GH5 Lenses for focusing by hand for a doc shoot?

[icarusfilm]

The focus by wire implementation is def better with mft than the totally useless one from Sony. Especially the Leica branded ones the Olympus PRO line with the MF switch are significantly better. I think that the in camera peaking is good enough for focus pulling a monitor might be better but then you are rigging again and lose the form factor.

I honestly don't think the focus by wire is all that bad. It is different but it still achieves very good results when one learns how to use it. There are a ton of native lens users that manual focus every day. Repeatable focus may be difficult for a rack focus but I doubt a lot of that happens in a doc shoot anyway. The focus by wire was designed to make manual focus on a subject easy and it does just that. If you need to keep changing focus back and forth between subjects you may notice it harder to nail the same focus with the same exact amount of turn of the focus ring each time but again on a doc shoot I don't really pay much attention to how much I'm turning the focus ring. I turn it until the shot looks in focus and I stop. Focus by wire works great for that.

Instead of worrying about a manual focus lens consider investing in a external 1080p monitor to help nail focus. You can get really good 1080p lightweight monitors today that make focus a lot easier for around $200. Also learn how to make good use of the focus peaking and focus assist tools. Focus peaking is not perfect but it gets me there most of the time unless the lens is really soft and lacks contrast. Native lenses tend to work extremely well with the focus peaking. The punch in to focus is amazing if you can afford to focus before you hit record.

 

[KINOKS]

I honestly don't think the focus by wire is all that bad. It is different but it still achieves very good results when one learns how to use it. There are a ton of native lens users that manual focus every day. Repeatable focus may be difficult for a rack focus but I doubt a lot of that happens in a doc shoot anyway. The focus by wire was designed to make manual focus on a subject easy and it does just that. If you need to keep changing focus back and forth between subjects you may notice it harder to nail the same focus with the same exact amount of turn of the focus ring each time but again on a doc shoot I don't really pay much attention to how much I'm turning the focus ring. I turn it until the shot looks in focus and I stop. Focus by wire works great for that.

Instead of worrying about a manual focus lens consider investing in a external 1080p monitor to help nail focus. You can get really good 1080p lightweight monitors today that make focus a lot easier for around $200. Also learn how to make good use of the focus peaking and focus assist tools. Focus peaking is not perfect but it gets me there most of the time unless the lens is really soft and lacks contrast. Native lenses tend to work extremely well with the focus peaking. The punch in to focus is amazing if you can afford to focus before you hit record.

You are definitely right in saying that rack focusing doesn't happen that much in a doc. It does, but not that much. I do have a 1080p monitor and am accustomed to using peaking, although I don't trust it 100%. But I wont be using it for this project as it's a 7" and I want a really small package. Maybe a zacuto viewfinder...

Are you saying that peaking works better with native Pany lenses then other glass?

 

[Thomas Smet]

The focus by wire implementation is def better with mft than the totally useless one from Sony. Especially the Leica branded ones the Olympus PRO line with the MF switch are significantly better. I think that the in camera peaking is good enough for focus pulling a monitor might be better but then you are rigging again and lose the form factor.

I used to use large ENG shoulder mount cameras for run&gun so I never really considered adding a monitor to an already tiny DSLR to be a deal breaker with the right support gear. More effort yes but it doesn't have to be a deal breaker.

 

[Thomas Smet]

You are definitely right in saying that rack focusing doesn't happen that much in a doc. It does, but not that much. I do have a 1080p monitor and am accustomed to using peaking, although I don't trust it 100%. But I wont be using it for this project as it's a 7" and I want a really small package. Maybe a zacuto viewfinder...

Are you saying that peaking works better with native Pany lenses then other glass?

I find it works better, yes. Peaking works off of contrast so the less contrast a lens has the harder it is to detect high contrast edges. Native glass tends to be very sharp and have a lot of contrast even wide open. FF lenses like rokinon tend to get a bit soft and low contrast when opened wide at f1.4. Older FF glass like my Canon FD lenses are really bad with focus peaking due to the horrible contrast when used wide open.

