Other: FX9: Glass Options- Cine or AF or both?

T

truelife

Well-known member
As a new FX9 owner I've enjoyed using AF zooms for interviews, however I usually prefer primes for interviews. I currently have a nice set of SLR Magic APO Hyperprimes which obviosuly have pretty manual focus and nice coating. However, without testing something like the Sony Planar 50mm against my 50mm t2.1 Cine prime, I'm wondering if the look will be appreciably different.

For now I think the answer is to own both, but curious to hear thoughts...
 
I will say that the 50mm 1.4 Zeiss Planar is my favorite lens I’ve ever owned at any price point. Its image is absolutely incredible. I love shooting it wide open and find that it holds up very well that way. It also can be de-clicked and has a very good manual focus. By far the best Sony lens with manual focus I’ve worked with outside of the 18-110.
 
Sony should soon be releasing a cine line (based on the G-master series, presumably). Those will have both the AF and the manual features. 16-35 should be the first out of the gate.

PS. Schedule is, obviously, subject to change due to the situation in China.
 
A new 20mm was released today. Great focal length/look on FF.

https://www.adorama.com/iso2018g.html

While watching a regular final product (an edited piece with motion blur and compression), normal people will not notice any differences from any combination of any modern lenses made by anyone.

Show them side-by-side static clips and charts, some may.
 
NorBro said:
A new 20mm was released today. Great focal length/look on FF.
Click to expand...

Yes, that lens plus recent reviews I've heard of folks using the FX9 with Sony primes has made me rethink the need for Cine primes for much of my work. I know about the Cine zooms Sony will release but those are obviously pricey and don't offer the aperture of the primes.

Also curious if there's much of an optical difference between the Planar and GM lenses?
 
When you have a cinema camera that's a manual-focus only machine, it's awesome to experiment with real cine lenses (even old ones from 30-40-50 with imperfections), but I don't think it makes much sense on the FX9 for most people.

It's one of the best AF cameras in the world and Sony has such nice E-mount lenses. They are so perfect for each other.

I imagine there are always some differences in optical formulas with lenses (more so with higher-end glass vs. lower-end glass), but it's nothing to get caught up in, IMO.

___

You have to remember that these lenses are made for photography systems in which many use them completely wide-open and then analyze only ONE very high-resolution 6K-8K frame. That's what that extra money is for. Great performance wide open. Edges. Bokeh. Contrast. Maybe controlling flares. (Build-quality and mechanics too.)

In the video world, we lose our resolution with motion. IMO, in reality, our 4K and 6K cameras can sometimes become 2.5K-ish cameras, visually. No one is able to analyze the performance in the same manner...it will never be the same like analyzing one 6K-8K still frame (most likely with a high shutter).

Videos don't look like photos.

___

8-10 years ago, some cheaper "modern" lenses had bad chromatic aberration or were super soft wide-open or had wild flares (some like that), but when's the last time you've seen an E-mount lens from the past several years that wasn't good? All of Sony's glass - even their $198 50mm - is going to look at least pretty good if not great on such a high-quality FX9 sensor.

There are many reviews from photographers who compare the G Masters to other lenses (via one 6K-8K still frame), and many don't find the price difference to be worth it.

So...is there much of an optical difference between the Planar and GM lenses? Probably nothing you would ever be able to notice unless you'd be continuously shooting wide-open with each lens and comparing their results.
 
Just shot the FX9 all last week on four different shoots. I was actually impressed with the results from the much maligned FE PZ 28-135mm f/4.0 OSS G lens. Sure, it's not as fast as a nice prime but using the hi base ISO of 4,000, I was impressed with how good that lens made
talent look, even with just a small two or three LED panel kit, balancing against ambient light for a natural not lit look. The AF system on the FX9 is magic, I can't imagine not using AF lenses with it. I agree with the others, the differences between using the Sony AF lenses and
high end cinema glass will be there but hardly noticeable to anyone without side by side comparison.

