Sony NEX-FS100 parfocal lens shootout

ShawnLam

ShawnLam

Active member
What are the best zoom lenses for the Sony NEX-FS100?

I tested Canon, Nikon, Sony, Minolta, Sigma, and Tokina lenses to see which zoom lenses were the best on the FS100.


Here is my review with accompanying video.
http://bit.ly/fs100lens
 
tokina 50-135 f/2.8 ?

tokina 50-135 f/2.8 ?

ShawnLam said:
What are the best zoom lenses for the Sony NEX-FS100?

I tested Canon, Nikon, Sony, Minolta, Sigma, and Tokina lenses to see which zoom lenses were the best on the FS100.


Here is my review with accompanying video.
http://bit.ly/fs100lens
Click to expand...
I've heard that the tokina is parfocal and highly regarded...
 
Wow a lot of work.

We agree on one thing .. bargain 35-70 lenses can rock.

Firstly I think it is important when choosing a lens set to emphasise the annoyance factor of mixing Nikon with other lenses due to the direction of focus travel.

Parfocal.

While desirable many shooters only use zoom lenses to reduce the size of thier kit and cut down time expending lens changes
Parfocality is only critical if you must zoom while rolling .. which many shooters see as a shooting style that should have been abaondoned with the mid 70s cop show

As for a smooth zoom ring, while desirable, it is only critical if you zoom while rolling

As for the evaluation of parfocality I would suggest that if you had a shimmable adapter you could have acheived it with some of the lenses that you did not consider parfocal

As shimmable adapters are not widely available such a point is largely theoretical - the collimation process is no doubt so expensive as to only occur when teching up for a shoot of the budget that would use full cine lenses

Also I did not see a consideration of the 17-xx lenses which may be important to those wanting to include a wide POV into thier zoom 'portfolio'

In considering the longer zooms it is imporant to consider the desirability of a lens collar that spreads the mass of the lens between the rod system and the camera mount

FYI I have landed up with..

Nikkor 18 prime
Nikkor 35-70 F3.5 manual zoom (ROCKS, for $100 hard stops, smooth, long travel you name it)
Nikkor 70-200 2.8 G AF zoom (lens collar)

and the 18-200 kit lens for more RNG situations

I might swap out the 35-70 for a (more massive and costly) 28-70 (real aperture, hard stops) or 24-70G (more width, s**tty aperture, no hards stops) at some point in the future
I might also add a 17-55 for wide to medium use

I also scored a nikkor 100-300F5.6 manual for $75 - lovely motion but no collar but great for the $$

IMO

SamMM
 
I've got the Nikon 28-100 mm f2.8. Very versatile but hard to find lens. oh and agree on the focus direction issue - very annoying as im used to canon and the rest of them way of focusing. They should do a native sony e-mount version of it though, with stabilization, and then a wide adaptor, versatility sweetness. I think that would sell.
 
sbrenner said:
I've heard that the tokina is parfocal and highly regarded...
Click to expand...

I know it is tempting to only watch the video and not read the article but have a read - there is a lot more discussion in the article that I could fit in my video.

As for the Tokina ATX-Pro 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 lens, I covered a lot of its story in my article. Unfortunately the Nikon-mount copy I was testing had issues. I have since purchased an Alpha mount copy and included it in a later test here:
Vancouver Video Production Blog - Sony FS100 Wide Angle Zoom lens test.

Unfortunately the lens is really horrible when it comes to flare and ghosting. Probably the worst I have ever tested. So I avoid using it and will probably sell it because as an event and corporate video producer, I can't always control every single light source. I tried using it on a shoot in an auto garage but even though the lights were 30 feet above the floor, they were spilling too much light into the lens, causing massive ghosting. So I had to switch lenses.
 
Thanks @ morgan_moore. It was a lot of work but also a lot of fun learning about the different lenses and seeing how they compared for video work.

Parfocal is not important for every shooter but for the type of work I do, it is, because I need to change focal length (zoom in and out) while filming and I can't have my shot go out of focus with every focal length change. So with that requirement also comes evenly dampened rings. I had not heard of a shimmable adapter but you did a good job of explaining why they aren't relevant anyways ;-)

Also I did not see a consideration of the 17-xx lenses which may be important to those wanting to include a wide POV into thier zoom 'portfolio'
Click to expand...

I discussed briefly in the article how come there were no wide zoom lenses. Originally I had included them in the test but I had problems finding any that were supposed to be parfocal and that I could get my hands-on for the test.

I later bought the new Sony SAL1650 DT lens and found it to be both parfocal and had an evenly dampened zoom ring. Here is my review on that lens:
Vancouver Videographer tests Sony SAL1650 wide zoom lens on Sony FS100
I find I use this wide zoom lens more than a normal zoom lens.

Now what are my next steps?
I'm going to take a second look at the Sony 28-75mm f/2.8 SAM lens to see if I just had a sticky copy. It was parfocal but I didn't include it in my shootout as I had already tested it. And then I might look into a faster f2/8 70 or 80-200mm lens but my beercan is so good and so inexpensive that I'll have a hard time justifyin
 
cant disagree with your personal specs!

Whats the focus like on that sony lens

like the kit lens (terrible)

or like a Canon L (acceptable .. just)

S
 
The SAL1650 Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 manual focus is great.

