FS5: Lens choices

swphotovideo

swphotovideo

Member
Looking for opinions of those that may have been in a similar situation as I currently am in. I'm using a FS5 & A6500. I have a bunch of native E mount glass already, but I'm wanting to have some non fly-by-wire focus options. My video work is mostly corporate work, weddings and events.

The lenses I'm currently using for video are: 18-105 F4 (outdoor run & gun), 24-70 GM (indoor run & gun), 24mm f1.8 (mostly on Zhiyun Crane), 55m f1.8 (interviews), 10-18 (gimbal / wides), 85mm f1.8 Batis (short telephoto at weddings).

Looking for lenses that will make my life easier. Don't want to be switching lenses all the time.

Some of the lenses I've been considering:

- Sony 18-110 F4. Wish it was mechanically parfocal instead of electronically. Bit expensive and it's hard to convince myself it's worth the price jump over the 18-105. I don't do a heap of outdoor day stuff, but this would be perfect for those times.

- Fujinon MK18-55. Probably would only get used on corporate jobs, not sure I'd use it at a wedding. Expensive, but I really like the look of this lens.

- Sigma 18-35 f1.8 & 50-100 with MC11. Seems like a good combo, but worry that the range of the 18-35 will be a bit limiting.

- Sigma/Tamron 24-70 f2.8 & Speed Booster. Is this a good all-rounder?

- Sigma 24-105 f4 & Speed Booster. Another alternative for an all-rounder.

- Sony 70-200 GM. Fly-by-wire, I know. I don't really have any decent telephoto options at the moment. A manual focus 70-200 f2.8 would be great, but if I get the Sony I could use for photography.
 
I love the Sony 18-110. It is parfocal. It focuses manually without issue. The zoom can be used manually or with power. It is larger, longer and heavier than the 18-105, but still can be used handheld. Your 18-105 will be idle most of the time once you start using the 18-110. Other than the fstop and the zoom range, there is little that is similar between the two.

I also have the fast Sigma 18-35, which is very nice in low light, though a tad heavy for my taste. I am also a fan of the Rokinon 12mm, which I use a lot when collecting b-roll. It is fast and light.
 
Personally, I'd say the 24-105 is one type of zoom that would never need to come off the camera. And short of that, I'd say 24-70, would be the next one. Vincent Laforet, who has a nice blog about lenses, says that if you could only get one lens, the 24-70mm is it. I really like the Tokina 24-70 f2.8 and Tokina lenses in general but it's heavy.

The faster you can make the lens, the better, but, of course, that adds to the price. It is also a nice feature that you can punch in with center scan and effectively double your focal length with no quality loss I can see, so that could make your 24-70 switch to 48-140 if and when you needed it.

But it looks like you have a nice variety of lenses as is.
 
I've had this same question for the past year. I've been using a Canon 24-105 and it has been fine, except for the usual short focus throw etc, plus occasional glitching with the iris and IS.

I have a similar collection of native E lenses and GMs.

This week I bought the 18-110. Ive been trying to avoid it since it was launched, thinking it was such a huge margin in cost over the similarly functioning 24-105.

Actually, so far I love it.

I don't get the complaints about it being "electronically" parfocal. It just works. No lag, no clues that it's being done by a computer. And you're only going to use it on a Sony camera, so what's the issue?

I wish I bought it months ago. I think it would have made 2 recent shoots much easier.

I think I may have become one of them there fanboys. :-)

Ben.
 
The two best e-mount zooms currently on the market are the Fujinon MK 18-55mm and 50-150. The Sigma 18-35mm is a no brainer too. You could add the Sigma 150-600 in there and you are basically covered for everything apart from fish-eye.
 
bengiles said:
I've had this same question for the past year. I've been using a Canon 24-105 and it has been fine, except for the usual short focus throw etc, plus occasional glitching with the iris and IS.

I have a similar collection of native E lenses and GMs.

This week I bought the 18-110. Ive been trying to avoid it since it was launched, thinking it was such a huge margin in cost over the similarly functioning 24-105.

Actually, so far I love it.
Click to expand...

I was lucky enough to borrow the 18-110 for free from a local camera store for a job today. It was a joy to use, made life very easy. The electronic witchcraft it uses to be parfocal was not an issue in use. Only complaint was a bit of lag on the servo zoom, and found it harder to get a very accurate / controlled zoom with it - much faster to use when in manual zoom mode anyway. Haven't had a chance to review the video just yet, but image quality was looking great on the SmallHD Focus. I think I'll definitely be picking one up.

Although, I did try out the Fujinon 18-55 whilst I was at the same camera shop and MAN that thing is nice to use.

I think the only question is, which to get first! Lol. Probably the 18-110.
 
I used the Tamron 24-70 (+SB) as my go-to RnG lens for the past few years, and was very happy with it. The IS comes in handy for follow shots at up to 70mm (the Tamron is the only 24-70 on the market with IS).

I've never understood people's affection for the Canon 24-105, which has IMHO, sub-par IQ lens in almost every way (massive wide distortion, CA, softness, bleurgh). I'm afraid to say that I think fans of this lens are either a) lazy, so don't like swapping lenses, or b) haven't experienced nicer glass and so don't recognise the IQ compromises they're constantly making.

I picked up the Fuji 18-55 MK a few months back, and I'm VERY impressed with both it's IQ and ergonomics. The true parfocality has certainly helped me go from 90% sharp wides to 100% in the blink of an eye, just bash in, focus, and bash out. No more scrunching up my eyes and hopelessly cycling through the FS7 shitty 'focus mag' function, trying to tell if my wide will actually look sharp on a larger screen.

