FS5: Sony 18-110 OR 24-105 w/speedbooster

K

kedara

Member
Hi,
which lens to prefer? on FS5 for documentary work. (with lots of interviews but also pretty much handheld situations)
the cost is not so relevant because the production company is buying...
thanks...
 
Does parfocality matter? The 18-110 is parfocal (with a slight latency if you crash zoom)

Does size matter? The 18-110 is physically larger.

Do you have enough light for F4? Does F4 matter in terms of look?

Personally, I dislike working with Canon stills for video by now. I used to use the holy trinity, but after I got the 18-110 and the MK zooms, I don't consider using my Canon lenses for anything else than photography.
 
thanks,
Parfocality less matters. but will be nice.
the size doesn't bother me much. and always got enough light.
the only reason I considered the canon combo was the 2.8 look with speedbooster.
maybe I will try to convince them to get 18-110 and fujinon 50-135 for interviews...
 
I have both, since I own the 18-110 I don't use the 24-105/sb anymore. It's a matter of personal taste probably but the 110 makes it more versatile for me than f2.8. For that I still have some contax zeiss in the bag.
 
The 24-105 ramps and more importantly is prone to chromatic aberration which was unacceptable to me. Hence I bought the 18-110 but use the 24-70 when needed in low light.
 
LennyLevy said:
The 24-105 ramps and more importantly is prone to chromatic aberration which was unacceptable to me. Hence I bought the 18-110 but use the 24-70 when needed in low light.
Click to expand...

I had to travel really really light recently. I almost had decided to go for the GH5 but I went for the FS7 with one lens Sigma Art 24-70/2.8 instead. It performed great, with the SB it was 2.0 for interviews and the IS helped a lot for handheld B-Roll shots.
 
If you get a good copy 24-105, it’s great. It can also be much sharper than the Sony which is not sure great at low apertures
 
I have a good copy of the 24-105 Canon. But if you want that focal range, why not consider the Sony G-series 24-105 already with the e-mount. It is a far superior lens to the Canon 24-105. I've shot with it on the A7rIII and it is lightweight and compact.

Ned Soltz
 
kedara said:
Hi,
which lens to prefer? on FS5 for documentary work. (with lots of interviews but also pretty much handheld situations)
the cost is not so relevant because the production company is buying...
thanks...
Click to expand...

I'm gonna say "neither". The Canon 24-105mm is problematic...the 18-110 is slow and uninspiring.



I own the Sony 18-105mm, the Sony 18-110mm, the Sony 28-135mm, a Sony 10-18mm, a RED 50-150mm. But I rarely use any of those zooms. The zooms I use the most when shooting doc-style are my Sigma 18-35mm and my Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II. I mix them often despite the fact that they do not color-match without some help in post. If matching is important to you, swap out the Canon 24-70mm for the Sigma Art 24-70mm.

The Sigma 18-35mm is magic.

Ideally, you'd go with the two Fuji MK zooms. But it doesn't sound as if you have the budget for that right now.
 
JPNola said:
I'm gonna say "neither". The Canon 24-105mm is problematic...the 18-110 is slow and uninspiring.



I own the Sony 18-105mm, the Sony 18-110mm, the Sony 28-135mm, a Sony 10-18mm, a RED 50-150mm. But I rarely use any of those zooms. The zooms I use the most when shooting doc-style are my Sigma 18-35mm and my Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 II. I mix them often despite the fact that they do not color-match without some help in post. If matching is important to you, swap out the Canon 24-70mm for the Sigma Art 24-70mm.

The Sigma 18-35mm is magic.

Ideally, you'd go with the two Fuji MK zooms. But it doesn't sound as if you have the budget for that right now.
Click to expand...

Do you use the sigma 18-35 with the normal metabones adapter or speedbooster?
 
Clermond said:
I have both, since I own the 18-110 I don't use the 24-105/sb anymore.
Click to expand...

Same here, have both an 18-110 and a 24-105. The 24-105 is a Sigma ART which I find considerably better than the Canon for video due to the fact is much closer to parfocal and doesn't ramp on exposure like the Canon. Not worried at all about auto functions or stabilization as I use the Nikon version with a Speed Booster Ultra that has the aperture ring. Turns the Sigma ART into a quite decent f2.8 interview zoom. For the bulk of general shooting it's the Sony 18-110 that covers most requirements so it gets used a lot. For the price and performance it a no brainer.

On the other hand at the other end of the scale if you are on a budget you could do far worse than ending up with one of the quite amazing 2006-7 vintage Tokina 28-70mm F/2.8 ATX Pro lenses for not too many $$$s, it needs to be a Mk I or Mk II as the formula changed after the Mk II. You would find you have a lens built like a tank, all metal and that is constant aperture with an iris ring and that is 100% parfocal and that exhibits only the slightest and I mean slightest amount of breathing when pulling focus.

https://vimeo.com/38152106

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKD98G59snA

Stills biased but it gives you an idea on the 80-200mm

http://www.photographyreview.com/pr...tokina/at-x-828-af-pro-80-200mm-f-2-8-sd.html

Why are these two 28-70 lenses so good? The Mk I and Mk II, I have both, were built to the legendary Angeniuex formula that came from Angenieux’s famous 28-70mm F/2.6-2.8 zoom lenses which were derived from the company’s cine design heritage. Angenieux licensed Tokina to use this design. I seem to recall Dan Chung from Newshooter used to use one a fair bit. Tokina also made the Tokina AT-X 828AF Pro 80-200mm constant F/2.8 also parfocal based on the same technology. One of which I have and I just love the fact that it is parfocal. These Tokinas aren't as contrasty or clinically sharp as most of today's glass but they do work to produce a quite pleasant image. Just watch for out for situations where you might run into a fair bit of flare.

History of the lenses

http://www.johncaz.net/home/tokina-at-x-pro-af-28-70mm-26-28

A shot from a couple of years back from the 28-70 Mk I with Speed Booster Ultra on an FS7 at f/2.0. Looks way better without the web compression but you get the idea.

Tokina 28-70 Mk 1 + SB @ F2.0.jpg

Chris Young
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top