I can't wait for the Sony LA-EA2 adapter to allow phase detection autofocus (PDAF) on Alpha lenses.

I think when that happens Sony lenses will clearly be a better fit on the FS100 than Nikon lenses. Just so long as there is smoother iris control than there is on the LA-EA1.
 
Indeed. Im mainly nikon because I have a nikon shooting stills background -

If Sony brought out a decent DSLR stills camera (18mp FF, plus 25p vid of some nature) I might consider canning the whole nikon deal

Id have to learn to focus the other way but also I could get an NEX7 and some voigtlander glass to complete a really nice system

S
 
HAHA! crocks with socks! nice!

anyway.. very nice test. thanks so much for putting in the time and work!
 
Thanks for doing the test. Very informative. Unfortunately, the test only makes me not want to use any of those lenses. Originally, I thought about getting a Nikon 17-55mm, but that lens is almost double the price of a SAL-1650. I also have reservations about Nikon after using their 17-35mm with my RED one and finding out that the lens is not parafocal. For a $1600 lens, that's really disappointing. The $500 Tamron 17-50mm I stuck on my 7D appears to be parafocal. Great lens for the price. Right now I am considering getting an FS100 with either the SAL-1650 or Tamron 17-50mm alpha mount lens. What are your thoughts between the two? Also, what is the advantage of the LA-EA2 over the LA-EA1 besides autofocusing? You mentioned a problem with the iris control using the LA-EA1.
 
Rayburn said:
Right now I am considering getting an FS100 with either the SAL-1650 or Tamron 17-50mm alpha mount lens. What are your thoughts between the two? Also, what is the advantage of the LA-EA2 over the LA-EA1 besides autofocusing? You mentioned a problem with the iris control using the LA-EA1.
Click to expand...

I haven't used the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens but Tamron claims it is parfocal. Ken Rockwell says it breathes and in direct sun has green blobs. For the price I'd go with the Sony because of the autofocus ability that the LA-EA2 will allow and the build quality is really nice. I'm told that if the sal1650 wasn't a crop sensor DT lens, it would be a G lens (which for Sony is good but Nikon is bad).

The LA-EA2 allows both autofocus and is supposed to have smoother iris changes (from the body of the camera). On the LA-EA1 with every change one direction, it goes three stops up, two down. So you can't change the iris while filming. But until the new firmware is out I have no way of knowing how either adapter will perform with the FS100. The LA-EA2 has a translucent mirror so you loose a bit of light as well.
 
This may be a dumb question, but can you change the iris manually with the LA-EA1 or LA-EA2 or do you have to use the control on the camera body in order to change the aperture? What I mean is, can you get around the stuttering change in aperture by manually doing it by hand similar to how Nikon adapters work.
 
I have to add that some lens are parfocal only through the electronics. an example of this is my 17-35 4.0 which is parfocal on a canon body but not when mounted on a dumb mount.
 
This may be a dumb question, but can you change the iris manually with the LA-EA1 or LA-EA2 or do you have to use the control on the camera body in order to change the aperture? What I mean is, can you get around the stuttering change in aperture by manually doing it by hand similar to how Nikon adapters work.
Click to expand...
Alpha lenses don't have iris rings on the lens so there are two ways to change the iris:
1) Electronic controls through the body, which the LA-EA1 and LA-EA2 adapters allow.
2) Through a manual ring on the adapter barrel, which some third party adapters allow.


I have to add that some lens are parfocal only through the electronics. an example of this is my 17-35 4.0 which is parfocal on a canon body but not when mounted on a dumb mount.
Click to expand...

This doesn't make sense to me. The mount shouldn't change the parfocal nature of the lens. It only adjusts for a proper flange back distance. Perhaps on a Canon body you are autofocusing and don't realize it. The only real critical way to determine if your lens is truly parfocal is to zoom in, manually focus, then zoom out. Then analyze the footage on an HD monitor. I found using my NLE and zooming in also helped to see if the lens was perfectly parfocal, very close, or not at all. Some lenses should be but the copies I tested went a bit soft at full wide.

Unless the mount is slightly out, which is possible with lower cost mounts. I found that on my FotoDiox adapters, some lenses would have a tight fit and others would have a bit of play. But this was more annoying to me than detrimental to the image quality and focus. I couldn't get the lens to go out of focus by wiggling-it on the mount, which makes sense, and a loose fit only rotates the lens slightly, but it doesn't change the flange back distance unless the play is to and fro (mine was only rotational).
 
I own the Sony NEX-FS100 and I want to buy a wide angle lens for it. I was originally going to get the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 For Sony Alpha along with the LA-EA2 Adapter.

Then I started reading:

May need firmware update for auto focus / auto iris to work properly, translucent mirror loses some light, etc...

Since most wide angle lenses don't need auto-focus to work and I hate using auto iris anyway, why not just get a wide angle lens with manual focus and manual iris on the lens itself?

That would be fine with me.

Problem with the Tokina is I can't adjust the iris manually from the lens. At least not with the Sony alpha mount version.

So which wide angle lens do you recommend for the Sony NEX-FS100 that has both manual focus and manual aperture control from the lens itself? Which e-mount adapter should I get for it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top