I'm considering purchasing the Olympus 14-35mm. I don't have any doubts as to its quality. But is there any other lens in this range/speed to consider? Is there any zoom in this range that is faster? $3k is about my budget. But discussion about more expensive lenses is also appreciated.
Olympus Zuiko 14-35mm f2.0 or Something Else?
- Thread starter Paul F
- Start date
Brian@202020
Veteran
For speed there is nothing like it in a zoom. As for range I've been looking into the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 Nikon mount. It's all manual and not quite as good, but it's cheaper and it might be good enough for me.
Panasonic are bringing out a 12-35mm next year, but who knows how far away this lens is.
If I had to buy a lens now it would a toss up between the Olympus 14-35mm f/2.0 and the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8
Both lenses are very sharp wide-open, with the Olympus having the extra stop of speed, and Nikon having the longer reach.
If I had to buy a lens now it would a toss up between the Olympus 14-35mm f/2.0 and the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8
Both lenses are very sharp wide-open, with the Olympus having the extra stop of speed, and Nikon having the longer reach.
Good note - why? too stiff, too loose, it clicks?
Good to know. I don't mind buying this lens now and then trading or adding to the collection.
Also, all manual is ok with me.
bgundu
Veteran
Sorry, should have been more clear. The aperture changes are in steps, and not smooth transitions between f stops.
Darren Levine
Veteran
in prepping for a feature shot on 2 af100s, i'm very much leaning towards using the 14-35 and the 35-200 for both the speed and better yet, their dirt cheap rental costs compared to any proper zeiss or cooke lenses. VERY temping...
Completely agree. I own the 14-35 and 'am very happy with it aside from the hard step aperture changes. My second choice would definitely be the Nikon 17-55. Now if I owned the Tokina 11-16, the Nikon would be my first pick. Actually, if I had to do it all over again that would be the route I would take. For the same cost as the Oly 14-35, I could gain 20mm on the long end and 3mm on the wide.
Yes, I'm was thinking the same thing; buy both lenses. The stepped aperture is a disappointment and is a bit off-putting, but isn't there some company that de-clicks aperture rings?
edit - did you mean 35-100 instead of 35-200 or is there another Olympus f2.0?
Last edited:
My preference is to give up the range of the Nikon for the extra speed. But if I did get both the 14-35 and the 35-100, then I have the coverage. Not that I have that much money lying about.
bgundu
Veteran
The declicking only works with lenses with a manual aperture ring. The zuiko lenses here are electronically controlled.
Shooter
Veteran
Why with your experience your asking "why" is a mystery to me. But here's my answer:
Because during those rare moments when you have to change exposure while filming (say a interview with natural light), any iris change is a hard noticeable step with the 14-35. Unlike a cine, de-clicked still or even a EX1 and other cams where it's not indexed.
Shooter
Veteran
Actually , I assumed the answer but I asked "why" only because I was wondering how often people actually do change aperture mid shot and how successful they are in "hiding" it.
We have done it a number of times over the years but with no expectation that it is ever seamless or useable so I actually wondered if it would be a show stopper in regard to buying a particular lens or not.
We do have an Olympus 14-54mm lens with this stepping aperture but it is only used on the GH2... though we did use it reluctantly on the AF102 once and the issue was more an annoyance than a real problem.
We have done it a number of times over the years but with no expectation that it is ever seamless or useable so I actually wondered if it would be a show stopper in regard to buying a particular lens or not.
We do have an Olympus 14-54mm lens with this stepping aperture but it is only used on the GH2... though we did use it reluctantly on the AF102 once and the issue was more an annoyance than a real problem.