Need a zoom lens

B

Brian@202020

Veteran
I did some run and gun doc style shooting today with my AF100. After the shoot I realized the zoom range and f-stop range I would like for such types of shoots. I think somewhere around a 12mm to 85mm in a f2 or f2.8 zoom would be perfect. Does anyone know of a quality zoom that fits this description? I don't care about the brand or mount as long as it's good quality and there is an adapter avalible to convert the lens to MFT.
 
Right now it doesn't exist. Here's hoping the rumored panasonic 12-60 f 2.8 OIS actually shows up. The closest you'll get right now is the olympus 12-60 f2.8-3.5 But it will require the 4/3 to micro 4/3 adapter, and it's not stabilized. I'd love to hear from anyone who has that lens what they think about it on the af100.
 
Brian, that's we bought the Arri Alura 18-80mm T2.6--but it's anything but a run and gun lens! It's cool to stay with one lens all day, but it's a lot heavier/bigger than just about any 35mm SLR lens, of course.
 

Attachments

  • AF100_Alura_FP2.jpg
    AF100_Alura_FP2.jpg
    52.5 KB · Views: 0
tacotim said:
Right now it doesn't exist. Here's hoping the rumored panasonic 12-60 f 2.8 OIS actually shows up. The closest you'll get right now is the olympus 12-60 f2.8-3.5 But it will require the 4/3 to micro 4/3 adapter, and it's not stabilized. I'd love to hear from anyone who has that lens what they think about it on the af100.
Click to expand...

I have the OLY ZUIKO 12-60mm SWD f/2.8-4 (I assume that's then lens you're talking about). It's great for the price. I did a quick short film with it and the ZUIKO 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5. Here's a link below.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?235521-COUPLES-A-Short-Film-using-the-Panasonic-AF100

One thing to note is the aperature vs. focal length (Source: DP Review). Seems to change quicker than I'd like.
Screen shot 2011-01-24 at 9.08.33 PM.png

I also have the 14-35mm SWD f/2 but, to be honest, I use them all fairly equally.
 
Last edited:
Here is one lens I know I could work with. (as a variable prime with some small zoom function if required.)

http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Produ.../AF-S-Zoom-NIKKOR-17-35mm-f%2F2.8D-IF-ED.html

It ticks most of my boxes - price, quality, speed, costant f-stop, heritage, build, focal range for my purposes and most importantly to me ..its manual.

CONS: It is a still lens, it will have a crop factor (from its APSC origins )

This lens ticks more boxs for me than any other I have found so far.

FWIW: I wont use a zoom that I can not monitor the aperture (adapter issue) ..hence manual and I wont use a lens that does not have a constant f-stop across the range.
 
Shooter said:
CONS: It is a still lens, it will have a crop factor (from its APSC origins ).
Click to expand...

Yes, and I hate to bring this subject up again because it gets everyone crazed.... but m4/3 to APSC crop factor isn't too bad, only 1.3x or less (if 16x9 output taken into consideration).
That's something I can live with.
Looks like a great lens choice, Shooter.
Screen shot 2011-01-24 at 9.23.37 PM.jpg
 
kylekmd said:
I have the OLY ZUIKO 12-60mm SWD f/2.8-4 (I assume that's then lens you're talking about). It's great for the price. I did a quick short film with it and the ZUIKO 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5. Here's a link below.
.
Click to expand...

yeah, that's the one i was thinking of. how is the focus ring on it? is it a really short throw, or smooth and long?
 
http://www.abelcine.com/fov/

Shooter, it's from Abel Cine. Just plug in the two sensor sizes you're comparing and... voila.

But keep in mind, it doesn't take into account 16x9 framing/output which will make the crop factor even less. For example, APSC to m4/3 crop factor is actually something like 1.16x and not 1.3x, if I remember correctly.

tacotim, the focusing ring has a longer throw than other stills lenses I've used, requiring more than half a turn to go from infinity to the 25 cm setting. Focusing precision is excellent.
 
Last edited:
Brian@202020 said:
I did some run and gun doc style shooting today with my AF100. After the shoot I realized the zoom range and f-stop range I would like for such types of shoots. I think somewhere around a 12mm to 85mm in a f2 or f2.8 zoom would be perfect. Does anyone know of a quality zoom that fits this description? I don't care about the brand or mount as long as it's good quality and there is an adapter avalible to convert the lens to MFT.
Click to expand...

Unless some genius chemical engineer comes up with a super light-weight material with the characteristics of optical glass, such a lens is impossible, at least for a run and gun operation. That's a huge zoom range and a very wide aperture which demands a complex and very large design. It's physics, whose laws resist bending.

