FS7: What is your best lens with your FS7
- Thread starter duol1972
- Start date
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
I use lots of different lenses depending on what I'm shooting. Each wouldn't be ideal for the situations another would shine in.
For the wide end of things I really like the Sigma 18-35 F1.8. Its a fantastic lens. Its fast, sharp wide open and has a decent focus ring. Downsides are the limited range but I use it like a variable prime because its like 3 primes in one 18,24,35.
For the wide end of things I really like the Sigma 18-35 F1.8. Its a fantastic lens. Its fast, sharp wide open and has a decent focus ring. Downsides are the limited range but I use it like a variable prime because its like 3 primes in one 18,24,35.
olof
DVXuser Sponsor
I have been using the 24-70 f4 Sony FF. It is very light sharp and the IS works very well. Instantaneous AF works very well with the FS7. And this lens is great with the A7s as well. Great single lens for compact R&G.
Negatives are, Iris is not smooth with current FW, but workable. Focus ring is unpredictable and not usable with FF IMHO. Extends when zooming in.
////////////////////
I also have the Silver 18-200 from the FS700, and it works very well for HD, a bit soft for UHD. But this is a perfect R&G in HD and the range is fantastic. For some jobs this would be my one lens choice. The IS is fantastic on this lens, the best I have ever seen.
Negatives, not great for 4K. Extends when zooming in.
////////////////////
Canon 70-200 f2.8 is simply a fantastic lens as are my other L's.
So my answer is really, different jobs different lenses.
Shooting for news I would always take the 18-200.
Interviews Canon fast zooms and primes.
Macro and product shots Canon 100 f2.8 macro.
I also have the 28-135 coming, that may turn out to be very useful interview lens. And a good all around medium zoom lens.
There is no one perfect lens for every situation IMHO.
Negatives are, Iris is not smooth with current FW, but workable. Focus ring is unpredictable and not usable with FF IMHO. Extends when zooming in.
////////////////////
I also have the Silver 18-200 from the FS700, and it works very well for HD, a bit soft for UHD. But this is a perfect R&G in HD and the range is fantastic. For some jobs this would be my one lens choice. The IS is fantastic on this lens, the best I have ever seen.
Negatives, not great for 4K. Extends when zooming in.
////////////////////
Canon 70-200 f2.8 is simply a fantastic lens as are my other L's.
So my answer is really, different jobs different lenses.
Shooting for news I would always take the 18-200.
Interviews Canon fast zooms and primes.
Macro and product shots Canon 100 f2.8 macro.
I also have the 28-135 coming, that may turn out to be very useful interview lens. And a good all around medium zoom lens.
There is no one perfect lens for every situation IMHO.
Hi RatLabProductions and thank you,
Do you use the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 with a Sony mount or with a metabones speedbooster?
Does anyone has tested the Nikon 14-24 f:2.8 with the FS7 ? Or the 24-70 f:2.8?
I own the Nikon 70-200 f:2.8, the 50 f:1.4D and the 35 f:2D, how these lenses work with the FS7?
Do you use the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 with a Sony mount or with a metabones speedbooster?
Does anyone has tested the Nikon 14-24 f:2.8 with the FS7 ? Or the 24-70 f:2.8?
I own the Nikon 70-200 f:2.8, the 50 f:1.4D and the 35 f:2D, how these lenses work with the FS7?
They should work fine with the metabones speedbooster or regular adapter.
AndreyBlanco
Active member
If you use the 18-35mm with speedboster you will see lot of vignette from around 18-25mm is better to use it without speedboster
for Run and gun, doc, events, etc a good lense is the Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 VC + Speedboster
Side by side with Sigma 18-35mm (sigma without SB) They look the same, Big Plus for the Tamrom is gives you Stabilization and about +20mm extra range
for Run and gun, doc, events, etc a good lense is the Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 VC + Speedboster
Side by side with Sigma 18-35mm (sigma without SB) They look the same, Big Plus for the Tamrom is gives you Stabilization and about +20mm extra range
Liam Hall
Veteran
My three most used lenses over the past couple of months with the FS7 are the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS, Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 and Canon 35mm F/1.4 all with the Speedbooster Ultra. This camera really excels with a short prime and it doesn't need to be an expensive top of the range one.
planetweckesser
Member
Has anyone tried the Sony 18-200 on the FS7 - going out today to test it - if it is too soft for 4K I'll probably return it. I also have the kit lens and the Sigma 18-35 but wanted something with 10-11 X zoom.
