d1rockwild
Well-known member
Will you be shooting solo with one body? What's your budget?
GH2 Best zoom lens for weddings?
- Thread starter mustangranch99
- Start date
I don't know. Tamron makes a 25-105 constant 2.8 for $500. Can that extra bit of iris and range really add that much?
That would make for some terribly boring dance footage.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Except that I followed up my post with how a monopod, should rig and steady cam would help as well. There are many ways to shoot dance footage without hand holding the camera.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Yes it could. F2.8 on a zoom lens is hard enough. Moving to f2.0 is a huge jump while still maintaining decent optical quality. There is a reason why Olympus is the only company to make a decent affordable f2.0 zoom and it costs a fortune. F2.0 is very difficult in a zoom. The more range a zoom has the harder it is to make fast. Yes Tamron has done well with that particular lens but going wider and longer and faster will not be an easy thing to do. Even the Olympus lenses at f2.0 have a very limited zoom range and it would be very difficult for them to do a 14-140 at f2.0. Have you ever seen the size of those lenses as well? They were designed for 4/3 sensors but still huge and heavy.
Last edited:
stoneinapond
Veteran
Could you post a link to this lens? I can't find any mention of it.
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
Same. I would love to have a 25-105 f2.8 for $500
Two other factors that make the zoom expensive and heavy besides the 2.0 is that David wants it to be parfocal and have internal zoom. The 14-140 has neither. That is the big distinction between a DSLR zoom and a video zoom.
The Zuiko 14-35 2.0 and the Zuiko 35-100 2.0 are nearly $5000 (together). These are not parfocal and the 14-35 is not internal zoom. Compare the size of those two lenses to the 14-140. Combining that range together and making it parfocal and internal would make it exponentially more expensive.
Fujinon introduced a 19-90 parfocal internal zoom t2.9 that is selling for $38,000.
[edit] Look at the size of these two lenses. The 14-35 (left) is about 3x the volume of the 14-140. Now imagine combining those two lenses.
http://www.lenstip.com/242.3-Lens_review-Olympus_Zuiko_Digital_35-100_mm_f_2.0_Build_quality.html
The Zuiko 14-35 2.0 and the Zuiko 35-100 2.0 are nearly $5000 (together). These are not parfocal and the 14-35 is not internal zoom. Compare the size of those two lenses to the 14-140. Combining that range together and making it parfocal and internal would make it exponentially more expensive.
Fujinon introduced a 19-90 parfocal internal zoom t2.9 that is selling for $38,000.
[edit] Look at the size of these two lenses. The 14-35 (left) is about 3x the volume of the 14-140. Now imagine combining those two lenses.
http://www.lenstip.com/242.3-Lens_review-Olympus_Zuiko_Digital_35-100_mm_f_2.0_Build_quality.html
Last edited: