Yep. *sigh*. I was up until 4:55 a.m. this morning trying to fix the audio. When it was imported into a Final Cut Pro multicam edit timeline, it screwed something up with the audio. Something is off with either that workflow or a setting somewhere, or, something was off when going from mono --> multicam --> dual mono --> Timeline. It's crazy because I 100% had run a de-esser and re-ran it twice in RX 10 audio editor. I'll take a look at this later on today. I can't do anything about this video, but I'll ensure it gets resolved before future videos. I hear it also, and it's terrible. Good audio is over 1/2 the experience of any video. I actually appreciate your letting me know, as I thought I was going crazy. 👍 I'll leave this pinned to the top of the comments, as I'm sure others will notice this audio issue as well.

@@pal2tech I was surprised that the video side of the Viltrox seemed not as great. It is marketed as a video lense.

@@stevegeorge7773 Interesting. To be clear, autofocus on many lenses and the stepping exposure issue I see a lot with various lenses. I think it becomes more pronounced when it opens up to as wide as f/1.2, and that focus by wire reaches from foreground to background. I don't know if it's in the 3rd party communication with the camera's autofocus system or what, but I wouldn't use this or most lenses like it in fully Auto mode for either exposure or AF. For sure, you can use it with video, but as I mentioned in the video, it's helpful to set the exposure to fully manual (to avoid the exposure stepping) and, of course, manual focus if you are in a position to do that. If not, then set AF to AF-C, with AF Speed to something like 0 or -1. You can get by with this workaround, I think. But no, I would not consider this a 'video lens,' even though Viltrox makes the best 3rd party lenses for the Fuji system. And lastly, I tested one of the first lenses they had available. So it could be that this either was improved (or will be) in a firmware update.

@@pal2techYep, one can expect improvements by firmware - the 75mm f/1.2 performed much better in video with the latest firmware, albeit not flawlessly. Very probably it will have newer firmware, just not take it for granted.

@@pal2tech Hello! Among these 2, Which do you recommend to start product/Food photo with Fuji XT4 …Vittrox 85mm ($349) or Fuji 90mm? :) I read a few reviews saying that Vittrox doesn’t last longer :/

It's great seeing these lenses however as it cements apsc as viable for pro use which is awesome but yeah the compactness is still not to be dismissed.

We could 100% still benefit from a 135mm, 8mm and even a 300mm. I’d like to see viltrox stick to making primes; I think Sigma and Tamron will have us covered on the Zoom end of lenses.

The Voigtlander lenses are quite small. Manual focus, of course, but I often prefer that.

"Now the new lenses are mostly focused on larger lenses for maximum sharpness and wide apertures." did the compact lenses like the F2 primes cease to exist just because they released some larger lenses? No, thus your argument is invalid. Mind-boggling how that has to be explained.

Yeah. I've been contemplating switching from m4/3 but the lens bulk is real. A lineup of tiny f/2.8 primes would really tempt me to switch. (My current go-to lens is only 100g!)

It's great for event photographers.

The 27mm f2.8 is just unbeatable. I thought maybe that plus a larger, faster lens would be a good combo. But I sold the 56mm 1.4 after realizing the 27mm is all I will ever need (probably naive but happy for now)

Ditto

I would love that too!

Viltrox 85mm I think I'd like 135 full frame I stand to be corrected

@@mahlanerannius6733 that’s irrelevant my friend. We want 135mm for APSC.

@@ChristianThueringer It's coming! They heard me. " 135mm f/1.8 Lab Series coming by the end of 2023. Lab Series image quality and performance will be higher than the Pro series"

@@Eyeofkamau It's coming! They heard me. " 135mm f/1.8 Lab Series coming by the end of 2023. Lab Series image quality and performance will be higher than the Pro series"

Hi, Sigma already released a zoom lens for Fuji. I'm talking about Sigma 18-50 f2.8 DC DN Contemporary. I am waiting for bright but less heavy and bulky lenses 😅

Same, I already got the 75.

How are those Viltrox lenses doing about embedding their lens correction profile in the protocol with the camera ? (The camera itself uses that to correct the jpegs and to include it in the raw files. Photo editors like C1 use it to correct distortion, vignetting and transversal chromatic aberration).

