FS7: How about this sony 18-110 lens

bengiles said:
Please. Someone hurry up and buy this damn thing and then give us a rational opinion..
Click to expand...

I bought it and I like it. But as all the Fujinon-Cooke-Zeiss-Ninjas scared me to death I don't dare anymore
to write that I don't care too much about f4. I don't mind to ride that donkey as long as it transports all my
goods to the client in time. If I have time for the racetrack on Sunday I unpack some Zeiss prime or rent a Cook(e)
 
Didnt JP answer the whole thing totally a few pages back..

Answer CN7 17-120.. but you,ll need an easy rig / no tripod... or 100mm tripod and someone to carry it.. or decline the shoot.. get rich girlfriend and retire like Nirv.. end of thread.. ?
 
morgan_moore said:
Any chance of a test vid. Some manual focus pulls, MOD at both ends,
Tstop compared to a trusted prime.
Click to expand...

I feel like watching someone manually focus a lens is on the worthless side of things. Actually having one in your hands would be the only way to really know. Or trusting someone's opinion.

I bought the 28-135 that way, having only seen videos - I hated it and regretted the purchase. It wasn't for the f4, it was for the damn slow zoom electric feel. The lens didn't feel real.

There are services online that will ship you rental gear and you ship it back - rather than drive however far away you said it was (6 hours or something idk). Perhaps not in the UK? Not sure honestly, but borrowlenses.com or lens rentals.com - the 18-110 is out there. putting your hands on it will be the only way to answer your question.





also - lol, 35 pages of everyone reiterating the same points.... but I still keep reading
 
I bought the 28-135 that way, having only seen videos - I hated it and regretted the purchase. It wasn't for the f4, it was for the damn slow zoom electric feel. The lens didn't feel real.


thats exactly why I like the canon 18-80 better.
 
Osslund said:
A lens should be like popping the mirror on a 5D. Straight out looking exciting.
Click to expand...

I've been scratching my head for a while trying to work out WTF this means... Can you enlighten me Osslund? I feel like a child who wandered into the movie part way through (you know the rest, and if you don't, you should!) :-) jason
 
jasonbrooks said:
I've been scratching my head for a while trying to work out WTF this means... Can you enlighten me Osslund? I feel like a child who wandered into the movie part way through (you know the rest, and if you don't, you should!) :-) jason
Click to expand...

Its actually very true. I remember dic)king with my EX1, my ex1 and letus mirrorbox junk glass thing. Then the 5d turns up, pop on a 50 and I remember it.. 'yes this is what Ive wanted'.

Of course 24-105F4 vistavision is 2.8 S35 look so none of these zooms will have that 'yep' look. None of the zooms will get close to the now unfashionable vistavision at 1.2 look.

Of course take the 5d from the back of camera to the grade/export and.. well it was not quite all we thought.. but there was 'a moment'

And the 5d had good colour, sony was sick vision until slog.
 
Anyone who worked with a 5D, at the time when it was the shitt, will remember the wow factor each time that mirror popped out of the sensors way and the result appeared on the rear screen. I guess it's the same with lenses. They either have it or they don't.

It's like a Canon 85/1.2 and snapping away and everything just looks great.
 
Here are my first quick tests with FS-5 and Sony 18-110 (at the end very shoort with Sigma 18-35 non cine).
The limitations are clearly visible.
I did not care about WB, exposure, framing, cameraposition, and so on
I just wanted to see what the lense does.


klfi
https://youtu.be/vSFQalwAVwo
 
Last edited:
All in all I think there is a lot of nonsense that's graced these last few threads about zoom lenses.

My observation is that most of what you guys seem to call character or wow factor in a lens is nothing more than low depth of field. The wow factor on a 5D was simply a full frame sensor and often a fast lens. That's what the wow is on a Canon 85mm f1.2. Its a sharp lens wide open so its - "Wow." Its also the god awful worst focusing ring I've ever experienced my life and I hate using it. The only so called boring thing about 18-110 seems to be that its f4 and you can't use a speed booster with it - otherwise I haven't the slightest idea what the heck you're talking about because no one has shown a test with any kind of production value. I guarantee if Vilmos Szigmond shot a test it would look fantastic.

On the first page of this thread Ned Solz who's credentials as a pro I respect says the focusing ring feels natural and its sharp - so that's a good endorsement - but its just a tool. An F4 parfocal zoom with IS and some reach . Its limited, but If you want all that for some kinds of work and its sharp enough with a decent focus feel then it sounds like a steal.

Just looked at kifi's test above and frankly I'm kind of knocked out. I wish there were fewer AF tests and his manual focus racks were slower. I imagine the speed wasn't dictated by the focus ring , at least I hope not because they were very fast and jarring. But the IQ of the lens looked great to me and I really saw very little difference between the Sony and the Sigma and I know the Sigma is very sharp. For wide open at F4 the tree branches showed very little if any CA and that's a big deal. Looked very clean overall. I'm no lens expert but that's my 2 cents anyway.
 
Last edited:
Yes sorry for some focusing mistakes - fokusing was too fast. Becouse of the local light sitation i could not reshoot. I wanted to do all stuff at nearly the same light situation. I soon try to do same takes again slowlier and more precise.
Thanks for your interst.
 
Thanks for the time you took. I was surprised at how good the autofocus was. I think FS5 has a better system than the FS7 though. Were you using face detection or just regular autofocus? ( I don't know how face detection works actually, just have heard its better.)

The comparisons with Sigma were very helpful as I know that is a very sharp lens. Was that also at f4?
 
Kifi thank you for this.

Personally I think the lens has little enough DOF to look cool with good subjects, framing and light. Also the reach is exciting.

Len "Eff Fear" is german for F4 :)

Kifi maybe you can expand on this..?

If my understanding of your lens use is correct it seemed to be non parfocal when using manual zoom???

This makes some sense as the lens is not parfocal but the sony electric brain makes adjustments during a zoom to refocus.

Am I right in the lens is way from parfocal in manual zoom mode?

--

As for the manual focussing.. yep not great pulls but at least I can see that there is no 'jerk' as the pull starts.

Thank you.
 
Sam I think it was in autofocus when it had trouble holding focus during the zoom. But maybe that was incorrect. Seems to me I did test that last week and it seemed to hold fine even during a crash zoom. Better than I expected. But I might be mistaken.
 
Im interested in manual focus, manual zoom, you may remember I smashed my rocker up in frustrations at its poor ergonomics

S
 
Lenny,
no face detection...just regular AF. Sigma 18-35 was not on SpeedBooster but on Comelite. I took care that Sigma 18-35 was on F-4 too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top