Best run n gun zoom lens suggestions

[Mac]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but shouldn't a fast zoom (say 14ish-70ish f/2.8ish) be much easier to make for m4/3 than it is for full frame cameras? Seems like cameras with smaller sensors have proportionally larger range lenses with faster apertures

for instance the HMC 150 (1/3 inch chip set) has a 3.9-51mm f/1.6-3.0 (35mm Equivalence 28-368mm) that would be an insane lens on the AF100, as long as your arm and 60 lbs. But I'm trying to figure why panasonic didn't release what should have been (relatively) easy and produce something like Canons 24-70 f/2.8 which goes for under $1400. Heck olympus already has their 14-35 f/2 but its $2300 and for me that range is just a little short and it doesn't support auto focus or OIS.

And if panasonic didn't want to go to the trouble (after all there not exactly a lens company) don't their pro cameras come with Fujinon glass and the prosumer stuff all come with Leica branded glass. seams like someone cold have made a phone call ya know.

I think the problem is that the more auto the lens is, the less desireable it is from a cine standpoint. The iris issue is a prime example. Also, auto focus, while useful in small chip cameras, becomes very cumbersome the larger the chip. I find it unusable on, say, the HVX200. OIS I don't know about, or care about since I never use it, but the simpler the lens the better I think...

It would be nice if the lens "communicates" with the camera, giving readouts in the finder re: fstop and focus, but not control those things. Anyway, that's my opinion.

 

[heavyG]

I think the problem is that the more auto the lens is, the less desireable it is from a cine standpoint. The iris issue is a prime example. Also, auto focus, while useful in small chip cameras, becomes very cumbersome the larger the chip. I find it unusable on, say, the HVX200. OIS I don't know about, or care about since I never use it, but the simpler the lens the better I think...

It would be nice if the lens "communicates" with the camera, giving readouts in the finder re: fstop and focus, but not control those things. Anyway, that's my opinion.

Pretty much my opinion as well.

 

[Shooter]

I concur with both of you.

Meantime ...taking "zooms" out of the equation...we have plenty of cine options via PL mount lenses and some more then adequate stills lenses such as manual Nikkors...to get the job done without issue.

 

[groveChuck]

I recently shot in Costa Rica what I would consider 'Run and Gun' Shot with the AF100 / 18-50 combo on horseback, while ziplining above the tree canopy, handheld while waist deep in the ocean surf, handheld over the side of a moving boat / out the window of a moving car… Interspersed with shots where the camera was on the deck, on a chair / table and on sticks when I had time to set them up.

Can you share any footage? I used to shoot that sort of stuff for cruise lines on Beta (400a, D600), and I'd love see how the AF100 (and that focal range) does in those situations.
Did you wish you could get wider than 18mm much?
Thanks!

 

[heavyG]

Can you share any footage? I used to shoot that sort of stuff for cruise lines on Beta (400a, D600), and I'd love see how the AF100 (and that focal range) does in those situations.
Did you wish you could get wider than 18mm much?
Thanks!

**My own personal feeling**
Wider than 18mm never really enters my mind - my background was producing TV spots for national / international clients where we shot everything on ARRI 435 / 535's and none of the DP's that I ever worked with would ever order a lens wider than 18. I've just gained an eye where if I can't get it all in at that focal length I rethink the shot rather than get into a "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" type look.
**My own personal feeling**

As for the videos…
Here are the 'Roughs' and I say roughs because these were a first runthrough that the client got excited about and posted without caring that they weren't done.

http://blip.tv/touristatv/springs-resort-in-costa-rica-5346115
http://blip.tv/touristatv/zipline-adventure-in-costa-rica-5346076

You'll see that some of the footage completely sucks (I've never ridden a horse before; let alone focus, ride the iris and frame a shot) My intention had been to clean it up, but since the client released it without warning, paid, and contracted more - the will to fix them is somewhat diminished.
Strangely the general public doesn't care - the 7 videos in this series have been viewed well over 250,000 times in 5 weeks from various Air Canada websites / syndication and the comment stream is positive. So I stopped beating myself up about it, but I will control the next batch more closely.

P.S. the B roll camera is a handheld Panasonic Lumix underwater type cam - name escapes me right now.

 

[Jesse Brauning]

The more I look, the more I look back at getting the Panasonic 14-50 2.8-3.5 OIS lens. I have the Olympus 14-54mm 2.8-3.5 but I find myself constantly missing the OIS. It helps decrease rolling shutter artifacts so much, and makes any glidecam or handheld work just look better.
Autofocus really only interests me if it works as well as the 14-140. If it's any slower, it's not going to cut it.

