GH3 Interview lens

S

Scott Bastedo

Member
I'm picking up a GH3 in a week or so, and I need to grab a lens suitable for interviews. I only have the cash for 1 decent lens, so I am deciding between the Panny 12-35 f2.8 and the 35 - 100 f2.8. I was initially leaning toward the 12 - 35, but I've been considering otherwise, as I occasionally shoot stage acts from a few rows into the audience.

Thoughts?
 
I have both and I enjoy the 35-100 a bit more. But, if you bite on the 35-100, you will end up buying a the 12-35.
Considering what are looking to shoot, get the 35-100 first.
 
Agree. I have both lenses too and I think even in a small room you caould back up far enough to get a medium shot with the 35-100 and obviously get good close ups with out having to get to close to your subject. Right between 42.5mm and 50mm (85mm to 100mm in FF) is sort of a magical focal distance for Interview close ups or portraits. The 12mm-35mm is an amazing lens but some how they managed to make the 35mm-100mm even better plus it zooms and focuses internally.
 
I can see why you may need both lens. But how GH3 handles the crop from the sensor? may be a option to the 12-35 and use the sensor crop when needed while you don´t buy the longer lens.
What do you think?
 
If you need a lens for an interview I would certainly go with the longer one. I'm not sure that ETC mode is a good idea due to the extra noise if it's anything like it was on the GH2.
 
If you don't use auto features, you could find used older version Nikon mount Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 50-150/2.8, and a nice Novoflex adapter, all for less or even money as the 35-100.

I've also seen Olympus 35-100/2 lenses coming available used for around $1500
 
That's a possibility, but I'd prefer the autofocus and full iris control.

mcbob said:
If you don't use auto features, you could find used older version Nikon mount Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 50-150/2.8, and a nice Novoflex adapter, all for less or even money as the 35-100.

I've also seen Olympus 35-100/2 lenses coming available used for around $1500
Click to expand...
 
Scott Bastedo said:
That's a possibility, but I'd prefer the autofocus and full iris control.
Click to expand...

Actually, the Olympus mentioned above is a Four Thirds lens native, with AF and Iris control. The only thing the Lumix lens has over it is OIS. But if the camera is on sticks, you don't need stabilization for an interview.

Personally, I always stick to primes for interviews. Zooms are great for docu work and performances. You can get something much cheaper and faster if you don't need to zoom (and why would you need to on an interview?).

In fact, why do you need autofocus for interviews? Is the subject going to be walking around? There isn't much that can destroy nice talking head footage as much as a sudden focus-hunting motion of an AF lens in continuous mode.

In general, an accepted rule of photography is that primes have higher optical quality than zooms. That being said, Panny has managed to do a bang-up job with the sharpness of these new zooms. I'd still reach for a prime when shooting an interview, but that's personal preference I suppose.
 
I'm loving the 35-100. great interview lens. Frame it so you can pop in for a super tight. Shallower DOF due to tele.
 
I've heard excellent things about the Olympus 75mm f1.8 if you're looking for the autofocus features.
 
panny should come up with a really good m43 cam like af100a on steroids (avc intra, 12 stops dr)
because these 12-35 & 35-100 makes it a really awesome system that has huge advantage over competition which dont have these yet.
 
Bern Caughey said:
During interviews we constantly reframe to avoid jump cuts, & the 35-100mm has become the go to lens for this need.
Click to expand...

Bern,

I'm assuming you mean reframe in post. In which case, may I ask, why is the 35-100mm better than any other sharp lens when needing to resize in post?
 
BobbyMurcerFan said:
Bern,I'm assuming you mean reframe in post. In which case, may I ask, why is the 35-100mm better than any other sharp lens when needing to resize in post?
Click to expand...
He's talking about reframing in camera. It's a popular trick for interviews if you want to make it look like you have a second camera to cut to. A sharp zoom is necessary in that case.
 
I saw that trick in one of Rob Rodriguez's ten minute lessons on movie making. The original El Mariachi was very low budget, and some shots were done in only one take.
 
Everyone raves about this lens - I'm trying to wrap my brain around it being 2.8 - is that really fast enough on the GH2/Gh3? My only point of reference is using the 20 1.7 & a Canon FD 50 1.4.
 
Set them to f2.8 and see if that's fast enough for you.

As long as there's any light in a space, it's usually adequate, in my experience.
 
Although probably out of your price range, my favorite sitdown interview lenses are the Cooke 18-100mm, or the older Cooke 20-100mm which I own. They have the perfect range for doing single camera interviews, and have a very pleasing look when shooting people. The other advantage they offer over a native M4/3 lens, is they cover a S35mm image sensor if you ever wanted to change cameras. The downside, they are big and heavy.
 
mcbob said:
Set them to f2.8 and see if that's fast enough for you.

As long as there's any light in a space, it's usually adequate, in my experience.
Click to expand...
Well.. When I'm outside or even indoors with a lit up room, I'm using lots of ND to get to 2.8. You can always pack some 1.2 glass for shooting at night.
 
The thing to keep in mind is: Which zoom range is easier to duplicate with older SLR lenses ?

I would say the 12-35mm zoom range is very difficult to duplicate using old Nikon AI-S or Canon FD lenses, so this is the zoom lens you buy first.

For the 35-100mm zoom range, you can get buy with older Nikon or Canon lenses with an adapter until you can afford to buy the Lumix 35-100 zoom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top