It works fine on the GH2 and I'm planning to use it on the BMPCC too when it shows up. If by "video-ish" you mean sharp, then yes it is a sharp lens.

I wouldn't describe John Brawley's footage as looking video-ish

@jimmykorea What really sold me on the 12-35 was this video:

though of course it's all exteriors. The color and sharpness to my eye is quite cinematic. I would just really love to see the lens perform in a cinematic context with human subjects, professional lighting, etc so I can get a better idea of how it deals with motion. Sure there have been plenty of tests of events/crowds, but the look of running and gunning is very different than if you have planned movements, controlled setting...

I have SLR Magic primes, but I am considering this lens as an all-in-one solution, specifically to rent out to others as a package with the BMPCC at low cost. I am always wary about renting out primes to people because of the damage that can occur when changing lens or the damage to lens mounts when changing. I have insurance, but I like to minimize the risk as much as possible. Haha

I'd have to agree I haven't been impressed with the 12-35 as well, but I'm not a big fan of any Pany glass. If I have to have stabilization I'll resort to it but I avoid it at all costs. Maybe the 20mm.

I have high hopes for the 12-35 on the pocket cinema cam. Hopefully, there is no in-cam sharpening going on like there is on the gh2 which IMO is why the lens creates a video look on that camera. Sharpened edges has never been cinematic.

The 12-35 has been OK for me as a utility lens (on the gh2) but it has it´s quirks which has managed to make me fuck up some stuff over time. Among other things it´s the lens that seems most prone to creating aliasing / moiré problems, maybe not surprising considering how sharp it is in itself and considering the in-cam sharpening.

Gaussian blur is a friend in post with that one. Other than that, it is quite "neutral" and can relatively easily be corrected to fit other lenses in look.

Actually I'm not sure the sharpness is the problem, watching Inception as I type and its razor sharp, soft doesn't mean cinema. My opinion is the lens is, and I know this isn't technical but looks kind of dull, not glossy like Leicas and even other lumix lenses. I blame the coatings they use that takes away the glossy clearness of good glass. I could be wrong but I want to see some better footage before I risk on such an expensive lens.

@Trumpetman

You just posted everything I was going to post except one thing. Every is talking about how the Speed Booster is a little soft on the edges. This will be less on the BMPCC since it is a smaller sensor, so the sharper center will be more prominent.

@kurth

The active part of the sensor is still centered.

Don´t mistake sharpness and sharpening. It´s very different. While the 12-35 certainly is resolving a lot judging from stills, there is in-camera sharpening (gh2, gh3) which makes edges stand out, almost separated - judging from the videos shot with it. The look created is a bit similar to many camcorders and it cannot be mistaken for actual detail, f.i. from a 5k-2k downsampling which has all the detail but very even edges.

Just downsample a still with 12-35 and you´ll see it looks remarkably different to a video frame grab of the same subject.

Some cams will output 1080p which is very close to this. (highly detailed video with minimal artifacts)

---

The thing with a cropped image circle is that you loose a lot of the feeling of a lens if it´s cropped too far (if the lens is designed for a much larger sensor). It will also magnify optical problems, like CA. Hence plenty of lenses will seem lacklustre or like bad performers on cameras with smaller sensors.

The 12-35 however, is designed for a sensor that is not dramatically larger than s16. There is no sharpening in the bmdpcc afaik and so, there is a good chance the 12-35 will actually come to it´s own when shooting moving images on that cam.

@jimmykorea I agree, but it's hard to say judging from that particular footage because it is essentially "home video" style. I expect the 12-35 is going to be a popular lens for this camera given the sensor size and given the odd focal length primes that one would get for it and wouldn't find very useful on other cameras. For instance, I would have a very hard time being able to justify having 5 different wide angle lenses for my GH3. On the BMPCC there would be a stark difference between them. As a rental, it would take a while to recoup that investment. So I'm just keeping my finger's crossed that the 12-35 is good enough.

Well I'm waiting it out till I see the kind of lens/ pocket cam footage that I'm looking for. I'm open to being proven wrong on the 12-35mm, just not that hopeful. hopefully we will soon see for ourselves...

Just sand the front element with super ultra fine sandpaper to get rid of the flare killing coating. Should get you the cine quality you're after ;) Id use 1800 grit.

Seriously though, it is the coating thats probably keeping this lens from being 'cinematic'. The most realistic option would be asetone or something.

@jimmykorea Here's another by the same dude, with the 12-35. I agree it's hard to believe it's the 12-35, this is some of the best looking GH3 footage I've ever seen, period.