FS5: Sony FS5 or Sony F100 with Full Frame E-Mount GM Lenses?

B

Budgieboots

Well-known member
Hello,

Are there any compatibility issues if you use a say,
Sony SEL FE 24-70mm F/2.8 GM Zoom lens,

On either a Sony FS5 or FS100?

I understand that if you use a APS-C lens on any of the Sony A7 series, you’re relegated to “crop mode” and 4K filming is disabled. As well, if you’re taking stills on a Sony A7Rii, you immediately get downscaled to 18 megapixels if using APS-C.

Thanks!
 
You can use them, they just might not be as useful in terms of their zoom ranges.

Eg a lens designed to be a wide-standard zoom on a FF camera, will look like a standard-telephoto zoom when used on a s35 sensor. In order to get the wider angle you'll need to use something which is designed as super-wide for FF like the 16-35 - and that is much more expensive than a lens designed for aps-c/s35.
 
deltoidjohn said:
You can use them, they just might not be as useful in terms of their zoom ranges.

Eg a lens designed to be a wide-standard zoom on a FF camera, will look like a standard-telephoto zoom when used on a s35 sensor. In order to get the wider angle you'll need to use something which is designed as super-wide for FF like the 16-35 - and that is much more expensive than a lens designed for aps-c/s35.
Click to expand...

Or you could just get lenses designed for APSC......but at a wider focal length than 24-70.
There is a 17-55 F2.8 (Canon lens.). There is an 18-35 F1.8 (Sigma Art.). There is an
11-16 (Tokina) or a 10-20 (Sigma). There is even an 8-16 (Sigma.). All of these
lenses are relatively cheap.....at least compared to FF lenses. Plenty of ways
to get a wider angle without being forced to buy 'something designed as super wide
for FF.'
 
I so wish Sony would release an APS-C sized 24-70 2.8 with OSS... As someone who hates shaky handheld footage OSS is essential. And for the FS5 it would be a great lens... But since they're putting IBIS into all their new still cameras they seem to have stopped putting OSS into their lenses... I guess IBIS will make it into the video cameras eventually though... But I'm not upgrading from my non-IBIS cameras anytime soon...
 
It is really strange that Sony hasn't brought out a 16-50mm f/2.8 e-mount lens with OSS. Between the loads of mirrorless APS-C cameras they've sold, and all their S35 camcorders, it seems like it'd be a guaranteed sales success. Even Canon and Nikon strangely ignore this standard zoom lens. The Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 is not "great" optically (and I think it's rated at T3.5-3.7), plus the stabilization is really dated compared to what Canon offers now. Nikon makes a 17-55mm f/2.8 zoom, but it's 14 years old, doesn't have IS, and sells for $1,500.

If you don't mind focusing manually, I'd recommend picking up a Tamron 17-50mm VC lens. They are about $350 new, gray market. It has the best IS of all comparable APS-C zooms (for video). You could also get a Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8, and mount it on a speed booster, which would give you a 17-50mm f/2 equivalent, with excellent image stabilization as well. The Tamron is $750 new, gray market. I picked one up from "Emmy Photo" on Amazon, and it came is pristine condition. The Sigma Art 24-105mm f/4 works great on a speed booster too, giving you a wider range at an "equivalent" f/2.8. Or you can mount it with a simple $100 electronic adapter and use it at 24-105mm at f/4 with IS as well.
 
Ben Scott said:
Use a tripod or get better at shooting handheld.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with this if you are looking at a 24-70 especially. IS is no replacement for an operator who knows how to use the camera on their shoulder. However, I can see that for certain styles of shooting, IS can be helpful for grabbing certain kinds of shots without a rig, and especially getting handheld footage from 70mm and up that doesn't have that shakycam look.
 
Speaking as someone who likes to move the camera around using my hands and arms (and rarely mounting it on my shoulder, like in news and reality TV), I find IS absolutely essential. I have it on all my lenses except for my f/1.4 primes.

When you have your camera rigged for lightweight, nimble shooting, it can be hard to hold a 35mm lens stable in many positions. It totally depends on what you do, but the ol' "Put it on your shoulder or put it on sticks! Image stabilization is newfangled witchcraft for kids!" mentality often produces the most sleep inducing images I see in documentaries. Especially when the cameraman is tall like I am and just tilts the camera down at a 5 foot tall lady or child. Looks lazy and sloppy.
 
