SEARCH  WEBSITE

Known as the "plastic fantastic" this lens is a decent optic, for a not much money. It has a good close focus distance, and though the focusing ring is very thin (probably too narrow for focus gears to be added) it's somewhat easy for me to use when focusing by hand. I don't think the color rendition of this lens is very accurate. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic G7 + BOOST (Metabones XL .64x) Canon 50 1.8 ii Natural "PHOTO STYLE" -3 CONTRAST -5 SHARPNESS +2 NOISE -2 COLOR -0, -0 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST B IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS B IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR C IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: June 8, 2022 at 10:24:31 PM Known as the "plastic fantastic" this lens is a decent optic, for a not much money. It has a good close focus distance, and though the focusing ring is very thin (probably too narrow for focus gears to be added) it's somewhat easy for me to use when focusing by hand. I don't think the color rendition of this lens is very accurate. My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

INDOOR OUTDOOR < Back #301 Advanced Playbook 2 Static WIDE & TIGHT Snipe This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. 30 LIGHTS 50 CAMERAS 200 AUDIO This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Want to view and manage all your collections? Click on the Content Manager button in the Add panel on the left. Here, you can make changes to your content, add new fields, create dynamic pages and more. You can create as many collections as you need. Your collection is already set up for you with fields and content. Add your own, or import content from a CSV file. Add fields for any type of content you want to display, such as rich text, images, videos and more. You can also collect and store information from your site visitors using input elements like custom forms and fields. Be sure to click Sync after making changes in a collection, so visitors can see your newest content on your live site. Preview your site to check that all your elements are displaying content from the right collection fields. BE SAFE & BRING TAPE.

[Note: This also is using an M42 screw mount to Nikon F adapter, in addition to the Nikon F to M43 SHIFT adapter noted.] I will have to admit this lens has a lot of character but it, like so many of these vintage lenses, is inconsistent in terms of how it renders light. [UNFILTERED] Panasonic GX85 + HELICOID (Macro Helicoid Adapter) Pentax Super-Takumar 50 1.4 ii Natural "PHOTO STYLE" -4 CONTRAST +4 SHARPNESS +3 NOISE -1 COLOR OFF HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: July 8, 2022 at 11:26:12 PM [Note: This also is using an M42 screw mount to Nikon F adapter, in addition to the Nikon F to M43 SHIFT adapter noted.] I will have to admit this lens has a lot of character but it, like so many of these vintage lenses, is inconsistent in terms of how it renders light. My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

This lens is a 1990s vintage "TELE" kit lens (for Nikon mount). One interesting thing is it seems to be exactly the same as the Quantaray (of this same focal length). I started the test using the exact same custom settings, and the resulting images look almost identical. Also, both lenses have a 1:2 MACRO spec in the same exact focal length range (the macro lock engages between 180-300mm on both lenses). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic G7 +ADAPTER (Non-Optical) Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" -1 CONTRAST +1 SHARPNESS +4 NOISE -1 COLOR -2+2 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD DEFAULT Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 LD Panasonic G7 NATURAL -0-0-0-0 HS -0-0 CUSTOM Promaster 70-300 4-5.6 LD Panasonic G7 NATURAL -1+1+4-1 HS -2+2 REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST A IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS B IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE C IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR B IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: September 9, 2023 at 8:23:24 PM This lens is a 1990s vintage "TELE" kit lens (for Nikon mount). One interesting thing is it seems to be exactly the same as the Quantaray (of this same focal length). I started the test using the exact same custom settings, and the resulting images look almost identical. Also, both lenses have a 1:2 MACRO spec in the same exact focal length range (the macro lock engages between 180-300mm on both lenses). My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

Overall, this microphone sounds pretty good (i.e. it sounds natural and "REAL") and this is with the included (stock) FOAM windscreen. However, what is really interesting is that this microphone does not sound good with the Comica...(furry lavalier windscreen). That's interesting because most of the lav microphones I've tested sound BETTER with that furry windscreen. (This microphone doesn't seem to benefit from a reduction of reverb when used INDOORS, as a lot of the other microphones seemed to. This means both that this microphone is not a good choice for me to use OUTDOORS (with the Comica furry). Also, it means, even if I did find another lavalier furry windscreen, this one will be slower to use because I can't just leave a furry windscreen on all the time (I prefer to use lav mics that sound better with a furry windscreen (both indoors and out). The good news is that they did a really good job making this microphone sound natural with the included (stock) FOAM windscreen, which I can't say is the case for a lot of other lavalier mics (the ones I've tested of course). "LAV" Proximity [7 inches / 17.78 cm] Zoom F1 [NO AUX. BOOST] 7RYMS Lavalier (for iRAY DW30) WINDSCREEN: Foam (Stock) 96k 24bit REC. SETTINGS OFF REC. LOWCUT OFF REC. LIMITER ? REC. LEVEL AUX. SETTINGS N/A AUX. BASS N/A AUX. HIGH-LOW N/A AUX. OUTPUT MIC. SETTINGS N/A MIC. LOWCUT N/A MIC. HIGH PASS N/A MIC. BOOST (RFI) RADIO FREQUENCY INTERFERENCE LESS THAN 1.1ft / 0.34m BETWEEN 1.1ft / 0.34m -2.2ft / 0.67m BETWEEN 2.2ft / 0.67m -3.3ft / 1m BETWEEN 3.3ft / 1m -4.4ft / 1.34m Published: January 5, 2023 at 1:56:47 AM REAL RATINGS After testing each microphone, I like to know if it sounds realistic (accurate lows/bass, mids, highs/treble) in combination with the recorder and/or AUX. amplifier, to see if it needs EQ. LOWS/BASS DO THE "LOWS" SOUND REAL? MIDS DO THE "MIDS" SOUND REAL? HIGHS/TREBLE DO THE "HIGHS" SOUND REAL? NOTES: Overall, this microphone sounds pretty good (i.e. it sounds natural and "REAL") and this is with the included (stock) FOAM windscreen. However, what is really interesting is that this microphone does not sound good with the Comica...(furry lavalier windscreen). That's interesting because most of the lav microphones I've tested sound BETTER with that furry windscreen. (This microphone doesn't seem to benefit from a reduction of reverb when used INDOORS, as a lot of the other microphones seemed to. This means both that this microphone is not a good choice for me to use OUTDOORS (with the Comica furry). Also, it means, even if I did find another lavalier furry windscreen, this one will be slower to use because I can't just leave a furry windscreen on all the time (I prefer to use lav mics that sound better with a furry windscreen (both indoors and out). The good news is that they did a really good job making this microphone sound natural with the included (stock) FOAM windscreen, which I can't say is the case for a lot of other lavalier mics (the ones I've tested of course). Keep in mind, these settings will not establish the exact level you'll need for every scene (where the audio level "bounces" around -12) but my goal is to provide a good starting point (that comes out clean, after boosting in post). It's also important to use these "recommended settings" for my microphone-specific EQ files to work properly (they won't work as intended if any of the "audio variables" are different). The EQ file was created to correct any sonic imperfections of the microphone or wind protection (foam, furry) and have been created with Audacity (the free audio editor) to make them as affordable as possible. Also, it's important to always monitor (accurate headphones) your audio while recording so you can hear any problems and make any changes needed to your audio. GAFFER TAPE SUPPLIED BY