I also use a loupe on the LCD screen of my GH4 with great results. It doesn't increase the low resolution of the LCD monitor but it makes it much easier to see the sharpness of the shot since it covers your entire eye. I highly depend on the viewfinder for run&gun as a must have item. It also helps give another point of contact with your body to keep the camera sturdy.

I use this one on my GH4. https://www.amazon.com/AUTHENTIC-KA...pID=51AzajQN9SL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Not sure if it still works perfectly with the GH5. If it does work it should be even better with the GH5 since the LCD is higher resolution. Eventually we might get to the point where a GH camera has a LCD with enough resolution to use with a loupe where an external monitor will no longer matter. The Pocket 4k for example has a nice built in 1080p display. There are a few 5" loupes out there that would be amazing on that camera. Thought about getting one for my 5" Ninja Blade but have not pulled the trigger yet since the Blade will eventually be upgraded to a 7" Ninja Inferno. My old eyes struggle too much with a 5" display and its time to move from HD to 4k for my external recording.

 

[icarusfilm]

The more sharpness and contrast the lens has the easier it is to nail focus by peaking, also the after the aperture it’s easier to nail focus at f1.2 than at f5.6


QUOTE=KINOKS;1986759113]You are definitely right in saying that rack focusing doesn't happen that much in a doc. It does, but not that much. I do have a 1080p monitor and am accustomed to using peaking, although I don't trust it 100%. But I wont be using it for this project as it's a 7" and I want a really small package. Maybe a zacuto viewfinder...

Are you saying that peaking works better with native Pany lenses then other glass?[/QUOTE]

 

[ozmorphasis]

I find it works better, yes. Peaking works off of contrast so the less contrast a lens has the harder it is to detect high contrast edges. Native glass tends to be very sharp and have a lot of contrast even wide open. FF lenses like rokinon tend to get a bit soft and low contrast when opened wide at f1.4. Older FF glass like my Canon FD lenses are really bad with focus peaking due to the horrible contrast when used wide open.

I also use a loupe on the LCD screen of my GH4 with great results. It doesn't increase the low resolution of the LCD monitor but it makes it much easier to see the sharpness of the shot since it covers your entire eye. I highly depend on the viewfinder for run&gun as a must have item. It also helps give another point of contact with your body to keep the camera sturdy.

I use this one on my GH4. https://www.amazon.com/AUTHENTIC-KA...pID=51AzajQN9SL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Not sure if it still works perfectly with the GH5. If it does work it should be even better with the GH5 since the LCD is higher resolution. Eventually we might get to the point where a GH camera has a LCD with enough resolution to use with a loupe where an external monitor will no longer matter. The Pocket 4k for example has a nice built in 1080p display. There are a few 5" loupes out there that would be amazing on that camera. Thought about getting one for my 5" Ninja Blade but have not pulled the trigger yet since the Blade will eventually be upgraded to a 7" Ninja Inferno. My old eyes struggle too much with a 5" display and its time to move from HD to 4k for my external recording.

I still need to try a loupe on the GH5. It's worth noting that the hdmi out on these GH cameras still have a noticeable delay. For some situations, it would be great to have the benefits of bypassing the external solutions while still being able to nail focus and see all of the details within the frame.

Having said all of that, the smallhd focus has proven very valuable recently. It is impossibly lightweight, but really helps nail focus. The exposure tools are also very useful. taking it on an off is also quick and it has just enough brightness to get you through a lot of situations, although I wouldn't recommend it in direct sunlight without a shade.

+1 regarding contrast of lens and peaking. No issues whatsoever with native lenses or the sigma 18-35mm. The issue is that I often want the softness of a vintage lens, so peaking becomes more difficult. However, that's not the direction you need to go for doc work.

 

[KINOKS]

I find it works better, yes. Peaking works off of contrast so the less contrast a lens has the harder it is to detect high contrast edges. Native glass tends to be very sharp and have a lot of contrast even wide open. FF lenses like rokinon tend to get a bit soft and low contrast when opened wide at f1.4. Older FF glass like my Canon FD lenses are really bad with focus peaking due to the horrible contrast when used wide open.

