Any reason NOT to use this lens with the AF100

[Lpowell]

i owned it before - and its a junk, at least in terms of video filming! probably the worst breathing among others 4/3, ois is not active, also its manual iris is useless, i really dont know why would u want it...

Hmm, that's not my experience with the Leicasonic 14-50mm - both OIS and iris work properly on the AF100. The only feature not supported is auto-focus.

... (funny thing i bought it cheap as a broken lens for like 70$)

OK, that certainly could indicate a problem...

[anatusa]

very short focus throw and non constant iris , and the worst breathing among all other 4/3 or m4/3 i deal with, and crazy loud iris clicks - all that has nothing to do with my zoom stocks at 22mm (that's what i meant by saying broken - and its a common issue with that lens, tons of similar reports(BH, here, google)). from what i know non of the 4/3 lenses gives u ois.... yes it does make sound , but its pretty much all

also buying it new now would be a strange thing to do..... as there is already 12-35 and price is very close, but u ll get m4/3 mount no needs for an adopter, constant iris f2.8, AF, OIS, wide angle, silent lens! yes zoom range is shorter, but as soon your zoom will stocks at about 22-23mmm, the zoom range will not be any of your concerns!

the only reason i bought is because it was dirt cheap(70usd), i just could not resist! but sold it away as soon i had enough of money for other lenses! for pics - its a real great lens (but not for video) - fast af, very sharp, the guy i sold it to was really happy to get it cheap for (around 300 usd :-) ) he uses it with olympus 4/3 camera, also he reported later that from times to times the zoom works all the way to 50mm, then stocks again.

the best lens i used so far - sigma 4/3 70-200 macro f2.8 constant, no click at all - sweet lens, got it kind of cheap from Ebay, almost new, no marks at all. works like butter! very nice for cinematic look, really separates the object from the background! and zoom is internal - will work with mate box! hard to find, but worth it!

IMG_2789a.jpgIMG_2802aa.jpg

[mcbob]

I'm not kidding myself that it might be perfect, but in my use it's been a good lens. It gets good images at the right ranges (for me) with smooth mechanical function. Now that I've encountered and solved the zoom sticking issue, i have no fears of keeping this in my kit.

No problem with me if you don't like it, we can't all like the same glass. I have a 70-210 range zoom that I never have reason to use, and hated the 20/1.7 that others adore, but also love a Vivitar 28-90 non-constant, varifocal chunk that's likely a useless pig for others.

Enjoy

[anatusa]

for me the iris is critical on a shoot especially if its out side, i set the nd, i set the iris, iso, but then if i zoom in or out and iris is not constant - i have to do it again.... its already enough pain with the sun coming in and out....

never used 20mm , but in general so far i dont like any pany or oly lenses .......... the only one i found useful - pany 25 mm m4/3 f1.4 , but if say true only for the reason i payed for it same price as i payed for sigma 30mm f1.4, and pany is sharper, wider, and weights less, i can use electronic ff with it - in case i ll ever need that option (well maybe there many pluses over sigma 30mm, and i am sure its far better then 20mm f1.7), so i sold sigma....

big zooms are great for image isolation from the background .... and it really makes sense if u shoot out side as usually u close the iris a little and/or use nds
also that sigma 70-200 - is macro, great for details and its kind of working differently from others 4/3 lenses i used - the focus throw is not that short.... u can really rotate the focus

so far my favorite middle zoom is 4/3 sigma 18-50 f2.8 macro, constant iris does make sense, no clicks at all....., cheap on ebay!

definitely going to upgrade to cine manual lenses , but cant decide yet if i ll keep af100 or will move else where....

kind of scared to step in into old manual lenses - was going to buy a set a few times from ebay , but good lenses that are clean with out glass scratches - coast kind of a lot......

[mcbob]

A video example might be helpful here, FWIW:

https://vimeo.com/33314421



Granted, all but one are lit interviews... fairly tame test circumstances for any lens. All (except the white background) are ungraded with reference audio only.

