GH2 Need siggestions: Best f2.8 medium zoom lens?

M. Gilden said:
...using a G-lens on an F-mount usually means you can't adjust the aperture since it is electronically controlled. I'm not familiar with the D mount, but I think it is the new pro-series that offers both full-auto and full-manual (aperture ring physically exists on the lens for manual operation, but can also be controlled internally by a compatible camera body).
Click to expand...
In Nikon parlance, "G", "AF-D", and "AI-S" refer to the lens' focus and aperture design rather than its camera mount ("F-mount"), which is common to both manual and auto-focus lenses. But your summary is essentially correct:

AI-S - manual focus, with aperture ring
AF-D - auto & manual focus, with aperture ring
G - auto & fly-by-wire focus, without aperture ring

For vintage lens enthusiasts, virtually all Nikon AI-S lenses can be used with GH2 adapters. And as you mentioned, Nikon's AF-D lenses offer vintage manual controls combined with modern aspherical lens design. For use on the GH2, the G lenses offer no additional advantages and their lack of a manual aperture ring makes them a poor fit. Of course, neither auto-focus nor image stabilization features on any Nikon lens will work with the GH2.

Aperture control is actually mechanically coupled on all Nikon lenses, using the same mechanism on modern auto-focus lenses as was originally designed for Nikon manual lenses. If you examine the lens mount, you'll find a small lever protruding from a slot in the rear of the lens. On both film and digital cameras, this lever is used by the camera's aperture control mechanism to adjust the iris in Shutter Priority and Program modes. There are no aperture control electronics in the lens itself - all of the smarts are built into the camera.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I have been happy with the Olympus 14-54 f2.8-f3.5 II lens.
Click to expand...

While Olympus makes some truly great lenses, the lack of constant aperture means the light will noticeably change while you zoom. While 2.8-3.5 isn't as bad as others, if you plan to do any kind of documentary or live event work, you really need a constant aperture zoom.

lpowell said:
AI-S - manual focus, with aperture ring
AF-D - auto & manual focus, with aperture ring
G - auto & fly-by-wire focus, without aperture ring
Click to expand...

This should really be stickied somewhere.
 
I've been vacillating between the
Leica 14-50
Olympus 12-60
Olympus 14-54 mk2

I've grown used to stepping apertures, but there are times I could really use that extra stop vs. the 14-140 and its ilk. I like the little extra range on the 12-60, the manual aperture on the 14-50, and the lower price and brightness the 14-54.

By the time I've decided, the Lumix 12-35 and 35-100 may well be available. Oh well.
 
lpowell said:
G - auto & fly-by-wire focus, without aperture ring
Click to expand...

Are Nikon G lenses really focus-by-wire ? As I had always thought that these lenses will manually focus on mechanical lens adapters, and they have hard stops for infinity focus and close focus.

My understanding is that focus-by-wire lenses have no mechanical connection and can only be focused using the lens AF motor. ( like the lens ring on Panasonic HMC-150 / HPX-170 cameras )
 
ed_lee83 said:
I use the Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8. Pretty good, costing about $400 these days - ideally get Nikon mount as it has manual aperture.
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 DX is good, but doesn't have manual aperture I believe
Click to expand...

@ed_lee83 Which series is your Tokina 28-70? Is that the AT-X? SV? Really like the range of this lens.
 
TheDingo said:
Are Nikon G lenses really focus-by-wire ? As I had always thought that these lenses will manually focus on mechanical lens adapters, and they have hard stops for infinity focus and close focus.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong, but all the Nikon G lenses that I've tried out lacked both aperture rings and hard focus stops. If the focus ring continues to rotate after you reach infinity or closest focus, then it's a focus-by-wire system.
 
M. Gilden said:
While Olympus makes some truly great lenses, the lack of constant aperture means the light will noticeably change while you zoom. While 2.8-3.5 isn't as bad as others, if you plan to do any kind of documentary or live event work, you really need a constant aperture zoom.
Click to expand...

This is true but to be honest, I do not consider zooming while recording an option with the GH2. It is just too fiddley and I do not think the Olympus lens is parfocal.
 
it is not.

so if you do not shoot/edit using zooms then the Oly is a great all-around wide-zoom lens for docu work. however, i routinely find 54mm to be just a little short. you'll want to have a fast long-zoom to back it up with once you're ready to expand your kit. the other cool bonus to this lens is its macro ability...makes for great extreme closeups!
 
Bassman2003 said:
This is true but to be honest, I do not consider zooming while recording an option with the GH2. It is just too fiddley and I do not think the Olympus lens is parfocal.
Click to expand...

Plenty of documentaries were shot without parfocal zooms on 16mm and 35mm film. The hunting for focus look is normal and almost expected in that situation. Not exactly sure what is more "fiddley" about the GH2 versus any film format.
 
My 4/3 Sigma 18-50 f2.8 just came in the mail - and as expected, the AF is noisy and slow when compared to m43 lenses that are optimized for video. But I'm not complaining - it's nice to have autoaperture and AF options that are not available with legacy Nikon and Canon FD glass.

The Sigma does seem to be sharp throughout the zoom range - and the extra half stop of light gathering is nice - especially at the long end.

And it looks good on the camera ;-)

P1010431.jpg
 
Last edited:
M. Gilden said:
Plenty of documentaries were shot without parfocal zooms on 16mm and 35mm film. The hunting for focus look is normal and almost expected in that situation. Not exactly sure what is more "fiddley" about the GH2 versus any film format.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I should have been more clear. If on tripod I would think a zoom could be pulled of without disrupting the camera. I was thinking more from a very small camera point of view and how touching the camera without inducing movement seems to be very challenging. The Oly lens mechanism is not the smoothest either. So I find my self approaching shooting with this small setup like I have a prime lens that is adjustable.

The 14-54 II does have nice optics and geometry.
 
true, the Oly zoom ring is not what i'd call smooth. the electronic focus ring on the other hand is. but most dslr zooms are not parfocal anyways so zooming shots are pretty much not an option.
 
brunerww said:
My 4/3 Sigma 18-50 f2.8 just came in the mail - and as expected, the AF is noisy and slow when compared to m43 lenses that are optimized for video. But I'm not complaining - it's nice to have autoaperture and AF options that are not available with legacy Nikon and Canon FD glass.

The Sigma does seem to be sharp throughout the zoom range - and the extra half stop of light gathering is nice - especially at the long end.

And it looks good on the camera ;-)

View attachment 46480
Click to expand...

That's hot! share some sample pics/videos when you can. This seems like a nice option.
 
=T wish Panasonic would say more about the two X zooms... Although they're not exactly medium, I want the pair.
 
I am thinking of pulling the trigger and getting the tokina 28-70 as well...how does it hold up with sharpness and clarity?

I love shooting with my 50mm Takumar because it is not oversharp like some Olympus lenses, but its still very beautiful and clear.

And do you find the 28-70 is a good range for like shooting weddings outdoors and what not?

My plan is to get the 28-70 and a 70-200 lens...but I feel I may need a wider lens because of the crop factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top