Canon 17-55 EFs glass

Chris Johnston

Chris Johnston

Veteran
In my search for a constant apeture zoom it occured to me that I have a 17-55 2.8 EF-S lens in my 60D bag.

Anyone ever try this on a FS100? Is the EF-S vs S35 gonna give vig?

I know the iris is a pain to set but I could pop it on the 60D and set it.....Just wondering if the Vig will be distracting or if it's even there???

I don't want to even waste the couple bucks for a dummy EOS/ emount adapter if the vig makes it unusable.
 
There shouldn't be any vignette... 1.52x crop vs 1.6 crop is very close and its only 17mm so it should be fine. The tokina 11-16 is a DX/efs lens and has no vignette with the fs100, so i assume a 17-55 would be okay.
 
videohog said:
In my search for a constant apeture zoom it occured to me that I have a 17-55 2.8 EF-S lens in my 60D bag.

Anyone ever try this on a FS100? Is the EF-S vs S35 gonna give vig?

I know the iris is a pain to set but I could pop it on the 60D and set it.....Just wondering if the Vig will be distracting or if it's even there???

I don't want to even waste the couple bucks for a dummy EOS/ emount adapter if the vig makes it unusable.
Click to expand...

eheath has it correct - no vignetting.

Why not look at the Sony SAL1650 16-50mm f/2.8 lens. I reviewed it here:
Vancouver Videographer reviews SAL1650 on FS100

This way, if you pair it with the LA-EA2 adapter (when new firmware is released) you will gain autofocus (PDAF, which is better than CDAF) and the ability to adjust the iris through the body of the FS100 (although not sure if the iris changes will be smooth enough that you can make them while filming, although it still will be better than setting the iris on the 60D every time.
 
While it seems to be a nice lens, I still have to look at the $1100 cost for something that may, or may not, work. (as opposed to the $50 or so for a dumb mount)
I would love to see that glass in an E mount, (honestly don't know why they wouldn't make one???)

In the end is it worth the additional $1050 bucks for a somewhat Mickey Mouse fix
 
videohog said:
While it seems to be a nice lens, I still have to look at the $1100 cost for something that may, or may not, work. (as opposed to the $50 or so for a dumb mount)
I would love to see that glass in an E mount, (honestly don't know why they wouldn't make one???)

In the end is it worth the additional $1050 bucks for a somewhat Mickey Mouse fix
Click to expand...

I too wonder why Sony can't just make their Alpha lenses and E-mount lens. I'm sure there is a good reason but I have never seen it explained.

Not sure why you would consider it a Mickey Mouse fix - what wouldn't the LA-EA2 and SAL1650 pairing allow you to do (other than smooth manual iris changes)?

I guess that is the beauty and challenge for Sony on the FS100 - there are so many lens options and their own solutions (via adapters or native e-mount lenses) aren't ready yet so using Canon lenses for DSLR video shooters and Nikon lenses for photographers is the "default" - and there are several "defaults", depending on exiting or lack of existing lenses.

I'm kind of glad I don't have enough legacy glass that I'm trying to make work on the FS100 but until Sony updates the firmware every workflow has its compromises.
 
ShawnLam said:
I too wonder why Sony can't just make their Alpha lenses and E-mount lens. I'm sure there is a good reason but I have never seen it explained.

Not sure why you would consider it a Mickey Mouse fix - what wouldn't the LA-EA2 and SAL1650 pairing allow you to do (other than smooth manual iris changes)?

I guess that is the beauty and challenge for Sony on the FS100 - there are so many lens options and their own solutions (via adapters or native e-mount lenses) aren't ready yet so using Canon lenses for DSLR video shooters and Nikon lenses for photographers is the "default" - and there are several "defaults", depending on exiting or lack of existing lenses.

I'm kind of glad I don't have enough legacy glass that I'm trying to make work on the FS100 but until Sony updates the firmware every workflow has its compromises.
Click to expand...

Guess I shouldn't have called it a Micky Mouse fix...., Just don't see the logic in why I have to buy a new $400 Sony adapter so that my new $700 sony lens will work on my new $6000 Sony camera. (not to mention why they did such a Crappy job on the first adapter)
Don't get me wrong....I actually like the kit lens. It seems to work fairly well. Just can't see how they could spend all that time developing such a great camera, then don't adapt one of there faster lens' (such as the sal 1650 2.8) to work on it natively. (somebody HAD to know that the first thing asked was gonna be what glass will work....)