I also use a loupe on the LCD screen of my GH4 with great results. It doesn't increase the low resolution of the LCD monitor but it makes it much easier to see the sharpness of the shot since it covers your entire eye. I highly depend on the viewfinder for run&gun as a must have item. It also helps give another point of contact with your body to keep the camera sturdy.

I use this one on my GH4. https://www.amazon.com/AUTHENTIC-KA...pID=51AzajQN9SL&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Not sure if it still works perfectly with the GH5. If it does work it should be even better with the GH5 since the LCD is higher resolution. Eventually we might get to the point where a GH camera has a LCD with enough resolution to use with a loupe where an external monitor will no longer matter. The Pocket 4k for example has a nice built in 1080p display. There are a few 5" loupes out there that would be amazing on that camera. Thought about getting one for my 5" Ninja Blade but have not pulled the trigger yet since the Blade will eventually be upgraded to a 7" Ninja Inferno. My old eyes struggle too much with a 5" display and its time to move from HD to 4k for my external recording.

It would be great if cameras started having higher res monitors! But as of now, it is what it is... I still think a loupe can be great. Whats annoying though is that you are fixed, you can't swivel the loupe. It's an interesting way of shooting and as you say it allows for another contact with the body. I'm used to shooting from the shoulder, so shooting from the hand is mostly new to me. A second point of contact will be much appreciated.

Re peaking: yeah the contrast aspect... I thought that there was some extra communication lens to camera that helped with it

 

[KINOKS]

+1 regarding contrast of lens and peaking. No issues whatsoever with native lenses or the sigma 18-35mm. The issue is that I often want the softness of a vintage lens, so peaking becomes more difficult. However, that's not the direction you need to go for doc work.

Nop, I don't. And tbh a lot can be done in post, not much need to shoot with soft lenses if all you want is a soft picture. Sure it depends on you budget for post, if you can afford a true colourist to make the look, but even a non pro colourist can maybe achieve some results in simulating a vintage lens (slight blurring of different channels, selective luma frequency manipulation, etc.). A lot of texture can be made in post if you know what you are doing. It's just the appeal of shooting with a fully manual old school lens that cant

 

[KINOKS]

Any of you guys tried the Canon EFS 17 - 55 2.8 ? It's focus ring looks a bit better...

 

[ozmorphasis]

Any of you guys tried the Canon EFS 17 - 55 2.8 ? It's focus ring looks a bit better...

It's a favorite inexpensive workhorse documentary lens for a lot of EF mount users, especially Eos users. It works with a mod on the speedboosters, but it involves taking off a plastic ring at the mount that leaves the electronics inside somewhat exposed. Google it, you'll see the details.

Stabilizer combined with zoom range on S35 is why it is attractive. The focus ring is ok, but NOT amazing. Not as smooth as Sigma 18-35mm, for example. But, people use it professionally for doc work all the time, especially while traveling. It's small, relatively fast, and provides stabilization. It also extends into the telephoto range just enough to get some decent closeups without needing to get ultra close to your subject. That's what I miss with the 18-35mm. Also, after speedboosting, it's F2. That's not bad.

I would love for someone to make a 17-55mm range fast lens with great manual focus, stabilizer or at least electronic contacts so ibis can adjust automatically, and ideally parfocal. The Fuji Mk is the only I thing that heads in this direction, but is expensive and has no contacts. All of the 17-55mm range still lenses are so/so when it comes to manual focus, but totally serviceable. I just think that range is really important and underdeveloped by lens manufacturers. Obviously Fuji agrees. It would be great to see others follow. Sigma Art 17-55mm F2.8 with ois would be nice, with art lens smoothness to the focus ring.

 

[hscully]

Any of you guys tried the Canon EFS 17 - 55 2.8 ? It's focus ring looks a bit better...

I have been poking around myself to kit up my GH5. I think I'm going with the Olympus 12-40. It has a neat arrangement, a "manual focus clutch" that provides hard stops for manual focus. Really, the AF stuff works on these cameras and as a manual, pull your own focus guy, I think it's fantastic.

Also, on a side note, I picked up DMW XLR1 audio adapter and worked with it on a job last week. That thing is great! It is so clean, manages line inputs with a switch and is ridiculously small and light. Great addition.

