FS7: lens choices

B

BlindDog

Member
I saw the FS7 at an event a couple of days ago. I was very impressed, and hope to make it my next camera. The problem is what lenses to use with it. My usual gig is fast, RNG, but mostly tripod based. A 2/3” camera with a wide B4 zoom fills the bill nicely for that. But the S35 sensor in the FS7 means new, and honestly less versatile lens choices.

Before I go any further I want to say that I’m not talking primes here. For specific projects I can see renting a set, but for the work I’m actually doing I need a zoom. And, alas, not top cinema zooms either. I love reading about the finer points between Zeiss and Cooke lenses, or which Angenieux has the creamiest bokeh. But this is all academic to me – at this point I can’t afford them and that’s that. I’m looking for solid, affordable, real world lenses that will get me by.

If I were to dream, my top choice would be the Canon 17-120. A lens with a broadcast lens form factor that goes from reasonably wide to reasonably tele would be ideal. But it’s way, way too expensive (and not released yet). So that’s out.

The camera I handled had the Sony 28-135 kit lens with it. I was hoping it would prove to be a decent interim lens while I saved up for something fabulous. The build was about what I expected – plastic, but hopefully able to hold up with a lot of care. But I was very underwhelmed by it’s optical performance. I knew it wouldn’t be wide enough, but it just looked soft to me. The Sony guy looked distressed when I asked him about the lens, and claimed it was an early prototype and the production lens wouldn’t be released for a month or two. Perhaps the back focus was off. I would be interested to hear from anyone who’s used this lens and was happy with it’s performance.

They also had a couple of Sony-Zeiss e-mount zooms, the 16-35 f4 and the 24-70 f4. These are stills lenses, not cine, but I was liking them a lot. Especially the 16-35. They were solid metal, stabilized, lightweight AF zooms that looked good to me. They didn’t have the camera connected to a monitor, so I couldn’t really do a critical examination of them, but they looked great through the viewfinder. Sony also has f2.8 versions of both lenses. I’d love to hear from anyone who has used these lenses. B&H also lists a S-Z16-70 f4 lens that is, astonishingly, less expensive than either of the two lenses above. I know that there has to be a catch, but I’d really, really like to hear from someone who has the dirt on that lens.

I checked out GL Optics, and they have wide zooms and tele zooms but nothing in between. Tokina is planning to produce cine versions of some of their stills zooms, but I don’t see a lens that really speaks to me there.

Which leaves me with 3 options: Sony-Zeiss stills zooms, Stills zooms (Canon or Nikon) with a speedbooster or dumb adapter; Or a 2/3” broadcast zoom with an optical adapter.

Using a 2/3” lens is appealing because I would get a wide ratio zoom with a servo control, and I also already own an excellent one. But the optical adapters I’ve seen leave much to be desired. I played with one at NAB this year and was not impressed with the image. Has anyone really had success going this route?

Stills zooms might be the way to go. I know the difficulties and tradeoffs in using non-cine lenses, but there are a large number of excellent lenses to choose from and the prices are attractive. I’m leary of the speedbooster because it almost sounds too good to be true. But I haven’t tried it and I could be wrong.

So have I missed an option? Does anyone have a great lens solution they’d like to share? Does anyone have good things to say about the kit lens? All input is welcome.
 
I think an affordable R&G lens is the Canon 24-105 on Speed Booster which on Super 35mm format makes it a 17-75 f2.8. I usually use this lens for R&G and a set of Zeiss primes for more controlled shoots. The Image Stabilization is nice as well.

The new Sony ENG lens looks great - I think it's a 24-135 f4 (somewhere around there), I just wish it was wider (like an 18mm) and an f2.8
 
Many of us have this "problem".

You can't transform a S35 camera into a ENG camera by any means.

But there are several alternatives regarding lens choice.
As I'm doing corporate stuff and doco I'll use zoom lenses most of the time too.

I had the Canon 17-55/2,8 with image stabilizer on a Metabones Smart Adapter.
Nice lens, reasonably fast and cheap, too. But the focal range isn't often big enough.
Best value for the money if the focal length is enough for you.