Lenilenapi
Carbonite Member
I currently am comparing the Sony 18-200 SELP against a Tamron 16-300 which Alister Chapman recommends. Initial impression is that i prefer the Tamron. Same Fstop but the Tamron has a normal focusing ring. The Sony lenses are maddening. You lose autofocus but that's not so great on this camera anyway. Tamron EF version has IS but won't work with metabones adapter ( not mark IV anyway) . Does work with the Commlite. You could get the Sony A mt but then you lose IS. The reach is fantastic. IQ - dunno yet - probably similar.
Babu - do you use the 18-105 with the lens distortion on Auto, to correct the wide pin cushioning in that lens. If so be careful because in CINE EI it puts you in all LUTS ON ( including recording the LIUT) or no LUT at all. That's one reason i sent it back and went to the Canon. Also hate the manual focusing.
Babu - do you use the 18-105 with the lens distortion on Auto, to correct the wide pin cushioning in that lens. If so be careful because in CINE EI it puts you in all LUTS ON ( including recording the LIUT) or no LUT at all. That's one reason i sent it back and went to the Canon. Also hate the manual focusing.
Thank you for your replies. I have to buy a wide angle zoom lens, do you advise me the sigma 18-35mm or the Tamron 24-70mm (or an another lens ?) if I mount it with a metabones speedbooster ultra Nikon G to E-mount ?
Many of you said that the sigma 18-35 is a good lens but does it have a lot of vignette with the speedbooster or not ? If I take it with a sony mount, it will be a 25-48mm (crop factor x 1,39), no ?
I'm going to use the FS7 on two documentary this year and I would like to have a good wide range zoom to complete my Nikon 70-200 f:2.8 !
Many of you said that the sigma 18-35 is a good lens but does it have a lot of vignette with the speedbooster or not ? If I take it with a sony mount, it will be a 25-48mm (crop factor x 1,39), no ?
I'm going to use the FS7 on two documentary this year and I would like to have a good wide range zoom to complete my Nikon 70-200 f:2.8 !
alaskacameradude
Veteran
The 18-35 is a APSC/Super 35 lens. So, it doesn't work throughout the zoom range with a speedbooster which is designed
to give you close to a Full Frame field of view. But it does work with no vignetting with a normal smart adapter throughout the zoom range.
So really it depends what you want/are used to working with. I don't deal with any of the 'crop factor' stuff because I am used to
working with cinema cameras and what a lens looks like on a Super 35 chip so I don't worry about 'converting' or 'crop factor'.
An 18-35 is an 18-35. If anything, I would go the other way and say a 24-70 'would look like a 17-50 mm' if it was used with
a speedbooster.
Lenilenapi
Carbonite Member
Had a disappointing series of tests today. Even though I had a second 16-300 Tamron which worked on my still camera, I had trouble getting the aperture to respond properly . It didn't work at all on a metabones MkIV and was just dicey on a Commlite. It didn't respond quickly and often very erratically. I like the lens unfortunately but it doesn't seem to work on the FS7. Also seems to slowly lose stop as you zoom in which is a drag for me. If someone else had better luck please let me know. Alister Chapman said he uses it with Commlite but so far I can't and I haven't heard from him. i may be stuck with the 18-200 SELP for exterior run & gun. Its not terrible and there are ways to make it work , but just a simple rack focus is tough as nails.
I also had trouble with a Sigma 18-35. Didn't work at all on the MkIV but was OK on the Commlite. Oddly I often had to turn the camera on and off to keep it working. However it is a beautiful very sharp lens even compared to my Zeiss ZF primes. It also has less longitudinal (correction: lateral) Chromatic aberration (purple green fringing) then the Zeiss. Axial CA is the dirty secret of all Still lenses and i'm surprised it isn't discussed more on lens tests. maybe because still guys can photoshop it out. Many highly touted lenses like the Zeiss ZF, ZE 35mm 1.4 can be horrendous around high contrast elements at wide apertures. Some of the Rokinons are also terrible. When i opened my zeiss 35 to test it the bubble wrap on the table was completely flashing green and magenta - horrendous . It wasn't a bad lens as I tested another. Buyer beware!
the negative on my 18-35 was that the focus ring got sticky when I moved it slowly. Reviesw on the web say its very smooth so maybe I had a bad one - Any other reports on that? I may just send it back for another. Thank you to the B&H lending library.
Tamron 24-70 - quite sharp ( sharper than 24-105 canon), quite nice - par focal enough (Sigma 24-105 was wildly unparfocal) - Nds Commlite again - no Mark IV which makes me wonder about a speed booster which is part of the appeal.
Its the only 24-70 with Image stabilization. Nice lens - focuses like a nikon though.
Oh yeah I checked speed booster ultra with my Zeiss primes. It is softer in the corners but not terrible.
duo1972 - I don't want to be disrespectful but I see posts like yours often I assume because people have heard that Speed booster is cool. But do you know why you want to use speed booster or what it actually does?
The quick version is just that it squeezes the image from a Full frame lens down to an APS-C size digital frame (or Micro 4/3, etc) , giving you the depth of field of the full frame lens and an extra stop of light by squeezing the larger picture down. The 18-35 is not a full frame lens , squeezing it would leave you with a round circle around the picture.
lenny
I also had trouble with a Sigma 18-35. Didn't work at all on the MkIV but was OK on the Commlite. Oddly I often had to turn the camera on and off to keep it working. However it is a beautiful very sharp lens even compared to my Zeiss ZF primes. It also has less longitudinal (correction: lateral) Chromatic aberration (purple green fringing) then the Zeiss. Axial CA is the dirty secret of all Still lenses and i'm surprised it isn't discussed more on lens tests. maybe because still guys can photoshop it out. Many highly touted lenses like the Zeiss ZF, ZE 35mm 1.4 can be horrendous around high contrast elements at wide apertures. Some of the Rokinons are also terrible. When i opened my zeiss 35 to test it the bubble wrap on the table was completely flashing green and magenta - horrendous . It wasn't a bad lens as I tested another. Buyer beware!
the negative on my 18-35 was that the focus ring got sticky when I moved it slowly. Reviesw on the web say its very smooth so maybe I had a bad one - Any other reports on that? I may just send it back for another. Thank you to the B&H lending library.
Tamron 24-70 - quite sharp ( sharper than 24-105 canon), quite nice - par focal enough (Sigma 24-105 was wildly unparfocal) - Nds Commlite again - no Mark IV which makes me wonder about a speed booster which is part of the appeal.
Its the only 24-70 with Image stabilization. Nice lens - focuses like a nikon though.
Oh yeah I checked speed booster ultra with my Zeiss primes. It is softer in the corners but not terrible.
duo1972 - I don't want to be disrespectful but I see posts like yours often I assume because people have heard that Speed booster is cool. But do you know why you want to use speed booster or what it actually does?
The quick version is just that it squeezes the image from a Full frame lens down to an APS-C size digital frame (or Micro 4/3, etc) , giving you the depth of field of the full frame lens and an extra stop of light by squeezing the larger picture down. The 18-35 is not a full frame lens , squeezing it would leave you with a round circle around the picture.
lenny
Last edited:
Hi Lenny,
No problem !
I just want a good adapter for my FS7, no matter if it's a speedbooster or another because I already own Full frame Nikon lenses and I would like to use them with the FS7.
I don't have the opportunity to test different adapters. For now, I effectively heard that the speedbooster was a good adapter but if another adapter is best for my lenses, no problem !
I absolutely don't want to have a full-size image with shallow depth of field and I'm OK with the super 35 sensor of the FS7 !
No problem !
I just want a good adapter for my FS7, no matter if it's a speedbooster or another because I already own Full frame Nikon lenses and I would like to use them with the FS7.
I don't have the opportunity to test different adapters. For now, I effectively heard that the speedbooster was a good adapter but if another adapter is best for my lenses, no problem !
I absolutely don't want to have a full-size image with shallow depth of field and I'm OK with the super 35 sensor of the FS7 !
Lenilenapi
Carbonite Member
You're better off starting with the standard adapter IMHO because its cleaner. However both is best. Use speed booster when you want extra low DOF or need an extra stop. Spend the extra for the Ultra also. Nikon lens are much less hassle than the Canon's - I just wish they had image stabilization.
Erik Wittbusch
Well-known member
Hi,
I'm loving my Canon EF-S 17-55/2,8 IS. No L lens, but comparably in terms of image quality.
It's definitely cheaper build, but has a good range on the FS7, is fast enough and fully usable at f2,8
and features IS if you're going handheld.
I even don't have these "problems" with my Smart Adapter (MarkII) or my Speedbooster for my Canon 80-200/2,8L.
I also have the Sony SEL18-200 and hate the electronic focus ring.
I'll replace it with the Tamron 28-300 on my Speedbooster soon.
I'm loving my Canon EF-S 17-55/2,8 IS. No L lens, but comparably in terms of image quality.
It's definitely cheaper build, but has a good range on the FS7, is fast enough and fully usable at f2,8
and features IS if you're going handheld.
I even don't have these "problems" with my Smart Adapter (MarkII) or my Speedbooster for my Canon 80-200/2,8L.
I also have the Sony SEL18-200 and hate the electronic focus ring.
I'll replace it with the Tamron 28-300 on my Speedbooster soon.