If you're going to use and eyepiece, why not just use the evf in the camera. That's part of the beauty of mirrorless, no? Personally, I'm looking seriously at that Small HD focus monitor. Running off those batteries is reason enough to get that little thing. Glad to hear on here that it is really light.

 

[KINOKS]

It's a favorite inexpensive workhorse documentary lens for a lot of EF mount users, especially Eos users. It works with a mod on the speedboosters, but it involves taking off a plastic ring at the mount that leaves the electronics inside somewhat exposed. Google it, you'll see the details.

Stabilizer combined with zoom range on S35 is why it is attractive. The focus ring is ok, but NOT amazing. Not as smooth as Sigma 18-35mm, for example. But, people use it professionally for doc work all the time, especially while traveling. It's small, relatively fast, and provides stabilization. It also extends into the telephoto range just enough to get some decent closeups without needing to get ultra close to your subject. That's what I miss with the 18-35mm. Also, after speedboosting, it's F2. That's not bad.

I would love for someone to make a 17-55mm range fast lens with great manual focus, stabilizer or at least electronic contacts so ibis can adjust automatically, and ideally parfocal. The Fuji Mk is the only I thing that heads in this direction, but is expensive and has no contacts. All of the 17-55mm range still lenses are so/so when it comes to manual focus, but totally serviceable. I just think that range is really important and underdeveloped by lens manufacturers. Obviously Fuji agrees. It would be great to see others follow. Sigma Art 17-55mm F2.8 with ois would be nice, with art lens smoothness to the focus ring.

Oh I see, so in the process of modding, the lens losses electronic connection with the speedbooster. Dang!

I agree on the latter part of your reply. Most definitely I do, this thread is showing just that - that this part of the lens market place is underdeveloped for us that do film/video. And I was just also wishing that Sigma would make an Art standard zoom lens. Actually for GH users, the Oly 12 - 40 would be just great if it worked with the camera just as Pany lenses do... But otherwise, a S35 17 - 50 2.8 lens is obviously better as you get an extra stop of light with a focal reducer.

This is why I started looking at full frame. The sigma Art line of zooms for full frame looks nice for shooting video. The 12 - 24 f4 and the 14 - 24 f2.8 ! Man it would be great to be able to shoot with an actual 12mm FOV. You can't get that on mft. Also the 24 - 105 f4 is really nice. Only thing wrong with them is that the zoom ring turns the wrong way. Sigma looks to be a bit lazy lol

If the A7s mk3 turns out to be good, and for me that means less jello and better internal codecs, then I'm probably switching to it for small camera shoots.

 

[icarusfilm]

The oly 12-40 will work on the GH5 like a native lens it doesn’t have IS so it won’t interfere with the ibis and the focal length is read electronically it’s really a good choice

Oh I see, so in the process of modding, the lens losses electronic connection with the speedbooster. Dang!

I agree on the latter part of your reply. Most definitely I do, this thread is showing just that - that this part of the lens market place is underdeveloped for us that do film/video. And I was just also wishing that Sigma would make an Art standard zoom lens. Actually for GH users, the Oly 12 - 40 would be just great if it worked with the camera just as Pany lenses do... But otherwise, a S35 17 - 50 2.8 lens is obviously better as you get an extra stop of light with a focal reducer.

This is why I started looking at full frame. The sigma Art line of zooms for full frame looks nice for shooting video. The 12 - 24 f4 and the 14 - 24 f2.8 ! Man it would be great to be able to shoot with an actual 12mm FOV. You can't get that on mft. Also the 24 - 105 f4 is really nice. Only thing wrong with them is that the zoom ring turns the wrong way. Sigma looks to be a bit lazy lol

If the A7s mk3 turns out to be good, and for me that means less jello and better internal codecs, then I'm probably switching to it for small camera shoots.

 

[KINOKS]

I have been poking around myself to kit up my GH5. I think I'm going with the Olympus 12-40. It has a neat arrangement, a "manual focus clutch" that provides hard stops for manual focus. Really, the AF stuff works on these cameras and as a manual, pull your own focus guy, I think it's fantastic.

