is seriously wrong. Did you record any footage to show as an example?

BH posted a warning re this lens and the 16-35 I believe. Check out the 6K product page. Something to the effect that it could cause sensor noise. Given the new FW update and the fact that I’d like an IS lens thought I’d give it a shot. Could be down to user error (I haven’t shot raw since my original 2.5k) but my Rokinon 1.4 is pretty clean at all apertures. Will try to post something tonite

scorsesefan wrote:Hi. New to this forum... I just purchased the new 6K cinema camera and paired it with a Panasonic 24-105 (FF Leica mount) and I'm getting four corner vignetting in all 6k modes. Anyone have this issue? Thanks

Hi.

Yeah I used the same lens when I first got the camera and was surprised to find the same thing. It seems like a Panasonic choice to allow a little vignetting? I presume to does the same on their own cameras as the sensor size is the same but never actually checked. Maybe they do an in-camera corrector to hide it?

I still liked it for the IS though but it was a disappointing learning.

JB

Thanks, John. Reassuring to hear I’m not alone. Too bad as there isn’t too much Leica FF IS glass… Hope Sigma lenses don’t exhibit the vignetting. Btw nice job on your 6K FF promo vids

Alex Mitchell wrote:Banding and noise? Caused by a lens? With a 12-bit codec!? Nah, a lens can’t just cause banding in an image unless something is seriously wrong. Did you record any footage to show as an example?

It does sadly. Not optically of course.

The BH note alluded to earlier can be found here: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... ra_6k.html
Note: If this camera is paired with certain Panasonic lenses, images could be affected. Specifically, the Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 Macro O.I.S. and Lumix S Pro 16-35mm f/4 use a switch-mode power supply, which could radiate noise into the sensor.

So it's apparently an electromagnetic interference issue. See the attached images I took from a open gate clip using my Lumix S Pro 16-35mm f/4 lens. If I press the lens release which disconnects power to the lens the pattern goes away. I ramped up the contrast a fair bit to make it very visible in the picture. Because the pattern changes every frame it's visually fairly noticeable as a flicker both on the camera screen and in the footage as viewed on a pc.

The same lens doesn't cause this issue on a Lumix S5, but the BMCC seems susceptible to the interference from the lens electronics. Which makes lens shopping an interesting problem. It's not like anyone reviews/publishes data about EMI.

This being a rather "physical" issue makes me worry there isn't a possible firmware fix for this. I'd love to be wrong though since I'd like to use this lens.

Jakob, congratulations on your sleuthing to find the cause of that odd electromagnetic interference behaviour. You and B&H Photo will have spared many from discovering this the hard way.

That emi might not be the smearing that's been shown. I think most if not all the demonstrations of the smearing have been with adapted lenses which raises the specter in my mind of stray light entering at the sides of the OLPF, the way light travels through fiber optics, apparently not happening if the lens cap is in place.

For sensor blooming or smearing to occur there has to be pixels that are clipped. The bloom is overflow from “full” photosites.

JB

Tom Roper wrote:That emi might not be the smearing that's been shown. I think most if not all the demonstrations of the smearing have been with adapted lenses which raises the specter in my mind of stray light entering at the sides of the OLPF, the way light travels through fiber optics, apparently not happening if the lens cap is in place.

That's an interesting theory, but the smearing is happening on my camera with a native L mount lens.

Same for me. The test shots I did were also with a native l mount lens (sigma 24-70 art). But other lenses with adapters (PL, FD and EF) gave exact same result so its really a sensor or circuitry problem.

Shoots that theory down! Good to know, thanks!

Light drop off or vignetting is common on all FF sensors as it captures more of the corner characteristics of the lens. Camera manufacturers uses in camera optimization, in Canon's case "Auto Lighting Optimizer" which corrects or evens out the lighting across the field a feature that can be enabled or disabled in camera. What we don't know is how much of this optimization has already been done in camera as standard or if you can actually disable it with certain make. I like the option to enable lighting optimizer and maybe BMD can add that in a firmware update? I'm not sure if similar feature exist in Resolve?

I don't think BM has an in-camera correction for vignetting. Maybe in a FW update?

