Well, I partially replay to myself (please guys, don't let me alone in this topic!)
WIDE
I've seen some demos, and it seems to me that curved Zuiko 7-14 gives a too strong distortion (for my taste) at 7 (but also higher). On the other hand Lumix 12-35's OIS seems to have some micro-jittering issue.
I'd say that for video-shots it's better to go for a 32bit-gimbal (like Pilotfly H1+) together with an OIS-free lens like the
Zuiko 12mm f/2 prime lens. Yes, it's actually a mid-wide lens but hasn't distortion at all and it's fast! (See this
VIDEO by Moeru Maruyama.)
Anyway I have to take into account that I could use the lens for stills too, and perhaps OIS becomes more useful than a gimbal for this purpose, isn't it?
So, what do you think is the best compromise:
1. 12-35 with OIS (for both video and stills)
2. 12-35 (OIS disabled + Pilotfly for video, OIS-on for stills)
3. 12 f/2 + Pilotfly (for both video and stills)
TELE
More or less same question here: it doesn't seem to me that 42.5's OIS can replace an "external" stablization for video. So the competition could be between two different lens: Pana 42.5 f/1.2 (OIS disabled) vs Zuiko 75mm f/1.8. I've seen wonderful videos with the 75mm (another Maruyama's
VIDEO) but I wonder if it's right for my purpose: I'd use tele for close-up shots, for details like hands, faces, eyes. 75mm seems perfect but I wonder if the great shallow DoF could become a problem, especially without a tripod (even with the gimbal). I've read someone saying that 75mm DoF forces you to stop down to take more in focus, but it means less light! Therefore many prefer a more "usable" (they say) 42.5mm.
And again there is my need for stills to take into account (do I need OIS for handheld stills?)
So, what is the best tele compromise?
Please guys post your advices!