I have a full compliment of fast nikons primes to go with both my cameras and a novaflex adapter for each of them but it sure would have been nice to have a fast constant apeture zoom available at the anouncement time.

I've often wondered why the MTF and Birger mounts seem to take forever to come out........maybe there's something about the way the cam talks to the glass that might be technically overwelming even if Sony is letting them have unfettered access to the tech scematics for development for free. (otherwise I would imagine Sony would be able to just pop a E mount on the sal 1650 rather than the A mount.???)
 
Hey Shawn (or anyone actually)
I've been looking at various options for a zoom and the Laea2 and the a mount sal 1650 2.8 might be a viable option for one of my cams. (b&h had the la ea2 for 309 yesterday, noticed it's back to $400 now)

Anyway, I'd like to ask a few questions to kind of solidify my decisions.

Do you have a la-ea2? If so is the current functionality similar to the la ea1? (basicly, just get the ability to move the iris, and no autofocus or IS?......on the fs100)

Secondly, the "special notes from Sony" say this.....
Aperture setting for video capture is fixed at the maximum aperture of the lens or f/3.5, whichever is lower (AF-C).

Maybe I'm missing something but.........what does that mean? If I've got a 2.8 lens, can I only get 3.5? or if I've got a 4.5 lens I can somehow magically get 3.5 out of it? I'm not sure at all what that means???????

Basicly just looking for a good zoom in that (16ish to 55ish) range that I can at least adjust apeture with. (If I get AF or IS, that's just a bonus...)



EDIT.......I found this on the VG10 with la-ea2

Aperture is set to F3.5 when you record movies with autofocusing. When you are using a lens with an
F3.5 or smaller F-stop, aperture is set to the maximum F-stop of the lens. When you want to set your own
value for aperture to record movies, select [Aperture Priority] or [Manual Exposure] in [Shoot Mode],
and select manual focusing. If you change the aperture while recording a movie, the noise may be heard
or the screen may become brighter while the camcorder is processing the adjustment.

I'm not sure but as I read it , if you want autofocus and you're using a 2.8 lens, then you will ONLY get autofocus at 2.8. If you change it to 5.6 (or anything other than 2.8) then it manual focus only.
 
Last edited:
Ps.....
Third question
Does the SAL 1650 have a decent focus? ie, is it a hard hookup thr the lens or is it similar to the kit lens in that the focus ring just spins and spin with no hard stops?
 
videohog said:
EDIT.......I found this on the VG10 with la-ea2

Aperture is set to F3.5 when you record movies with autofocusing. When you are using a lens with an
F3.5 or smaller F-stop, aperture is set to the maximum F-stop of the lens. When you want to set your own
value for aperture to record movies, select [Aperture Priority] or [Manual Exposure] in [Shoot Mode],
and select manual focusing. If you change the aperture while recording a movie, the noise may be heard
or the screen may become brighter while the camcorder is processing the adjustment.

I'm not sure but as I read it , if you want autofocus and you're using a 2.8 lens, then you will ONLY get autofocus at 2.8. If you change it to 5.6 (or anything other than 2.8) then it manual focus only.
Click to expand...

The way I understand it, using this adapter, if you have autofocus selected the lowest (ie largest) f-stop you will get is f3.5 (even if you open up to f2.8), so an f2.8 lens would be under utilized. I do not believe that what you say here is at all accurate.

However, the last statement in the blurb above is disturbing - "If you change the aperture while recording a movie, the noise may be heard or the screen may become brighter while the camcorder is processing the adjustment." I think we all suffer, oddly, from the rapid rate of progress in this technology. If Sony or Canon knew that the camera bodies they sell today might still be viable in say, two years, they might actually spend some time to develop a decent lens, instead of just trying to stick still lenses on movie cameras with half-baked adapters.

I would also like to know how the focus ring works on the 1650 though. This is the biggest drawback to the kit lens, IMHO.
 
"" I do not believe that what you say here is at all accurate. ""

Well, I hope you're right but that first sentence from Sony would imply otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top