GH2 Waiting on this lens.

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jamesmallonuk

Well-known member
I still think the m4/3 system is lacking a real great piece of glass for a fast stabilized zoom. I had high hopes for the 12-35mm but so far the footage seems kind of dull, doesn't have that wow factor of the leica 14-50mm. (I find it too big for the GH cameras and am looking to use it also for the black magic pocket)


So I'm hopeful for this lens to give us a zoom with a bit of character that can be used run and gun. I'm wondering why it was announced some months back but we still having seen it. Is this normal for lens?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/918951-REG/tamron_14_150mm_f_3_5_5_8_di_iii.html
 
Me thinks they are too close to the new pany 14-140. What I'd like to see is a 17-50 f2.8 equivalent in m43 i.e a 14-35 f2.8 from tamron.
 
I think 3.5 is fine especially for run and gun. The whole shallow dof to achieve film look has been overdone. What I do however want is a lens that has character and softer than the panasonics without using a SLR magic porn lens.
 
The Lumix 12-35 "seems kind of dull" so you want a "softer" lens. One that has "character". Very confusing. Can you define lens "character"?
 
I use Panasonic lenses along side of Nikon lenses... if I don't have time to dial back any in camera sharpness with the Panasonic lenses, I just soften them just slightly in post... in order to match the older Nikons...

I like the 12-35... it's nice and sharp when you need it, and you can always dial it back in camera or post...
 
awelgraven said:
I use Panasonic lenses along side of Nikon lenses... if I don't have time to dial back any in camera sharpness with the Panasonic lenses, I just soften them just slightly in post... in order to match the older Nikons...

I like the 12-35... it's nice and sharp when you need it, and you can always dial it back in camera or post...
Click to expand...


Ai think a better option before any post is to first get the imaged filtered on camera. What do you mean softening in post? That sou da like Gaussian blur which makes everything look again like 80's porn.
 
dan.carter said:
The Lumix 12-35 "seems kind of dull" so you want a "softer" lens. One that has "character". Very confusing. Can you define lens "character"?
Click to expand...


There is a middle ground....Between Lumix oversharp and the character lenses of SLR Magic.

Leica. Example 14-50mm Leica four thirds...awesome optics, has some practical flaws however and is a little big for the GH2 and expensive.

Olympus has a lot of nice m4/3 lenses but no stabilized zooms.



This is no news to anyone by the way....
 
I wouldn't get you hopes up on that Tamron offering a 'wow factor'. Going by the specs, there shouldn't be anything all that special about it.
 
vtwiz said:
I wouldn't get you hopes up on that Tamron offering a 'wow factor'. Going by the specs, there shouldn't be anything all that special about it.
Click to expand...


maybe not wow but so far I haven't not liked any zoom or even prime that's not Lumix. The new sigmas looks nice and if the Tamrons can be half as good as say their full size lenses i expect it to be what I'm looking for. The wow factor is that it's go stabilisation and isn't a Lumix quite honestly.
 
The reason I dismiss the SLR Magic is after a short love affair with the lenses. I came to the conclusion that outside of Vimeo video of the month people really don't want to see extreme shallow depth of field and soft images. I blame the 35mm adapters that got everyone thinking film look has to be soft. I challenge you to put any of your favourite movies on now and see if they are soft. Cinematic usually means sharp images. I think we all know now cinematic or filmic really is about composition, lighting, dynamic range, color science, lenses. I'm just not convinced anymore it means soft and shallow IMHO.
 
@Jamesmallonuk...good point... it seems as if the color/DOF of the 5D MK III achieves closer to hollywood than GH3...but the sharpness/density of pixelation of the GH3 is closer to hollywood....for those of us who can't spend more than 5D or GH3...how do we choose between the two?
 
I'm not understanding here. You say you want a sharp, stabilized zoom lens........ as far as stabilized zoom lenses are concerned you wont get much better than the 12-35 2.8. Use that lens and learn how to grade to get the 'wow' factor.
 
JasonMillard81 said:
@Jamesmallonuk...good point... it seems as if the color/DOF of the 5D MK III achieves closer to hollywood than GH3...but the sharpness/density of pixelation of the GH3 is closer to hollywood....for those of us who can't spend more than 5D or GH3...how do we choose between the two?
Click to expand...


Im not sure if your being sarcastic but assuming your not, here's your answer, and I was talking about glass not cameras.

http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/uk/products/blackmagicpocketcinemacamera

Amd amazingly you will save money enough on the GH3 to buy some reasonably cheap glass.
 
Last edited:
vtwiz said:
I'm not understanding here. You say you want a sharp, stabilized zoom lens........ as far as stabilized zoom lenses are concerned you wont get much better than the 12-35 2.8. Use that lens and learn how to grade to get the 'wow' factor.
Click to expand...


I didn't say its not a competent lens. I said its a dull image. In many ways its a victim of modern development that tries to eliminate any character with coatings to remove flare etc. like I said I'm not saying anything a million people have said about the lumix lenses ie too sharp, clinical, video looking. At least try to get my point, I'm not the first to say this, your acting like I'm the only person who recognised that you often want to add non Panasonic lenses to get a pleasing look. A million m4/3 adapters agree with me.
 
The limiting factor for most M43 zoom offerings is their variable minimum aperture. Shooting with a variable 3.5-5.6 aperture (particularly for run n gun) limits you to an f5.6 if you want to maintain usable zoom within the shot. Not an option for me.
 
JasonMillard81 said:
it seems as if the color/DOF of the 5D MK III achieves closer to hollywood than GH3
Click to expand...

...What in the world are you talking about ?

Just like the thread you started in the Canon Full Frame forum, I am going to ask you to define what you mean by "achieves closer to hollywood" because this makes absolutely NO sense to me.

Today the majority of Hollywood movies are shot with the Super35 format, which is much closer to the Micro 4/3 size than the odd-ball Full Frame 35mm Still Photo format, that was used for only a few Vista-vision films made by Hollywood production companies.

The Full Frame 35mm Still Photo format has next to nothing in common with Hollywood movies, especially when you consider that most films are shot with a DOF that closer matches the DOF found on Micro 4/3 format cameras than the ultra shallow DOF of the 35mm Still Photo format.

I've also pointed out that several feature films have been shot over the past year using the Panasonic GH2 camera, with the most current one being Shane Carruth's "Upstream Color", and it looks like a well shot Hollywood feature film.

So what exactly are you talking about?
 
jamesmallonuk said:
Ai think a better option before any post is to first get the imaged filtered on camera. What do you mean softening in post? That sou da like Gaussian blur which makes everything look again like 80's porn.
Click to expand...

Well, the option I go for 98% of the time is turning down sharpness in camera. But if i'm running and gunning and don't have time for that, I can add just a little bit of diffusion in post, and I feel that helps match my Nikons with my panasonic lenses. Your mileage could vary. It might not be the best way of doing it, but I can get it to match pretty closely, in my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top