WahWay wrote:Light drop off or vignetting is common on all FF sensors as it captures more of the corner characteristics of the lens... I like the option to enable lighting optimizer and maybe BMD can add that in a firmware update? I'm not sure if similar feature exist in Resolve?

There may be a simpler way, but perhaps DaVinci Resolve’s FX Relight might be able to add a graduated light to the perimeter of the image circle. You would use the reverse mask so that the edges receive the most light and the center area is unaffected. Centre the ‘light’ and the target in the center of the frame and move the light farther away on the z-axis so the light is reasonably smooth for most of the frame. This could be very computationally intensive and don’t know if it will work at all since relight uses a depth map of the scene, whereas you want a wash unaffected by the depth presumably. You could fool the effect by recording a depth map of an entirely flat surface and copy and paste that into a Colour Node.

A separate Colour Node could be used for the actual adjustments to Relight, but it wouldn’t be necessary as you’re going to do this for each lens (focal length affects the vignettes you have to correct.

The fault in this is that if you did a Resolve ‘zoom’, the calculations won’t know that and apply your results when there isn’t a problem. Of course on those shots you simply omit the Relight effect.

My suggestion is a PITA if the camera had the light map of the lens and could make the adjustment in-camera as part of Lens Correction. Lens Correction exists in Resolve, but no time to read that now as I’m off to a shoot. I thought lens correction was for pincushion and barrel distortion though so may not include vignettes.

Jakob Progsch wrote:The BH note alluded to earlier can be found here: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... ra_6k.html
Note: If this camera is paired with certain Panasonic lenses, images could be affected. Specifically, the Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 Macro O.I.S. and Lumix S Pro 16-35mm f/4 use a switch-mode power supply, which could radiate noise into the sensor.

So it's apparently an electromagnetic interference issue. See the attached images I took from a open gate clip using my Lumix S Pro 16-35mm f/4 lens. If I press the lens release which disconnects power to the lens the pattern goes away. I ramped up the contrast a fair bit to make it very visible in the picture. Because the pattern changes every frame it's visually fairly noticeable as a flicker both on the camera screen and in the footage as viewed on a pc.

The same lens doesn't cause this issue on a Lumix S5, but the BMCC seems susceptible to the interference from the lens electronics. Which makes lens shopping an interesting problem. It's not like anyone reviews/publishes data about EMI.

This being a rather "physical" issue makes me worry there isn't a possible firmware fix for this. I'd love to be wrong though since I'd like to use this lens.

Thanks for that info and I have tested my 24-105 on the 6K FF and I cannot reproduce that problem. Are you running on the latest firmware of the camera?

GonzagueGB wrote:Thanks for that info and I have tested my 24-105 on the 6K FF and I cannot reproduce that problem. Are you running on the latest firmware of the camera?

I updated it right away. The version on the camera says 8.3.2. I don't have a 24-105 to test with but it's highly reproducible with the 16-35 at 3200ISO. Less so at 400ISO which makes sense since a higher gain will cause EMI to show up more.

Jakob Progsch wrote:

GonzagueGB wrote:Thanks for that info and I have tested my 24-105 on the 6K FF and I cannot reproduce that problem. Are you running on the latest firmware of the camera?

I updated it right away. The version on the camera says 8.3.2. I don't have a 24-105 to test with but it's highly reproducible with the 16-35 at 3200ISO. Less so at 400ISO which makes sense since a higher gain will cause EMI to show up more.

Interesting, I only tested at 400, will try at 3200 later. I am going to InterBEE tomorrow and will ask BM staff there, coz that is actually a real problem . I need at least ONE native lens with IS.

I give it a try this morning at the office (nothing scientific) at ISO 3200 F4 in on poorly lighted ceiling and nothing, sure if you crank up to F22 you will see noise patterns but nothing out of the ordinary.

Below some screenshot at 24mm F4 with the latest I boosted the exposure, contrast...

Now, I also tried with a V Mount Battery, same result. I tested on a Sigma 35mm F2, same result. I am wondering what could be the difference between your result and mine, beside the lens obviously. I have no idea what my 24-105 firmware is, maybe you should check this out too. Did you mount a Monitor and tested with a HDMI? I had problem in the past with my 6K and HDMI Monitors and cables that was bringing noise when I was powering the monitor on the V Mount battery as well as the camera and decided to ditch the Freeworld monitor and bought a Small HD instead (no more problems) ...