I use the Canon 24-105/4L on a speedbooster as many people do. It has a longer focal range,
is as fast on the speedbooster and stabilized too. I don't like it loosing 1/2 to 1 effective stop
on the long end (while beeing a constant f4!) and tendency to produce heavy flares in backlight
situations. You need to avoid direct sunlight or lightsources in the frame.

If this lens were a little lighter and had no push-pull zoom, I'd go for the Canon 28-300/3,5-5,6L.
It's more than 1,5kg and doesn't perform much better than the Nikon, has IS and is weatherproof.
It's pricey and heavy but without a real alternative. I think you need a lens support on rails for
this guy...

Sometimes I use the Sony SEL 18-200/3,5-6,3. It has a very nice image stabilization, is cheap
and lightweight and has a great focal range. But it's a wobbly lens with by-wire focus and definitely
on the slow end. It's a workhorse, but it's image quality isn't on par with the above mentioned Canon
zooms. I just don't like these electronic lenses that much.

There is a Sony SEL 18-105/4, which is better built and faster too. But this one needs internal correction
of distortion which is very strong. Better skip this one.

Nikon has some nice lenses but the IS doesn't work on the available adapters. Iris control is manually on the
adapter without knowing the adjusted stop. It's just guessing.
I would like to have something like the Nikon 24-120/4 on a speedbooster or their 28-300/3,5-5,6 on a speedbooster
too. Nice lenses, reasonably fast for such a big range.

New to the game is the Tamron 28-300/3,5-6,3 in Canon mount. I'll try this one soon on my speedbooster and see
how it performs. It's half a stop slower than the Canon/Nikon superzooms, but shouldn't be worse optically.
It has image stabilization and is lightweight and cheap. If it's on par with the Nikon and performs better with back
lithing this will be my RNG choice...
 
The SEL 18-105 has real potential. Supposedly the FS7 corrects it well and that gives you a parfocal f4 lens with IS and push auto focus. It is supposed to be quite good optically with correction. However because the correction takes processing power, it does not work in 4K and not over 60fps. Sigma also makes a 24-105 f4 that doesn't have iris drop off and is supposed to be sharper than the canon but its not par focal. No perfect choice.


My buddy has an F55 and uses a Fujinon B4 zoom with an adapter . he found it good optically and it has a great range and is a real lens., but they re expensive. Probably quite expensive to get a broadcast version through.
 
BlindDog said:
My usual gig is fast, RNG, but mostly tripod based. A 2/3” camera with a wide B4 zoom.
Click to expand...

So why break what isn't broken? Stick with the rig you have and dont jam a square peg into a round hole?

If your client can afford proper ENG cams well they should be able to afford (the rental on) the Canon lens (17-120) which is in the same price class as a B4 rig surely?

That and the Cabrio 19-90 are really the only professional solutions for S35 zooming.

OK you have made your choice.

My personal solutions are..

The 18-200 sony kit lens - the lens is a putrid lump of plastic with non responsive focus wheel that makes it 90% unusable - the one thing you dont need to worry about is lack of light - if you can see with a 2/3 camera at 2.8 you will see fine with the FS7 at 6.3
The problem with that lens is after you touch it the next thing you need to touch is a sick bag.

I hate that lens, but use it sometimes when I need the range or the stabilisation. At least it was cheap and doesnt need a rip off adapter.

I had a 25-105 canon and it is a little bit better but the focus is still horrid and the thing was basically falling apart after a couple of years.

My personaly favorite one lens solution is a 28-85 oldskool manual zoom with a Speedbooster.

Personally I use the Nikkor 28-85 but understand most don't like the focus direction, and should investigate the old Canon FD and Contax zooms also the old Vivitar(?) designed by Angie.

You might lose a little range over a modern zoom but the tactility easily outweighs those few mm.

​IMO :)
 
I'm with Morgan here. Your work requires a different beast. I've just spent two weeks in the US shooting on my FS7. I had ten lenses including three zooms and I would have taken more if I could have squeezed them on to the flights as carry-on.
 
Other options had not been mentioned including PL mount Red zooms, 18-50/t3, 17-50/t3 and 50-150/t3, they are essentially rehouse improved still lens but you can achieve repeatable focus and pull smooth zoom/aperture. My copy of 18-50/t3 is parfocal and sharp and stays on the f3 all the time.

