Opinions wanted: Sony 18-105 PZ or Canon 24-105 for run and gun?

[nareik]

Well, I learned the craft on 16 and Super 16. I have never really shot on 5D. My teacher back then told me that the 35mm film is the standard reference. I have never heard a cinematographer use the Super 35 as a reference. But good for you if you have. Anyway. This is boring.

"And um, one more thing. This thread was never about comparing the 24-105 to
the Sony 18-200. It was the Sony 18-105. Just sayin......"

Are you sleeping? Tell what the name of the tread is.

I actually never said anyone was wrong....I said please FF shooters don't start
telling me I'm wrong because you are using your FF frame of reference. It took
about two posts for a FF shooter to jump in and say "you are wrong....it 'becomes'
a 33-145." This is what I was trying to avoid, because it always leads to confusion,
but I wasn't the one who stated telling people they were wrong, I just continued to
assert that in Super 35 terms, I was right....which is a fact. If only posters would have
just heeded my call to not confuse things....I made it very plain I was speaking in
Super 35 frame of reference (and not Full Frame) but some Full Frame shooter
always has to jump in and to tell me I'm wrong....when really he is not taking the
time to see what I just wrote.

Im a cinematographer. I did NOT start shooting with a 5D. The FF is NOT necessarily
the logical frame of reference for most cinematographers. When I was working as a
AC, I was not told to "give me a lens that gives the same FOV as a 50mm would on
a Full Frame camera." Because cinematographers tend to 'think' in Super 35 terms.
So my DOP would just ask me to put a 35mm on the camera. He didn't care necessarily
if it was a Full Frame lens or APSC lens (in actuality he wanted a cinema version of
one of these but that's another story) because they all look the same...35mm FOV
on a Super 35 cam. No 'crop factors' or 'Full Frame equivalents' were ever discussed on
sets, and I find that they are most common among still photogs who see the Full Frame
camera as the natural frame of reference. Actually I know some even higher end pro
photographers who see an even bigger sensor as the 'frame of reference' and refer to Full
Frame as 'cropped'

Facts are facts, and a 24-105 on Full Frame, gives roughly the same field of view
that 17-70 does on a Super 35 camera.....that is a FACT.

And um, one more thing. This thread was never about comparing the 24-105 to
the Sony 18-200. It was the Sony 18-105. Just sayin......

 

[alaskacameradude]

Well, I learned the craft on 16 and Super 16. I have never really shot on 5D. My teacher back then told me that the 35mm film is the standard reference. I have never heard a cinematographer use the Super 35 as a reference. But good for you if you have. Anyway. This is boring.

"And um, one more thing. This thread was never about comparing the 24-105 to
the Sony 18-200. It was the Sony 18-105. Just sayin......"

Are you sleeping? Tell what the name of the tread is.

If cinematographers you work with worry about 'converting' lenses
to Full Frame as you did by saying 'let's use the 33-145', when they
mean the 24-105, then I'm really glad I don't work with them, because
that would confuse me.

Name of the thread?
"Opinions wanted: Sony 18-105 PZ or Canon 24-105 for run and gun"

I hope your alarm is ringing because someone needs to wake up for sure....

 

[nareik]

Ok Alaska. You win. I did mixtape. Sorry about that. Long days.

If cinematographers you work with worry about 'converting' lenses
to Full Frame as you did by saying 'let's use the 33-145', when they
mean the 24-105, then I'm really glad I don't work with them, because
that would confuse me.

Name of the thread?
"Opinions wanted: Sony 18-105 PZ or Canon 24-105 for run and gun"

I hope your alarm is ringing because someone needs to wake up for sure....

 

[alaskacameradude]

Ok Alaska. You win. I did mixtape. Sorry about that. Long days.

No prob. And hey, if you want to convert everything to FF that's cool too.
There's a ton of still photogs making the transition to motion who do it all
the time.

I was just trying to keep it easier to understand for everyone, because it seems
like every time there is talk about lenses, this 'crop factor' stuff springs up and
confuses a lot of newer people. Since the person was talking about the FS700,
(which is a Super 35 sized sensor) and since the 18-105 won't work on a Full Frame
camera anyways, I thought it made more sense to keep the discussion in Super 35
terms.

 

[sissond]

I own and use both regularly on my 700. I use the Canon with both the regular metabones and the speedbooster.I love both lenses for different obvious reasons. First of all they both offer great quality considering the affordable price (I got my Canon grey market, brand new for $750 on Ebay). I like the Canon because I also have a T3i for stills, the obvious benefits of the speedbooster, and a slightly better image than the Sony. The Sony doesn't need an adapter, has power zoom, auto-focus, zooms internally to barrel, still looks pretty good, and is even cheaper.

In the studio, and other calm controlled environments, I use the Canon. Also the Canon in low light with the speedbooster. I use the Sony in run-and-gun situations. I'm not worried about the distortion of the Sony with 4k, because I use the Sony in situations when I usually wouldn't want to use my Shogun.

Finally, last March I helped film a snow boarding competition as part of a crew for Outside Television. The first day was calm and sunny and I was shooting off sticks. I used the Canon with the standard metabones adapter. The adapter started giving me issues with the shutter while trying to make adjustments and zooming in/out. Between that, using gloves, and standing on un-even packed snow, using the Canon was a handful for the fast moving events. But it was manageable and I got some great footage. The second day called for high winds with rain, freezing rain, sleet, and snow. I stayed with the Canon and had a much harder time in the adverse conditions. I began missing too many shots and switched over to the Sony. The Sony stayed on for the rest of that day and the entire day after while we worked through a mild blizzard. I'm glad I had both, but for that job, the Sony is the one I'd take if I had to choose.