 

[Shooter]

There are many reasons why I now think I should have got that Panasonic 14-50 4/3 lens.!!!

Note to myself: Do your homework properly.

 

[xenogears]

The more I look, the more I look back at getting the Panasonic 14-50 2.8-3.5 OIS lens. I have the Olympus 14-54mm 2.8-3.5 but I find myself constantly missing the OIS. It helps decrease rolling shutter artifacts so much, and makes any glidecam or handheld work just look better.
Autofocus really only interests me if it works as well as the 14-140. If it's any slower, it's not going to cut it.

And the OIS from the 14-50mm work with AF100? maybe i´m wrong, but i don´t think so.

 

[groveChuck]

**My own personal feeling**
Wider than 18mm never really enters my mind - my background was producing TV spots for national / international clients where we shot everything on ARRI 435 / 535's and none of the DP's that I ever worked with would ever order a lens wider than 18. I've just gained an eye where if I can't get it all in at that focal length I rethink the shot rather than get into a "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" type look.
**My own personal feeling**

As for the videos…
Here are the 'Roughs' and I say roughs because these were a first runthrough that the client got excited about and posted without caring that they weren't done.

http://blip.tv/touristatv/springs-resort-in-costa-rica-5346115
http://blip.tv/touristatv/zipline-adventure-in-costa-rica-5346076

You'll see that some of the footage completely sucks (I've never ridden a horse before; let alone focus, ride the iris and frame a shot) My intention had been to clean it up, but since the client released it without warning, paid, and contracted more - the will to fix them is somewhat diminished.
Strangely the general public doesn't care - the 7 videos in this series have been viewed well over 250,000 times in 5 weeks from various Air Canada websites / syndication and the comment stream is positive. So I stopped beating myself up about it, but I will control the next batch more closely.

P.S. the B roll camera is a handheld Panasonic Lumix underwater type cam - name escapes me right now.

Hey, they look good for "roughs", and yeah, if the client's happy, it can be hard to motivate for a finer cut...
First time riding a horse!!! That should have been a thread and film unto itself, ha ha!

Reminds me of riding in Belize (for the first time in... 20 years?) I got the bright idea to ride backwards to get the faces of people behind me- the footage was good, but...saddles are meant for sitting frontwards... if youknow what I mean... :huh:

Your horseback riding footage looked fine for a first time out, but is a case (IMHO) for a wider lens- for both a wider FOV and stability.
And since an 18 would have the FOV of an 18 on an Arri, but the FOV of 36 on an AF100 (yeah... I know it's still an 18, but you know what I mean!), for me at least, there's a case for a wider lens- Shooter's looking at the Panasonic 14-50, and I'd love to have the Tokina 11-16 for riding a horse.
But thanks for sharing your stuff man, and glad the client's happy... and you got to ride a horse! Giddyap!!!

 

[Bern Caughey]

**My own personal feeling**
Wider than 18mm never really enters my mind - my background was producing TV spots for national / international clients where we shot everything on ARRI 435 / 535's and none of the DP's that I ever worked with would ever order a lens wider than 18. I've just gained an eye where if I can't get it all in at that focal length I rethink the shot rather than get into a "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" type look.
**My own personal feeling**

For the most part I agree with your thoughts, & very rarely go wider than 14mm on the AF100. I'm not a long lens user either, & when possible prefer to stay shorter than 35mm.

However I bought the 7-14mm for a crane, actually Condor, shot where we we needed a broad establishing shot, but due to strong winds were unsure how high we'd be able to get. We lucked out on the wind, & didn't need the ultra-wide, but had gigs coming up that required filming in very tight spaces, so decided to keep it.

The 7-14mm is compact enough to always bring along, & produced dynamic footage while driving along the "Wall" in Palestine, so I consider it a worthy bit of kit for documentary work.

Though I've still never used it, I also carry the 100-300mm, & am sure one day it will prove worthy too.

Best,
Bern

 

[heavyG]

For the most part I agree with your thoughts, & very rarely go wider than 14mm on the AF100.

I bought the 7-14mm for a crane, actually Condor, shot where we we needed a broad establishing shot, but due to strong winds were unsure how high we'd be able to get. We lucked out on the wind, & didn't need the ultra-wide, but had gigs coming up that required filming in very tight spaces, so decided to keep it.

The 7-14mm is compact enough to always bring along, & produced some dynamic footage while driving along the "Wall" in Palestinian, so I consider it a worthy bit of kit for documentary work.

Best,
Bern

If we all didn't have different ideas - the films we watch would very bland indeed.

 

[groveChuck]

The 7-14mm is compact enough to always bring along, & produced dynamic footage while driving along the "Wall" in Palestinian, so I consider it a worthy bit of kit for documentary work.

