What about the Sony PLs?

There's no free lunch or perfect lens set up for every need. I went the Nikon route . Set of Zeiss ZF cine mods and the 11-16 Tokina , 17-35, 28-70 , 80-200 and even an 18-200 Nikon for run & gun. I'm happy with that so far but i do alot of industrial video and docs and light and fast is what its about. I can carry 3 spare zooms in a bag over my shoulder and be ready for anything quickly and the Nikons are great lenses. I often also carry just the 85mm 1.4 Zeiss and sometimes the 50mm for when I need the speed for very low light more commonly if I'm shooting an interview in a small space and want the low DOF.
However I'm wary of when I will get work that will require meticulous focus pulling. I have seen already that the throw on the Nikon's is very short and imprecise. For some jobs I will no doubt rent PL's but those haven't happened yet. I set the back focus on my F3 for my MTF and all my Nikon's match but the one test I've done (very Quickly) switching to a PL 18-85 didn't seem correctly back focused. I'm hoping I was wrong and need to go to a shop with a bunch of PL's and find out whether I can switch back and forth seamlessly. Still have my fingers crossed but the first test was not encouraging.

My buddy went a much more expensive route and bought a set of older PL zeiss standard speeds (f2) and an 18-85. For my needs they wouldn't work. The 18-85 would generally be an albatross and I make great use of the 1.4 primes. I've held on to a couple of fast Nikon primes (35mm f1.4 and 105 f1.8) even though they aren't at their best wide open just to have the speed when needed and I have used the 35 a few times (audience at concerts). When Zeiss finally sells a 35mm 1.4 ZF I'll probably buy it. Timur's Cooke 2.8 primes would be useless on most of my jobs. But for some work and some stuff I aspire to they might be perfect.

If I had the dough to get a set of PL primes, Sony primes, or the big PL zooms. I would augment it with the Nikon zooms no matter what , as they are so versatile and small.

Oh yeah the title of this was what about the Sony PL's - Jesus for me those things are so damn big I don't have room to carry them around. I need to be compact and quick. I can carry 5 zooms or 7 primes in a case that would only carry 3 Sony lenses.

Lenny Levy
 
Last edited:
Lenny, did not Zeiss release their fast 35mm ZF.2 a couple of months ago? I seem to recall seeing it as available at B & H sometime early July.
 
Lloyd is quite an accomplished photographer and his reviews are very good...worth the price of admission.

He also leads tours of Yosemite and Sierras.

I agree ... contrast on the cabin is wonderful. Classic Zeiss.

Bob
 
Please, don't shoot the messenger but here is another cheap option for Nikon mount:
Samyang 35/1.4, 85/1.4 and recently introduced 24/1.4 (!!!)...
These are all manual focus, matte box friendly aspherical lenses with tons of great reviews (for first two at least). 35/1.4 comes in "DSLR video" version (smooth aperture ring) as well.
I handled 85/1.4 in a local store (under another name: Rokinon) and it feels really nice and solid... Smooth focusing and finish...
I am seriously considering getting some of these lenses as they would cost less than so called "Birger EOS mount"....
 
Thanks for the tip guys, Has anyone compared the Zeiss f1.4 with the F2.? I might want to upgrade now. I like the idea of having 1.4 lenses.

Would love to see that Samyung 24mm f1.4 . Has anyone seen that reviewed yet. Is it even out yet? Their 8mm looks pretty interesting
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
Sony PL lenses should fit into any PL mount camera. They could not name it PL mount if it weren't PL mount. I've used the Sony lenses on the F3, and I've also used my PL primes on the F3, as well as many zooms, including two Red zooms, 18-50 and 50-150. They all fit just as they should.


And anyone who invests in a three lens set must either do very repetitive work for a living or is handicapping themselves heavily. Sony needs to add more primes to the set. They owe it to the people who bought the first three... despite however disappointing those were. The Sony PL's are an expensive way for someone to take the training wheels off and have a first go at using something like professional PL lenses.
Click to expand...

Except they don't have witness marks.... so what's the poo pooing point?
 
TimurCivan said:
Except they don't have witness marks.... so what's the poo pooing point?
Click to expand...

falling_from_bike.jpg

Training wheels off too soon. My original review of these lenses about 8 months ago, resulted in my opinion that if in a position of buying these lenses, I'd rather invest in a top notch photography lens set, such as Lieca-M's (if there's a mount option) or especially ZF's. Top shelf photography lenses might be the better choice until one can afford to purchase a more functional PL lens set. The Sony PL optics are decent, but the housing will likely melt if you leave it in a hot car (jk) and there are no witness marks (not kidding). So being really big, the barrel girth does not help the 1st AC at all. And did I mention there are only three focal lengths?

However, with that said, I've never done a color match test with the Sony PL's. I wonder if they color match better than ZF's do. If not, that's another tough point to loose on. If so, that is really a benefit, however there are only three lenses, so you'd still have some issues with how limited you are with lens length.
 
Last edited:
FWIW I tested them in projection and on MTF machine as well as "touch and feel" session on camera. We put the 35 against the 40 Master prime. They held their own.
Pretty spectacular IMO. I also liked the lightness and the fit and finish. The one nice thing I noticed about the focus control is cam design that allows for a very progressive footage mark spacing. The far footage marks are not cramped together.
As for the plastic I tend to embrace modern technologies rather than diss them on principal. Aren't the camera bodies made out of plastic?
Weren't the same guys complaining about the same thing when the first pro "plastic" cameras appeared? Get over it people- you are in a hi-tech industry.
No they are not MPs and the FL selection is very limited-but the ones available are just fine....
 
