Interview Lens

[Jesse Brauning]

In the realm of manual primes, and given the whole crop-factor nonsense: what would you consider to be a great interview lens, and why?

[Noel Evans]

14-140 - Why? Because interviews require a lot of flexibility as the locations are always different, you dont always know what your going to get until your on location and often times you see the location for the first time when your shooting it. Interviewees also dont want to be sitting around forever while you set up. Id rather pop on the 14-140, choose my background - then spend the time lighting it and making it pretty. When I get to my camera the 14-140 will then let me go in a bit out a bit throughout the whole thing.

[Ticheli]

In the realm of manual primes, and given the whole crop-factor nonsense: what would you consider to be a great interview lens, and why?

Hard to beat a 50MM; works out to somewhere between 55MM and 60MM depending on what you are comparing it to; it's about 55MM compared to a Red One at 16x9 HD. This is wide enough to get a waist shot without backing off too far and "telephoto" enough to produce a flattering close-up. The wider lenses tend to exaggerate the face, making it bulbus. Not good unless you're going to a character look.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

[Andrew J. Allsbury]

To achieve the "pretty" blurry background it will need to be a fast lens at a low aperature, we are planning on using the following lenses depending on room size restraints:
Panasonic 20mm 1.7
Nikon 24mm 2.8 (Obviously last choice)
Nikon 50mm 1.4

The 14-140 looks to be a great lens, but at f4 I don't think you are going to take full advantage of the DoF most want from this camera in an interview setting.

[Fotojorno]

For myself and of course depending on much distance for camera to subject and subject to background I have to work with. I would bring to every interview my Zeiss ZF 35 2.0, Nikkor AIS 50 1.8 and Nikkor AIS 85 1.4. Those are three of the fastest, sharpest lenses I have and would cover a safe range for most interviews. I dont own a 4/3rds zoom yet but Im sure I would bring that as well. I actually played around with the Panny 14-140 today at B&H and was pleasantly surprised by it. The 5.8 max aperture when zoomed in is kind of a deal breaker for me, not because of the slightly increased DOF (@140) but because of the need for more light (indoors) at 5.8.

Oh.. B&H said I was 16th on the paid wait list. Jan, please send them at least 20 in the first shipment!! ..please.

[Jesse Brauning]

I've been looking for a really cheap 85mm. Any mount, I don't care. But, ebay's got nothing under $100, except for 1 busted up Canon 85mm F1.8 FD, which looks too busted up to be safe.
Any ideas about that?

[Ticheli]

Don't be too quick to assume you need f1.4; at 6' you're going to have only a couple of inches DOF. That's pretty slim; get a talent with some mobility and you'll lose focus.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

[Coco Bermudez]

Oh.. B&H said I was 16th on the paid wait list. Jan, please send them at least 20 in the first shipment!! ..please.

not to deviate from the subject...but when did you put your pre-order? I also did it via B&H

[Jesse Brauning]

You have a good point, I'm less concerned with something super-fast at that focal length, than something nice and sharp. I'd be happy with anything up to F2.8, as long as it was sharp and cheap.

[Coco Bermudez]

i plan to be using my Zeiss lenses F1.4 - F1.8. I can't wait to try a Fujinon TV-Z Lens 10-140mm F1.6. I had modified for use with my GH-1...should be awesome.

[Fotojorno]

not to deviate from the subject...but when did you put your pre-order? I also did it via B&H

I ordered and paid on 10/12. If you call their customer service # and give your order number they can look up your spot. As far as availability goes, they said they ordered a lot of them but have no idea how many Panasonic will send in the first shipment.

A manual focus Nikkor AIS 50mm 1.8 is probably the cheapest sharp fast lens you'll be able to find. My manual focus 85 1.4 was $500 on ebay but is in mint condition. Yeah at 10ft to subject with the 85 on a 5D the DOF at f1.8 is 5 inches, at f5.6 it's 17 inches, not a huge difference. 5.6 gives a little bit of safety in case the subject moves a bit.

[tflak]

...I actually played around with the Panny 14-140 today at B&H and was pleasantly surprised by it. The 5.8 max aperture when zoomed in is kind of a deal breaker for me, not because of the slightly increased DOF (@140) but because of the need for more light (indoors) at 5.8.

The 14-140 is at 5.0 by 28mm, 5.3 at 35mm, 5.6 at 50mm, and 55+ = 5.8. For indoor interviews it's like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

[Petros Kolyvas]

There's a Tamron 28-105 2.8 for Nikon mounts I just noticed - it's not made anymore but available enough. Anyone ever seen or used that one? Even if it breathes and doesn't maintain focus while zooming, it could be good for interviews. Am I crazy?

[Jesse Brauning]

That looks like a very interesting lens. Possibly a great buy for any kind of tripod work. I'd love to know more about it as well.

[Petros Kolyvas]

That looks like a very interesting lens. Possibly a great buy for any kind of tripod work. I'd love to know more about it as well.

I have a 17-50 2.8 Tamron which I quite like. At first there were a few caveats: a) the backwards focusing b) the ultra-short focus throw.