The Leica D 14-50 is used in the first interview (Rumsfeld) and the last interview (surgeon). Other lenses used in these samples are Leica Summicron-R 50, Vivitar Series 1 28-90, and Vivitar 50/1.7

Waiting for editors to finish and link the sizzle reel for the rest of the doc with Rumsfeld; the director wanted mid-take reframing and and R&G stuff, so the 14-50 got plenty of work that day.

[mcbob]

Fiddling with this and comparing it to my 12-35... I'm really thinking I only keep the 12-35 around because of its size and AF virtuosity.

Here was the wacky bit I discovered... As we all know, the 12-35 does 4 distinct aperture adjustments while zooming. These 4 hit regardless of aperture in roughly the same place.

The Leicasonic, on the other hand:
- a mess of little clicks and adjustments when set to f2.8 (as it stops to 3.5 over the zoom range)
- one adjustment at f3.2 (occurs around 24mm as it stops down)
- one adjustment at f3.5 (occurs around 42mm, aperture stays at 3.5)
- no adjustments whatsoever from f4 down. Rock steady aperture. Shmoooooove zooming.

Odd I never really noticed it before, as I usually live around f4-5.6 when shooting on the move... But I reckon that's a good thing.

[Lpowell]

What's unique about the Leicasonic is the combination of a manual aperture ring with solid OIS in a fast varifocal lens. For video, it's not really usable as a zoom lens, due to its electronic iris and noticeable focus breathing. But if you always pre-frame and pre-focus your shots, the lens' 14-50mm f2.8-3.5 range covers a wider variety of shooting situations than most any other MFT-native lens. In addition, its Leica optics really are top notch, and the aperture ring is calibrated in 1/3-stops, displayed directly in the AF100's viewfinder.

However, I'd have to say the Leicasonic works best on the GH2, because it's not fully functional on the AF100. It works only as a manual-focus lens and its focus mechanism does not respond to the AF100's remote-control circuits. This makes it strictly a hands-on lens on the AF100, whereas the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 is far better suited for automated operation.

[mcbob]

While it's technically varifocal, I find it less varifocal than the other comparable 4/3 zooms... if you're at a modest ~5.6 aperture, the deeper focus will usually make up for the slight difference in focal point as you zoom.

Funny you prefer it on the GH2, and the 12-35 on the AF... my preference is the exact opposite simply due to the size and handling of each combo. Since I run full manual anyway, the lack of AF on the AF is a NI.

[Lpowell]

While it's technically varifocal, I find it less varifocal than the other comparable 4/3 zooms...

I agree, that's what I mean by "varifocal", i.e. not a true parfocal zoom that will stay in-focus across its entire zoom range. I first saw the term varifocal used in the 80's by Vivitar to describe one of its exceptionally fast manual zooms that needed to be refocused after zooming. In those days, zoom lenses were expected to maintain parfocal performance by mechanical design, and a lens that did not stay focused as it zoomed was an anomaly.

The reason I don't use the 14-50mm much on the AF100 is because I have a Manfrotto 521PFI remote controller permanently mounted on the handle. It's incompatible with the Leicasonic, but works well with Micro 4/3 lenses and also with the legacy Four Thirds Olympus 14-35mm f2 and the Panasonic 25mm f1.4. If I wasn't enthralled with those speed demons, I'd probably settle for the 12-35mm f2.8.

[XSVpro]

Can I suggest the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 over the Leica. It does breath a little but focuses to 0.27m, has hard stop on the focus ring and is very sharp, Its the same glass they put in the RED 17-50 variable prime after all. I also own the 70-200 f2.8 from Tamron and find its of the same optical quality, has hard stops and focuses down to 0.95m, best in its class for close focusing.

With the Novoflex Nikon to m43 adapter you also have stepless aperture adjustment.

No OIS or auto focus but a field of view of 35-400 at f2.8 with stepless aperture at under £1000 is pretty hard to beat. Depends what you are mainly shooting but I haven't needed to go wider too often (and I own the Lumix 7-14).

My £2