Let's talk glass: Lenses for the AF100!

it looks as if the Olympus glass does not offer IS. I would really like a fast-ER zoom with IS. Canon looks as if they have a few good ones with IS, but still no word on adapters for those lenses correct? The canon 17-55 2.5 IS looks like a good lens, if they come out with an adapter so the IS will work that is.
 
Olympus has in-camera stabilization and therefore their lenses do not. Panasonic on the most part have OIS.

swanny said:
it looks as if the Olympus glass does not offer IS. I would really like a fast-ER zoom with IS. Canon looks as if they have a few good ones with IS, but still no word on adapters for those lenses correct? The canon 17-55 2.5 IS looks like a good lens, if they come out with an adapter so the IS will work that is.
Click to expand...
 
Barry_Green said:
Yep, I think that's a decent set for most purposes.

Only on the 14-140. The pancakes don't have OIS.
Click to expand...

What about indoor ceremonies with 14-140? Can you compensate enough with the ISO so that it will be usable? I'll def need a zoom to use indoors as well, either with the af100 or a GH1. Not really any need for good shallow depth of field for the ceremony.

Thanks for all the advice!
 
swanny said:
but still no word on adapters for those lenses correct? The canon 17-55 2.5 IS looks like a good lens, if they come out with an adapter so the IS will work that is.
Click to expand...
No definitive date or even speculated date on the adapter. I still expect it to be available before the AF100 is though, so that Canon lens might be a viable option.
 
swanny said:
Always a trade off? Personal opinion - is it worth having a faster lens but no IS, or IS and a slower lens?
Click to expand...

Largely depends on the focal length. A wide lens doesn't need OIS nearly as much as a tele lens does. A 100-300 zoom without OIS would be pretty much useless without a tripod. A 7-14 lens, you probably couldn't tell the difference between with- and without-OIS on something like that.
 
swanny said:
What about indoor ceremonies with 14-140?
Click to expand...
At tele end; my original hvx @ iso200, gain +6dB, F2.8 is same as af100 @ iso3200, F8.
So at tele end; af100 & 14-140 will be less than 1 stop faster than original hvx and even slower than hvx200a.
 
Barry,

I'm looking at a future documentary shoot where I'd like to use the AF-100. My first choice in zooms would be an Angenieux Optimo DP 30-80mm on A cam and an Angenieux Optimo DP 16-42 on B camera. These 'DP' series lenses, as you probably know, have elongated rear elements. Would you happen to know if they would clear on the AF-100?

I see no reason why it would not, but I read somewhere that the Optimo DP lenses were questionable in compatibility. In my mind, a flange of 52mm is a must for PL lenses, thus, if the AF-100 has a PL mount it would have to be 52mm and thus would be enough room for any PL lens that fits in a PL mount. Just wanted to make sure, as I can't currently test the AF100.
 
Last edited:
Angenieux came by the IBC booth to test-fit one of their lenses to "see if it would work". And they were happy with how it fit. So -- without trying those specific lenses, I'd say the odds are very high that they'll work fine.
 
very excited to try these out, just went on an ebay spree for lenses the past week.

tokina 17mm 3.5 for nikon manual
ais 35 1.4
ai 50 1.4
ais 85 1.4
ais 105 1.8

i was happy with them on a redrock/hvx setup, the af100 must be amazing.

possibly adding a 105 2.8 macro to the kit. definitely a zoom but it wont be used much so ill hold until ill need one.
 
JesterJJZ said:
I've recently started looking at the Olympus Zuiko line. I'm planning on eventually getting a set of Zeiss Primes but want a basic 3 lens starter kit that I can use.

Was looking at:

Panasonic 7-14mm f/4.0
Panasonic 14-140mm f/4.0-5.8
Panasonic Lumix 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6

But now considering:

Olympus Zuiko 7-14mm f/4.0
Olympus Zuiko 14-35mm f/2.0
Olympus Zuiko 35-100mm f/2.0

Granted the Olympus are faster and more expensive, can I get by with the Lumix lenses?

There are the olympus 14-54 2.8-3.5, 12-60 2.8-4.0, 50-200 2.8-3.5
much cheaperthan the 14-35 and the 35-100. covers more, and considering the promised clean iso it's fast enough fot most jobs
Click to expand...
 
amosrafaeli said:
There are the olympus 14-54 2.8-3.5, 12-60 2.8-4.0, 50-200 2.8-3.5
much cheaperthan the 14-35 and the 35-100. covers more, and considering the promised clean iso it's fast enough fot most jobs
Click to expand...
12-60 is not micro4/3", so will it work just with adapter?
 
all of them are 4/3

all of them are 4/3

toke lahti said:
12-60 is not micro4/3", so will it work just with adapter?
Click to expand...

all of them are 4/3
but the 14-35, 35-100 2.0 are also 4/3 and not m4/3
so ypu need adapter that both Panasonic and Olympus make.
and it work electronically with all of this
 
Will work with the glasses I already have for my GH13 in semi-pro environments and independent productions:

Pana 14 - 140 mm
Pana 7 - 14 mm
Leica 19 mm f 2.8
Voigtlander 25 mm F 0.95 (pre-ordered, coming end of year)
Voigtlander Nokton 50 mm F 1.1
Zeiss Makro 100 mm f 2.0
Zeiss Jena 180 mm f 2.8

Two "exoticals" - in an optical sense a bit "rubbery" but nice:

Vivitar 100 - 500
Vivitar 600 - 1000

Own a Hot-Rod PL adaptor so we can use the lenses we may already have rented in a project for a "grown up" camera.
 
amosrafaeli said:
all of them are 4/3
but the 14-35, 35-100 2.0 are also 4/3 and not m4/3
so ypu need adapter that both Panasonic and Olympus make.
and it work electronically with all of this
Click to expand...
Another interesting Four-Thirds lens is Panasonic/Leica 14-50/F2.8-3.5
It is similar optically to Olympus 14-54/f2.8-3.5 Mark II (tad shorter), which seems to be fairly popular with GH1(3) owners. One distinct advantage the Panny/Leica carries is OIS.
 
toke lahti said:
What lens was that?
It wold be very interesting to see test frames from af100 eg. with this:
http://www.abelcine.com/store/Canon-11.5-138mm-Super-16-Zoom-10194/
Click to expand...


Despite Angenieux having many different lenses, I'd imagine they were testing one of the two Optimo DP lenses. The DP lenses have a longer rear element, which makes it incompatible with film cameras because of the mirror shutter. The regular optimo lenses, such as the giant 24-290, regardless of it's size, would be fine as it's rear element would be no different than any Zeiss Prime, Cooke, etc.

Take a look:

NAB0908-DSC_2462.jpg

versus the original optimo:

Optimo15-40Lense.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top