A good interview lens

Hey, Oly 14-35mm is too Heavy and tooooo Expensive.
You will increase the weight of AF100 by more than Double, so it won't be handy.

Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 is tooo much great for it's Price.
 
The bulk of my work is shooting interviews, and I am reconsidering my lens choices for the AF100 for interviews. Right now my zooms are the 17-55 Canon 2.8 and Canon 70-200 2.8, which I planned to use with a Birger mount but used this past week with a non-electronic mount. I found that my ideal spot was at 55 with my 17-55, but that I was a little closer than I like to be, both for framing and room setup. 70 would work if I move back, but then I'm stuck and can't go any wider. Basically that 15mm gap in my zooms is problematic, so I am planning to sell a couple Canon lenses (but keep some so I can still use my 7D for some stuff) and go the Olympus route with the 14-35 and 35-100. The latter will become my interview lens and will allow me to easily get my wide(er) and tighter shots in a single cam interview. They aren't cheap, and they aren't small, but they're fast, and apparently very nice looking.

Basically I think any zoom that taps out around 70mm (like a 24-70 or 28-70) would be great for interviews. I think the 17-55 range can work fine, but I like to move back a little bit more to get a little more compression in the shot.
 
I read some reviews on the Tokina 28-70. There has been some concerns about the lens being a bit soft from 2.8-5.6.

Benjamin,
I had the oly 50-200 and sent it back as it made a ridiculous racket when using the on cam iris wheel and when using the zoom function.
Curious if that is the case with the 35-100 or 14-35?
 
JohnF, good to know about the 50-200. I will have to check that out, but the other 2 seem pretty popular on this cam and a bunch are reporting good experiences with those, so we'll see.

And you bring up another good point about lens softness at wide open (or close to wide open) apertures. I find in more normal lighting around ISO 400 I am around 2.8-3.5 on my lenses during interviews, and my 17-55 is ok at 2.8, but much better by f4, so the advantage of the f2 zooms is that you can stop them down more. Same would be true with a fast prime. Something like a 50 1.4 would probably be sharper at 2.8 than a zoom lens that is wide open at 2.8 when at 50mm.
 
many reviews of lenses are obviously for still images. In the video world these so-called soft lenses can look organic and warm and desirable. I say borrow or rent lenses and give them a go before dismissing them because of an online review. Also, m4/3 sensor uses the sweet spot of full frame or APC sized sensors, so ignore reviews that say lenses are soft at edges.
 
Other option is Pentax A 35-105mm F3.5. If you want to have more distance.
It is very good lens, very sharp wide open.
Weight will be more, of course.
 
Whats up wit all the zooms?

Does any one like the fixed focal length lenses?

I like the 20mm f1.7 - 35mm f2.8 - 55mm f1.2 - 135mm f3,5 & 200mm f5

And then try backing up or moving closer to the subject?
 
primes are great. Sometimes with interviews there is very little time to readjust your shooting position. You need to go from Close ups to mediums without interruption. Zooms are ideal for interviews.

Igelkott Film said:
Whats up wit all the zooms?

Does any one like the fixed focal length lenses?

I like the 20mm f1.7 - 35mm f2.8 - 55mm f1.2 - 135mm f3,5 & 200mm f5

And then try backing up or moving closer to the subject?
Click to expand...
 
Yes, what Bgundu said. If I know I don't want to change focal lengths then a prime is fine, but moving the physical position of the camera is almost always impractical during an interview. Plus (and more importantly) getting a wide AND close up with a prime can have a different look. For instance a close up with a 35mm where the camera closer to the subject is often not as desirable as being at 70mm with the camera further back.
 
I'm a fan of the Tamron 17-50 f2.8; it's a nice little lens for interview situations with the AF100; since the sensor is a bit smaller than 35MM movie film, the long end can do a head & shoulders shot at a comfortable working distance. Compared to a Red, the lens is closer to a 60MM, which isn't too bad for pleasing close up shots. Of course I'd prefer the Red 17-50, but it's quite a bit more expensive and zooming and follow focusing are somewhat rate in the interview situation.


Good shooting and best regards,

Leo
 
I've been using the dreadfully slow Lumix 14-140mm for 2 days now. The sweet spot for me for a tight single is 81mm. I can't wait for the Birger mount so I can ditch this lumix lens.
 
mcgeedigital said:
Just got the Tokina atx 270af pro 28-70mm f/2.8 pro just for that purpose and it ids excellent.
Click to expand...

I just got the exact same lens. Do you find that the weight of the lens with an adapter is OK for the Af-100? I think it might getting "close" to that limit before having to use lens support??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top