There is also lightweight Lomo zooms 25-80/t3.5 that is sharp and lightweight and par focal.

There is also an article by Dan Chung on newsshooter about lens choices for fs7 that's worth a look too.

From filming with Sony FE 24-70/4 with a7s last weekend on a doc job in Scotland, I would not recommend the lens for professional or client job, focusing by wire is a nightmare on the tiny screen of a7s and there is also no focus mark/distance on the barrel so you have no idea about the distance, evening when filming in manual mode. The OSS definitely helps but I lost a few good moments due to focusing and have to rely on push focus a lot of time.
 
Last edited:
Which 24-70?
By the way on any of these still lenses like E mt and EF through metabones or other adapter, how fine are the increments/stop for iris changes. Can you do something vaguely smooth or is only 1/3 stop increments?
 
(delving into unfamiliar territory here)

If Chung is correct and the A-mount lenses give you a superior auto focus to the FE's, then one might audition Tamron 70/200 2.8 and a 24/70 2.8 and Sigma 70/200 2.8 and 24/70 2.8. There's also Sigma 24/105 4.

That's just off specs, not any hands-on experience.
 
BlindDog, what is your budget for quality glass. I know canon 17-120 at $31,000 is took much. If you can does a deal that's $10k less then I'd suggest looking at Zeiss compact zooms that should be able to be E mounted... 28-80 is an excellent lens. They also have a 70-200. A native mount lens is ideal no matter what lens you choose.
 
HD Gear Guru said:
BlindDog, what is your budget for quality glass. I know canon 17-120 at $31,000 is took much. If you can does a deal that's $10k less then I'd suggest looking at Zeiss compact zooms that should be able to be E mounted... 28-80 is an excellent lens. They also have a 70-200. A native mount lens is ideal no matter what lens you choose.
Click to expand...

Im guessing the basic problem with those lenses is that they are not wide enough.
 
evilthought said:
there is usually no IS on A-mount lenses, as A-mount cameras have IBIS.
Click to expand...

Some Sigmas A-mounts - no Tamrons - have optical stabilization.

If one goes fully manual, then Rokinon/Samyang are a decent pick in the bang-for-the-buck department.
 
Thanks for the input. A lot to think about here.

I know a 2/3” camera is pretty ideal for the work I do. But the heads on my HDX900 have developed the dreaded intermittent issues and I can’t trust it any more. It’s a $4300 fix, which I can’t justify in the face of decreasing demand for that camera. The FS7 has such a wonderful image and great features that I’m ready to deal with its lens issues. On to the future.

As for renting lenses, that’s a good special occasion solution, but I feel not an everyday thing. I’m going to need to own lenses.

Red zooms are a possibility. They’re at the North end of what I’d consider affordable, but if I could find good examples they’d be a pretty fair solution.

We have one vote for a B4 lens and adapter. I’m skeptical, but I think I’m going to have to investigate this further.

I’ve heard great things about the Zeiss Compact Zooms. Plus, Zeiss showed a mock up of an EFP type zoom controller at NAB this year. But they’re still out of my price range.

I read Dan Chung’s articles about using Sony stills lenses and Canon stills lenses with Metabones adapters. Good points about the difficulties in manually focusing the focus-by-wire Sony lenses. But they are lightweight, stabilized, AF, relatively inexpensive and highly integrated with the FS7 (except for some slow iris issues that I’m hoping will be fixed with a firmware update). The focusing issues may just be something to live with. The problems with the Metabones adapters seem more serious. It sounds like something that would eventually be fixed, but who knows? Maybe Nikon lenses with an adapter with iris control might be a better choice.
 
Do not under estimate the yuk factor of flu by wire focus on an non par focal lense on a narrow dof camera.

I use nikkors but know that other way focus is a head twister - again this is very narrow dof you get with these cams.

The biggest thing is to borrow and try.

Two thoughts - I have an ex1 and will not sell it if I get an fs7 - ill flog my fs100 - because there are jobs you need a zoom.

A second thought - your 2/3 cam is end of life but you have a fantastic lens I guess - I wonder if you could pick up a 2/3 cam with Sdi out and use a recorder !! I've considered this with some cams that cost an arm and a leg five years ago - but I kind of decided clients that need run-gun can probably live with my ex1 footy and look
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top