Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 80
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,427
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    Like the 5d2 it was bundled with.. a canon accident that they had no concept would be super handy
    Well, Canon probably had no idea it would be so "super handy" for video. When I bought my first 5D2(for stills), I bought the bundle with the 24-105 and I was pleasantly surprised just how damn useful the lens was(is). It's your quintessential "walk around lens". 24 is pretty wide on FF, 105 is decent reach for things reasonably close and it has 'sorta macro' capability. I have a client that shoots with a mix of C300 mk I's & II's and Amira's. If I have to shoot on one of the 300's, I usually have the 24-105 on it. Unless it's the PL mount version they have, then I can use some of their really nice glass. I've actually run around shooting 'stripped-down' handheld(not shoulder mount) with their Canon 30-105PL on it. It'll test your fortitude, but at least you have a real aperture ring and it's parfocal.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    3,427
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    I totally get where you are coming from. For the S35 imager for my C200, I was really liking the Canon EF-S 18-135 f/3.5-5.6 STM IS for outdoor shooting where the slow speed wasn't too much of a hindrance. But that 1.5x/1.6x crop factor was terrible and I have since stopped using it and replaced with with the 24-105 USM IS II, which is a pretty good lens and it's FF so no vignetting and no discernable aperture ramping that I see in the field although I am sure that if I shoot against a white or gray wall it's there. The FS7 + SB + this lens does seem like the perfect setup. My production partner did a recent corporate shoot where he rented the FS7 + Sony 18-110 f/4.0 and he LOVED it. Unfortunately I am not crazy for the FS7 color science so that rules it out for me although I occasionally rent it.
    Okay, I get that there may be vignetting with the EF-S lens since s35 is slightly larger than APS-C, but I don't get where you're going with the crop factor comment. Unless you've figured out a way to "speed boost" a Canon lens on a Canon APS-C/s35 body, the 24-105 is going to not be as wide or tight as the 18-135. Doesn't matter if it's a full-frame lens or not, if you're putting it on an aps-c/s35 sensor. A 24mm FF lens is going to give you the same FoV on a s35 sensor as a 24mm s35 lens on a s35 sensor. But you know this. So did I miss the point you were really trying to make about the crop factor?


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Byron Bay, Australia
    Posts
    1,347
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Feeley View Post
    I'm not sure the RED glass is a perfect example. Seems to me they were rebarrelling a still lens, a legit thing to do, and also largely priming the market for their RED cameras, also a legit thing to do. But were their lenses loss leaders?

    ...And when you get to the $10,000ish price point for cameras, there's a growing number of mounts, flange depths, and markets/needs to support.
    The 18-50 was a rehoused Sigma I believe, but from everything I have gathered the (much nicer) 17-50 is an original design. You could be right that it was a loss leader though.

    The large number of mounts to support is one reason why a single solution is such a glaring omission. A single (long flange) design can have different mount versions (or even be swap-able, as many are these days). Plus a big reason mirrorless is so popular for video is it lets people use virtually any lens they want - and in many cases, that means adapting to PL or EF anyway. If a manufacturer covered those two mounts, I think they'd really have a winner. But maybe I don't understand all the market factors at play.


    Quote Originally Posted by nothing View Post
    If you like the Red so much, just get a copy of the lens that sits inside their shoddy re-barrel - the Tamron 17-50 non-VC. I've been using this lens on personal projects for years and it's awesome for that, extremely underrated by most.
    I've had that lens. Two of them actually, because they fall to bits under actual use. Ok optically, but terrible for smooth manual focus and with all the faults of DSLR lenses that I want to avoid. I also have not heard any confirmation that it is in fact a rehoused Tamron - everything I've read (or people I've spoken to) seem to say otherwise. Perhaps you are thinking of the earlier 18-50 which was a rehoused still lens, and did have some big issues with build quality and consistency. In any case, I've AC'd jobs with the Red Pro 17-50 and can say that - rehoused or not - the thing is built solidly enough to live up to the demands of pro use, even when rigged with a matte box and proper follow focus.

    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    I just bought the Fujifilm XT-3 and if I was in your position, I would buy it with the two Fujifilm Cine zooms in X-mount, the FUJIFILM MKX18-55mm T2.9 and the FUJIFILM MKX50-135mm T2.9 Lens.
    If I'm going to pay $5000 for a lens I want to be sure it will last longer than the camera! I'm very resistant to purchasing something that could be completely EOL'd when it comes time to upgrade next.
    VIDEO PRODUCER ON THE NSW NORTH COAST, AUSTRALIA
    Sony FS700 || Shogun Inferno
    Adobe CC 2018


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    6,540
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    I dont know much about lens design but the 24-105 would be come huge if you built a case to stop tromboning?

