GH2 optimal lens for indoor studio lit mainly wide shot 1080 30/60p on gh2

G

greg sage

Member
Looking to get gh2 in next few days, and wondering if I should save a few bucks and get used one with a standard 14-42 kit lens, or buy body and handpick the best lens for my purposes.

Some closeups, but nothing extreme, and used mainly indoors under studio lighting conditions. Mainly wide shots of entire greenscreen stage setup (8'x15' stage) cut together with upper body shots.

Sorry, much to learn about lenses, but wondering about the fixed fstop ratings on various lenses, and making sure that I start off with the best match if I only have one lens for a while. Not sure if fixed at f1.7 is ok, if ones with more zoom power tend to be worse at wide settings, or if there's something else important I wouldn't even think to ask.

Looking for either recommendations, or general direction of what to look for.

thx.
 
The 14-42 and 14-140 are very versatile, and work just fine in controlled situations. You'd be wise to try the 14-42 in your studio first, and reassess your lens needs if it doesn't perform well for you.
 
In your thread about shooting green screen we suggested a couple of apps that would let you calculate the exact focal length lens needed to cover your green screen for a full wide shot for the room size you gave with your camera of choice. Did you even bother to take the time to calculate how wide a lens you will need for such a short distance in your room?
 
Greg,

I agree with McBob. Try the 14-42 first & save yourself the money. A $340 fixed 20mm f1.7 will give you more flexibility with lighting, as long as you don't mind moving the camera fore and aft to get the right framing, but I'd rather have a zoom.

Only challenge you may find with the 14-42 (and the $650 14-140) is that they are slow, which can be a problem, even with studio lightiing.

I started out with a 14-140, but I didn't like how slow it was, so I found an old discontinued Sigma 18-50 f2.8 for 4/3 mount for a couple of hundred $ on eBay.

With a $106 MA-1 adapter, you have an autoaperture lens with autofocus, and a constant f2.8 across the zoom range. Admittedly, the autofocus is loud and slow compared to the Panasonic kit lenses, but I prefer a noisy autofocus to no autofocus, and I can always go manual if I need to.

Some people prefer (relatively) fast zooms such as the Olympus 12-60 f2.8-4.0 or the Panasonic 14-50 f2.8-3.5 for 4/3 mount, but they're more expensive.

Much more expensive is the Olympus 14-35mm f2.0 constant aperture lens. At $2300 new, though, it is 4 times the price of the camera!

Looking forward, Panasonic has shown a couple of concept lenses for micro 4/3 with constant aperture f2.8 zooms - hopefully, they will release them this year.

Hope this is helpful,

Bill
 
David W. Jones said:
In your thread about shooting green screen we suggested a couple of apps that would let you calculate the exact focal length lens needed to cover your green screen for a full wide shot for the room size you gave with your camera of choice. Did you even bother to take the time to calculate how wide a lens you will need for such a short distance in your room?
Click to expand...

A few times, actually... although I don't have an iphone.

I used some online calcs and such... learned about hyperfocal distance, etc.

Still not quite sure, though as it's not like I can fill everything out and solve for one bit. There are several variables. Looks like I'll be starting with the 14-140 lens, though, so that'll give me some flexability. Rather just avoid painting myself into a corner until I'm more comfortable with the gear... then looka at some primes for 20mm or whatever works.

I did mainly DOF calculations, though. The tools I looked at didn't address the fact that a background has a fixed height and width, but were focussed on camera distance from subject, DOF, etc. All that was easily workable with several focal lengths, but not quite sure how they translate into final frame size fitting the greenscreen. Essentially, it would appear I want to be back as far as possible for a few reasons. No lack of lighting, so that's not an issue. Overall, it would seem the 14-140 is going to make it much easier to not sweat this bit.

Had to also consider the possible benefit later of the OIS, and the savings to be had with the package cost.
 
I've shot a ton of studio and outdoor greenscreen stuff with the 14-42, it works great if you're lighting things properly. It's a very versatile lens, and the image stabilization for video works very well. Get it.
 
Thx for the input, guys.

Camera ordered with 14-140 kit lens for starting point. Financially, it worked out to where the lens cost me about $300 over the cost of the camera, so it seemed like a good route... especially for a beginner to get some basic bases covered. I'm sure I'll end up getting some kind of pancake and a fisheye in the relatively near future too. Anything else will likely be a while... by which time I'll have had the opportunity to dig into the camera and assess my needs.
 
I've found the 14-140 to be too slow for the most common lighting setups I work in (with other people in low-budget documentary, nonprofit, and indie short film situations). F4 would be bad enough, but it goes past f5.6 at the long end (to f5.8). For interviews, I use the Rokinon/Samyang/whatever-brand-name-they're-using-now 85mm/f1.4, which I love. Beautiful look.

HOWEVER: the 14-140 is such a wonderfully useful lens outdoors. On vacation, I'll keep the 14-140 on the camera all day long and switch to the Panasonic 20mm/f.17 pancake at night.

So even if the 14-140 doesn't work well for you in the studio, I think you'll be pleased to have it anyway, for outdoor shooting and the occasional indoor setup where you can make it work.
 
Gerson said:
I've found the 14-140 to be too slow for the most common lighting setups I work in (with other people in low-budget documentary, nonprofit, and indie short film situations). F4 would be bad enough, but it goes past f5.6 at the long end (to f5.8). For interviews, I use the Rokinon/Samyang/whatever-brand-name-they're-using-now 85mm/f1.4, which I love. Beautiful look.

HOWEVER: the 14-140 is such a wonderfully useful lens outdoors. On vacation, I'll keep the 14-140 on the camera all day long and switch to the Panasonic 20mm/f.17 pancake at night.

So even if the 14-140 doesn't work well for you in the studio, I think you'll be pleased to have it anyway, for outdoor shooting and the occasional indoor setup where you can make it work.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm just looking at it right now like I have a lot to learn in terms of lenses, camera settings, etc... so maybe better to start off with something flexible and at least workable in each of the common situations I might encounter. Doing music videos, a fisheye seems inevetable at some point, but for now, so long as I can get a good wide indoor studio lit shot, I'm set for the short term. The first two projects slated are all greenscreen, but I'm sure it's only a matter of time before I'll be doing some outdoor, steadicam type stuff. In fact, I'm already scouting a few beaches for a possible third video.

I just ordered a ton of lighting (claimed 7k watt equivalent kino diva type fixtures) in 6 separate fixtures, so I should be able to dial in the lighting pretty well to find the right sweet spot.


Anything else anyone can share with me about the particulars of the 14-140 as it relates to studio lighting indoors in relatively wide shots? Honestly, I'm still not quite sure what all the ramifications are about a "slow" lens, but looking now to dial in the optimal lighting levels to get the best possible exposure with minimal noise, no digital gain, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top