GonzagueGB wrote: I have no idea what my 24-105 firmware is, maybe you should check this out too.

I checked and updated the lens firmware from 1.0 to 1.1 but it didn't make a difference.

GonzagueGB wrote:Did you mount a Monitor and tested with a HDMI?

As far as accessories go I tried with and without the battery grip, with and without an external SSD and also connected the HDMI to a LG TV at some point. The result is always the same and the pattern is also visible in the HDMI out signal.

I also tried different light sources since initially I thought this was some PWM issue with non-video LED lights. But it happens with everything including natural light.

One thing I noticed affects not the presence but the shape of the pattern is whether the lens is in manual or autofocus mode. In autofocus mode the bands are narrower (higher frequency?).

Jakob Progsch wrote:

GonzagueGB wrote: I have no idea what my 24-105 firmware is, maybe you should check this out too.

I checked and updated the lens firmware from 1.0 to 1.1 but it didn't make a difference.

GonzagueGB wrote:Did you mount a Monitor and tested with a HDMI?

As far as accessories go I tried with and without the battery grip, with and without an external SSD and also connected the HDMI to a LG TV at some point. The result is always the same and the pattern is also visible in the HDMI out signal.

I also tried different light sources since initially I thought this was some PWM issue with non-video LED lights. But it happens with everything including natural light.

One thing I noticed affects not the presence but the shape of the pattern is whether the lens is in manual or autofocus mode. In autofocus mode the bands are narrower (higher frequency?).

I talked to some tech person at InterBee about this problem. They are aware of it and they are talking to Panasonic about it. Apparently this affects a few lenses from Panasonic what I mean by that is that not every 16-35 or 24-105 are affected. According to the tech, the problem is a component that Panasonic is switching time to time, think about it that way they could use Brand A or B for a component and it is like a Russian roulette. They have 6 24-105 for test only 2 are affected. They tested different lenses version and same.

I am apparently in the lucky group and my lens is not affected.

Thanks for reporting back. That makes sense I guess.

GonzagueGB wrote:

Jakob Progsch wrote:

GonzagueGB wrote: I have no idea what my 24-105 firmware is, maybe you should check this out too.

I checked and updated the lens firmware from 1.0 to 1.1 but it didn't make a difference.

GonzagueGB wrote:Did you mount a Monitor and tested with a HDMI?

As far as accessories go I tried with and without the battery grip, with and without an external SSD and also connected the HDMI to a LG TV at some point. The result is always the same and the pattern is also visible in the HDMI out signal.

I also tried different light sources since initially I thought this was some PWM issue with non-video LED lights. But it happens with everything including natural light.

One thing I noticed affects not the presence but the shape of the pattern is whether the lens is in manual or autofocus mode. In autofocus mode the bands are narrower (higher frequency?).

I talked to some tech person at InterBee about this problem. They are aware of it and they are talking to Panasonic about it. Apparently this affects a few lenses from Panasonic what I mean by that is that not every 16-35 or 24-105 are affected. According to the tech, the problem is a component that Panasonic is switching time to time, think about it that way they could use Brand A or B for a component and it is like a Russian roulette. They have 6 24-105 for test only 2 are affected. They tested different lenses version and same.

I am apparently in the lucky group and my lens is not affected.

Are you OK with the vignetting? I returned my 24-105 because it does so in all 6k modes...

GonzagueGB wrote:… it is like a Russian roulette. They have 6 24-105 for test only 2 are affected. They tested different lenses version and same.

I am apparently in the lucky group and my lens is not affected.

Great analogy, unfortunately that’s going to deter sales of L-mount lenses.

scorsesefan wrote:Are you OK with the vignetting? I returned my 24-105 because it does so in all 6k modes...

Am I ok with that? No, but we don't really have a choice, do we? I know the 24-105 has a lot of bad rep in general, but when travelling these are great lenses and in native L mount, if I am not mistaken, this is the ONLY lens available.

