FS7: What is your best lens with your FS7

Ordered a Metabones Leica R to E Mount v2 adapter. only cheap and should provide a more secure connection than using multiple adapters.
 
Any updates on an alternative E mount full frame zoom lens that can be controlled with the FS7 zoom rocker and is wider (and maybe faster than f.4) than the 28-135mm kit zoom? My canon 70-200 f2.8, 16-35mm, 24-105mm and Zeiss primes all work fine with the Commlite adapter, but I can see a need to have the zoom functions in certain situations. Has anyone tried a B4-E mount adapter?
 
Year by year, computing power keeps getting smaller and smaller and cheaper and cheaper for the same performance. The same, unfortunately, isn't true for optics. It's physics. There are hard limitations on how light travels through glass that keep lens from getting smaller and lighter for same optical performance.

Mind you, there is innovation, and some of it takes advantage of the amazing microcontroller tech available now, but you're just not going to see a compact lightweight 18-300mm S35 lens... at any pricepoint.

The B4 adapters I've seen are for PL... but because the 2/3 sensor is smaller, they involve enlarging the image for the S35 sensor. You're not likely to find a single S35 lens that does everything you want all in one.
 
Funny how nobody has mentioned the very versatile Canon 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6. I guess those last set of numbers might dissuade people since it is a variable f/stop lens. And yes, slow. But as an all-purpose R&G-type lens that's especially suited for exterior work ('cuz it's slow), it's pretty dang wonderful. Great focal range, has IS, image quality approaching an L-series lens, but is less than $700. I use it a lot. Don't know why it's so "under the radar," when it gets stellar reviews from owners. I also second the praises of the Canon 70-200L f/4. Tack sharp, IS, and much lighter and less expensive than the 70-200 f/2.8.
 
I have settled for Zeiss touit 12mm, Sony zeiss 16-70 f4, sony fe 70-200 f4 and the zeiss loxia 35mm and 50mm when control and shallow DOF is needed. It's not perfect but will work for now.
 
morgan_moore said:
people desire lenses that open so wide everything (including the subject) is OOF. Esp F4 is fine IMO
Click to expand...
F4 is great, but any lens will be softer wide open. Buying a 2.8 lens means you can close down just a hair and be sharper with deeper focus but still expose easier in darker environments. That 15-85 on the long end is f/5.6, and if you're shooting *at* 5.6, it's probably not as sharp as it could be, meaning you'd have to stop down a bit, making the image even darker.

Most people don't talk mention the 15-85mm because it's slow, has variable aperture, and is made for EF-S so it's not full frame (less flexibility). If you're dropping $8-10k on a camera, spend a few hundred dollars more to get the 24-105 f/4 (also has IS). This can be put on a speedbooster to effectively become a 17-70 2.8 w/ IS. Want longer zoom and you're OK with losing a stop of light? use a non-speed booster and you basically have a second lens in your kit that zooms to 105mm and is still faster than the 15-85mm.
 
I'm often staggered by the crappy quality of glass people want to put in front of their cameras. And it's not about price. a £20 Helios 44-M2 can give fanastic results, but sticking a nifty 1.8 on there and wondering why your shots aren't looking all Hollywood and your focus pulls aren't nice and clean astounds me.
 
jshbckr said:
F4 is great, but any lens will be softer wide open. Buying a 2.8 lens means you can close down just a hair and be sharper with deeper focus but still expose easier in darker environments. That 15-85 on the long end is f/5.6, and if you're shooting *at* 5.6, it's probably not as sharp as it could be, meaning you'd have to stop down a bit, making the image even darker. Most people don't talk mention the 15-85mm because it's slow, has variable aperture, and is made for EF-S so it's not full frame (less flexibility). If you're dropping $8-10k on a camera, spend a few hundred dollars more to get the 24-105 f/4 (also has IS). This can be put on a speedbooster to effectively become a 17-70 2.8 w/ IS. Want longer zoom and you're OK with losing a stop of light? use a non-speed booster and you basically have a second lens in your kit that zooms to 105mm and is still faster than the 15-85mm.
Click to expand...
Yes. I agree totally. I first bought the 70-200 f.4 when I received my new Canon C300 and it was okay for interviews, but then tried a friend's f2.8 version and bought it the following week along with a few Zeiss CP.2 t1.5 primes and it has turned out to be one of the best investments I could have made. For wide POV shooting, I think I'll just stick with my Canon 16-35 f2.8 for now until something better comes along. I don't own a speedbooster since I ordered a commlite adapter before the Metabones promotional one arrived. For certain news type events I have to cover from time to time, there may be no avoiding the full frame kit lens (28-135 f4) with rocker zoom control.
 
Hi

I have finally received my FS7 and I began to use these lenses with a speedbooster ultra :
- Nikon 35 f:2D & 50mm f:1.4D
- Tamron 24-70mm f:2.8
- Nikon 70-200mm f:2.8
- Tokina 11-16mm f:2.8

So, I'm a little disappointed about two things :
- No stabilization for the Tamron 24-70 or for the Nikon 70-200mm
- Can't use the iris Wheel on the camera or on the handgrip to change the iris

For these two things, I would like to know if it's a problem from metabones or from Sony ? Why Canon lenses have stabilization or iris wheel which works and not Nikon lenses ?

