FS7: FS7 + 28-135mm F4 G OSS = Good for run and gun?

alex1

alex1

Well-known member
Hi guys,

Has anyone tried using the FS7 + 28-135mm F4 G OSS for any doc or run and gun style shooting?

I'm working with a production company on a new doc series and they are thinking of using this combo.

But before we try it out I would love to hear any feedback from current owners.

Cheers.
 
Sony 18-105/f4 - I'm shooting a broadcast doc, mostly handheld actuality, and this sits on the camera most of the time.

Others talk of pincushion distortion - but I'm just not experiencing it, regardless of in-camera distortion correction being switched on or off.

Tough bodied (mostly metal, I think) and it has an internal zoom, so nothing extends out. f4 seems to be consistent across the zoom range.

Downside - doesn't have manual aperture ring. You have to use dial on the camera or grip and the grip dial is laggy and frustrating.

Otherwise behaves in a very similar way to the 28-135.
 
I have been using the 18-105 a lot as well recently and I am pleasantly surprised. I don't see any noticeable distortion unless I look at brick walls, its par focal from what I can tell pretty sharp.
When using this lens I tend to zoom in push AF , push auto iris on skin zoom out and shoot it works. I am tempted to also get the 28-135.
 
icarusfilm said:
I have been using the 18-105 a lot as well recently and I am pleasantly surprised. I don't see any noticeable distortion unless I look at brick walls, its par focal from what I can tell pretty sharp.
When using this lens I tend to zoom in push AF , push auto iris on skin zoom out and shoot it works. I am tempted to also get the 28-135.
Click to expand...

I would bet that optically neither of these Sony lenses is truly par-focal, but rather, that both behave in a par-focal manner through automated fly-by-wire electronics. That is to say, it's cheaper to engineer a lens that isn't optically parfocal and to use microprocessor to continuously adjust the elements to behave parfocal.
 
Viddovation said:
I would bet that optically neither of these Sony lenses is truly par-focal, but rather, that both behave in a par-focal manner through automated fly-by-wire electronics. That is to say, it's cheaper to engineer a lens that isn't optically parfocal and to use microprocessor to continuously adjust the elements to behave parfocal.
Click to expand...


We are talking about a $550 lens for that money its money
 
I have tested the 18-105 on several cameras incl. FS100/700/FS7.

It's pincushion distortion is a real problem, especially in the middle range.
The FS7 has automatic lens distortion compensation in HD, but not in UHD/4k and
it doesn't work with independend LUTs either.

This means unusable for me, because it won't be usable in UHD/4k.

But I have not tested the lens lately, but I attached it tp the FS7 on a Sony demo show
and I realized the same distortion when shooting in UHD or with automatic lens distortion compensation set off.

If I'm wrong here, I'd be happy to see UHD footage with this lens from the FS7!
 
I only use the 18-105 in ENG type situations where for the most part you are either on the widest or tightest focal length. Every time I forgot to switch the lens correction on after using HFR I realized later that my eye didn't catch any distortions that would be problematic in real world situations.
 
I understand how you use it, but this would not be a run+gun lens for me.
I tried the Canon 24-105/4 on a speedbooster. Nice but not really flare resistant
and distortion free.

Now I use the Canon EF-S 17-55/2,8 IS on a smart adapter. This is the best lens, I found
for R+G on my FS7. It's wide enough, it's fast enough, has a "real" mechanic focus throw
and image stabilization on top. I would love to have a little more focal length, but hope for
the 2k center scan mode to make it a 17-110 then.

The 28-135 is another league compared. It's very close to a real cine zoom, that cost an arm
and a leg. It's big, but has stepless iris ring, focus ring, servo zoom (it's slow, but usable) and
great image stabilization, too.
But the wide end is just to long for me. I need at least 18mm for R+G and f4 is on the slow side
too. It's okay but not really great. I wait for something wider and faster. I'd need something
like a 18-80/2,8 with IS and mechanical focusring before throwing money out again...
 
