Microjitter question

So you may have some money to spare for vintage glass

… I’ll probably get a used one for $400 rather than a new one for 900.

Given the lens housing is mostly plastic including some of the moving parts and given that the used lens has been around for many years potentially with either a great deal of use or misuse or worse possibly not used much and stored improperly and therefore subject to degradation, buying used from a stranger has its possible downside. Buying new can be a form of insurance. But you may buy used and receive an excellent copy. Inevitably in life we are guided by the words of Clint Eastwood as Dirty Harry (1971): “Do you feel lucky, punk?”

Joe,

here's a video I shot 11 years ago with a RED Scarlet-X and the Canon 17-55 2.8. It was all handheld without any rig, you can see how smooth the IS works.

I used to shoot wide open, I don't see distracting vignetting but I can't remember if there was any on the wide end of the focal range. I don't think there was.

https://vimeo.com/michelrabe/ajourney?share=copy

Looks like I screwed up gamma on the export back then :=)

Fun video thanks for that!
Looks good but of course I don’t know how much the red suffered from micro jitters. But if it looks like that on my 4K I’d be delighted.

Anyone know how the panny 12-35 MFT lens compares to the Cannon both image and IS wise?

I think that lens looks terrible (as many MFT lenses).

I wouldn't say it looks terrible; there's a good representative example below (although this was shot on the original Pocket, not the Pocket 4K, and the cinematographer used a gimbal; this isn't handheld). The IS is pretty much useless compared with the Canon. However it's a lot smaller and lighter, and no need for an adapter. It has strong barrel distortion at 12mm. I don't use mine much anymore except for travel, where it's a nice option.

That video looks good but those are also all wide shots and I'd argue it would have looked good with most lenses - good motif and time of day/light...and also the lovely OG Pocket!

I bought the 12-35mm to test on the P4K once and sent it back, the P4K needs a little work in post to get rid of that digital edge (unlike the OG) and the 12-35mm added to that, in my opinion at least.

A speed booster and APS-C/H focal lenghts does make a huge difference on the P4K imo.

If it doesn't need to be that small and light, I second the Canon. The Panny needs more in camera correction, which the BM cameras don't have.

So you may have some money to spare for vintage glass

I've been buying some from ebay recently, most of them has issues like stuck iris, stiff focus and dust but seller sometimes don't mention that so I was force to do my own repair.
Most impressive so far is the Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50mm f1.8 red MC but I also got the earlier zebra version with orange radioactive lens.

Thanks! I think any non-stabilized glass longer than a 30 will be a no go for me in most day to day stuff but when it’s on a tripod… would love to take a look at that lens.

Got the Canon 17-55 IS and what a difference! The IS smoothed away all the micro jitters.
Thanks everyone for contributing and steering me in what seems to be a very good direction.

Welcome to the club of Canon 17-55 2.8 fans


How's vigentting? I couldn't recall if I had used it with the same camera / Speedbooster combo you are using.