List of lenses based on ability to focus smoothly?

W

Wendt

Active member
It would be helpful to me (and maybe others) if the community could rank their experience with DSLR lenses as it relates to the lenses ability to work with a follow focus unit (focus smoothly, longer travel, lack of breathing etc.)


Example:

Lenses that work well

Lenses that are OK

Lenses that do not work well

Here is a list of lenses that I am trying to pick a 3-4 lenses from. If you have experience with any of them as it relates to its ability to focus only please put them under the proper headings or add other lenses that you do not see on the list. Thanks

Zeiss ZF

Zeiss ZE

Tokina 11-16mm 2.8

Canon 24mm 1.4 L

Sigma 30mm 1.4

Sigma 50mm 1.4

Canon 17-55mm IS 2.8

Tamaron 17-50mm VC 2.8

Canon 60mm 2.8 macro

Canon 85mm 1.8

Canon 100mm 2.8 L macro

Canon 70-200 2.8 L
 
Zeiss ZF 25, 35, 50, 85 have exquisitely wonderful focus ability with huge long "throw". Ideal for use with a follow focus.
 
To define good focusing I think it isportant to consider..

Throw

Smoothness

Stops
Spinning past infinity can interfere with FF devices
-------
Lenses I own
16-55 Tokina
Smooth 6/10
Throw 2/10 (where 10/10=long throw)
Stops yes

Any manual nikkor
Smooth 4-6/10
Throw 6/10
Stops yes

AF Nikkor
Smooth 7-9/10
Throw 6/10
Stops (Yes ??)

24-105 Canon L
Smooth 7/10
Throw 3/10
Stops NO

Canon 70-200 L non IS
Smooth 9/10
Throw 7/10
Stops NO

S
 
Thanks for all info and detail-this really helps. How important is a lens with "stops" if you have a follow focus?

I also find it interesting that not all L lenses are created equal in this category. How would you rate the Canon 24-70L compared to the 70-200L?
 
wide angle zoom lenses tend to offer very short focus throw - this enables AF to work fast for stills use

stops are important if you work to marks !

In that you are actually thnking about lenses - thier mechanics - not thier paper specification I would suggest to try before you buy - physically - in your hands - on your camera !
 
Wendt said:
How would Canon L glass compare to the Zeiss lenses?
Click to expand...

I don't have experience with the Zeiss', but I haven't been all that impressed by the mechanics of the Canon EF lenses.
For one thing, the focus ring will spin past the endpoints to infinity and beyond, and there always seems to be enough play until the focus ring actually 'grabs' that any focus mark is slightly different depending on which direction you approach from.
Pulling focus on the lens by eye is fine, but not with a FF.
 
Tim Joy said:
but I haven't been all that impressed by the mechanics of the Canon EF lenses. For one thing, the focus ring will spin past the endpoints to infinity and beyond, and there always seems to be enough play until the focus ring actually 'grabs' that any focus mark is slightly different depending on which direction you approach from. Pulling focus on the lens by eye is fine, but not with a FF.
Click to expand...

What you call "spin past" is usually called "servo focus ring" (correct me if I am wrong). Does Canon have lenses that have fixed focus rings and IS and auto focus in combination with the D7 during filming?
 
Just picked up the Canon 50 1.4 and the 85 1.8 and am shocked by how crap the focusing is, esp on the 50. I thought the 50 1.8 was bad w/the servo and the 50 1.4 was ok, but I guess it's servo too or something.

Either way it's really bad - has the whole you can turn it a little before it actually moves and it feels like it's working against you focusing.

Admittedly that's on a 5 minute play heh, but still!
 
hi there,

i´m quite new to the business, but the ZF lenses are specially for the Nikon Mount, wouldn´t it be better to get the new ZE lenses for the canon mount, or are there any lacks of quality? difference?
how do you use those lenses on a canon? adapter?

thanx, mischa
 
If you intend to use them primarily/exclusively with a Canon body, then certainly get the ZEs instead.

The only differences are that the ZE lenses don't have an aperture ring, they do have direct electrical contacts with the Canon mount, and they are Canon instead of Nikon. You can adapt Nikon lenses to mount on a Canon, but you can't go the other way (without having an optical element in the path).

Maybe Kholi can answer, but do the ZEs focus "the right way"? The ZFs focus the Nikon way, which is backwards from broadcast/cinema lenses. If the ZEs focus "the right way" then that'd be another reason to go with ZEs. The only real drawback to the ZEs is if you want to use them on something other than a Canon, you're going to be quite limited.
 
the 24-105 is pretty smooth, but the focus throw is pretty short. IMHO a better lens for stills than video, but it does work amazingly well. I would take my 5dii out and about without it. On aps-c, I feel that it is not wide enough and too slow to get the bokeh I want. You would be better off with something like the canon 17-55 2.8 for a general purpose lens on aps-c. You can also look at tamron and tokina who both make lenses in that range with 2.8 constant aperature for around $600. If you go tamron, go with the model that has VC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top