Now, distortion and vignetting are common, and we will have to leave with, however don't expect Panasonic to make things better in their future lenses (or any other makers to a certain extent), as they are PHOTO lenses, and they design them (with their compromise) with "Built-in Camera Correction" in mind. And Panasonic is really bad at this as they really leverage that like crazy. Look the 24-105 does not even cover the full sensor of the 6K FF in Open Gate. Panasonic is a brand that I used to love but the more years pass, the more they privilege fixing things in body and adding features in their cameras rather than giving their products the "characters" it needs to compete against other.

I am lucky to have some friend in the lens business here in Japan and these trends of "Built-in Camera Correction" is JUST starting, as it really helps manufacturers to make ever smaller lenses. On my 35mm F2 Sigma the distortion is REALLY visible, and I was quite surprised by it. So either BM embraced "Buit-in Camera Correction" (which I doubt) or we drop native L mount lenses (from the Alliance) and go with PL ones.

rick.lang wrote:
Great analogy,

Thanks

rick.lang wrote:
unfortunately that’s going to deter sales of L-mount lenses.

Well, Panasonic has lost me a LONG time ago since they introduced Focus by Wire... And with BM SAF rather unreliable AF, Focusing with ANY Panasonic lens is a nightmare.

I Think that BM need to make a choice here, and they may already had done it : Doing the minimum, but I wish they could at least incorporate a few things for L Mount lenses, like for example Lense firmware update from the camera body or via desktop app and Focus ring control (like Panasonic and Sigma does) in order to toggle between linear and nonlinear. They joined the L Mount alliance now, so embrace it.

GonzagueGB wrote:

scorsesefan wrote:Are you OK with the vignetting? I returned my 24-105 because it does so in all 6k modes...

Am I ok with that? No, but we don't really have a choice, do we? I know the 24-105 has a lot of bad rep in general, but when travelling these are great lenses and in native L mount, if I am not mistaken, this is the ONLY lens available.

Now, distortion and vignetting are common, and we will have to leave with, however don't expect Panasonic to make things better in their future lenses (or any other makers to a certain extent), as they are PHOTO lenses, and they design them (with their compromise) with "Built-in Camera Correction" in mind. And Panasonic is really bad at this as they really leverage that like crazy. Look the 24-105 does not even cover the full sensor of the 6K FF in Open Gate. Panasonic is a brand that I used to love but the more years pass, the more they privilege fixing things in body and adding features in their cameras rather than giving their products the "characters" it needs to compete against other.

I am lucky to have some friend in the lens business here in Japan and these trends of "Built-in Camera Correction" is JUST starting, as it really helps manufacturers to make ever smaller lenses. On my 35mm F2 Sigma the distortion is REALLY visible, and I was quite surprised by it. So either BM embraced "Buit-in Camera Correction" (which I doubt) or we drop native L mount lenses (from the Alliance) and go with PL ones.

Well, it would be nice if BM could introduced built in lens correction in a FW update, but not even sure if that's something that's possible? The 24-105 is one of a few OIS L mount lenses (my hands aren't as steady these days) so it's disappointing that these issues are cropping up...

scorsesefan wrote:Well, it would be nice if BM could introduced built in lens correction in a FW update, but not even sure if that's something that's possible? The 24-105 is one of a few OIS L mount lenses (my hands aren't as steady these days) so it's disappointing that these issues are cropping up...

It is TOTALLY Possible, there is nothing stopping BM to implement these, just time, money and or will. But to be honest is it BM that need to compensate for Panasonic short comings in these areas? I mean Panasonic is willingly doing these to save money and time. It is easier to correct these flaws by software than optically. Don't get me wrong, they COULD fix it optically, but the cost, weight and time would not be something we will all like. There is a reason why Cinema lenses cost so much and why they are so big and bulky.

Honestly, I am not asking much personally, let us be able to update lenses firmware and toggle linear mode on focus and I will be happy with that.

Yeah, if you're joining the L mount alliance you should start implementing stuff like focus-by-wire adjustments, because they're (unfortunately) fundamental to the way most mirrorless mounts work.

GonzagueGB wrote:
Honestly, I am not asking much personally, let us be able to update lenses firmware and toggle linear mode on focus and I will be happy with that.

Linear mode toggle sounds reasonable, lens firmware update is not. Would you ask of the lens maker to update camera firmware? IMO, it is the responsibility of the lens maker to include a process for updating their firmware. What does Sigma do? Does their L-mount camera allow you to update a Panasonic L-mount lens?

Sean van Berlo wrote:Yeah, if you're joining the L mount alliance you should start implementing stuff like focus-by-wire adjustments, because they're (unfortunately) fundamental to the way most mirrorless mounts work.

Yeah, but if history repeat itself I won’t see it happening… Case in point MFT… they have the Pocket 4K for years now and none if these are implemented… So, I am not really confident on this.

We did kind of go though a lot of this with MFT.

There are SOME corrections that could be implemented but the way I understand it, many of these corrections are brand specific and some can’t really be applied to “motion” images because they would be distracting over time (like CA corrections). Geometry corrections maybe but even so if it’s not done right frame to frame with a panning shot weird things could happen. It’s also something that happens though RAW typically and though each brands raw library / format which would then somehow have to get cross converted to with with say, braw. This is something more complex than a lens profile in LR.

Other lens makers have better solutions too. Olympus, who I’ve long been a fan of and have consulted with on their PRO series lenses put a lot of effort into their focus by wire manual focus feel, adding hard stops on the lens itself for example and making a mechanical clutch and focus action. To use you would THINK it’s actually manually mechanically focusing the lens! But it’s all by wire. Not required to then be implemented by the camera to manually focus the lens. It can be done clearly.

Olympus as a company with a long history in optics also tend to rely less on in-camera and post corrections.

I think this is just a LUMIX issue in terms of the choices they make to build their lenses. I have to say I was pretty surprised that the lens doesn’t even cover as I too hoped to take advantage of the OIS.

Sigmas manual focus on the art lens was also pretty twitchy. It’s just the problem with modern AF stills lenses is that they don’t work so great when you want to manually focus them because the things that make a MF lens great to work with are bad for AF.

The Leica L lenses do feel better and are obviously better optically but they don’t have the OIS option.

Hopefully Panasonic lift their game and make a better version of this lens.

JB

In an ideal world the two parties who manufacture what I'm pretty sure is 90% of your customers lenses will change to accommodate you, but in practice it might be smarter to do it the other way around.

Tom Roper wrote:What does Sigma do? Does their L-mount camera allow you to update a Panasonic L-mount lens?

Listen I could completely imagine this and I could be really wrong, but I think it is possible. And again maybe it is my imagination but I remember that I could update the Sigma MC21 firmware from a S5IIx

And this may confirm that I may not dreaming it

"The following procedure is to update the lens firmware via SIGMA fp series camera. For firmware updates of Leica and Panasonic L-Mount cameras, please follow the instruction manual for each camera."

https://www.sigma-global.com/en/accesso ... l=firmware

GonzagueGB wrote:… "The following procedure is to update the lens firmware via SIGMA fp series camera. For firmware updates of Leica and Panasonic L-Mount cameras, please follow the instruction manual for each camera."

Read this carefully. The last sentence deserves a little more transparency as this is what they are really saying so buyer beware:

For firmware updates of Leica and Panasonic and Sigma[/] L-Mount cameras, please follow the instruction manual for each [i]Leica and Panasonic and Sigma camera."

There is no implied warranty these lenses will work on other L-mount cameras nor any assurance the lens firmware can be updated by any camera other than the camera marketed by the lens manufacturer. I think we learned this lesson many years ago on this forum, but we were optimistic that BMD joining the L-Mount consortium would make it easier.

Long term solution: standardize all cameras on L-mount and acquire a company that will make BMD branded lenses. To be competitive and not disadvantaged, you need to follow similar business practices that have worked for years with companies that compete in both the lens and camera markets. Do you seriously think that Panasonic and Sigma meet regularly to share all their secrets and code to help each other since their part of this L- mount alliance? Of course you don’t. Look at the warranty of the Sigma L-Mount lenses: guaranteed to work on an appropriate Sigma camera but may also work on other cameras.

Thank you JB for cautioning me about buying L-mount lenses for the BMCC6K; I’m staying with PL-mount even if they’re bigger, heavier, dumber. They’re my rock.

