FS7: FS7 successor (rumours/expectations)

On the other hand - let's juggle that for a second - there's new Canon RF 28-70 F2 that is just under 1.5 KG and is priced at $3,000. Could one make an 18-80 at F2.8 or something similar in the same price range? With the ever increasing low light performance, acceptance of full frame and falling LED light prices, this ought to be within the range of possibilities.
 
DLD said:
there's new Canon RF 28-70 F2 that is just under 1.5 KG and is priced at $3,000
Click to expand...

That currently ONLY fits one camera that has a 1.8x sensor crop when shooting 4K video and has terrible rolling-shutter.

Eventually Canon should produce a better EOS R camera for 4K video, but that may be more than a year away...
 
Last edited:
Ya but that's Canon's business strategy of the moment. If they decide to make RF their stills line and keep the EF as the video/cine line, then the number of models will increase while their sales will drop.
 
Sony could improve a lot on the 18-110 as I see it. Even if it would prove to be difficult to get to F2.8 anything better than F4 would be nice. They also need to squeeze in closer focusing and more aperture blades for smoother bokeh.
Why not compromise a bit? 18-100 F3.2 with 9 aperture blades and close focusing at 45 cm at 100mm? I'd seriously consider that.
 
I guess they could. I guess they could make it f2.8 but I don't think it would weigh 2.4lbs and cost $3,500.00 Sony built this at a price for a camera they felt would replace EX3's and it's that camera's philosophy and its followers that this lens is aimed at. It focuses down to about 65cm at 100mm and about 15cm at 18mm, that's from the front of the lens. I agree it's bokeh is it's worst aspect but in the real world of corporate and doco it hasn't bee a real issue so far. Some Custom 709 mid shots, as that's what the producer required, all at f4.0.

Chris Young

clip 01_800.jpgclip 02_800.jpgclip 03_800.jpg
 
These look badly out of focus. Or is it "the look" ?



cyvideo said:
I guess they could. I guess they could make it f2.8 but I don't think it would weigh 2.4lbs and cost $3,500.00 Sony built this at a price for a camera they felt would replace EX3's and it's that camera's philosophy and its followers that this lens is aimed at. It focuses down to about 65cm at 100mm and about 15cm at 18mm, that's from the front of the lens. I agree it's bokeh is it's worst aspect but in the real world of corporate and doco it hasn't bee a real issue so far. Some Custom 709 mid shots, as that's what the producer required, all at f4.0.

Chris Young

View attachment 135452View attachment 135453View attachment 135454
Click to expand...
 
Hey, J Brown

Can you show us some of your material you’ve shot on an 18-110?

Cheers,

Ben.

J.Brown said:
Sony could improve a lot on the 18-110 as I see it. Even if it would prove to be difficult to get to F2.8 anything better than F4 would be nice. They also need to squeeze in closer focusing and more aperture blades for smoother bokeh.
Why not compromise a bit? 18-100 F3.2 with 9 aperture blades and close focusing at 45 cm at 100mm? I'd seriously consider that.
Click to expand...
 
broughtonfilm said:
These look badly out of focus. Or is it "the look" ?
Click to expand...

Believe me the original footage is pin sharp. Client very happy. These low res JPGs are just to show how the various out of focus and practical light sources look in general day to day work as this is one of the main criticisms of the lens and its 7 blade iris. Similar iris bokeh comments as leveled at the Cooke lenses with their 7 blade irises.

https://www.eoshd.com/2015/01/slr-magic-vs-cooke/

Chris Young
 
Last edited:
The Sony 18-110. It's what has sat on my FS7 for the past 2+ years. I've always dismissed it as a "donkey" lens - just gets the job done.

But on reflection, I think it's an extraordinary lens. There's nothing else out there that offers such an impressive balance of wide end, reach, low distortion, smooth operability, reliability and light weight - let alone the price. And all at a constant f4.0. And nothing's come out since that remotely challenges it.

I'm selling my FS7, but I'm reluctant to get rid of the 18-110 - it's such a brilliant working lens for independent film-makers who can't/don't want to work with a large camera support team.

Sony cocked up by releasing it quietly off the back of the wrongly-specced FF 28-135, which wasn't loved. So it's been tainted by that.

I reckon this is the "one lens" that most of us FS7 owner-ops should be packing. So, cock on the block time. Here are some recent gigs - all actuality shot on 18-110 - at times, in some pretty challenging conditions:

https://vimeo.com/232792842

https://vimeo.com/253991376

https://vimeo.com/326606732


Ben.
 
bengiles said:
I reckon this is the "one lens" that most of us FS7 owner-ops should be packing. So, cock on the block time. Here are some recent gigs - all actuality shot on 18-110 - at times, in some pretty challenging conditions:
Click to expand...

Now't wrong with any of that material BG! The 18-110 is not a lens to engender much passion but for all your aformentioned points is why I find I'm using it way more than I expected to when I bought the thing. It's not a lens I would use for great 'artistic' value but as an all round lens there is as you say really not much out there that delivers what the 18-110 does for the price. Lot of lens snobbery out there. Almost 100% of the time its detractors have never even used one so don't even know what they are talking about. After doing a shoot on a Varicam LT that was running a PL Canon 30-105 I was curious so grabbed the 30-105 Canon and my Metabones PL and tried it on the FS7 and apart from the extra speed on the Canon's f2.8 there was very little difference in sharpness but on CA the Sony killed the Canon. The best the Canon delivered was from about f4.0 onwards. For hand efficient focusing on the Canon 30-105 I found the 300 degree throw to be too much really feeling I needed a follow focus. I don't have that problem on the 18-110. Prices? $3.4k vs $23k. Very hard to justify that sort of price difference in my line of work when there is virtually nothing on screen to convince me to spend that extra amount of money. Sure I think lenses like the Canon are built to a much higher lifetime duration standard but for 6.5 x the price? Nah!

Chris Young
 
bengiles said:
I'm selling my FS7, but I'm reluctant to get rid of the 18-110 - it's such a brilliant working lens for independent film-makers who can't/don't want to work with a large camera support team.
Click to expand...

I switched from FS7 to Pana EVA1 last year. The 18-110 is the only thing I really miss.
 
To switch camera these days is a bit pointless. Unless you go Arri its better to wait as we are on the last inches before the next leap.
 
Was at the Cine Gear Expo in Hollywood this weekend and saw an interesting new S-35 zoom from Laowa.
They're coming out with a 25-100mm 2.9 in EF/PL Mounts called the OOOM, which stands for "Out Of Our Minds". The price is listed at $6,500. I didn't actually see the lens itself, but it is pictured in their new brochure. Looked for it later on their website, but it's not there yet. (I was too busy gawking at their lovely 9mm 2.8 and 24mm Probe lens to notice the zoom until later). Seems like it's priced between the cost of a pair of $4,000 Sigma zooms. Their number one design goal was to eliminate focus breathing and keep it parfocal. I got pretty excited about this lens at first, but upon reflection, the price seems kind'a high compared to everything that you get with the Sony 18-110mm. Still, I want to try one in person first, find out how many iris blades that it has, and see if they will release it in e-Mount.
 
Personally I think they are out of thier minds making this lens!

Id guess 90% of S35 zoom buyers whant an 'eng' lens being one starting at 18mm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top