Your favorite Zoom? What do you recommend? What's fast?

A

Avenger007

Well-known member
Ive been hunting for the best zoom for the money and have yet to find one or two that cover the full focal range and deliver excellent results. My zeiss 28-70 is the only one in the zeiss still lens lineup that actually has 3 rings for manual use. I can't use their extending two ring design (focus and zoom share a ring) any longer which my 40-80 and 35-135 both have. And they aren't very fast (most in the 3.5-4.5 range).

I'm considering dumping the whole EOS setup and going PL with an Optimo zoom or finding some old S16 lenses if they cover the frame properly (still researching). Max I'd like to spend is around $3500 maybe $4k at the most. I'd love to find some fast SLR types though for around $2k, for example a 24-70/80 f2.0 or 2.8 and a 70-200 f2.0 or 2.8 both with macro or a good min focus dist because I would need to get a PL mount for every single adapter. I like using my EOS primes/zooms on the brevis/sg/and M2 without changing anything.

Please provide links if you have them
 
Last edited:
I'm a nikkor guy :)

17-35mm & 80-200mm - both F2.8

I have the 70-200mm VR as I bought it originally for stills, but it doesn't have a manual aperture ring (require 'matchstick' trick). The 80-200mm is fully manual.

I think 17-35 has a more significant change in perspective, especially for moving images. The 28-70 range does not really cover 'wide', in my opinion.

The nikon F2.8 zooms are arguably sharper than most primes.
So a 17-35, 80-200, and a 50mm 1.4/1.8 might be 'all' you need.
 
Unfortunately without something like panatape running off a lens like that, my AC would kill me every time I asked to go with the zoom. In other words, the "windowed" design for the barrel markings are somewhat of a no-no.

Myself and others sometimes live or die by the witness marks on a true manual lens, because as soon as the talent moves outside of your FF marks, your done for. Unless you've got superb 20/20 vision.
I wish nikon removed that design because I am a fan of the nikkor zooms for still photo work.

It seems as though if you want a fast zoom with good quality they either lack an aperture ring or have the "window" design. By hinder the film making process.
 
Avenger007 said:
Unfortunately without something like panatape running off a lens like that, my AC would kill me...
Click to expand...

they are SLR lenses, your AC will kill you regardless. might as well give them a little extra fuel :grin:
But i know what you mean. It will never stop annoying me that they removed the manual aperture ring. the vibration reduction is a huge benefit with stills, but heartbraking that it cannot be used with my FE2 :cry:
 
From what I've read (and yet to personally test) the 17-35 f2.8 Nikon breathes on par (or less than) cinema lenses...
 
The 17-35 2.8 is a cool lens, still need to test it on a HD cam but on my DVX its great.
So far I only needed the 17-35 2.8, my 50mm 1.4 and a nice old 180mm 2.8

Some shots need a bit more planning with the 50mm but I love shooting with just the 50mm at 1.4. And I would not want to use any of these lenses without a nice follow focus.

Here is a little experimental vid shot with the 17-35mm:

http://www.vimeo.com/834229
 
Last edited:
Nice work, visualbrother. The DVX still continues to impress.

I'm like you, I love the 50mm - probably from the old photography days but if I'm doing nature / landscape, I LOVE my 80-200 Tokina 2.8 - it's a push / pull zoom so it's a bit cumbersome that way but I'm used to not using it with a FF and when shoulder mounted, it's actually a pretty efficient lens when you get used to pulling focus by hand while zooming. Very happy with the glass though.

cheno
 
Hi visualbrother. There was quite a bit of vignetting in that 50mm "head stuff" clip. I have not used an adapter with a dvx. Is vignetting just a reality when shooting with this?
 
Thanks, the DVX is pretty cool and using the cine gamma + 25P (shooting PAL) gives it a nice look.

As for zoom lenses:
Interesting, I got a 35-70 2.8 push / pull nikkor here and always thought it would be useless on the adapter. Will do a test run with it.
To be honest I do worry about using any lens that extends or retracts because i am waiting for my redrock micro matte box and its hard to figure how that is going to work. :Drogar-Evil(DBG):

Also makes me wonder how many people actually zoom during shooting.

Chenopup said:
Nice work, visualbrother. The DVX still continues to impress.

I'm like you, I love the 50mm - probably from the old photography days but if I'm doing nature / landscape, I LOVE my 80-200 Tokina 2.8 - it's a push / pull zoom so it's a bit cumbersome that way but I'm used to not using it with a FF and when shoulder mounted, it's actually a pretty efficient lens when you get used to pulling focus by hand while zooming. Very happy with the glass though.

cheno
Click to expand...
 
Actually the first shot has a lot of vignetting, shot that one with a Sigma 24-70 3.5 at 35mm. Its an old zoom and not suitable for adapter work.

Not sure if this is correct but I found all zooms and primes with F3.5 or smaller to give a lot of vignetting.

The 50mm has no vignetting at all, its the lighting that gives that effect.

A single LTM (pepper 200 with 150W bulb) spot was used on the subject exposing them almost 1 stop more then the background.


Charles Lowthian said:
Hi visualbrother. There was quite a bit of vignetting in that 50mm "head stuff" clip. I have not used an adapter with a dvx. Is vignetting just a reality when shooting with this?
Click to expand...

I also found that I preferred to use fast primes instead of any of the 2.8 nikkor zooms.
 
Last edited:
ahhh that would explain it. didn't think the 50mm has that vignetting. yes, it was just that openeing shot i was referring to the vignetting on. anyway, nice head shots :)
 
I scrapped the optimo idea. I have a tokina 24-200 soon to be tested (if UPS would ring a door bell rather than leave a slip on the door and run off).

I think im gonna stick with the angenieux still zooms. The long zoom has macro too. If only the 28-80 could do better than a .65m MFD.

Still interested in finding a good 16-35 zoom or better yet...a quality fast 16mm that doesnt cost an arm (Zeiss goes for around $1500+). I'd like to find a 25mm F1.4 as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top