I'm 6'4".

Shooting handheld is a technique all on its own, whether you are at waist height or on a shoulder. And focal length choice, walking technique and a base level of strength/stamina all come into it.

Nothing to do with IS being witchcraft. I just don't like it - especially when you can actually see it when shooting off speed. But then I shoot handheld because of reasons other than 'ease'. I'm sure you can post an example of when a shot would be impossible to get without it, but that has never occurred in my career thus far.

Not judging other people for using it, but it is no substitute for learning the actual technique of how to shoot handheld.

Watch a workshop from a master

 
Yeah, also not using camera on my shoulder and sometimes it's the FS700 sometimes the A7S, almost always situations that are live... sometime I have to hold the camera for a whole 30-40 minute show and things like that... OSS is pretty essential, helps a lot... if I could I would be on a tripod always, unfortunately that is not the case... Really like the Sony emount lenses with OSS for these situations (in which I also use the face recognition most of the time)... I also almost never have time to switch lenses etc, which is why a 24-70 2.8 OSS would be perfect...
 
I picked up a 24-70/2,8 yesterday.

Similar thinking to others - I have a A7Rii, which I use for smaller shoots and stills. It's the stills that really need the quick focusing native lens and i get IBIS for handheld video work in S35 4K mode.

On the FS7, I'll continue using my Canon 24-105 donkey for handheld work. Does the job, and the focal range works for 95% of what I do.

I'll use the 24-70/2.8 for tripod interviews - although I find I'm doing less and less tripod work, as I find it sterile and lifeless.

Final analysis for me at the mo - while the Sony cinema cameras and A7 stills cameras share the same lens mount, there are various gotchas that prevent you sharing the lenses between the two systems effectively.

Image Stabilisation - sorry, Ben S, I don't agree. Since 1987, I've been shooting Sony DXC3000, M7, numerous BetaSP and Digi 2/3", Panasonic P2, Aaton and Arri 16mm, and various recent digital offerings. For me, there's a clear demarcation from when we moved from hefty SD cameras to featherlight HD cameras. This is when the "micro-jitters" started and i don't think it's a shooting technique issue, per se. I think it's a combination of lack of camera system heft/balance and exponentially increasing resolution.

If I damp down my FS7 with V-Locks, tripod plates etc, I've probably got a fighting chance of smoothing out those jitters. But I've deliberately stripped back my camera to minimal guff, so IS rescues me from myself. I won't shoot handheld with my setup without Image Stabilisation - no point, it just looks like ****.

Of course, it all coincides with me getting older, but I'm fitter than I've ever been and I think my technique has improved over time.

Ben.
 
The amount of people I see trying to shoot handheld on an 85mm wide open at f1.4, hand on lens trying to pull manually with zero support or use of the body as an anchor is crazy...

^^ That is absolutely a technique issue.

Again, I'm sure other people have reasons when it would save them, but for me I only shoot handheld when something would benefit from being shot handheld.

Agree about weight, but since the FS5 came out I've seen so many people moaning about the weight of the FS7, which is absurd. If you balance it properly it is a perfect weight for good handheld shooting. Once again I put the blame squarely on the shoulders of weedy camera operators whose beards make them front heavy as opposed to cameras themselves. That said, I'd love an Easyrig :)

EDIT: I'm not dissing IS per se. I'm just saying it's something which should rest on top of proper camera setup and lens choices plus good technique. Not a panacea for not having those.
 
deltoidjohn said:
Obviously... but that was not the question!

And as the OP's question pertains to native glass, perhaps better alternatives to suggest would be E-mount lenses such as the 16-70 f/4?
Click to expand...

I totally misunderstood the question and had to go back and re read it....
must be getting old. So in answer, sure you can use full frame Sony Emount
lenses on a Emount Sony Super 35 motion camera. Just understand the different
FOV between FF and Super 35 as you can't use a speedbooster with native lenses.
I haven't used any of the new full frame G series Sony lenses, but they have a great reputation
.......and a price to match. I wonder how much functionality comes to the Sony motion
cameras by using them. Do you get 'steady shot?' Do you get 'active steady shot?'
(This is a better version of steady shot which is on some Emount lenses but not all.)
Auto focus? Auto Iris? Face tracking? Tap screen to focus? (Last two are FS700 features.)
Programable rack focus? Almost makes me want to rent them just to try them out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top