@@fridadeivizsla2729 Sigma 18-35

@@gregoryjackson2790 lol yup, he made an appearance

@@gregoryjackson2790 I’m really just testing different setups and seeing how it looks on a larger screen. But it might help someone who is trying to learn how to do it!

You have film cover looking clean. I could never get it looking the way I wanted

@@lexgraham I found that I had to do a global white balance shift, offset for resolve, and save it. So now it’s automatically accurate when I apply it

Yeah. Same order as the title

There are two other videos on the channel testing this mic with no music

@@gregoryjackson2790 thank you, Dad!

Yes. The m-42 to EF mount is just a simple screw on. Once you have done that, you can use the speed booster just fine

very kind of you to say, and I agree!

This is an MKE400 boomed into a Zoom H6

for this test it was connected to a wireless mic, and the receiver was on the camera. I have also boomed it by attaching a Zoom H6 to the boom arm using a small rig magic arm so I can connect the mic directly to the recorder.

Thank you. I love how the footage looks from the X-H2S

Unfortunately it doesn't

Depending on which film simulation you apply and the strength of the film color slider, you will have to make a global adjustment to remove the blue or purple tint and decrease the exposure/highlights. What I did was save and export that global adjustment and exposure adjustment as a preset before film convert (in final cut) for all of the film simulations I use so that every time I applied film convert with that simulation, it would automatically remove the color shift and darken the image without having to do it manually. I don't know which software you use, but you should be able to do the same in the other editors. From there you can make minor adjustments for each shot as needed.

IN this case I bought a very inexpensive M42 to EF screw on adapter. From there, I have the Fringer EF-FX II Pro adapter for any EF glass.

@@VidzbyG can’t u do a m42 to fx mount adapter? Or do you have to do ef then fx?

@@visionsoferic you can go straight to FX. I have that adapter as well. The reason I chose to go EF is so I don't have to bring multiple adapters when I use more than one lens. The ef Adapter is also shorter, so the lens doesn't stick out as much

In camera I did highlights -2. I also added contrast with color wheels in final cut. Nothing too extreme

@@VidzbyGGreat results! Thanks

Sorry for the delayed response. I have a physical adapter from m-42 mount to EF (very affordable, metal piece that screws on). Then the fringer EF-FX adapter to fit it to the camera

I exposed it to the right so I can bring down the exposure later. Usually that helps with noise in cinestyle and in log profiles

Sigma 18-35.

appreciate it

Thank you!

Thank you!

Yes, just eterna. Because the dynamic range of this sensor is better than previous sensors, I think you truly can get away with just using eterna and making slight contrast and white balance adjustments

Glad you enjoyed this clip. The lens is great, definitely gives good character. You do have to saturate a little more, but that’s typical for these vintage Zeiss lenses from what I’ve seen.

Thanks for your comment! I didn’t apply glow to this footage. This was film convert Kodak 5207. I just did a white balance and contrast adjustment and boosted saturation.

@@VidzbyG nice, are you using any tools to soften?

@@girishkhakurel2673 I am not. I jut have sharpening turned all the way down. Final Cut doesn’t have a softening option built in for non 3D footage

@@girishkhakurel2673 Going back and reviewing this, I think it just may be this particular copy of the lens. Some copies have a more hazy look than others when they are wide open. Stopping down from 2.4 to 2.8 or higher you may not notice it as much.

Thanks. I really enjoy the lens. Results will very though depending on the version and the condition of your copy. Overall, it helps decrease the sharpness of the X-H2s and give a more filmic vs digital look

Thank you! The Zeiss lens renders so well. I didn’t know how much of a difference it would make, but I can see why they’re viewed so highly now

This was shot in cinestyle profile, that helps. I also upscaled to 4k. Which helps with sharpness

@@VidzbyG thanks! I dont know what cinestyle is but I'll google it!

Thank you!

Thank you. It was a great camera.

just subscribes:)

Thank you!

Not for this video, but yes. This camera didn’t have stabilization

I think it has to do with over exposure in bright sun. I only have a 2-5 stop ND, I need a 6-9 so that I can expose properly

Thank you!

@@VidzbyG My pleasure!

Thanks! Yes, it’s a great setup

I think they are very similar, but the better dynamic range, autofocus, and codec options make the XH2S better for my needs. You can get an amazing image from the xt4 still.

@@VidzbyG got it! thank you🍻

Thank you!

It was music from youtube studio I believe. I'm not using resolve currently, I use Final Cut Pro

I haven’t used the R10, so I can’t say for sure if it’s better than the M50, but I would go with the newer model if you want the best quality. If you want to save money, the M50 is a solid option.

@@VidzbyG thanks bro

Hi, I haven't used the R10, so I'm not really sure if I can tell you which one is better

thank you