However I used the short focus throw to my advantage. I can keep my hands on both pistol grips and use the tip of my left thumb to focus across nearly the whole range with a little adapter I picked up from Cinevate. Turn a shortcoming into a strength I say! (I still often focus in the wrong direction though - like learning to play a new instrument.)

[Noel Evans]

The 14-140 is at 5.0 by 28mm, 5.3 at 35mm, 5.6 at 50mm, and 55+ = 5.8. For indoor interviews it's like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

I couldnt disagree more with this. In fact Id say the opposite is true. Sure you can shoot an interview with a prime. But your stuck at one focal length unless your constantly changing lenses. The 14-140 can get you on a diff. focal length in seconds. And at this chip size f5.6 - f6 is a pretty good place to be. Especially when they are properly lit.

[Matthew B]

I couldnt disagree more with this. In fact Id say the opposite is true. Sure you can shoot an interview with a prime. But your stuck at one focal length unless your constantly changing lenses. The 14-140 can get you on a diff. focal length in seconds. And at this chip size f5.6 - f6 is a pretty good place to be. Especially when they are properly lit.

I completely agree. Who wants to shoot an interview at f1.8, every time the talent moves they'd slip in and out of focus. Proper lighting will always focus on the subject a lot nicer than shallow DOF will. Proper lighting in particular is something that seems to have been neglected by a lot of DSLR users.

BTW I'm not saying incredibly shallow DOF is bad, as it does have its uses.

[Multi-Media]

For me, I almost always light for an interview, so that's not an issue. The main thing I'm concerned about is keeping the subject in focus as they move... yes, they shift in their seat... lean in... lean back... and I'm conducting the interview usually alone, so I don't have the luxury of having someone pull focus... I can glance over at the screen and tweak framing, but I try to maintain eye contact with the subject and draw them out without distraction. This is one of the reasons I bought the 14-140 last week... so it can track focus to their face. Even though I have that focal length covered by several other lenses... it's not about light or framing... the communication link with the camera that this lens (and the 20mm 1.7) provide, makes them an essential part of the kit. with the help of the great advice from this forum... that's what prompted me to act... I'm just glad I was able to secure them...

[tflak]

I couldnt disagree more with this. In fact Id say the opposite is true. Sure you can shoot an interview with a prime. But your stuck at one focal length unless your constantly changing lenses. The 14-140 can get you on a diff. focal length in seconds. And at this chip size f5.6 - f6 is a pretty good place to be. Especially when they are properly lit.

If I was stuck with a prime if not using the 14-140, I might agree with you. I shoot a lot of impromptu stuff and don't always have the luxury of proper lighting. Which is why I rely on the Olympus 14-35 2.0 and 35-100 for covering all the bases in interviews. Now those are guns! Should have added this to my original post. Based on what I wrote, I can completely see where you're coming from.

Actually shot an interview recently using the 20 1.7 at 3.2 - wasn't packing my guns at the time and it was a very tight space with low lighting and I wanted to blur out the ugly wall behind. As Matthew said, shallow DOF does have its places. Sure, the subject whined a little about the straps cutting off circulation, but they never went out of focus. :)

EDIT: Speaking of the 35-100, have been meaning to ask this -- so far, I haven't had the need for rails for the type of shooting I do, and the 35-100 has a tripod collar so a light DSLR hanging off the end hasn't been a problem. But I'm thinking the AF100 might present problems. Any thoughts?

[Vitaliy Kiselev]

I am with Noel here.

Use 17-50mm Tamron, cheap 14-45mm or GH1 kit 14-140mm.

I don't know how you want to shoot interview using 85mm F1.4.
Unless you want to see his eyes only (and remember to use good ropes to fix him) :-)
Plus it is telephoto on m43. I use it only for portraits on 1.5x Pentax, but mostly on F2 or F2.8.
Quite frequently even F2.8 is too much and you must close up to F4 or F5.6.

[Andrew J. Allsbury]

Just got some possible good news from B&H:
"BHRep: You are within the 1st 20. There are currently 36 on backorder. We have over 100 scheduled to arrive."

Hopefully he knows what he's talking about...

[Erik Olson]

14-140 - Why? Because interviews require a lot of flexibility as the locations are always different, you dont always know what your going to get until your on location and often times you see the location for the first time when your shooting it. Interviewees also dont want to be sitting around forever while you set up. Id rather pop on the 14-140, choose my background - then spend the time lighting it and making it pretty. When I get to my camera the 14-140 will then let me go in a bit out a bit throughout the whole thing.

Is that glass parfocal?

[Fotojorno]

Just got some possible good news from B&H:
"BHRep: You are within the 1st 20. There are currently 36 on backorder. We have over 100 scheduled to arrive."

Hopefully he knows what he's talking about...

Yes, let's hope he does.

[groveChuck]

Speaking in terms of desired results, as opposed to specific lenses, the criteria I would be looking for would be:
Zoom, so a mix of shots can be captured.
Constant aperture zoom, so iris doesn't need to be changed.
DOF of at least 20 inches, perhaps up to 24? (I would do tests first). I don't want the subject rocking in and out of focus. As long as they're not against a wall (and why would they be), the BG will still be pleasantly soft. Pleasantly soft, not a total lack of context of the subject's location.

