AF101 lens options
- Thread starter indigo
- Start date
Shooter
Veteran
I dont know of a centralised single resource but heres how I see it.
You need to decide what kind of shooter you are first ( and a budget of course) and also what compromises you are prepared to make. eg quality, operation, lens function..
photographically....then you can go in various directions ...
Each lens needs to be considered carefully. There are traps for the unwary.
Choices:
1- High end in every respect : PL Mount - all cine lenses. (incl cine zooms)
2- Cine style shooting with full manual still prime lenses - Nikkor, Canon ,Contax adapters with cinevised lenses ( declicked, focus gear rings etc)
3- Same as above but non cinevised
4- Compromised solutions - Auto Still lenses (prime and zoom) AF, MF, OIS, variable aperture, fast /slow. Note. Not many still zoom lenses function as would a cine zoom lens. There are a few ( very few) excellent choices for variable primes. (I have only found one that meets my criteria : Nikkor 17-35 f2.8 and I use it as a variable prime)
Auto lenses suit many people and their work style...so I am not disrespecting these as an option . I call them compromised from my perspective only.
5- Lenses currently in development for this camera. We are all waiting to see what emerges on this front. ( I am expecting most of them to be mostly prosumer level. The pro area is covered by PLs )
You need to decide what kind of shooter you are first ( and a budget of course) and also what compromises you are prepared to make. eg quality, operation, lens function..
photographically....then you can go in various directions ...
Each lens needs to be considered carefully. There are traps for the unwary.
Choices:
1- High end in every respect : PL Mount - all cine lenses. (incl cine zooms)
2- Cine style shooting with full manual still prime lenses - Nikkor, Canon ,Contax adapters with cinevised lenses ( declicked, focus gear rings etc)
3- Same as above but non cinevised
4- Compromised solutions - Auto Still lenses (prime and zoom) AF, MF, OIS, variable aperture, fast /slow. Note. Not many still zoom lenses function as would a cine zoom lens. There are a few ( very few) excellent choices for variable primes. (I have only found one that meets my criteria : Nikkor 17-35 f2.8 and I use it as a variable prime)
Auto lenses suit many people and their work style...so I am not disrespecting these as an option . I call them compromised from my perspective only.
5- Lenses currently in development for this camera. We are all waiting to see what emerges on this front. ( I am expecting most of them to be mostly prosumer level. The pro area is covered by PLs )
You have capsulised the lens choices quite well, and I am also waiting for something to "emerge on this front"... The only argument I would offer is that PL zooms are primarily built for big, solid cameras, and there are those of us (documentary filmmakers and others) who would like to see a manual, light weight, relatively fast, 5 to 1 (or there abouts) lens in a m4/3 mount. I keep harping on this because I don't want to let it go. The optics exist, whether the 14-54, or the 12-60, or the Leica (I think it's 14-50) wouldn't it be nice to pull all the electronic junk out and replace it with conventional cams and iris rings and charge more money for it? And everybody's happy.
And please, Barry, don't respond by saying I'm talking about still lenses again... I'm talking about CONVERTING still lenses to be efficient on this camera!
bgundu
Veteran
All optically great. For some the aperture ring is very important. If you already have a modern Nikon camera, getting the newer G lenses would be nice on both systems.
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
dpreivew has good reviews.
The micro four thirds page shows a line up of native lenses.
There have been many lens tests and aside from dedicated focus marks on many PL mount lenses - which is without a doubt an asset - there is NOT such a great difference in glass. I get the feeling it is like wine. There are wine snobs who will tell you that paying the difference is worth it but perhaps it is just the psychological effect of making them feel the lens is better because they sacrificed an arm and a leg for it.
Shooter
Veteran
If you have this attitude to quality glass..it is doubtful you need anything better or know much about lenses.
It makes a big difference and its nothing to do with being a lens snob. Ask any DP worthy of the term "D.P".
Little example : I have one lens in my personal complement of Nikkors that just does not cut the mustard. My AC refuses to use it. It is visibly inferior to the rest of my Nikkors. BTW - it has been fully restored and calibrated as have all my Nikkors.
( Funny that it happens to be on Ken Rockwells '10 Worst Nikkor Lenses'. ( Nikkor 35-70mm AI Zoom) I am only keeping it for nostalgia.
Take a look and compare a Zeiss prime lens against what ever else you have comparable. You are likely to see a difference if "you have the eyes to see".
BTW. Reading a bunch of reviews does not tell the entire story about lenses and their suitabilty for the task one may wish to apply them to. A great stills lens does not necessarily make a great motion picture lens.
It makes a big difference and its nothing to do with being a lens snob. Ask any DP worthy of the term "D.P".
Little example : I have one lens in my personal complement of Nikkors that just does not cut the mustard. My AC refuses to use it. It is visibly inferior to the rest of my Nikkors. BTW - it has been fully restored and calibrated as have all my Nikkors.
( Funny that it happens to be on Ken Rockwells '10 Worst Nikkor Lenses'. ( Nikkor 35-70mm AI Zoom) I am only keeping it for nostalgia.
Take a look and compare a Zeiss prime lens against what ever else you have comparable. You are likely to see a difference if "you have the eyes to see".
BTW. Reading a bunch of reviews does not tell the entire story about lenses and their suitabilty for the task one may wish to apply them to. A great stills lens does not necessarily make a great motion picture lens.