    My chum has an 18-55 fuji - we are going to try a side by side vs my nikkor manual 28-85/booster when we have a moment.
    If that’s what you consider huge then I don’t know how to help you. It’s not going to happen because there’s this thing called physics that gets in the way. Sony uses lots of processing to de-distort the 18-110, and it shows. CAC is something we use with various broadcast lenses and cameras, but you don’t want it in production cameras. At least not to that extent.

    Red tried to make an 18-85 T2.8 zoom that was somewhat affordable and decent. It was okay, but not great. And it way physically way bigger than anything we’re talking about here. As sensors get larger so will lenses, particularly zooms.

    The Red 18-50 source lens was a Sigma and the 17-50 was a Tamron. I repaired a number over the years and we’d buy donor lenses from B&H for parts.

    I know where a lot of the glass out there comes from. You may see various brands but you’d be surprised by who does the contract supplying. Certain doublets and aspherics are only available from individual sources.

    You all vastly overestimate the size of the market for pro video or Cine lenses. These things have to be made profitably, which is why they end up costing what they do.
    Mitch Gross
    Cinema Product Manager
    Panasonic System Solutions Company


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,787
    Default
    A 24-105mm F4 effectively becomes a 16-70 F2.8 when used with a FF to S35 SpeedBooster. The Fujinon 18-55 f2.9 really is the only affordable cine style lens close to that range. Shame it only comes in E-mount.
    New Website: www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    315
    Default
    A lens becomes nothing, It is what it is.

    It's better to look at it like this. The Canon 24-105 is a 4,37 times zoom and the Fujinon 18-55 a 3 times zoom. That's almost 50% more for the Canon and when used with a speedbooster it's both wider and tighter at either end.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    9,586
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Run&Gun View Post
    Okay, I get that there may be vignetting with the EF-S lens since s35 is slightly larger than APS-C, but I don't get where you're going with the crop factor comment. Unless you've figured out a way to "speed boost" a Canon lens on a Canon APS-C/s35 body, the 24-105 is going to not be as wide or tight as the 18-135. Doesn't matter if it's a full-frame lens or not, if you're putting it on an aps-c/s35 sensor. A 24mm FF lens is going to give you the same FoV on a s35 sensor as a 24mm s35 lens on a s35 sensor. But you know this. So did I miss the point you were really trying to make about the crop factor?
    The crop factor is, at least on my copies of the C200 and the 18-135 STM IS, because of the slightly wider crop factor in the C200, I can actually see the inside barrel of the lens and I can see the actual twitching of the IS mechanism at work and I see it bump and swim around while on a boat. You see it more when shooting the 17:9 DCI RAW than the 16:9 UHD of FHD but it essentially makes using EF-S lenses on at least my C200 a no go. The FF 24-105 doesn't suffer from this because it has a larger image circle. I see this extreme vignetting on all of my EF-S lenses but it's worse on the 18-135 STM IS. I wish that Canon had given the C200 a native 1.6X crop factor. The EF-S setting in the menu zooms in a few percent on the image but even with the EF-S setting enabled, I still see black circular vignetting in the corners. Maybe this is just my copy of each? Vignetting is one thing, but seeing the actual inside barrel of the lens housing in the corners is another.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    9,586
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Liam Hall View Post
    A 24-105mm F4 effectively becomes a 16-70 F2.8 when used with a FF to S35 SpeedBooster. The Fujinon 18-55 f2.9 really is the only affordable cine style lens close to that range. Shame it only comes in E-mount.
    It also is available in Fujinon X-Mount.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,787
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Brown View Post
    A lens becomes nothing, It is what it is.

    It's better to look at it like this. The Canon 24-105 is a 4,37 times zoom and the Fujinon 18-55 a 3 times zoom. That's almost 50% more for the Canon and when used with a speedbooster it's both wider and tighter at either end.
    Yes, but it's not a cine lens, which is the point... Also, I'm not talking about a 'lens' I'm talking about a lens WITH a Speed Booster. A speed booster changes a number of things, but let's not go down that rabbit hole.
    New Website: www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,787
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    It also is available in Fujinon X-Mount.
    Yes, of course.
    New Website: www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @FilmLiam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •