what are the best quality M4/3 lenses available for the AF100 Camera?

Yeah, I really would like those CP.2's to get no breathing and lenses that are all the same physical size, but I can't justify the money right now when the ZF's are the same optical image.
 
Choosing a lens.


This AF100 camera is an absolute conundrum.

It is built (and supplied) as a lensless camera but provides an interchangeable lens mount. ( in a specific mount ie. M4/3)

It is built as budget camera and saves its manufacturers premium codecs for its premium models.

The lenses that work best (optimally) on this camera are premium cine style lenses (PL) that utilise very expensive adapter mounts (if its possible to collimate them.)

The camera offer auto focus , face detect , functions etc... mostly unuseable with most lenses aaialble and likely to be used with it currently.

There appears to be no cine style lenses that work with the stock mount without adapters ( which of course do not work with the functions of the camera)

Most (or all) still lenses that use adapters make no use of the electronics of the lens or the adapters. ( May as well guess at what f-stop you are shooting! How else do you tell)

No adapters make use of the electronics in the lenses currently available. The ones that do are not really premium lenses and certainly not cine style.

So ...

We have a budget camera that works best with manual , very expensive cine style lenses that require expensive adapters ..or ancient still prime lenses (manual everything) on in-expensive adapters ....and utilise budget codecs (compared to Panny topshelf cams) .

Zoom lenses are even more of a conundrum.



Go figure.
 
Shooter said:
There appears to be no cine style lenses that work with the stock mount without adapters
Click to expand...

That is wrong. There is the Zeiss CP.2's, mentioned above, with m4/3 mount, that were supposed to be out 4th quarter 2010, so they should be out very soon. Has anyone heard a new date yet?
 
Mike@AF said:
That is wrong. There is the Zeiss CP.2's, mentioned above, with m4/3 mount, that were supposed to be out 4th quarter 2010, so they should be out very soon. Has anyone heard a new date yet?
Click to expand...

But how much would this run? How could buying a brand new set of CP2's with a native 4/3 mount be better than a used set of cinema primes+PL adaptor like the hot rod one?
 
The CP.2's have an integral interchangeable mount system, PL lenses don't. You can get the CP.2's in PL mount, or m43 mount, or Canon mount, or Nikon mount -- and you're not reallly committed to any of those, because you can always exchange the mount for one of the other mounts. The CP.2's have two big advantages over any PL set -- they cover the full frame sensor of an Epic FF or Canon 5D, and they can be mounted on DSLR cameras like the 5D/7D etc. without having to modify the camera body. So, they represent a "modular" and "future-proof" approach.

As to whether that makes it "better than a used PL set", that's up to the individual buyer to determine. I got the CP.1's (which are PL-only) because I really couldn't care less about ever using them on a mirror-box DSLR, and I have other PL-mount cameras, so even though it's interesting that you can get CP.2's with a direct m43 mount, that wasn't enough to make it the better choice for my needs. Yours may vary. I was able to pick mine up fairly inexpensively because a rental house was selling them, because the demand was for 5D's with CP.2's at the time. For the rental house, that set made more sense.
 
Jon Furtado said:
But how much would this run? How could buying a brand new set of CP2's with a native 4/3 mount be better than a used set of cinema primes+PL adaptor like the hot rod one?
Click to expand...

That's not the point. He's asking for lenses that don't need an adapter. Also, the CP.2's are considered cinema lenses and they are available with a PL mount as well.
 
We have a budget camera that works best with manual , very expensive cine style lenses that require expensive adapters ..or ancient still prime lenses (manual everything) on in-expensive adapters ....and utilise budget codecs (compared to Panny topshelf cams) .

Zoom lenses are even more of a conundrum.
Click to expand...

Very well stated, and exactly what I've been thinking. My primary reason for looking at the AF100 is that I have a nice collection of pristine Leica R lenses, including an Angenieux 45-90 f2.8, and with an adapter (sorry, contrary to the thread) I can finally use all of them on a video camera. Since I've shot film most of my life it doesn't bother me that electronic lens functions won't exist. I have no problem with glancing at the lens barrel occasionally. I've ordered my camera for late Feb/early March with the Leica R adapter and the 14-140 (although I'm considering the Olympus 14-35 instead after some of Barry's comments).

I'm waiting those 2 months to give me time to bail out and, to be honest, the posts on this banding issue are causing me to look around for the bucket.
 
BTW, The Metabones Leica adapter is excellent. I've been using it with my R Leica lenses without any issues.

Mac said:
Very well stated, and exactly what I've been thinking. My primary reason for looking at the AF100 is that I have a nice collection of pristine Leica R lenses, including an Angenieux 45-90 f2.8, and with an adapter (sorry, contrary to the thread) I can finally use all of them on a video camera. Since I've shot film most of my life it doesn't bother me that electronic lens functions won't exist. I have no problem with glancing at the lens barrel occasionally. I've ordered my camera for late Feb/early March with the Leica R adapter and the 14-140 (although I'm considering the Olympus 14-35 instead after some of Barry's comments).

I'm waiting those 2 months to give me time to bail out and, to be honest, the posts on this banding issue are causing me to look around for the bucket.
Click to expand...
 
For me, AF100 was the perfect upgrade from the HVX200. I used a cumbersome 35mm adapter with the flip which made the rig super heavy and awkward in tight spots. Panasonic always claimed that shooters like me were their target market, and I feel they have met those expectations, and then some. As a Nikon shooter as well, it made even more sense to me to stick with the same glass for the AF100. I agree that if you feel photography lenses do not meet your needs, it's going to be a huge investment in lenses. Looks like Panasonic did the logical thing and get the camera out there and have people rent higher end glass or use existing photo lenses. Already other companies are finally designing lenses for m4/3. Panasonic are rumoured to have a 12-50mm 2.5-3.3 HD lens soon too. I think the best is still to come!
 
Why the adapter hate? They are so cheap you can leave them on the lenses and forget they're even there. And you get the flexibility to buy lenses that will serve you on other non 4/3 cameras. As for manual lenses not communicating their f-stop and having no auto-focus- well duh that's what you get a camera like this for. You want a full auto focus auto-f-stop zoom, get any one of the dozens of nice fixed lens cameras out there. This camera is precisely aimed at folks who want full manual control of their images and an array of lens choices. If that's not what you're after don't get this camera.

Noah
 
bgundu: I too have an HVX that I've used with an M2 adapter to shoot mainly commercials (I have a 500 for documentaries, my primary function). I've used Nikon lenses because I wasn't able to find an adapter for the Rs. I also was/am excited about a more professional setup AND the ability to use my Leica lenses.

However, the "conundrum" that shooter refers to is that we have a "professional" camera that, with adapters, allows us to use a wide variety of lenses and an increased chip size for DOF and increased resolution - BUT with a codec that, because (supposedly, I don't know but have read here and elsewhere) it only offers 8 bit out, causes the increased resolution to exacerbate the banding that is masked in lower resolutions. I have no problem dialing down the detail or whatever, but I don't want to have to do it in post - and it is ironic.
 
Also, I don't think the original intent of this post was "adapter hate". I think the point was, what professional lenses are out there, off the shelf, that are specifically designed for this mount?.. that's a legitimate question.
 
Absolutely not an issue of "Adapter Hate".

We all acknowledge that this great camera works spectacularly with MANUAL LENSES and adapters (Nikon, Zeiss, PLs , Canons etc)

I was researching lenses prompted by someone on this Forum, and constantly ran into the AUTOMATIC LENS issue. Namely ...how do you set an aperture via the adapter and know what aperture you have set. eg Tamron 17-50mm.

That prompted me to find what good quality glass was available (and recommeded) in native M4/3 which assumedly, utilises the full interface andf functioning of the M4/3 Mount as fited to the AF100.

I also belive that lens manufacturers will produce (are producing) some quality lenses for M4/3. That will be a game changing moment for the AF100 and its successors.
 
In the process, though, you have articulated what has been bothering me ever since I read the specs on this camera. There are so many paradoxical concepts lumped together to make this box that it astounds me more people aren't as confused by it as I am.

As I say, I've ordered one - and will probably follow through with the purchase. But I am disappointed that the 8 bit issue will probably cause this camera to become obsolete quickly. (The original preproduction hopes were 10 bit out).
 
Mac said:
In the process, though, you have articulated what has been bothering me ever since I read the specs on this camera. There are so many paradoxical concepts lumped together to make this box that it astounds me more people aren't as confused by it as I am.

As I say, I've ordered one - and will probably follow through with the purchase. But I am disappointed that the 8 bit issue will probably cause this camera to become obsolete quickly. (The original preproduction hopes were 10 bit out).
Click to expand...

You wont be dissapointed by the camera.

I also am certain they will "upgrade this camera" leaving us early adopters a little miffed..but I can live with that by making this one pay for it self quickly.
 
Adapter hater! lol
Click to expand...

There is a growing tendency on these forums to negatively accuse anyone who is questioning the design or use of equipment. In my case, I love the look from Panasonic cameras - had a DVX, currently have a 200 and a 500. But brand loyalty shouldn't be blind. I criticized the 500 from day one - the finder, the weight for a tapeless camera, the (original) 5600 preset, the balance, etc. That's the function of these forums - so things improve.

My 500 is now considered obsolete - sure I've paid for it, but I like it - "I've grown accustomed to it's look" and don't really want to move on, so I will keep it and move "sideways" instead, to something like the AF100. Planned obsolescence may be a great marketing strategy, but it sucks when you're the one chasing the technology.

I do hope that questions like these will urge the development of more lens systems for this new (to video production) mount.
 
Last edited:
Sometimes if You have invested $30,000 or more in PL mount primes it is cheaper to buy camera with larger sensor which will benefit from that.

<<I do hope that questions like these will urge the development of more lens systems for this new (to video production) mount.>>
Me too.
 
Sometimes if You have invested $30,000 or more in PL mount primes
Click to expand...

You'd have to be a rental house or a hard-working DP to make that work... In my case, I make commercials to keep the doors open and make documentaries for pleasure. Docs don't pay enough to warrant owning big buck primes, so, in the case of the AF100, people like me have to troll the bargain basements - and I have some very nice Leicaflex lenses that I've had since Kodachrome was king.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top