Exactly. I've been using it to film docs where someone is talking about events from the 80s, and the vintage feel that this lens gives really pulls that off well. I could blast it with a UV or black light to get rid of some of the yellow tint -- or grade a little more aggressively -- but I kind of like it the way it is.
What kind of adapter did you use?! I was thinking about getting a generic one that I found but I've heard good things about the speedbooster adapter! Will the same adapter work with Canon FD lenses or is that a separate purchase entirely?
Haha yes, that's true. It's actually a full-fledged cinema camera boiled down into the body of a dslr. The size should be compared to an Ursa Mini Pro or Alexa -- a massive camera that rides on the shoulder -- rather than a dslr in terms of what it can do. This camera can't be compared to a dslr -- it's something entirely different. So thinking of it like this it's incredibly small.
@@RealLifeCinema i see, i didnt knew its a professional camera. I googled it with thought in mond i will find something similar in size with the Canon G7X Mark II or the Sony RX100 : ))
But you're right that the name is kind of misleading. It's the continuation of a line that started with the original Pocket Cinema Camera that you could actually put in a pocket. That camera was pretty famous, so I suppose the company wanted to keep the "pocket" name for branding purposes. However, Blackmagic Design -- as genius as they are about designing cameras -- tend to deliver some pretty misleading naming conventions. Ex: the URSA Mini Pro is not mini at all, the BMPCC4K can't go in a pocket. At this point it just kind of became the style of the company haha.
Not correct. The BMPCC 4k has an m4/3 mount, but the sensor size is near APS-C. And m4/3 isn't realky a size like APS-C. The old Pocket sensor was much smaller, like Super16mm, Gh2 was different to GH5 and so on.
I would love to see this lens and other M42 lenses with an M42 to EF adapter on a Metabones Speedbooster with this camera. So far, NO ONE -- I mean NO ONE -- has seemed to manage to do this. I'm guessing it's because the metal M42 to EF adapters would touch the Metabones Speedbooster's copper electronic pins when mounted, then the Metabones would be fried. I've been on every forum, every RUclips video possible regarding M42 to Metabones and BMPCC, but it seems attaching M42 lenses to Metabones and a BMPCC is impossible? If it was possible, that'd open up some seriously nice possibilities! Anyone have any ideas for those of us who already spent a wad of money for Metabones for our BMPCC?
This is absolutely possible. I use both the Super Takumar 50 f/1.4 as well as the 35 f/2 with the Metabones Speedbooster. No problem with the adapter touching the metal pins.
@@peterdanks6610 Everyone I've talked to, including myself have had bad experiences, and don't want to try it. Here's mine: I had an electrical Commlite EF to MFT adapter on my BMPCC. I put on my Carl Zeiss 50mm Pancolor with an M42 to EF adapter to it (that adapter was a K&F, steel-silver, non-coated one). Well, I turned on my BMPCC, and within seconds, I could smell a very nauseating and pungent burning -- that of typical short circuiting electronics. I quickly turned off my BMPCC, scared to death that I'd just fried something inside of it. It turns out it was the Commlite electronic adapter. It left multiple permanent burn marks on my M42 to EF adapter too, and the Commlite was completely dead. I'm talking FRIED. A hundred bucks lost in a few seconds. After that experience, I never tried anything like that again; especially NOT on my way more expensive Metabones!
I disagree. There is something about the way that light goes through a vintage lens that you can't fake in post. If you were correct here then why don't we all just use cheap Chinese crap lenses?
I went to Prague when I was 16 and this was exactly the colour of my memory. Well done, brought back some memories !
Yup, I'm a child of the sixties and I remember everything being in that colour palette. 😉
Definitely! That's exactly what I was going for!
Love it!!! Just ordered one)
Nice soft and bit yellowish..... and crazy flares, real vintage.
Exactly. I've been using it to film docs where someone is talking about events from the 80s, and the vintage feel that this lens gives really pulls that off well. I could blast it with a UV or black light to get rid of some of the yellow tint -- or grade a little more aggressively -- but I kind of like it the way it is.
GREAT CLIP!! was the whole video shot with the super takumar or some other lens was used? is this the 8 blade version or the 6 blade?
The entire video was shot with the Super Takumar.
What kind of adapter did you use?! I was thinking about getting a generic one that I found but I've heard good things about the speedbooster adapter! Will the same adapter work with Canon FD lenses or is that a separate purchase entirely?
Hey Wade! I just googled this camera and wondered why is it called a pocket camera? Its so damn huge!!!
Haha yes, that's true. It's actually a full-fledged cinema camera boiled down into the body of a dslr. The size should be compared to an Ursa Mini Pro or Alexa -- a massive camera that rides on the shoulder -- rather than a dslr in terms of what it can do. This camera can't be compared to a dslr -- it's something entirely different. So thinking of it like this it's incredibly small.
@@RealLifeCinema i see, i didnt knew its a professional camera. I googled it with thought in mond i will find something similar in size with the Canon G7X Mark II or the Sony RX100 : ))
But you're right that the name is kind of misleading. It's the continuation of a line that started with the original Pocket Cinema Camera that you could actually put in a pocket. That camera was pretty famous, so I suppose the company wanted to keep the "pocket" name for branding purposes. However, Blackmagic Design -- as genius as they are about designing cameras -- tend to deliver some pretty misleading naming conventions. Ex: the URSA Mini Pro is not mini at all, the BMPCC4K can't go in a pocket. At this point it just kind of became the style of the company haha.
Nice video! How do you pull focus outdoors and see the screen in daylight?
The screen on the camera is pretty bright. I haven't yet had much of an issue with this.
Hey! crazy video ! love it.....
what is the focal length u get with the 50 takumar ?? Need adapter ?
100mm 35mm equivalent with MFT sensor. Yes, need an adapter.
@@RealLifeCinema Its actually a 75mm equivalent for a 35mm (APS-C) sensor. - 50mm x 1.5 = 75mm. Cheers
@@robertredfern8001 His camera is not a APS-C sensor, its m43.
Not correct. The BMPCC 4k has an m4/3 mount, but the sensor size is near APS-C. And m4/3 isn't realky a size like APS-C. The old Pocket sensor was much smaller, like Super16mm, Gh2 was different to GH5 and so on.
Did you use a speedbooster?
Thank you
No. I don't have anything against them but I travel perpetually so the small form factor of MFT lenses helps.
How do you mount the lense in the camera?
With an adapter.
I would love to see this lens and other M42 lenses with an M42 to EF adapter on a Metabones Speedbooster with this camera. So far, NO ONE -- I mean NO ONE -- has seemed to manage to do this. I'm guessing it's because the metal M42 to EF adapters would touch the Metabones Speedbooster's copper electronic pins when mounted, then the Metabones would be fried. I've been on every forum, every RUclips video possible regarding M42 to Metabones and BMPCC, but it seems attaching M42 lenses to Metabones and a BMPCC is impossible? If it was possible, that'd open up some seriously nice possibilities! Anyone have any ideas for those of us who already spent a wad of money for Metabones for our BMPCC?
This is absolutely possible. I use both the Super Takumar 50 f/1.4 as well as the 35 f/2 with the Metabones Speedbooster. No problem with the adapter touching the metal pins.
@@peterdanks6610 Everyone I've talked to, including myself have had bad experiences, and don't want to try it. Here's mine: I had an electrical Commlite EF to MFT adapter on my BMPCC. I put on my Carl Zeiss 50mm Pancolor with an M42 to EF adapter to it (that adapter was a K&F, steel-silver, non-coated one). Well, I turned on my BMPCC, and within seconds, I could smell a very nauseating and pungent burning -- that of typical short circuiting electronics. I quickly turned off my BMPCC, scared to death that I'd just fried something inside of it. It turns out it was the Commlite electronic adapter. It left multiple permanent burn marks on my M42 to EF adapter too, and the Commlite was completely dead. I'm talking FRIED. A hundred bucks lost in a few seconds. After that experience, I never tried anything like that again; especially NOT on my way more expensive Metabones!
@@peterdanks6610 what m42 to ef converter do you use exactly?
Here ya go - vimeo.com/382787212
We use it with a Metabones EF and Adapter or with the M42 to mft Lens Turbo of Zhongyi. Works perfect. 😀
Hi
I think an IS lens would be more beneficial to the footage. That vintage look should achievable by grading. Thats what Braw is for....
I disagree. There is something about the way that light goes through a vintage lens that you can't fake in post. If you were correct here then why don't we all just use cheap Chinese crap lenses?
I also disagree. There's more to capturing an image than aiming to fix it in post production. Lenses impact the image.