Though I've still never used it, I also carry the 100-300mm, & am sure one day it will prove worthy too.

Best,
Bern

Bern- how about a film titled "Extremes", made only with the 7-14 and 100-300? :happy:

If we all didn't have different ideas - the films we watch would very bland indeed.

Truer words were never spoken...

 

[Bern Caughey]

Has anyone tried the Red Pro 18-85mm T2.9? Might be a little on the heavy side.

Even on a RED that lens is a beast.

 

[aguia]

For someone like myself who has been shooting with ENG cameras for the past 10 years the lack of a basic "video" lens with variable speed zoom and constant iris is probably the most glaring drawback of the AF100. It is a problem that is sort of balanced out by the advantages of the m43 mount and the promise of higher IQ. When I think about how I work with the ENG cams off the shoulder or hand held; Its extremely rare to do a zoom on the go, generally I'm wide and auto iris is off, if I go to long focal length the camera goes back on the tripod. Narrow dof is just a low percentage game hand held or "run and gun", I know its a budget thing but I would always tell a client that to accomplish that sort of look we would need to hire a steadicam person.

Back to the OP, I expect a constant aperture "video" oriented lens from panasonic in the 12-60mm range in the not too distant future, but actually the Tokina 12-24 isn't a bad compromise that no one has mentioned so far although I don't think it is as good optically as the current Olympus 12-60mm. Maybe even Duclos will do their treatment on the NIkon 17-55 one of these days.

 

[Mac]

Bern- how about a film titled "Extremes", made only with the 7-14 and 100-300?

When I was at UCLA in the late '60s I shot a student film for a friend, a drama, entirely with telephoto lenses.. The shortest was 180mm, on a std 16mm Arri S. I think the longest was 400mm. All the interiors were shot through windows, some from across the street with cars passing in the foreground. So, there is not a formula for what will work, in drama or documentary.

However, the question asked in this thread addresses the concept of shooting, I assume, handheld, on the move. I've been doing that most of my getting-to-be long life, and thus far there is not a perfect lens for the AF100. Not even close.. As I've said, I make do with the 14-54 Zuiko, but it's not something I would recommend to anyone.. I've said it before, and I'll say it again - we need a good, well-designed manual zoom for this camera!

 

[timbook2]

Hi heavyG, liked that footage! had to check back to find out you had an underwater lumix cam for the waterslide take Glad the clients like it too!! So you used the Red Zoom exclusively on those?
I agree: a good zoom lens for M43 is needed and please NO autofocus/iris stuff PLEASE!
I also like the handheld rig idea with the handle under the follow focus and the Aaton grip on the right ( with record button please). Lets hope by the time I am ready to buy the next model AF 101 some more lenses are available.

 

[Shooter]

For someone like myself who has been shooting with ENG cameras for the past 10 years the lack of a basic "video" lens with variable speed zoom and constant iris is probably the most glaring drawback of the AF100. .......

Its not really a drawback... its by design. The AF100 was not designed as an ENG camera. Neither was the Red , Alexa, the DSLRS etc...

There are plenty of ENG style cameras available. Its a matter of right tool for the job.

 

[aguia]

Its not really a drawback... its by design. The AF100 was not designed as an ENG camera. Neither was the Red , Alexa, the DSLRS etc...

There are plenty of ENG style cameras available. Its a matter of right tool for the job.

I think its debatable that the lack of native lenses for the AF100 is a "design" feature. I've never worked a news gig in my life but I think a compact camera like AF100 is almost by definition a "verite", or "EFP" (or whatever you want to call it) camera. A pro quality/feature zoom under 10K isn't too much to ask for.

 

[heavyG]

Hi heavyG, liked that footage! had to check back to find out you had an underwater lumix cam for the waterslide take Glad the clients like it too!! So you used the Red Zoom exclusively on those?

I only took the RED 18-50 and 50-150 on that shoot… In the end those seem to be the 2 lenses that spend 95% of their time on the AF100's we own.

G.

 

[Shooter]

I think its debatable that the lack of native lenses for the AF100 is a "design" feature. I've never worked a news gig in my life but I think a compact camera like AF100 is almost by definition a "verite", or "EFP" (or whatever you want to call it) camera. A pro quality/feature zoom under 10K isn't too much to ask for.

Actually it is a design feature. The camera is sold as a body only with the intention the user selects a lens of choice and purpose. It is obviously a production camera in the same sense as a Red , Alexa etc..

Those that are happy and able to use this production form factor (with a large sensor) for Events, ENG or "run and gun" have plenty of choices of "pro quality/feature zooms".... but the stumbling block is ...the "under 10k" bit.