Also, on a side note, I picked up DMW XLR1 audio adapter and worked with it on a job last week. That thing is great! It is so clean, manages line inputs with a switch and is ridiculously small and light. Great addition.

If you're going to use and eyepiece, why not just use the evf in the camera. That's part of the beauty of mirrorless, no?

Hm... I've never actually shot with it. Isn't it a bit uncomfortable? You need a bigger eye piece and even then it must be weird... Didn't figure out that the evf has a better resolution then the lcd lol

 

[Denny16]

The closest to that type of fast zoom (14-50mm range), I have found in a MFT lens, is the older Oly F/T 14-35mm f/2.0, fast, real manual focus with stops, auto focus when you want it, iris control via the camera, and it is parfocal. The downside, it only goes to 35mm on the long end, and it is large and heavy. Next would be the Oly 12-40 Pro, only f/2.8, but better range, not quite parfocal, and manual focus-by-wire is good.
Cheers

 

[KINOKS]

The closest to that type of fast zoom (14-50mm range), I have found in a MFT lens, is the older Oly F/T 14-35mm f/2.0, fast, real manual focus with stops, auto focus when you want it, iris control via the camera, and it is parfocal. The downside, it only goes to 35mm on the long end, and it is large and heavy. Next would be the Oly 12-40 Pro, only f/2.8, but better range, not quite parfocal, and manual focus-by-wire is good.
Cheers

Huh that looks nice! Albeit a bit expensive for a mft lens. It's 2.2k at b&h... Does it communicate with gh5 , does ibis works? I read that is has an 90° focus throw. Is that correct?

I also saw Oly 14 - 54 f2! Also really cheap... Wonder what's wrong with it, as on paper it looks great. That's a 28 - 108mm on mft at 2.8 - 3.5. What happened, why aren't people raving about this lenses and why did Oly discontinue updating them?

 

[Denny16]

Sanjin, I got my Oly 14-35 f/2.0 which my AD100 and paid around $1100 for it (mint condition), this was one of Olympus’ first Pro lens offerings, along with its companion lens the 35-100 f/2.0, which is even larger. These are Four Thirds lenses, and were replaced in the Oly lineup with the new MFT Pro series f/2.8 zooms. My 14-35mm Zoom works on my Oly Pen F mist fine, but you need the Panasonic F/T to MFT adapter, which passes lens electronic control to the camera. IBIS on my Pen F works with it, so since thenlens does not have IS, IBIS on the GH5 should work also. The IQ in this lens is very nice and somewhat cinematic, sharp, but not razor sharp, just lovely.

The Oly 14-54 is f/2.8-3.5 instead of the constant f/2.0 and was the kit lens with the Oly four thirds DSLR Cameras. It is a good lens, but max f/stop is not fixed, it is not parfocal either, and focus is focus by wire, with a slight delay.

I also have the Panasonic Leica original 14-50 f/2.8-3.5 FT zoom, which was Panny answer to the Oly zoom, it is also excellent, smaller and lighter than the Oly f/2 Zoom, but is also not parfocal and in mid Zoom has some breathing with far/near focus pull. It was my go to lens for interviews on the AF100. It is sharper and has a better Leica style IQ than the Oly 14-54, but again, it makes a great variable focal length lens, but not necessarily a good video zoom.

The new Panny 12-50 Leica Zoom is same IQ, smaller yet as a MFT native lens, and is parfocal, with a clickless iris (smooth iris changes as it ramps during zoom, set the camera to auto ISO to maintain correct exposure setting, and you are Golden! It has IS and also works with the GH5 IBIS for dual image stabilization.
Cheers

 

[hscully]

Hm... I've never actually shot with it. Isn't it a bit uncomfortable? You need a bigger eye piece and even then it must be weird... Didn't figure out that the evf has a better resolution then the lcd lol

Not too much yet, mostly hand held still on subject, doc stuff. But the few times I tried it, it was fine. It's just as if you were shooting stills. These were short takes, exteriors, no more than a few minutes. For these it was all speedbooster manual lens and I was able to nail focus fine using the camera EVF.