Edit
I’m not knocking the BMCC6K by the way. Being a new sensor with new image processing, it’s bound to take awhile for a shooter to learn where it excels and where you need to be careful. Bound to be different but looks like it also has the potential to produce a beautiful image.

rick.lang wrote:

GonzagueGB wrote:… "The following procedure is to update the lens firmware via SIGMA fp series camera. For firmware updates of Leica and Panasonic L-Mount cameras, please follow the instruction manual for each camera."

Read this carefully. The last sentence deserves a little more transparency as this is what they are really saying do buyer beware:

For firmware updates of Leica and Panasonic and Sigma[/] L-Mount cameras, please follow the instruction manual for each [i]Leica and Panasonic and Sigma camera."

There is no implied warranty these lenses will work on other L-mount cameras nor any assurance the lens firmware can be updated by any camera other than the camera marketed by the lens manufacturer. I think we learned this lesson many years ago on this forum, but we were optimistic that BMD joining the L-Mount consortium would make it easier.

I am not reading this and from what I understood from my talk to some people involved in these companies, it is supposed to be an alliance in the real sense of it where information are shared and that everything should be compatible and interchangeable. BUT, with time I am sure we will see (or already saw) some drift.

Anyway, what I am reading here is, Hey, we show you how to do it on a Sigma FP with many screenshots and steps, if you want to do it on a Pana or Leica, go and visit their website or read the manual for that procedure.

rick.lang wrote:Long term solution: standardize all cameras on L-mount and acquire a company that will make BMD branded lenses. To be competitive and not disadvantaged, you need to follow similar business practices that have worked for years with companies that compete in both the lens and camera markets. Do you seriously think that Panasonic and Sigma meet regularly to share all their secrets and code to help each other since their part of this L- mount alliance? Of course you don’t. Look at the warranty of the Sigma L-Mount lenses: guaranteed to work on an appropriate Sigma camera but may also work on other cameras.

Few thoughts.

. As I said it is a real alliance in the real term of the word, at least how it was created, but with Leica at the top and milking it the most egregious possible way you can imagine, I am not so sure now.
. They do meet often; I believe that at one point it was a monthly meeting and maybe still do that monthly meeting for certain things. And for a technical reason, as well, manufacturing is sometimes shared across the brands. Now I am sure that there are CORE members (L, P, S) and newcomers may not have the same privilege, but meetings exist as they share ressources at every level.
. BM Making lenses would be GREAT, as the real money maker is there, but it implies acquiring someone as you said, since making a lens, is an art and after seeing firsthand how they make them (Sigma literally test EVERY LENSES before they ship them), you need a lot of talented people across the board.

Anyway, like you I was expecting more from BM to join the L alliance, but I like the rest, I think that BM does not really care about the mount really and just go where they are welcome (MFT, L...), They should maybe take another approach and start offering camera with swappable mount like they did for the 12K but for the rest.

Appreciate your thoughts. BMD from day one has been at the mercy of what they can do to adopt their cameras to use what lenses their customers already have. The L-mount initiative is important to them or they would not have risked launching a camera that relied on native L-mount lenses that very few of us would have previously owned. Yes, L-mount is appealing as a mount to which you can adapt many existing lenses so the new camera has a chance to succeed thanks to adapters.

But over time more L-mount lenses will appear. If adapting existing lenses was truly the best way to go, Sigma and Panasonic wouldn’t be building any L-mount lenses. But the difficulty with these lenses from Panasonic and Sigma working flawlessly on a BMD L-mount camera, whether it be technical firmware issues or optical issues, illustrates that Panasonic and Sigma appear to be content to market less expensive and flawed lenses that may only perform best on their proprietary cameras with proprietary code to work around their flaws.

Surely BMD is getting sick and tired of playing this game that in the early days trying to cope with other camera manufacturers’ proprietary mounts and secret code. I’m tired of discovering faults with some photo/centric lenses on cinema cameras. So glad Fujinon and several other manufacturers of cinema lenses produced works of art (and durable reliable technology) that have performed well for many decades.

The L-mount could use an infusion of honest cinema lenses and perhaps BMD will take on the challenge. Not just for the BMCC6K, but for all L-mount cameras today and tomorrow. Sure they need to acquire someone who wants to make L-mount lenses, who also wants to become a leader rather than a follower.

GonzagueGB wrote:
Few thoughts.