[Matthew B]

Speaking in terms of desired results, as opposed to specific lenses, the criteria I would be looking for would be:
Zoom, so a mix of shots can be captured.
Constant aperture zoom, so iris doesn't need to be changed.
DOF of at least 20 inches, perhaps up to 24? (I would do tests first). I don't want the subject rocking in and out of focus. As long as they're not against a wall (and why would they be), the BG will still be pleasantly soft. Pleasantly soft, not a total lack of context of the subject's location.

Have you thought about the Canon 24-105 L IS, should end up having a focal range of 50-210mm which is not bad for an interview, not to mention the constant f4. It might be alright if a decent lens mount is made.

[Noel Evans]

Is that glass parfocal?

I highly doubt it. Just have to pick your moments to change.

[groveChuck]

Have you thought about the Canon 24-105 L IS, should end up having a focal range of 50-210mm which is not bad for an interview, not to mention the constant f4. It might be alright if a decent lens mount is made.

Thought about it, and am waiting to use it!
My wife's a still photog, has a set of 3 L series zooms (all 2.8 constant aperture) and 2 primes.
They are mine to use on the AF100 as soon as Birger releases an adapter.
So I'm awaiting the Birger as breathlessly as the AF100!
I have a deposit on an AF, and would be happy to make a deposit on a Birger.

But yes, an equivalent 50-210 would be a great range. I had experimented with my wife's 70-200 on her 5d (stills only non-MkII) in interview settings, seeing what it might be like using a MkII (which I ended up not getting), and while not the range of an ENG lens, it was great for MS-CU, with a nice bokeh.

C'mon Birger, please, please, please!!! :undecided

[AGMedia]

. The 14-140 looks to be a great lens, but at f4 I don't think you are going to take full advantage of the DoF most want from this camera in an interview setting.

This is exactly correct. Unless this lens defies all the rules of the past one hundred years -- that "14-140" will look exactly like something shot with a 150/170/200A. You pay dearly in terms of speed and sharpness for any lens with any "super" zoom range.

The "wow" shots we got (Letus w/150 or 170) were mostly with the Zeiss 85mm F/1.4. Unfortunately, that Zeiss is VERY soft wide open. We recently tried the old Nikon manual focus 85mm F/2 -- and were blown away by how sharp it is wide open. Traditionally, 85mm is the ideal portrait lens for a range of reasons.

The problem, and it is a problem, is that on the AF-100 your magnificent 85mm is the equivalent of a 170mm -- and that's a headache. The next problem is that most all wide angles, including the ones that cost a fortune, introduce various forms of distortions for portraiture.

So, although the Zeiss 21mm (42mm equivalent on the AF-100) is probably the answer to the question of the OP -- the truth is that we really don't know how well these lenses are going to work on the AF-100. Chances are a 2x crop on a Zeiss 21mm still isn't going to create the magic of a traditional fast 85mm -- so the smart folks may be the ones sitting on the sidelines waiting for the two thousand tests that will appear on Vimeo after initial release before buying new lenses.

[Jesse Brauning]

Ahh, waiting, you bitch - how I hate you.

[xbourque]

the truth is that we really don't know how well these lenses are going to work on the AF-100.

Yes we know. Just get your hands on any u4/3 camera that's already out there.

-X

[Multi-Media]

The "wow" shots we got (Letus w/150 or 170) were mostly with the Zeiss 85mm F/1.4. Unfortunately, that Zeiss is VERY soft wide open. We recently tried the old Nikon manual focus 85mm F/2 -- and were blown away by how sharp it is wide open.

There was another quote about paying a price in sharpness with a wide range zoom like the 14-140.

What nobody has discussed yet, and since this is the "Interview" thread, is the fact that too much sharpness is NOT necessarily desireable... now that we have Hi Def, I don't really want to see every pore on someone's nose or every hair coming out of somewhere... in fact, whenever I interview women execs (and gerenally most interviews) I use a 4X4 Black Diffusion FX 1/2 to filter out some of the wrinkles and smoothe out the complexion. The subjects are always flattered and that's what you want... a happy client.

In the old film days, they would stretch a nylon stocking over the lens for Extreme Close Ups. So, the main point is SOFT lighting (umbrella or bounce plus a diff screen on the lights and then a diff filter in front of the lens).

Framing is what you want from the lens... something that lets you get back far enough that you don't distort the features of their face. In the still world, the 135mm used to be called the "portrait" lens for this reason. In our world, the zoom lets us change focal lengths during the interview, so we can have a few shots to cut from.

[singleframe]

I've used a Canon 1.8 50mm and feel it's a perfect lens for the job.

24897

The bookcase was about one foot behind her. Blew my HPX out of the water! (sold it too.)

[dcloud]

There was another quote about paying a price in sharpness with a wide range zoom like the 14-140.



you can only worry on sharpness on 14 megapixel stills but not on 1080 video. so it will be sharp. if you want to soften it, increase detail coring in camera.
check barry's gh1 tests for more info