Olympus 14-35, 35-100 zoom lens owners

The Zuiko 14-54 does not have OIS either?
Is there any alternative at all to the Panasonic 14-50 if you want OIS?
(apart from the 14-140mm which I already have but it is too slow)
 
High budget productions with cine lenses do have image stabilization, although through often hundred of thousands of dollars worth of stabilization equipment
Click to expand...

This is a good point, and although I am not an OIS advocate, I think there is some credence to this argument. However, my hotrod roots, building fast cars and making them faster by eliminating unnecessary weight, extends to my philosophy about camera equipment. The more "unnecessary" stuff you can strip off, the better the system will respond. And the more reliable it will be in the long run. In the past I've used image stabilizers in helicopters, and twice have had to return to base for tweaking or repair. I just continue to believe that simpler is better.

But this is a philosophical argument with no basis in corporate thinking. They will build what will appeal to the largest consumer base, and that's fine. But, again, for me it's the "professional" features that matter, especially the ability to smoothly change stop during a shot.
 
@thomas To my knowledge there are no OIS Olympus lenses, because their sensors have image stabilization.

@Mac I agree. What type of helicopter shoots were you doing? What lenses did you use?

And back to the thread, so it looks like I'll get the 14-35mm lens, as I'll be shooting with it wide open most of the time anyways...
 
In lenses such as Olympus 14-35mm the iris mechanism is not linked mechanically with the zoom mechanism (or linked only at the widest opening). This is common in the lenses with no aperture ring , their construction relies on electronics, not on precise mechanical construction. There is no system of helicoids and cams which cause the iris to actually open and close mechanically as we zoom to maintain the constant F stop. Instead such lens has system of electromagnets that close/open the iris depending on the focal length. Digital-electronic - meaning that there is a specific number of steps/positions in which the iris can be in ( it can be called "resolution" ). It is not stepless and therefore we can hear clicks and slight changes of exposure. Because zooming is mechanical therefore it gives us infinite number of positions (focal lengths) - it is analog, not digital-electronic. The lens or the camera (or both) don't have enough "resolution" with which they control the iris to match all the intermediate zoom positions (which as mentioned before are infinite). This mismatch causes slight exposure shifts.
Increasing the "resolution" - the number of positions in which the iris can be in can solve the problem but in theory such lens will never match the lens in which zoom and iris are linked mechanically.
 
Last edited:
but in theory such lens will never match the lens in which zoom and iris are linked mechanically.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and that of course is the problem we all face. While it may be (partly) true that the AF100 is intended to use prime lenses, there are many situations where a light efficient zoom is needed. In my case, handheld documentaries, but there are many others as well.

I realize there's probably not a large enough perceived market, but wouldn't it be terrific if the lens gurus at Olympus or Panasonic took one of their excellent lenses apart and re-mounted the optics in a mechanical housing with an aperture ring?
 
It does not sound like this iris glitch can be corrected by upgrading firmware, no?
Click to expand...

I wish... Maybe it will... I hope it will... I just bought a 14-140 out of frustration because there just isn't another choice. I have the Zuiko 14-54 f2.8 which I use primarily as a WA f2.8. With these two lenses I can cover most of my zoom lens needs...

As long as the light doesn't change during an interview, or I don't have to walk from an exterior to an interior, or I don't need to pan from the driver of a car to the view out the windshield.. But, of course, all those things happen in my world every day.
 
Mac said:
there are many situations where a light efficient zoom is needed. In my case, handheld documentaries, but there are many others as well.
Click to expand...
I badgered the major lens manufacturers about this. I pestered Angenieux, Fujinon, and Zeiss, attempting to make the case that there is a potentially huge market for a small, affordable, fast zoom. I have a Super16 Angenieux 17.5-70 zoom, which is f/2.2. Compared to the Arri Alura S35 18-80 zoom, it's basically the same focal length but it's 1/10th the weight, half the length, about 1/4th the diameter, and almost an f-stop faster, and was 1/25th the price. Only problem is, of course, that the AF100's sensor is over twice as big as S16 film and so the lens doesn't cover the sensor. But it comes pretty darn close, maybe 80% close. So I think it would be reasonable that they could extend the image circle coverage just a bit, might make the lens just a bit bigger, maybe a tad slower, but maybe we would end up with something like a two-pound 17.5-70 at maybe f/2.4. With pure manual slick luscious cinema mechanicals. How many of you would buy something like that? I'd be first in line.

Question is, is there a big enough market for something like that? Well, consider that Red turned the PL lens market absolutely inside out, by selling 8,000 new PL-mount cameras in the space of four years. Panasonic has (by my estimate) sold that many AF100's in four MONTHS. And every one of us is looking for that cine-style lens... I think there's a huge market, I think it could be an amazing product, and I really hope that they listen and see the potential.
 
monkeyking said:
It does not sound like this iris glitch can be corrected by upgrading firmware, no?
Click to expand...
Not at present, but what's clear from your reports and others', is that the glitches vary among camera models rather than being flaws in the lenses themselves:

monkeyking said:
I started this thread originally testing the Olympus f/2 zooms on my AF100. Basically the iris glitch, as I call it, occured on all stops EXCEPT f/2 (wide open) accompanied by a very audible click sound. Now I have a GH2/GH1 and I share your observations; Even wide open at f/2 there is the dreaded iris glitch in both stills and movie modes. The glitch is more audible in movie mode but if you observe the exposure scale on the bottom right of the LCD you will notice a slight tic +/- in exposure as the image screen slightly brightens/darkens.
Click to expand...
For me, the conclusive evidence came when I tested the Olympus 35-100mm and the Panasonic 14-50mm on Panasonic's first Live View Four Thirds camera, the L1 from 2006. Results: no aperture glitches at any f-stop while zooming, and quick auto-focus without hunting. While Panasonic's support for legacy Four Thirds lenses did improve in the upgrade from GH1 to GH2, they've taken a serious step back with the AF100. And what I find difficult to understand is how the five-year-old L1 handles these lenses far more seamlessly than any of Panasonic's current models.
 
I have a Super16 Angenieux 17.5-70 zoom
Click to expand...

I have a 30 year old Cooke 10.4-52mm zoom that used to be the lens all super16 lenses were compared against - AND it nearly covers the whole 35mm frame (it was used handheld on 35 Camaflexes several times back then). I would love to use this lens, but I can't find that Aaton mount adapter_ I emailed the guy in germany, but no response.
 
I'd never heard that about the Cooke (that it could nearly cover 35mm)... darn you, Mac! Just when I thought I had kicked my lens buying addition, now I'm gonna start trawling for the Cooke (which, hey, it already has an awesome reputation)... and 10.4-52 would be an excellent range...

If you can't find an adapter, you could look into getting it remounted in PL or Arri Standard or something...
 
I was shooting extras for some old horror movie re-releases last week using the Olympus 14-35 zoom lens. The iris jump REALLY shows when zooming all the way out. Here's a few samples I pulled from one of the b-roll clips (10MB):

http://www.creativelybankrupt.com/rome/af100_olympus_14_35.mp4

I must also add, other than this lens issue, the camera is a dream. I am mostly shooting in controlled environments with no zoom so this is the first I've even experienced it in post after 3 months of owning the camera/lens combo.
 
Last edited:
Fond memories of that Cooke lens; I believe it was the s16 version of the Cooke 9-50. Used a manual Chroiszel zoom control on the side that was sweet. I think I used it with an Arri bayonet/Aaton adapter but that was so long ago.




Mac said:
I have a 30 year old Cooke 10.4-52mm zoom that used to be the lens all super16 lenses were compared against - AND it nearly covers the whole 35mm frame (it was used handheld on 35 Camaflexes several times back then). I would love to use this lens, but I can't find that Aaton mount adapter_ I emailed the guy in germany, but no response.
Click to expand...
 
Creatively Bankrupt said:
I was shooting extras for some old horror movie re-releases last week using the Olympus 14-35 zoom lens. The iris jump REALLY shows when zooming all the way out. Here's a few samples I pulled from one of the b-roll clips (10MB):

http://www.creativelybankrupt.com/rome/af100_olympus_14_35.mp4

I must also add, other than this lens issue, the camera is a dream. I am mostly shooting in controlled environments with no zoom so this is the first I've even experienced it in post after 3 months of owning the camera/lens combo.
Click to expand...

Hey, wait a minute. Was that for City of the Living Dead (or as we knew it on VHS, Gates of Hell)?? Man, I love that movie! What a cool gig.
 
Fond memories of that Cooke lens; I believe it was the s16 version of the Cooke 9-50.
Click to expand...

What happened (apparently) is that a cinematographer named Curtis Clarke, ASC (who I bought my Aaton and Cooke from) personally worked with Cooke in the UK to develop that lens. I'm not sure of the modification, but if memory serves there is an optical change in the rear element - it has a HUGE exit pupil - and the side effect is that it will (supposedly) work with 1:85 aperture with some minor vignetting.

I'm not 100% sure, though, that's why I don't want to change the mount on the lens, because I can still use it with the Aaton... Sure wish I could find that Aaton to MFT adapter though.
 
Barry_Green said:
a two-pound 17.5-70 at maybe f/2.4. With pure manual slick luscious cinema mechanicals. How many of you would buy something like that? I'd be first in line.
Click to expand...

And I'd be second in line, although a bit wider than 17.5 would be better. Are Red branded 17-50 T2.9 or 18-85 T2.9 not contenders, by the way? They're a little on the slow side, maybe a bit heavy, but they look good on paper and not totally ludicrous in price?

We do have buying power. Consider the constantly-back-ordered Voigtlander 25mm: I'm willing to bet that most of these have been sold to movie makers rather than stills photographers.

I've decided to stick with cheap and cheerful SLR lenses for now- my collection of 14/20/45 mm Lumix primes, Voigtlander 25mm, Olympus 12-60 mm and Lumix 45-200 mm cost me less than a single CP.2 prime. (And I need to be filming, so I can't wait for Birger).

I don't mind investing in "holy batman expensive" glass at some point, but right now these are giving me a good mix of focal length and aperture options with reasonable enough sharpness and constrast. Shame about the ergonomics, of course, but compared with shooting on a dSLR I'm still in hog heaven with the AF101 so all is well :)

Cheers, Hywel
 
GaryOldman said:
Hey, wait a minute. Was that for City of the Living Dead (or as we knew it on VHS, Gates of Hell)?? Man, I love that movie! What a cool gig.
Click to expand...
I was shooting for THE BEYOND, ZOMBIE, THE HOUSE BY THE CEMETERY and CANNIBAL FEROX - but he started breaking out random Fulci props and that one in the clip was from CITY. Good eye!
 
Well I just received a demo lens from Olympus to hold me until a new one can be shipped. Awesome service from my dealer and Olympus if I do say so myself to make this happen.

I'll report back with differences/similarities soon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top