❤❤❤😢 Thank you.

the f1.4 line up has pretty bad QC, and you're talking about a chinese brand, ofc the CS is shit, also these pro lenses are absolutely stellar, none of the copies i have seen (around 10 of my friends) are bad and all of ours are just as good as the reviews

How are those Viltrox lenses doing about embedding their lens correction profile in the protocol with the camera ? (The camera itself uses that to correct the jpegs and to include it in the raw files. Photo editors like C1 use it to correct distortion, vignetting and transversal chromatic aberration).

Gotta factor in price and focal length. If you want bokeh then something like 56/75 is gonna be better for you. I found the 1.2 aperture on the 75 to be fantastic for low light in really challenging conditions. 27 I would imagine would provide same benefits except at a wider focal length. I don’t think it’s fair to really compare it to the 33 1.4, they aren’t same focal length or price range.

@@MOTOJendays There's about €150 difference in price depending on where you shop right now. I paid €100 more than the 27 is selling for. Not a huge difference to make it the deciding factor. Used of course you'll be able to pick up a 33 1.4 cheaper than the 27. And it's completely legitimate to compare the 27 to the 33 if you buy it for portraits. We're talking the difference between taking one step forward or back. They are alternatives for the same situations. 56/75/90 different story. Obviously there are lots of options that will get you shallower depth of field than the 27 f1.2 in the 30-35mm range - even the sigma 30mm f1.4 (just). And you are right that longer focal lengths will be better for bokeh and DoF, for a completely different look. It sounds like you're more in the extra light gathering camp. But I have not seen any reviews at all in which this is pushed as the main advantage of the lens - it's all about IQ and depth of field with light gathering getting a side mention. This really removes the budget options from the equation, and the 27 2.8 lenses, but not the Fuji 33/35 1.4. But as far as light gathering is concerned, no argument there. And if someone is constantly shooting at 12800, maybe being able to shoot at 10,000 instead is a big deal. But if you tend to shoot no higher than 1600, is being able to shoot at 1250 instead such a big deal, or iso 640 instead of 800? Nice for sure to be able to stop down a fraction, but the trade off is obviously the size, flaring at times and the lousy video performance if that matters. Over the 23, the 27 has a much bigger advantage... although 23mm is more of a goldilocks focal length. But I can see some willing to give up some width for smoother and shallower DoF - especially if the priority is environmental portraits. Personally for environmental portraits, I like to have a little more environment and to be able to get a lot closer. And to be subtle and/or disarming. With smaller lenses people are happier to engage and show their true personalities I find. So I can see that 27mm might be a perfect between focal length for some. It could save buying both the 23 and 33, or it could replace both to simplify. A compromise. Others might just really like the focal length or value just having the one lens mounted for a job and not having to change (as much). But the 1/3 stop difference means a lot more as a spec than in real life unless you are constantly at the extremes of the current 23 or 33 lenses. I'm more in the simplify my gear camp. But creating more space on the shelf is less relevant (for me) than the space I will lose in the pack as I'd only carry either the 23 or 33, never both. So much like the 75, I think the "pro" tag hits the mark. Lenses for those that are working pros for whom bulk is not as important. Have two bodies, one with the 75, one with the 27 and you could be set for many events with a couple of zooms at hand.

@@brownbear100 I'm sorry but that's way too much for me to read over an opinion over the 27 vs the 33 lol. I really don't believe you can find an used 33 cheaper than a 27. That's insane. Cheapest 33 1.4s here in the US are like $750-$800. New is $900-$1k. And yes the only reason to talk about f1.2 vs f1.4 is the light gathering. In terms of dof it's almost nothing. It's a no brainer that 33 1.4 has more shallow dof.

@@brownbear100 I guess simply put it. You're trying to compare the focal lengths. Not the lens. And there's no objectively better focal length. Just cause you like 33 1.4 for the more shallow dof. Doesn't make it more appealing to everyone else who may like shooting with a 27.

the 33 is nearly double in price, end of discussion