Yes it's expensive, and investing in E-mount did make me hesitate for a good while, but the recent Venice (not that the MK is a FF lens) announcement has further reinforced my idea that it's actually been a solid investment, and one I enjoy and appreciate every time I pop out the lens cap.

Good luck deciding!

jason
 
I think you'll find that universally everyone who has purchased the 18-110 loves it . The same can be said for the Fuji . Likewise many people (including me) hate the Canon 24-105 . That's pretty much the broad consensus of opinion so from there its which one suits your needs best. I keep a 24-70 Tamron around for low light with IS and speed booster . I don't think the IQ is actually as good as the 18-110 but its better than the 24-105 for sure. The Canon 24-70 is a good lens but I want IS for that range because its my handheld lens.
 
I own the 18-110mm and can only say that I like it. I don't "love" it. I don't think I could "love" any f/4 lens. I owned the 18-105mm prior to owning the 18-110mm and the 18-110mm is without a doubt a big improvement over the 18-105mm in every way except for physical size. The smaller sized 18-105mm made for a smaller overall camera package that lent itself well to shooting EPK where a small rig is of advantage.

The 18-110mm is the closest thing to a B4-mount ENG lens for under $10k. People rave about the Zeiss 21-110mm but I know even without trying that lens out that the 21mm wide end would be frustratingly inadequate for ENG style shooting. The "budget" Cabrio, the Fujinon 20-120mm, is only slightly better in that regard.

Of all the lenses listed the 18-110mm is the most versatile for corporate work / event work, despite it being relatively slow at only f/4. But it won't exactly wow any clients with the images it produces. Were I doing weddings I would want something faster than f/4. The Fujinon MK18-55 is the sexiest of the choices listed. But you have to consider if you are likely in the near future to shell out another $4000 to get it's stablemate, the 50-135mm. Seeing as you already own the Sony GM 24-70mm, the Sony GM 70-200mm might be the best choice for you for your next lens.

If your priority is not having to swap lenses so often, then yes, the Sony 18-110mm is the option I recommend. You could almost live on it doing the sort of work you described. But, again, the images won't have that shallow DoF "wow" factor that you'll achieve with faster glass. Another thing to consider is that the 18-110mm is larger in diameter than most still photography zooms and as a result does not easily fit into a lens pouch worn on a belt, if that is the way you like to work. I find that limiting because when doing fast "run & gun" style shooting with my Fs7 I like to be able to carrying lenses in pouches on a lens belt. A backpack just doesn't work for me. When I shoot with the 18-110mm and switch to my super-wide Rokinon 12mm Cine, I have no place to put the 18-110mm. I've had to place it on the ground, leave it unattended, and come back for it later.

Between "fly-by-wire" focus and electronic / stepped iris, I'm not sure which of the two I loathe the most. The Fuji MK's are a means of avoiding both. You get true mechanical focus and true mechanical iris. Be it that you are willing to spend in the neighborhood of $8500 for the pair, the two MK's would make for a great duo. Albeit having to perform swaps far more often than you would with the Sony 18-110mm.

I think it more fitting to say that everyone who has purchased the Fuji MK loves it than to say that everyone who has purchased the Sony 18-110mm loves it. The Fuji MK is a fall-in-love-with piece of glass. The Sony 18-110mm is more of a fall-in-like-with piece of glass. It is serviceable and utilitarian. But not sexy or lust-worthy. It is the girl your mother wants you to date.
 
Well , I guess I would agree with JP about the 18-110. I love it for its purpose, but all of the issues he mentions are true it is more of a "fall-in-like with." For an all around it sure beats the 24-105 though or the 18-105. The Fuji is a lot more $'s with no IS and lots of lens switching - but nothing checks off every box.
 
I use the sigma 24-105 with speedbooster ultra and Im impressed with the quality of that combo. I always use a FF so the throw is decent. The extra range from a 24-70 is not huge though and I dont feel I really need it over IQ so might try the new sigma 24-70 some day. If I was working full time shooting I would get the fujinons.
 
Almost any modern lens can be shot in a way that makes it appear acceptable, but I loathe the EF 24-105mm just as much as the other guys here. I'm not saying it's worthless, but constantly seeing it mounted on the front of Canon's (S35) Cinema EOS cameras is sad. It sometimes makes me wonder how much those shooters care about their work. Maybe they aren't being lazy, but it looks like it since money usually isn't the issue. As a stills lens it probably works better, given how much you can tweak a single image vs. video.

I don't have too much to add re: lens options. I really like the 12mm f/2 Samyang, and for small APS-C primes, I also use the 21mm f/1.4 Samyang, the SEL 35mm f/1.8, and the SEL 50mm f/1.8. I also use a Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC and the new Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC SP, both with a speed booster. The Fujinon 18-55mm and Sony 18-110mm both look tempting (for differing reasons). Good luck!
 
karma17 said:
The faster you can make the lens, the better, but, of course, that adds to the price. It is also a nice feature that you can punch in with center scan and effectively double your focal length with no quality loss I can see, so that could make your 24-70 switch to 48-140 if and when you needed it.
Click to expand...

How does it hold up on a bigger screen. Haven't tried it yet on my Fs5.
 
Liam Hall said:
The two best e-mount zooms currently on the market are the Fujinon MK 18-55mm and 50-150. The Sigma 18-35mm is a no brainer too. You could add the Sigma 150-600 in there and you are basically covered for everything apart from fish-eye.
Click to expand...

#Liam I have this lens too, sports version, heavy, do you use the sigma 150-600 with speedbooster?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top