Thread: Sony PXW-FX6

Page 30 of 63 FirstFirst ... 2026272829303132333440 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 627
  1. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by OnSet View Post
    Another way to look at what's happening with focus is to be at a sharp angle to your bookcase (almost like looking down the row of books,) have color peaking on and see whether the focus point moves to the left or right as you zoom out. (It doesn't need to be a bookcase -- it could be something as simple as a flattened newspaper page taped to the wall. Of course the main thing is to make sure you're off-axis enough that only a small part of it is in focus...)
    Cool idea.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Default
    I wish they would just come out with an improved 28-135 II based on the mechanics of the 18-110. I assumed they would do this with FX9 but not yet. In the old d
    ays you could ask Sony for something like this but they don't seem to care for feedback anymore.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,242
    Default
    They will probably come out with a full-frame midrange zoom of the same caliber as their new autofocus cine 16-35, but who knows what the exact focal length range will be


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Default
    There's a normal zoom lens for the FX6 and FX9 coming soon.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Default
    Do you have some secret info on this? are we talking an inexpensive Sony lens like the 18-110 or a genuine break the bank zoom that i can't afford?


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    985
    Default
    Who knows when but Sony has definitely alluded to a range of lenses, quote "Sony also announced their intention to expand the FE C Cinema Lens line-up going forward." The lens on the left in this pic is a longer zoom of some sort.

    Chris

    https://sonycine.com/articles/sony-u...e-operability/

    Cinema_lens_series.jpg


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,242
    Default
    Yeah it's a holy trinity I think. The middle lens is the 16-35. The left is something like a 70-200. Judging by the size of the one on the right, I'm guessing it's a 24-70 or 24-105, something with about that range and ratio. I doubt it will have as much zoom ratio as the 28-135, so almost certainly not a true ENG ass-kicker. But still cool. If they go T3.1 like the 16-35 then it will probably be more like a 24-70. And the 2 upcoming lenses will probably cost at least as much as their $5500 cine 16-35


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    4,195
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by ahalpert View Post
    Yeah it's a holy trinity I think. The middle lens is the 16-35. The left is something like a 70-200. Judging by the size of the one on the right, I'm guessing it's a 24-70 or 24-105, something with about that range and ratio. I doubt it will have as much zoom ratio as the 28-135, so almost certainly not a true ENG ass-kicker. But still cool. If they go T3.1 like the 16-35 then it will probably be more like a 24-70. And the 2 upcoming lenses will probably cost at least as much as their $5500 cine 16-35
    That'd be my guess too:

    16-35mm T/3.1
    24-70mm T/3.1
    70-200mm T/3.1

    If they work as well as it sounds like the 16-35mm does (strong manual mechanics in addition to auto focus), then it'd be an extremely useful (if incredibly camera-specific) set. Being able to flip to autofocus in an instant, then back to manual control the second you need to - that's a pretty enticing prospect.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Nate Weaver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    1,212
    Default
    28-80 is my guess. And then of course 70-200.

    It’s like Zeiss all over again!


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Nate Weaver View Post
    28-80 is my guess. And then of course 70-200.

    It’s like Zeiss all over again!

    But presuming its rehoused lenses ,like the 16-35.. would it not be more likley to be 24-70 and 70-200.. either way they are going to way too front heavy for a fx6 hand held .. or even on many tripods.. ? .. a new 28-135 (albeit cheaper and more plastic ) ,but being 24-120 mm FF, with better manual functions would be better .. IMHO


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 30 of 63 FirstFirst ... 2026272829303132333440 ... 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
  •