The Panasonic G85 and GX85 tests almost always come out identical, but I tested this lens on the both just to make sure (again) and yep, they both work well with these settings (for this lens). Remember that it's always "lens-sensor specific" but because the G85 and GX85 keep coming out the same (test after test) I am going to start interpolating the results to either one (I'll explain more later). [UNFILTERED] Panasonic G85 + BOOST (Viltrox NF-M43x .71x) Sigma 17-50 2.8 NATURAL "PHOTO STYLE" -4 CONTRAST -5 SHARPNESS +3 NOISE -1 COLOR +3 SHADOWS HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST ? IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: April 8, 2022 at 10:47:28 PM The Panasonic G85 and GX85 tests almost always come out identical, but I tested this lens on the both just to make sure (again) and yep, they both work well with these settings (for this lens). Remember that it's always "lens-sensor specific" but because the G85 and GX85 keep coming out the same (test after test) I am going to start interpolating the results to either one (I'll explain more later). My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

TIPS #006 USE "T-LIGHTING" (NOT 3-POINT LIGHTING) I use T-Lighting because it’s faster to set up and less expensive than 3-point lighting (and yields similar results!) T-Lighting is much more versatile because it can be used in spaces with low ceilings. THE DETAILS To take a phrase from a blog post I have about this, "T-Lighting" is a simple, 2-light method that's faster and easier to set up than 3-point lighting but is less expensive (yet produces similar results). If you haven't heard of this, T-Lighting is a 2-light setup which uses the #2 light as both the 3/4 backlight AND as a background light (and the main light is used the same way as it would be in 3-point lighting). It's "faster" because you're only setting up a total of 2 lights (no boom for the "hair light") and it's easier for a number of reasons. Check out the BLOG post for more details, and the lighting diagram. ©2021 SilverLight Photo Co.

NOTE: For use with ATEM Mini, I'm adjusting the settings slightly (as shown below): CONTRAST: -3 SHARPNESS: -1 NOISE: +4 COLOR: -0 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW: OFF [UNFILTERED] Panasonic G85 + BOOST (Viltrox NF-M43x .71x) Nikon 50 1.8 AIS Natural "PHOTO STYLE" -5 CONTRAST -1 SHARPNESS +4 NOISE -2 COLOR OFF HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST - IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS - IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE - IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR - IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: June 9, 2021 at 6:18:28 PM NOTE: For use with ATEM Mini, I'm adjusting the settings slightly (as shown below): CONTRAST: -3 SHARPNESS: -1 NOISE: +4 COLOR: -0 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW: OFF My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

NOTE: In CineLike D, THIS LENS IS A PERFECT MATCH at -0-0-0-0. I am testing now in NATURAL because I need to be able to test still photo modes... [UNFILTERED] Panasonic GH4 + SHIFT (Perspective Control Adapter) Nikon 18-55 Natural "PHOTO STYLE" -5 CONTRAST -1 SHARPNESS +5 NOISE +2 COLOR -4+3 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST C IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS B IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE B IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR B IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: June 9, 2021 at 6:35:35 PM NOTE: In CineLike D, THIS LENS IS A PERFECT MATCH at -0-0-0-0. I am testing now in NATURAL because I need to be able to test still photo modes... My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

TIPS #011 USE A 1990s 70-300 (ON M43) FOR YOUR TELE SHOT This is a super inexpensive way to get a high quality telephoto shot. The key is to get a good 1990s vintage 70-300 and to use it with a Micro Four Thirds (2x crop) sensor that has IBIS. THE DETAILS When you're on a budget and need a good TELE (telephoto) shot, a 70-300 from the 1990s is an excellent choice. It's portable, affordable and common (there's lots of them available on the used market) and that's why I love them! I've tested more than 10 of these (from Sigma, Tamron, Promaster, etc.) and my favorite is one that was made by Tamron but is available as a Tamron, Promaster or Quantaray. All three are optically the same, per my tests. There are a lot of Tamron 70-300 lenses out there, so to help it's not the Di version, but the LD, and then the one with a 1:2 macro (not 1:4 or other). If you look for the Quantaray version, it's not one with the green lettering, or the gold lettering (it has white lettering with just a little gold) and it is identical to the Tamron except for the name. The Promaster (also a 1:2 macro) that has matching optics has a different rubber grip, but my tests indicate it is identical optically. All three of these ARE PARFOCAL, which is excellent. Most of the Sigma versions I tested of that vintage are not very good, but the older (first generation AF) all-metal versions can be pretty good. Also, this tip works best on a Micro Four Thirds body (for maximum telephoto reach) and with a body that has good IBIS (In-Body Image Stabilization). ©2021 SilverLight Photo Co.

It looks pretty good, but there is still a little bit too much contrast, which makes it difficult to stay within the dynamic range capabilities of this camera. In the future I'd like to try a Tiffen GlimmerGlass or Tiffen Black ProMist to see if it will help. FILTER: Promaster HGX UV Panasonic G7 + BOOST (Metabones XL .64x) Canon 70-200 2.8 CineLike D "PHOTO STYLE" -0 CONTRAST -5 SHARPNESS +5 NOISE +1 COLOR -2, +2 HIGHLIGHT SHADOW OFF iDYNAMIC OFF iRESOLUTION 16-255 LUMINANCE LEVEL Unsharp Mask* ADOBE POST-PRODUCTION AMOUNT RADIUS THRESHOLD REAL RATINGS After testing each lens-sensor combo, I like to know if the rendering is going to look realistic SOOC (S traight O ut o f C amera) or if it will need a LUT (to match the shots to other lenses and cameras). CONTRAST B IS THE CONTRAST "REAL"? SHARPNESS A IS THE SHARPNESS "REAL"? NOISE IS THE NOISE "REAL"? COLOR A IS THE COLOR "REAL"? *Click here to learn more about "REAL" Ratings . These ratings are AFTER my custom settings are applied (most combos don't look real good with default settings). Published: June 4, 2022 at 4:55:34 PM It looks pretty good, but there is still a little bit too much contrast, which makes it difficult to stay within the dynamic range capabilities of this camera. In the future I'd like to try a Tiffen GlimmerGlass or Tiffen Black ProMist to see if it will help. My goal for these camera settings is to improve the "lens-sensor relationship" by adjusting the contrast, sharpness, noise reduction and color with the result that it produces an image that looks less "digital" and more "organic" (more like film, etc). The first step is to apply these settings while shooting (produces an image that looks pretty good straight out of camera) but keep in mind there may need to be slight color grading (or a LUT) applied to finalize each shot. SPECIAL THANKS TO

In the old days, "multimedia" was just a fancy term that meant you could work with art, audio and video on a computer, which was quite a new thing back then. This page showcases my multimedia content creation portfolio to show how to simultaneously create content in multiple formats. HOW TO EASILY CONVERT ALMOST ANY MICROSCOPE... ...TO MICRO FOUR THIRDS. I was amazed how easy it was to convert an old microscope to use with my (Micro Four Thirds) camera. After I figured this out, I purchased several more microscopes to try, and I hope to post additional information soon (with sample pictures) of how to do it. I found many used microscopes online, and have purchased several for the test. The first requirement is that the microscope be monocular (single eyepiece). Some of my samples have pretty good optics included, and some are just average, so we'll see how that affects quality. One of the microscopes I purchased appears to be from the 1950s (or pretty close). I will need to test the image output to understand what magnification I'm really getting (due to crop factor of sensor, etc.) HOW TO (INSTRUCTIONS COMING SOON!) Plant-with-rain-drops-1 Plant-with-rain-drops-1 1/1 GAFFER TAPE SUPPLIED BY WE DO AFFILIATE PROGRAMS WE PARTICIPATE IN, AND HIGHLY RECOMMEND, AFFILIATE PROGRAMS (INCLUDING THE AMAZON ASSOCIATES PROGRAM) WHICH PROVIDE A SMALL COMMISSION TO ME (AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO YOU) WHEN YOU MAKE A PURCHASE THROUGH ONE OF THE LINKS ON THIS WEBSITE.