 

[KINOKS]

Sanjin, I got my Oly 14-35 f/2.0 which my AD100 and paid around $1100 for it (mint condition), this was one of Olympus’ first Pro lens offerings, along with its companion lens the 35-100 f/2.0, which is even larger. These are Four Thirds lenses, and were replaced in the Oly lineup with the new MFT Pro series f/2.8 zooms. My 14-35mm Zoom works on my Oly Pen F mist fine, but you need the Panasonic F/T to MFT adapter, which passes lens electronic control to the camera. IBIS on my Pen F works with it, so since thenlens does not have IS, IBIS on the GH5 should work also. The IQ in this lens is very nice and somewhat cinematic, sharp, but not razor sharp, just lovely.

The lens looks nice! It's rather big. I'm surprised how big it is for an FT lens. I know f2.0 takes it's toll on the size and weight, but damn, didn't think FT lenses can get that big

So basically it looks like Oly went for a small size rather then fast aparture. It makes sense as 12 - 40 is a better range then 14-35. But not making it fully manual doesn't. They kinda went 2 steps forward and one step back. There are also other trades off. Like IQ and speed.

The 14-35 lens looks nice but am not quite sold by it yet. I must try the 12-40 first and if the focus sucks then the 14-35 is the next step.

Tnx for sharing your firat hand exp. This is priceless!

The Oly 14-54 is f/2.8-3.5 instead of the constant f/2.0 and was the kit lens with the Oly four thirds DSLR Cameras. It is a good lens, but max f/stop is not fixed, it is not parfocal either, and focus is focus by wire, with a slight delay.

Focus has a delay? Well that kinda makes it a bit usless to us. It's kinda when you're looking at an external monitor that has a few ms of delay. I hate that for focusing.

I also have the Panasonic Leica original 14-50 f/2.8-3.5 FT zoom, which was Panny answer to the Oly zoom, it is also excellent, smaller and lighter than the Oly f/2 Zoom, but is also not parfocal and in mid Zoom has some breathing with far/near focus pull. It was my go to lens for interviews on the AF100. It is sharper and has a better Leica style IQ than the Oly 14-54, but again, it makes a great variable focal length lens, but not necessarily a good video zoom.

Tbh I've gotten so accustomed to lenses being parfocal that I have starting to taken it for granted. If the 14-50 has a good focus ring then I'll just order one from ebay and try it. It's really cheap, so not much harm if I wont like it.

The new Panny 12-50 Leica Zoom is same IQ, smaller yet as a MFT native lens, and is parfocal, with a clickless iris (smooth iris changes as it ramps during zoom, set the camera to auto ISO to maintain correct exposure setting, and you are Golden! It has IS and also works with the GH5 IBIS for dual image stabilization.
Cheers

Man I've gotten so much confpicitn info about this lens. From people loving it to people hating it. Some say the focus ring is the worst they have ever tryied from Pany and some don't mind it and like it. A local retailer has it, so it's not a problem for me to test it. It's just the Pany lenses that I can't get a hold off

 

[c3hammer]

I know everyone hates the fly by wire focus of the Panasonics, but I think it actually works pretty well once you work with it some. It's kind of like learning to use a vintage push-pull-focus combo zoom lens for sports. It was a b%*&! to try to keep a subject framed and in focus as it was moving. It took massive practice to learn to do it even reasonably. Don't get me wrong, the fly by wire is not perfect by any means, but the speed sensitive focus ring allows you do rather large focus changes in a very short throw once you sort out how to use it.

Here's my sample video that shows you can do it. This is with a 42.5mm f/1.7 which has an amazing image. I think it's the best image for the money in the m43 world. I use it almost exclusively with a 15mm f/1.7 for all my work. Don't need a zoom lens with ETC and in a pinch the 2x digital in 4K UHD to get up to three different effective focal lengths per lens. F/1.7 is invaluable for getting separation from your background. All the f/2.8 zooms are clinical looking depth of field that I much dislike.

Just my $0.02 for what it's worth.

https://youtu.be/GbESNMYJmEk

Cheers, Pete