The newly released FE 20mm f/1.8 G would be a GREAT addition to a zoom or two. I am testing the new 16-35mm Sony Cine lens with AF after NAB, they've had some delays with finishing it up and there are the Covid 19 supply chain issues too.
Even at f/4.0, I had shallow enough DOF on my interviews last week where if I was shooting MF lenses (and I had no production monitor, just the camera LCD), I would have been struggling to keep the rocking interview subjects in razor sharp
focus. It's really hard to manually track focus in UHD or higher resolutions without a big monitor or having your eyes glued to the EVF the whole interview. I shot some 2 hour interviews and the AF really made them a pleasure instead of torture.
 
Last edited:
I would also say don't sleep on the Batis line of Zeiss lenses. Absolutely beautiful lenses and fully compatible with the FX9 autofocus.
 
I am pretty interested in the Sony 20mm F1.8. The only thing that concerns me is the breathing. Most of the initial reviews are stills-based but a couple who have tested it in video mode have reported extreme breathing when racking focus. Go to the 3.00 mark in this video for example.

 
powervideo said:
I am pretty interested in the Sony 20mm F1.8. The only thing that concerns me is the breathing. Most of the initial reviews are stills-based but a couple who have tested it in video mode have reported extreme breathing when racking focus. Go to the 3.00 mark in this video for example.

Click to expand...

Yikes, that's some serious breathing! Pass.
 
I’m a video enthusiast, I would like to upgrade from my fs5 to a fx9. Getting the kit with the 28-135mm f/4 G
My primary use is taking video of my family I have small kids.
I would like to invest around $10k in lenses, which ones do you guys recommend ?
Also I’m using a zoom f6 for audio.With a rode ntg3 mic
 
Mercer2 said:
I’m a video enthusiast, I would like to upgrade from my fs5 to a fx9. Getting the kit with the 28-135mm f/4 G
My primary use is taking video of my family I have small kids.
I would like to invest around $10k in lenses, which ones do you guys recommend ?
Also I’m using a zoom f6 for audio.With a rode ntg3 mic
Click to expand...

Assuming you don't have any lenses already, you may as well jump straight into Sony E-mount lenses.

Since you'll already have the kit lens for general use & run & gun, I'd get the 16-35 to cover your wide shots, a 50ish mm prime, and then the 200-600mm for when they play sports. You should invest in a solid tripod as well.
 
Mercer2 said:
I’m a video enthusiast, I would like to upgrade from my fs5 to a fx9. Getting the kit with the 28-135mm f/4 G
My primary use is taking video of my family I have small kids.
I would like to invest around $10k in lenses, which ones do you guys recommend ?
Also I’m using a zoom f6 for audio.With a rode ntg3 mic
Click to expand...

You're going to buy an FX-9 to shoot home videos? Based upon my experience, it's way too large and heavy to work successfully as a home video camera. If it were me, I would never haul that
beast to soccer games, Disneyland, the beach, etc. Once you put the lens on, the larger battery and cards, it's not super heavy for a pro camera but for a home camera, yikes.
 
theraptor56 said:
Assuming you don't have any lenses already, you may as well jump straight into Sony E-mount lenses.

Since you'll already have the kit lens for general use & run & gun, I'd get the 16-35 to cover your wide shots, a 50ish mm prime, and then the 200-600mm for when they play sports. You should invest in a solid tripod as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks I have a very sturdy tripod with a fluid head, For lenses even though I have a new collection of Nikon lenses for my z7. They don’t work well for video.

When they do soccer games etc I just take a SOLOSHOT 3.
When we do racing I take a big camera.
I also like making time lapses, and most of all I like to thinker with the camera, streaming live etc.
I really got spoiled with the Variable nd of the fs5, but the poor 4K performance is what made me upgrade.
For me is a hobby, I even have an ingest station on my server room in my house.

IMG_0292.jpg
IMG_0293.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top