. As I said it is a real alliance in the real term of the word, at least how it was created, but with Leica at the top and milking it the most egregious possible way you can imagine, I am not so sure now.

It's not an alliance.

Leica own it. It's called "L" mount for a reason.

Leica have long partnered with Panasonic for their "Lumix" brand, and offering support. They are Family.

So are sigma who *probably* OEM many of the lenses that are sold as Lumix. Still in the family.

This is Leica's play pen. They decide who enters and gets to play. This isn't the same as m4/3 which is more like a genuine consortium.

GonzagueGB wrote:Anyway, like you I was expecting more from BM to join the L alliance, but I like the rest, I think that BM does not really care about the mount really and just go where they are welcome (MFT, L...),

They absolutely care. L mount is a great option. As well as realistically being the only one available to them, it's great for adopting to most other mounts. The shame here is that L mount isn't yet as MATURE as other mounts because it's still pretty new even as a STILL mount, let alone for high demand video users like BMD's customers.

Leica kept L to themselves for the first few years and it's pretty recent that Panasonic and sigma have done L mount cameras. It takes a long time to design and work up lenses.

GonzagueGB wrote:They should maybe take another approach and start offering camera with swappable mount like they did for the 12K but for the rest.

Not for this price point. But I'm sure they will on more expensive cameras.

JB

IMHO, the choice of this mount is already a great decision. While it may take time to mature for electronic lenses, you can already adapt so much great classic glass.
And then, Sigma made some excellent lenses in recent years.

easy to fix with a power window. Some of the cheaper cine lenses are bad for it in my experience, but a very large and very soft power window solves it.

Anyone know if there's been any progress on this? The vignetting I could probably live with (since I'm usually shooting in 6K DCI) but the banding interference is a no go.

I thought I would update this thread with my observations regarding the Panasonic Lumix 24-105 OIS L Mount

I spent a lot of time reading this thread over the past 12 months and every time I did I was put off buying this lens because of the EMI banding issues this lens has caused on the BMCC6K mentioned here and also on the B&H site.

I decided it was better to just stick with my set of Contax lenses and forget getting this lens.
Getting older means my hands are a little shaky and the lack of stabilisation on The BMCC is my biggest challenge, this is mostly fixed with Gyro Stab and more recently Ive been running a gimbal

So Blackmagic decide to bring out a beta auto focus for the BMCC6K...... I cant let that go by without having a play so I was back in the market for my first and only L mount lens. Again The OIS on this Lens was calling me and I decided to take a risk, buy it on Amazon with their 30 change of mind return policy, hell I thought from what Id heard about the vignetting on this that would be a good enough reason to get a refund.

Ok so I unboxed it today and my heart was in my mouth , I tested iso up to 12800 to try and duplicate the banding issue and with stab on and off there is no banding at any iso. So Happy.

Yes the Vignetting is pronounced at 24 but no big deal when shooting in opengate, it really is only an issue at 25 and below. Distortion down the wide end is also pronounced but thats an easy fix in post when necessary.
The OIS in this Lens is outstanding, blew me away, I'll frame shots in confidence now knowing what I see is what I get.
Even at 105 in its pseudo macro mode it was rock steady.

Auto focus, as I was mainly concerned about the EMI banding, I didn't spend much time with The AF but what I played with really impressed me.
I might put a video up on YouTube after tomorrows testing.

Ill talk about the AF on the AF Thread.

So while I'll go to the manual Zeiss lenses for most projects, the OIS and AF in its infancy means This baby just got a new lease of life.

Peter

Alex Mitchell wrote:

scorsesefan wrote:Thanks, Rick. I’m coming from Sony (fx6) and I’ve never had a vignetting issue with any of their FF glass. The issue seems to be in 6K.. In any case I’m picking up the Sigma 28-70 2.8 which I hope is OK. Returning the Panasonic to Adorama, which is having noise/banding issues on top of the vignetting. I’ll take a look at the Pro Panny lens you mentioned. Thanks

Banding and noise? Caused by a lens? With a 12-bit codec!? Nah, a lens can’t just cause banding in an image unless something is seriously wrong. Did you record any footage to show as an example?

That sounds like sensor smearing from not having enough light. I had it happen before. It looks like banding.