Other: FX6 Lensing Survey

jasonbrooks

jasonbrooks

Well-known member
Hey everyone,

TL; DR - my main point:
I'd be very interested to know what selection of lenses people are using with their new FX6 cams, how you'd rate them in terms of both IQ and ergonomics, and any images or edits you can embed or link to here to illustrate your thoughts.


The context:
Prospective FX6 owner here (currently own FS7 with Fujinon MK 18-55 & 50-135 covering 90% of my doc/promo work). My main (or probably only real) reservation before switching up to the FX6 is how much I've come to love my Fujis. The combination of full manual operation, long focus throw, parfocality, fluid aperture, respectable macro plus very nice (if not particularly characterful) rendition and bokeh have spoiled me over the past few years. Obviously with the full frame FX6 I would be limited to using these on 1080p work only, and hence probably selling them and replacing with full frame glass.

Obviously one of the draws of the FX6 will be the option of highly functional AF, for which I'd obviously not be able to use the Fujis anyway, but being able to swap between full manual cine zoom and a wide electronic AF lens for gimbal work, for example, would be amazing. Pretty sure that flexibility is not worth the extra £5K for an FX9 though, especially given it's bulk and other drawbacks compared to the FX6.

Thanks!

jason
 
Currently using a set of Canon FD lenses which are great.

Will probably get the new E-Mount Sigma 24-70 and 24mm f3.5, 35mm f2 and 65mm f2 as a modern clean AF enabled alternative too.

Or maybe Zeiss Batis. Not sure.
 
I've got:
- PZ 28-135: It is the only PZ, OSS lens there is. Constant F4. Relatively big on the FX6. I think it works very well and has little focus breathing.
- 24-240: A much hated lens to the stills community as it is "soft", but it is small, light and ranges from F3.5 to 6.3. I think it works remarkable well for Video and is a great travel super zoom. Couple it with Clear Image Zoom and you go from 24-360 = good wide and good tele. It's also cheap to boot. If I was on the Inca Trail again, this is the one I'd take.
 
Ben Scott said:
Currently using a set of Canon FD lenses which are great.

Will probably get the new E-Mount Sigma 24-70 and 24mm f3.5, 35mm f2 and 65mm f2 as a modern clean AF enabled alternative too.

Or maybe Zeiss Batis. Not sure.
Click to expand...

I have the Sigma 24-70 FE (which I use on my A7SIII, I don't have an FX6) and I think it's a stellar lens. Sharp, pretty, great autofocus. Hard to find fault with it. The MFD on the wide end is quite impressive as well, almost too close to use sometimes. Great magnification, higher on the wide end than the tele end.

Do you really need those primes if you have that zoom? I have the Samyang 35 and 85 f/1.4 for portraiture and they work well and the 2 extra stops give me a reason to change over to them. I considered Sigmas but I decided to save the money even though they perform better wide open and more evenly across the frame. I like the Samyang look, it's gentle and pretty and has nice flare.

Shout-out to the Tamron 70-180, it has probably the best autofocus performance of any FE telephoto zoom.

I also have the Sony 12-24 f/4 and the 28-135. They're both very useful although the 12-24 has way more distortion at 12 than my Laowa 12mm does. And the AF on these Sony lenses is possibly a little slower than my other lenses, maybe because they're older designs or maybe because they're heavier. My Tamron and Sigma are both lightning quick and the Samyangs aren't far behind. But the Sonys I have do a good job, too.

jmone said:
I've got:
- PZ 28-135: It is the only PZ, OSS lens there is. Constant F4. Relatively big on the FX6. I think it works very well and has little focus breathing.
- 24-240: A much hated lens to the stills community as it is "soft", but it is small, light and ranges from F3.5 to 6.3. I think it works remarkable well for Video and is a great travel super zoom. Couple it with Clear Image Zoom and you go from 24-360 = good wide and good tele. It's also cheap to boot. If I was on the Inca Trail again, this is the one I'd take.
Click to expand...

There's also the Tamron 28-200 which seems to be optically better than the older Sony 24-240, although it has a shorter range (particularly painful on the wide end I should think) and lacks OSS. But generally it's sharper and I think more even-keeled. As a bonus, it ramps from f/2.8 to 5.6 and is typically 0.5-1 stops faster than the sony at any given focal length.
 
ahalpert said:
Do you really need those primes if you have that zoom? I have the Samyang 35 and 85 f/1.4 for portraiture and they work well and the 2 extra stops give me a reason to change over to them. I considered Sigmas but I decided to save the money even though they perform better wide open and more evenly across the frame. I like the Samyang look, it's gentle and pretty and has nice flare.
Click to expand...

To be honest I hate working with zooms but they are sometimes a necessary evil. I might go for the 40mm f1.4 and 105mm f1.4 to make it more worthwhile as you say.

I have Manual glass in the Canon FDs covering zooms and primes. The 135mm f2.5 is great for interviews.
 
Those sigma primes are supposed to be amazing - but only the 40mm mirrorless redesign, I believe. Not the reflex design with built-in adapter, as it were.

The Sigma 40mm F1.4 ART (hereafter called the 40ART for brevity) is an optical juggernaut, with wall to wall sharpness, high contrast, and nice bokeh to match. It joins the 28mm F1.4 ART (review here) and 105mm F1.4 (review here) as examples of Sigma’s best optical work in a prime lens.
Click to expand...
https://dustinabbott.net/2019/11/sigma-40mm-f1-4-art-review/

Beware the 35 f/1.2 because it's beautiful but you can see the autofocus stepping through the range at intervals.

The sigma 24-70 is not too evil :) it's a beautiful zoom.

I was mighty tempted by sigma primes over samyang but the samyangs were way cheaper and plenty sharp for portraiture
 
I've owned a few Sigma cine primes and had great joy with them on various cameras.

AF is not something I use usually but makes sense to have it as an option.
 
Good thread Jason - thanks for starting. I think Ben and you have it pretty much sorted!

Nothing too exotic for me - have to watch the pennies till the work returns. I already have the 16-35 f4 Sony/Zeiss and the f4 70-200 Sony G, both of which I rate highly in terms of image quality and AF. The only one I'm planning to add right now is the Sony 24-105 which seems to get great reviews and fills the gap in my range.

I also like/prefer primes but zooms suit the work I do most of.
 
Ben Scott said:
AF is not something I use usually but makes sense to have it as an option.
Click to expand...

I never used it before the A7SIII. Some things I can do a better job with manually and some things with AF. And otherwise, I dont personally mind using adapters and only needed to buy new lenses for AF use since all my other lenses can adapt to E mount, including my old Leica M glass
 
The recent Sigma DGDN lenses I use with my A7R4 are 100% compatible with the FX6 (14-24, 24-70, 105 macro and 105/1.4)
I've still one EF Canon lens (35/1.4), the AF does not work with the Metabones IV
The Sigma lenses have an exceptional Image Quality on the A7R4, so on the FX6...
The 105/1.4 images look like this
 
Last edited:
Having tested my chums choices the other day.. 16-35 28-135 and 20-600 he seems well covered. the 28-135 is clearly a very good thing.
 
I'm using the FX6 with DZOfilm Vespids with PL mount. So far, I'm satisfied. They fit the FX6 really nice with their small size and weight.
 
I'm really impressed by how well they are made. Considering the price. The only complain I have, that they don't fit my Bright Tangerine Frame Safe 80mm clamp but work fine with the clamp on ring. Second, is that that the 100mm and 135mm are a bit stiffer than the rest on the focus ring.

Optics are really nice for the price, they flare a bit strange, but that's it. Still waiting for the 90mm macro thou. A friend of mine who have a big rental house in my country was already looking at them and was also satisfied. He is considering buying them for low budget productions. He likes them more than the rehoused Bokkelux lense (ie. NiSi, MavoPrimes etc.) because DZO will expand the range with a 16mm and maybe more lenses. I'm hoping for a 20 and 60mm maybe even something longer. There are rumors they are working on a FF zooms.
 
morgan_moore said:
Having tested my chums choices the other day.. 16-35 28-135 and 20-600 he seems well covered. the 28-135 is clearly a very good thing.
Click to expand...

Agreed - the 28-135 gets a lot of flack for its imperfections. But it's still a very useful tool whilst being about half the cost of the next FF zoom in the B&H catalog.

Don't forget to consider the 12-24 as an alternative to the 16-35

Vik Kamenicky said:
There are rumors Vespid are working on a FF zooms.
Click to expand...

That would be great because there are very few FF zooms on the market currently
 
Vik Kamenicky said:
I'm really impressed by how well they are made. Considering the price. The only complain I have, that they don't fit my Bright Tangerine Frame Safe 80mm clamp but work fine with the clamp on ring. Second, is that that the 100mm and 135mm are a bit stiffer than the rest on the focus ring.

Optics are really nice for the price, they flare a bit strange, but that's it. Still waiting for the 90mm macro thou. A friend of mine who have a big rental house in my country was already looking at them and was also satisfied. He is considering buying them for low budget productions. He likes them more than the rehoused Bokkelux lense (ie. NiSi, MavoPrimes etc.) because DZO will expand the range with a 16mm and maybe more lenses. I'm hoping for a 20 and 60mm maybe even something longer. There are rumors they are working on a FF zooms.
Click to expand...

Great. I think they'd do a really good job for me and might be a better bet than me continuing down the vintage stills glass route.
 
Switching from a FS5/A6300 to a FX6/A7sIII I had to change the majority of my lenses to fit full frame (my main lenses were tokina 11-20 2.8, sigma 18-35 1.8 and Canon 70-300 all in EF mount).

For the moment I have to do more on situation tests to have a more precise opinion on the new lenses. I bought:
Sigma 24-70
Sony 12-24 f4
Sigma 100-400 DG DN
Samyang 45 1.8 (It don't look very solid but for the price the autofocus is on par with the Sigma 24-70 and the image look very acceptebale)
 
I was also coming from a S35 camera (Fs5) so I've had to pick up some lenses. I have some FF manual lenses (Rokinon 35mm and 85mm; an old Nikon 50mm) but my current setup of FF FX6 lenses is:

Sony 24-105mm (will likely be my workhorse, all around lens)
Tamron 70-300 (just picked this up)
Sigma 150-600mm (a bit unwieldy but great reach and quality for the price)

I'm thinking of something on the wide end to round this out—like the Tamron 17-28mm—and then maybe a fast prime with AF, like the Sony 85mm.
 
The 28-135 F4 has copped a lot of criticism but for the price and what it gives in terms of efficient shooting means it's become the mainstay on my FX6. I've only swung lenses on a few different shoots (to a Nikon-mount Tokina 11-16mm with adapter on music clips and short docos). In the end the 28-135 is the nigh perfect run-and-gun lens for shooting solo with the FX6. The stabilisation works well, it has a good focus throw, the aperture ring's on the barrel, the fly-by-wire zooming action is smooth, auto-focus works well and it's a great range to have especially with the clear image setting.
 
Laowa just released a 1.4x expander to turn their S35 OOOM lens into am effective 35-140mm T4 https://laowacine.com/product/1-4x-full-frame-expander/

Lens + adapter for $6k

Definitely a soft lens with beautiful flares. Almost looks like a lens from the 70s/80s

Also definitely underscores the value of the sony which has more range/wider + IS/AF/servo. Different tools tho
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top