Not cheap either; the closest thing I can think of is the Alura, 18-80 T2.6, a truly wonderful accomplishment, but it weighs 10.4 pounds and costs $25,000.00.

But please keep dreaming; sometimes dreams do inspire reality.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo
 
Ticheli said:
Unless some genius chemical engineer comes up with a super light-weight material with the characteristics of optical glass, such a lens is impossible, at least for a run and gun operation. That's a huge zoom range and a very wide aperture which demands a complex and very large design. It's physics, whose laws resist bending.

Not cheap either; the closest thing I can think of is the Alura, 18-80 T2.6, a truly wonderful accomplishment, but it weighs 10.4 pounds and costs $25,000.00.

But please keep dreaming; sometimes dreams do inspire reality.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo
Click to expand...

Leo, I ask this out of ignorance, why is it impossible? in the 70's and 80's the most common lens on small 16mm cameras was an angenieux 12-120 f2.2. What is it that makes it so difficult to do now? It was a heck of a lens to have on a handheld beaulieu r16 or an arri-s, fantastic range, and a wide constant aperture. is it because of the size of the chip that the lens has to cover that makes it so difficult? Again, not trying to be argumentative here, i just want to know.


thanks, tim
 
tacotim said:
Leo, I ask this out of ignorance, why is it impossible? in the 70's and 80's the most common lens on small 16mm cameras was an angenieux 12-120 f2.2. What is it that makes it so difficult to do now? It was a heck of a lens to have on a handheld beaulieu r16 or an arri-s, fantastic range, and a wide constant aperture. is it because of the size of the chip that the lens has to cover that makes it so difficult? Again, not trying to be argumentative here, i just want to know.


thanks, tim
Click to expand...

Exactly. Smaller sensor size = easier to make big range glass.
 
Bigger sensor = bigger glass. You can get a 1/6" CCD camcorder with a 20x lens, no problem. But try to make a 20x lens that covers a huge 4/3 or S35 chip, and you'll be looking at a lens that's a yard long, half a foot in diameter, and weighs 30 pounds.
 
Cost doesn't matter as long as it's a mount that has a deeper flange depth and can be easily be adapted to fit future shorter flange depth cameras (future proof). As for impossible, apparently Panisonic can make something usable in a long focal range like the 14-140, and Olympus can make fast f2 zooms at shorter focal lenths, you would think with the right amount of money a company could make what I'm asking for.
 
Brian@202020 said:
Cost doesn't matter as long as it's a mount that has a deeper flange depth and can be easily be adapted to fit future shorter flange depth cameras (future proof). As for impossible, apparently Panisonic can make something usable in a long focal range like the 14-140, and Olympus can make fast f2 zooms at shorter focal lenths, you would think with the right amount of money a company could make what I'm asking for.
Click to expand...

What you want requires two things, a considerable zoom range from very wide to moderate telephoto and a very wide aperture. The former may be achievable, if a very complex design; the latter is not unless the lens is physically huge. You do know what the f stop is; this is very simple math, it simply cannot be smaller in diameter.

As I suggested earlier, even if such a lens could be designed and built, it would be very large and very heavy (unless a light-weight replacement for optical glass is discovered), and would undoubtedly be stratospheric in price. Bottom line; not going to happen.

Since price is not a problem, I suggest the Red 17-50; it's got a good zoom range for run and gun, is probably fast enough, and it's small and light-weight. Alternatively, the Alura at $25,000.00; much, much larger and heavier, but perhaps your type of run and gun can handle it.

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo
 
Well the rumored 12-60 f2.8 Panasonic lens mentioned earlier in this thread is a lot closer than the RED 17-50. I own the older RED 18-50 T3 and that lens is horrible. I do hear the new one is much better tho.
 
Since cost doesn't matter to you, I would suggest a two lens solution at this point since single lens coverage at this time is unavailable. A Duclos converted PL mount Tokina 11-16mm T2.8, and an Angenieux Optimo 17-80mm T2.2 will cover the range you specified.

As an aside, maybe it's just the frugal business owner part of me that must justify the validity of business expenses compared to the income they will generate, but it must be nice being able to say "cost doesn't matter".

All the Best!

Dave
 
Brian@202020 said:
Well the rumored 12-60 f2.8 Panasonic lens mentioned earlier in this thread is a lot closer than the RED 17-50. I own the older RED 18-50 T3 and that lens is horrible. I do hear the new one is much better tho.
Click to expand...

I have the RPZ 17-50mm and it is excellent.

It is a heavy bastard though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top