Do you have tricks for the speedbooster to know which stop is used on the lens ? For example number 1 on the speedbooster is how many stops closed compared to Full open ?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
For what it's worth i'm using the Canon 24-105 f/4 IS on a speedbooster. Works great, I get an extra stop and keep IS. Those saying 'don't use the speedbooster' need to make sure they are extensively testing it across the board before giving such advice to people. With this lens (and my 70-200 f/4 if I need the extra stop) speedbooster is all good. I also have the Ultra which is on my 18-35 f/1.8 which is a beautiful piece of glass and a great combo in my opinion.
 
No one makes an adapter that sends power to a Nikon lens to activate IS or to adjust the iris electronically from the camera. It pains me but that is the case.
You adjust iris with the ring on the adapter . It is mechanical and makes de-clicked smooth f stop changes which is great though.

I have an EF mt Tamron 24-70 f2.8 whose IS works fine with metabones adapters. Great lens. Don't know why your IS is not working with it.
need to be in advanced mode of course. It is the only 24-70 lens with IS.
 
Lenilenapi said:
No one makes an adapter that sends power to a Nikon lens to activate IS or to adjust the iris electronically from the camera. It pains me but that is the case.
You adjust iris with the ring on the adapter . It is mechanical and makes de-clicked smooth f stop changes which is great though.

I have an EF mt Tamron 24-70 f2.8 whose IS works fine with metabones adapters. Great lens. Don't know why your IS is not working with it.
need to be in advanced mode of course. It is the only 24-70 lens with IS.
Click to expand...

I presume Duol's 24-70/2.8 is a Nikon-F mount version, which would explain the lack of IS.

An electronic adapter for Nikon would be difficult because you still need to mechanically actuate the iris mechanism. This would require a motor, and not just circuitry. Probably not impossible - just very difficult.
 
Dean, Do you recommend the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 over the Canon 16-35 f/2.8?

The Canon is nearly twice the price of the Sigma.

Going by the photos of the Sigma it looks like its focus action would be more like that of one of the Sony alpha lenses than the focus action of one of the Canon EF lenses.
 
The Sigma is a fabulous lens. I don't have the Canon but people have been raving about the Sigma and the focus actions is normal mechanical ring, niot the Sony fly by wire.

Re Tamron, you are probably right that its a Nikon version. However I beat this horse a great deal. It should not be hard to make a Nikon adapter that only sent power to the lens for the IS and left the iris mechanical- which frankly is what most of us prefer anyway. It pains me that no one makes a Nikon adapter that sends power to the IS. I don't know why they seem to think it is a waste of time. I would pay a few $'s extra for an IS enabled adapter wouldn't you?
 
JPNola said:
Dean, Do you recommend the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 over the Canon 16-35 f/2.8?

The Canon is nearly twice the price of the Sigma.

Going by the photos of the Sigma it looks like its focus action would be more like that of one of the Sony alpha lenses than the focus action of one of the Canon EF lenses.
Click to expand...

JP, it's a great lens, very sharp even wide open, feels very well made. In essence they are two very different lenses though when paired with Metabones as the 16-35 will work (I believe) with the speedbooster and therefore give you a true wide angle combo at f/2. The Sigma, being an APS-C lens pairs with the standard Metabones (I have mine on the Ultra, works fine).
 
Thanks for your replies

I have the metabone speedbooster and I hesitate to buy a standard metabones. I had ordered it at CVP but it was out of stock since January.

I would like to know if you notice a difference of sharpness between the standard and the speedbooster because of the glass of the speedbooster or not at all ?

I am also tempted to buy a PL adapter for a future project, I can have a series of Sony Cine lens (35-50-85) of a F3. What do you think ? Will I have a better image with this series of lenses ? Which adapter would you recommend me if I had to buy one?
 
Duol said:
Thanks for your replies

I have the metabone speedbooster and I hesitate to buy a standard metabones. I had ordered it at CVP but it was out of stock since January.

I would like to know if you notice a difference of sharpness between the standard and the speedbooster because of the glass of the speedbooster or not at all ?

I am also tempted to buy a PL adapter for a future project, I can have a series of Sony Cine lens (35-50-85) of a F3. What do you think ? Will I have a better image with this series of lenses ? Which adapter would you recommend me if I had to buy one?
Click to expand...

I don't notice any difference, some who pixel peep will I'm sure.
 
It does indeed make a difference.
It was last year, when I realized, that my speedbooster+Canon 24-105 combo is extremely prone to flares.
I then checked my recordings (with FS100) and recognized this behaviour when light sources are in the frame, too.
I checked the same lens without the spedbooster and had a little better contrast, better flare resistance and nicer bokeh, too.

That was, when I switched over to the Canon 17-55/2,8 IS on a standard metabones adapter. Happy since then.
This lens is much underrated, as the red L-series line is missing. The only shortcoming is the position of the focus ring,
which is close to the camera and it's function as a dustsucker...
When we get center-crop mode one day, this will be the perfect lens: 17-110/2,8 with IS and mechanical focus!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top