Good to see a bit of balance and practicality move back into the discussion... It's fine to talk about perfect world scenarios or pushing someone towards a set of Panchros but when the person who has his wallet open making the purchase, things tend to be looked at a bit differently and everyone, I mean everyone, is on a different trajectory in this business and one scenario, as rational as it may seem to you, may very well be inappropriate for the person slapping down the dough.

Douglas, if you do decide to go for the Sony PL's and "witness marks" become critical to you, as standard practice is to use chart tape on lenses to add more increments on the focusing bezel. A roll of the tape costs under $7.00 and comes in a variety of widths. The most useful to you will most likely be a 1/4" to 3/16". Here's a link.

Thinking back to my own decision, initially I was all but set on getting a set of cinevized Zeiss ZF.2s but talked to a few other seasoned operators who were largely ENG/doc shooters who were either moving over to an F3 or adding it to the stable. A few of them decided on the Sony PLs for rentability. Most of them were planning to move upto more "accepted" lenses over time but felt they would be able to rent out their camera package more readily with the Sony PLs than a set of cinevized SLR lenses regardless of their quality. Your market may be different. This as well as my intent to move a fleshed out set CP.2s pushed me towards the Sony's. If I bought the cinevized ZF.2s I would have trouble letting go of them so the equity would be tied into the ZF's whereas the Sony's I would be upgrading. Also you would be tempted to get 4 or probably 5 of the ZF.2s. Once they are cinevized I believe the price tag is north of $8000. for 5 lenses. Have to check my spreadsheet when I get back to the office.

Douglas I hope you have read the threads on this subject earlier in the year. There is a lot of valuable information in them.
 
Last edited:
I think using acetone to test the housing of a lens is pretty non-scientific. LOL

I still don't see what advantage these $5k lenses offer over a good set of SLR lenses. I'd rather put that money towards a RED zoom.

P.S. On the other hand I got my MTF adapter last week and am quite upset with it since I can't get a single SLR lens to mount to it.
 
Andrew Stone said:
Good to see a bit of balance and practicality move back into the discussion... It's fine to talk about perfect world scenarios or pushing someone towards a set of Panchros but when the person who has his wallet open making the purchase, things tend to be looked at a bit differently and everyone, I mean everyone, is on a different trajectory in this business and one scenario, as rational as it may seem to you, may very well be inappropriate for the person slapping down the dough.

Douglas, if you do decide to go for the Sony PL's and "witness marks" become critical to you, as standard practice is to use chart tape on lenses to add more increments on the focusing bezel. A roll of the tape costs under $7.00 and comes in a variety of widths. The most useful to you will most likely be a 1/4" to 3/16". Here's a link.

Thinking back to my own decision, initially I was all but set on getting a set of cinevized Zeiss ZF.2s but talked to a few other seasoned operators who were largely ENG/doc shooters who were either moving over to an F3 or adding it to the stable. A few of them decided on the Sony PLs for rentability. Most of them were planning to move upto more "accepted" lenses over time but felt they would be able to rent out their camera package more readily with the Sony PLs than a set of cinevized SLR lenses regardless of their quality. Your market may be different. This as well as my intent to move a fleshed out set CP.2s pushed me towards the Sony's. If I bought the cinevized ZF.2s I would have trouble letting go of them so the equity would be tied into the ZF's whereas the Sony's I would be upgrading. Also you would be tempted to get 4 or probably 5 of the ZF.2s. Once they are cinevized I believe the price tag is north of $8000. for 5 lenses. Have to check my spreadsheet when I get back to the office.

Douglas I hope you have read the threads on this subject earlier in the year. There is a lot of valuable information in them.
Click to expand...
Thanks Andrew
So far the odds are in favor of Sony's PL. Sure is not perfect, but the price is. Even tho the marking are not the best at least it is easier than with still lenses. You also have electronic markings on the LCD with DOF graphically shown.
Eventually I'll start adding better lenses for the length that I may need until I start overlapping them.
I could even sell the F3 package after I finish production.:cheesy:
 
starcentral said:
I still don't see what advantage these $5k lenses offer over a good set of SLR lenses. I'd rather put that money towards a RED zoom.
Click to expand...

That's what I did.

Got the RPZ 17-50mm and love it.

Of course I came across a set of Duclos modded ZF.1s, so I kind of have the best of both worlds.
 
starcentral said:
I think using acetone to test the housing of a lens is pretty non-scientific. LOL
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call the plastic melting from exposure to acetone a test either. While taking the lens apart, I was using acetone to loosen the glue around the screw heads and noticed the melting plastic as a result. FWIW, I don't go around rubbing acetone on lenses to evaluate their quality. ;)

Sure the lenses perform fine, no better or worse than a Canon or Nikon zoom, but the fact that it was so susceptible to dust and dirt and the fact that Sony said to throw it away instead of service it kinda rubbed me the wrong way. If you're looking for a nice budget set of primes, these will get the job done.
 
Matthew, any less breathing than SLR lenses or about the same? To me that is the huge distinction if I'm paying over $1500 per lens. Otherwise it's Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Tokina for me... I've got use to focus pulling and marking my barrel, doens't bother me at all...
 
Matthew Duclos said:
I wouldn't call the plastic melting from exposure to acetone a test either. While taking the lens apart, I was using acetone to loosen the glue around the screw heads and noticed the melting plastic as a result. FWIW, I don't go around rubbing acetone on lenses to evaluate their quality. ;)

Sure the lenses perform fine, no better or worse than a Canon or Nikon zoom, but the fact that it was so susceptible to dust and dirt and the fact that Sony said to throw it away instead of service it kinda rubbed me the wrong way. If you're looking for a nice budget set of primes, these will get the job done.
Click to expand...

Glad to see you on the boards Matthew! Your products and knowledge are very well respected! Happy to see you here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top