Erik Wittbusch said:
The 28-135 is another league compared. It's very close to a real cine zoom, that cost an arm
and a leg. It's big, but has stepless iris ring, focus ring, servo zoom (it's slow, but usable) and
great image stabilization, too.
Click to expand...
I rented the lens once and found the zoom too fast! (didn't have the time to figure out that you could make it slower though.
But the wide end is just to long for me. I need at least 18mm for R+G and f4 is on the slow side
too. It's okay but not really great. I wait for something wider and faster. I'd need something
like a 18-80/2,8 with IS and mechanical focusring before throwing money out again...
Click to expand...
Sign me up for a 18-80/2.8 OSS lens as well! Even if it was a cheaper version like the 18-105 this would be very interesting to me. I would be happy with a 24-70/2.8 OSS also.
One sweet thing I noticed with the 18-105 on the A7s is that if you have digital zoom activated (which is surprisingly useful when shooting HD!) the zoom automatically continues zooming when reaching 105mm. Effectively making it a 18-210 lens. If it does the same with the 28-135 then that lens would be extremely flexible on a A7s.
 
All these existing lenses are compromises if Sony would bring out a mechanical version of the 18-105 I would drop up to 5k US on it even with a f4. Having said that even if I could afford a 35mm cine zoom like the 17-135 canon I wouldn't be able to use it on the kind of shoots I mostly do because of size and weight.
 
I have both the Canon 24-105 F4 and the Tamron 24-70 f2.8/.
The Canon is best for run & gun though it does tend to flare and it has some CA problems . The Tamron is very good optically and is the only 24-70 with IS. Focuses Nikon direction though. I don't know whether I will ultimately keep the 24-105. Both of course work with speedbooster which gives more zoom range and makes the Tamron an f2!
Agree about 28mm not being wide enough
 
I'm using the 24-105 f/4 with speedbooster and it looks great to me, but then i'm not interested in pixel peeping so much so maybe i'm wrong. To my eye, lovely combo for run and gun work.
 
18-105 has an unusable focus ring for me... just doesnt work.
the 28-135 is my run & gun lens for news/doc work since January on dozens of shoots, great lens... I just change to the tokina 11-16 for wide shots since its not wide enough.
 
icarusfilm said:
All these existing lenses are compromises if Sony would bring out a mechanical version of the 18-105 I would drop up to 5k US on it even with a f4. Having said that even if I could afford a 35mm cine zoom like the 17-135 canon I wouldn't be able to use it on the kind of shoots I mostly do because of size and weight.
Click to expand...

We all have the same dilemma. The lens we all want does not exist for any price. Even were one willing to drop $15k ( used price ) on one of the DP Rouges, the 16-40mm isn't long enough and the 30-80mm isn't wide enough.

Canon cine servo and the Fujinon Cabrio have the desired focal length range but are too large and too weighty for my needs.


I had not considered the 24-105mm f/4 with speed booster. That would make it a rough equivalent of a...what? 17-74mm f/3?

Were one seeking a Run & Gun zoom lens set that would only include zooms with an iris ring on the lens, a possible set would be:

* Tokina Cine 11-16mm f/3

* Red Pro 17-50mm f/2.9

* Sony FE 28-135mm f/4

I agree 100% with icarus- if Sony came out with a mechanical version of the 18-105mm I'd drop $5k on it, particularly if it were still a servo zoom. If it were mechanical and a f/2.8 I'd be willing to spend even more on it.

I live mostly on the combo of the Sony 10-18mm f/4 e-mount and the Canon 24-70mm II f/2.8 with Commlite EF to e-mount adapter.

Lastly- this may be a dumb question, but is the FE 28-135 a mechanical focus lens? At times it feels awful digital in it's action. No where as bad as the focus action on the Sony 18-105mm, but it definitely does not focus like a B4 zoom.
 
My manual nikkor 28-85 (3.5-45) and booster (total$600?) is pretty hard to beat. It even is faster than the $20g canon at the wide end!

S
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top