FS7: How about this sony 18-110 lens

I did some comparison testing with the 18-110 yesterday on FS7. All I did was test sharpness on a chart ( crucify me if you like) and I only compared the lens at one focal length 70mm and at f4 wide open . Time was limited. Compared to a far more expensive canon 17-120 on a 10 bit Sony monitor the sharpness look almost identical. However when I blew up the UHD recordings in Catalyst Browse it was clear that the Canon pulled away noticeably . You get what you pay for in addition to the other qualities of the 17-120. However the 18-110 looked damn good for the price. For those who say its similar to the Sony 18-200 I can verify that its not - its way way sharper even with the 18-200 at f6.3. I also compared it to Canon 24-70 and 70-200 (both 2.8 and series II) but I tested those wide open (should have done an f4 test). Here the 18-110 was a bit sharper than both of those but its possible they would have been similar if all were at f4.

So my conclusion is the lens is no slouch in terms of resolution and will fit in well with people generally shooting with good but lower priced DSLR glass. Its also not going to embarrass anyone who spent "real money" on "real glass".

Lenny
 
Thanks Lenny.

I think if I was starting out with a new lease package, I'd have added this on. But my lease will be paid up in a few months time and this lens just isn't compelling enough for me to ditch the 24-105.

Really appreciate your write-up.

Cheers,

Ben.
 
I decided to go with the Sony 18-110 and it is showing up today :) I rented it to try on a shoot and was very happy. For the first time in a while, I was able to shoot all my b-roll using one lens. My 28-135 just wasn't great for b-roll. It was never wide enough, which is why it goes onto eBay tomorrow.

The 18-110 is still slow, but I plan on using it for b-roll and primes for interviews.
 
Lens update:

I wrote about this lens on page 14 of this thread, and have been using it quite a bit since then.

I've run into a couple frustrating issues that I wanted to share with the community:

1. The Minimum Focusing Distance of this lens in MF is 3.1 feet. That doesn't sound like a big deal, but I've been in numerous situations now where I had to take a step backward while shooting in order to keep the image in focus.

For documentary, this is a major drawback. One situation that is particularly frustrating is riding in cars: if you're in the passenger seat, you won't be able to focus on the driver, forcing you to change lenses. Which, to me, defeats the purpose of owning a zoom lens like this.

It's true that the lens can focus down to 1.3 feet in AF mode, but this is also frustrating, because the AF on the FS7 is terrible. It only focuses around the center of the shot, meaning you have to keep your subject dead center to keep focus under 3.1 feet. So your options are to change lenses, or have crappy composition to maintain the temperamental AF.

2. The build quality is already causing me anxiety. In only a few short weeks, something has accumulated under the focus ring, and the ring now makes a grinding sound while in use. This is pretty unacceptable for a pro-level lens. As much as I hated the Canon 24-105, it's weather sealed and built like a tank, and gave me half a decade of service before needing to be cleaned.

All that said, I still like this lens for it's range, consistent exposure through that range, great image quality, servo, and portability.
 
Last edited:
With the ex1 there is a semi manual mode where you use the ring in af position but stil focus manualy - does this not work?
 
Yes, with the 18-110 you can focus manually without pulling the ring back and taking it out of auto mode, but you don't get hard stops. You can however use push auto focus in that mode when in wide angle (18mm) to get around the 3.1 ft distance limit.
 
Last edited:
jc01108 said:
Yes, with the 18-110 you can focus manually without pulling the ring back and taking it out of auto mode, but you don't get hard stops. You can however use push auto focus in that mode when in wide angle (18mm) to get around the 3.1 ft distance limit.
Click to expand...

I don't know the figures with the ex1 say 3ft "ring back" and 1.5ft "ring forward" but with the ex1 one can manually focus in "ring forward" mode and get the 1.5ft in MF mode with the loss of hard stops

You are not forced to use af to gain minimum focus?
 
put the focus ring to AF/MF but switch AF off at the camera. From my experience the distance at 35mm focal length and below is about 40cm. The subject is about 25cm away from the front lens. Pretty good for car interiors. Off course it is no macro lens :) I was shooting real life jobs on the field in the last few weeks an I am very very happy with the lens. It's sharp, easy to handle and behaves pretty good on a Ronin.
 
Yes, you can manually focus the lens to about 1.5 ft when the ring is pushed forward. The lens is remarkably similar to my EX1r's lens in that way.
 
Clermond said:
put the focus ring to AF/MF but switch AF off at the camera. From my experience the distance at 35mm focal length and below is about 40cm. The subject is about 25cm away from the front lens. Pretty good for car interiors. Off course it is no macro lens :) I was shooting real life jobs on the field in the last few weeks an I am very very happy with the lens. It's sharp, easy to handle and behaves pretty good on a Ronin.
Click to expand...

Ahhh yes, that was my mistake. I had AF turned on at the camera. It seems like an obvious oversight now, but regardless, I can confirm that the lens manually focuses at 1.5ft in this mode.

To be fair, it's a mild annoyance to have to switch the ring back and forth to achieve close focus, but at least now I don't have to switch back to the 24-105!
 
I would think that for car interiors, you would want a wide lens, at least 12mm, if no 10mm. 18mm on S35 is kinda narrow for interior shots.
 
basspig said:
I would think that for car interiors, you would want a wide lens, at least 12mm, if no 10mm. 18mm on S35 is kinda narrow for interior shots.
Click to expand...

he was talking about the issue of focussing on the driver from the passenger seat not about focal length.
 
Clermond said:
he was talking about the issue of focussing on the driver from the passenger seat not about focal length.
Click to expand...

Correct. But isn't that a function of focal length? That is, if you are full wide on the Sony 18-110mm the focus depth carries to closer than the 37.4" / 95 cm min focus distance.
 
I was thinking of the aesthetic choice. 18mm would give a closeup portrait shot with nothing else in the picture. At 12mm, it becomes obvious that the subject is in a car.
 
Sorry to keep talking about how much I like this lens.... but I keep wondering how I got along without it for so long. It is sharp, responsive and the parfocal quality is something I have severely missed. It makes shooting oh so much easier. It is not cheap, but compared with other parfocal zoom lenses, it is priced on the low end of the price scale. It is a manual lens, but can go into auto focus if you find yourself outside and can't see the viewfinder to focus, a life saver, sometimes. I have found that focusing it up close with the auto/manual ring pushed in, gets you within a foot and a half of the subject. That is close enough. And it acts pretty much like the EX1r's lens, which means that my muscle memory kicks in when I am using it. Nice.
 
jc01108 said:
Sorry to keep talking about how much I like this lens.... but I keep wondering how I got along without it for so long. It is sharp, responsive and the parfocal quality is something I have severely missed. It makes shooting oh so much easier. It is not cheap, but compared with other parfocal zoom lenses, it is priced on the low end of the price scale. It is a manual lens, but can go into auto focus if you find yourself outside and can't see the viewfinder to focus, a life saver, sometimes. I have found that focusing it up close with the auto/manual ring pushed in, gets you within a foot and a half of the subject. That is close enough. And it acts pretty much like the EX1r's lens, which means that my muscle memory kicks in when I am using it. Nice.
Click to expand...


I used it today for a corporate job, shooting on the floor of a trade show at the local convention hall. No, it isn't as "cinematic" as my f/2.8 glass, but the job was a corporate job and there was more than enough light for the 18-110's max f/4. Like JC said, not having to re-focus when zooming / being able to perform slow and evenly paced servo zoom / the greater focus ring travel over that of EF zooms / being able to "live" on the one lens if I so chose- I am very happy with my purchase. If I want shallow focus or need low-light capability I can always go to the EF glass or my Sigma 18-35mm. But if I want a utilitarian servo zoom and there is sufficient light, I can pop on the Sony 18-110mm.

Being on a zoom with a manual, infinitely adjustable iris helps make up for some of the 18-110's shortcomings and lack of "wow" in the images it produces. It is welcomed being able to smoothly ride the iris when panning from areas of differing light level and not have that awful steppy iris that always felt so amateurish and unforgivable. That always felt so "5D".

Money well spent. The 18-110mm isn't without major shortcomings, but not everyone can afford a Cabrio 19-90mm or Canon 17-120mm. And it is a far superior product to the Sony 28-135mm. Don't let your experience with that lens put you off to the 18-110mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top