GH5 Zooms for the S5/S1/full frame

junct

junct

Active member
Picking up a s5 or s1 (waiting from a quote from my local, hoping the s1 can match the price to deal with the niggling record limit issue).

I'm moving from a m4/3 system, which means new glass. I have a decent set of vintage primes for interviews and more controlled b-roll situations, but I need a workhorse zoom for most of my "run and gun" work (golly I dislike that phrase).

Sigma and Panny's 24-70mm might be doable, but I oft found the 12-35mm on my m4/3 system to be too narrow of a range (mostly on the long end). Since Panasonic's AF is a moot point, and neither of those lenses have lens stabilisation, going native mount here isn't particularly make or break. Maybe there is older glass with better manual focus and on-lens aperture controls I could be looking at in this sort of range?

Second native option is the 24-105mm. I was wary that f4.0 may be a bit on the slow side - but i figure the better low light performance of the s1/s5 would still blow the gh4 out of the water. And with a full frame, I probably can't manage a shallower DoF as a solo shooter than f4 would give anyway - can use primes when I *need* faster or shallower DOF. This one does have dual I.S. which is a big tick if investing in panasonic again. But, most photography lenses s*ck for manual focussing - the 12-35 was crap. I wouldn't expect this to be much better.

What non-native zooms should I be considering?
 
I loved the Lumix 24-105 on the S1. I recall that it had an option (or the camera had the option) to map the focus ring to a fixed focus throw (of your choosing! 90-degree, 180, 270, and 360 I think). So, unlike the focus-by-wire monstrosities of most systems including my Sony, you can do repeatable focus pulls because rotating the ring the same distance will give you the same focus change regardless of how fast you turn it.

And yes, with the low-light capabilities of the camera, I only felt obliged to swing to a faster lens on very dark dance floors at weddings. Even then, an exposure was doable, but I wanted a cleaner picture.

And yes, the dual IS works even better than IBIS by itself.

The AF is probably somewhat useful for filming an interview and keeping the face in focus. It might not react as fast as canon/sony, but I bet it will handle it for you.

Otherwise, you might consider the Canon EF 24-70 f2.8 II but you'll need an electronic adapter. Or maybe the Sigma EF 24-70, but I'm not familiar with it. Or the Canon EF 24-105.

Also there's the Lumix 20-60 which is interesting because it goes so wide.

But there were many jobs I shot wholly on the Lumix 24-105, with the Laowa 12mm capturing a few ultrawides/establishing shots.
 
ahalpert said:
I loved the Lumix 24-105 on the S1. I recall that it had an option (or the camera had the option) to map the focus ring to a fixed focus throw (of your choosing! 90-degree, 180, 270, and 360 I think). So, unlike the focus-by-wire monstrosities of most systems including my Sony, you can do repeatable focus pulls because rotating the ring the same distance will give you the same focus change regardless of how fast you turn it.

And yes, with the low-light capabilities of the camera, I only felt obliged to swing to a faster lens on very dark dance floors at weddings. Even then, an exposure was doable, but I wanted a cleaner picture.

And yes, the dual IS works even better than IBIS by itself.

The AF is probably somewhat useful for filming an interview and keeping the face in focus. It might not react as fast as canon/sony, but I bet it will handle it for you.

Otherwise, you might consider the Canon EF 24-70 f2.8 II but you'll need an electronic adapter. Or maybe the Sigma EF 24-70, but I'm not familiar with it. Or the Canon EF 24-105.

Also there's the Lumix 20-60 which is interesting because it goes so wide.

But there were many jobs I shot wholly on the Lumix 24-105, with the Laowa 12mm capturing a few ultrawides/establishing shots.
Click to expand...

Oof, that's interesting and makes a big difference. The lumix 12-35 was a pig to focus on (it's the only modern photography lens I've used). Being able to set the angle of the focus throw is a really neat advantage to a modern lens, actually..

I find it interesting that Panasonic didn't deem it necessary to use dual IS on their shorter zooms. Makes something like a contax zeiss 28-85mm at a third of the price pretty compelling.
 
Any non-electronic zoom lens needs to be manually adjusted for the IBIS settings. Electronic zooms are much more convenient.

Also, the 24-105 is a macro
 
soarprod said:
Any non-electronic zoom lens needs to be manually adjusted for the IBIS settings. Electronic zooms are much more convenient.

Also, the 24-105 is a macro
Click to expand...

Could you expand what you mean by this? There's some calibration needed for the IBIS with a vintage zoom?
 
You need to choose the focal length in the menu since the camera will not be able to communicate with it.

I.E. 25mm or 50mm or 200mm, etc...and then it's assumed the strength of the IBIS is adjusted.

There are also additional IBIS settings with OIS lenses that you won't have with other glass.
 
What NorBro said. And one significant implication is that as you zoom, your IBIS setting will be incorrect because the camera won't be automatically adjusting. You'd have to cut and go back into the menu and enter in the new focal length. None of which is the end of the world (cutting to adjust it or just leaving it), but you'll get a marginally worse result if the focal length is not set. And, frankly, probably a much worse result than a dual IS Lumix lens.
 
Thanks - that makes sense. So there is still some benefit to you native glass even if it doesn’t haven’t OUS (like the 24-70mm Panasonic/sigma).
 
Could be, but it's unclear how much of a difference you'd really notice.

It's been recommended to set it in the middle around 50mm to compensate for both ends in something like a 24-70mm.

But that might get more complicated with adapted super-zooms (or even a 24-105mm).
 
Ta. I’m curious to try putting a Contax zeiss zoom on and see how it compares to the native (non dual IS) lens of similar range. But the 24-105 likely makes the most sense for my needs.
One hang up is getting tied into a specific system, a relatively new mount with electronic features that only really work on a native mount. My lumix 12-35 is tied into a Panasonic m4/3 system. It has a dent on it so the resale value is buggered and it’s not really viable on any future camera system I’ll likely own. Ah well.
 
I'm in a similar boat with IBIS and lenses, and the system I'm currently using is more complicated with IBIS, and unfortunately the lenses which allow all of the settings to be used (or even a simple one like just being able to turn off the vertical or horizontal panning) are foolishly pricey.
 
junct said:
Thanks - that makes sense. So there is still some benefit to you native glass even if it doesn’t haven’t OUS (like the 24-70mm Panasonic/sigma).
Click to expand...

Actually wait a minute - as long as you're using an electronic adapter, the focal length will be communicated to the camera (I believe)
 
NorBro said:
I'm in a similar boat with IBIS and lenses, and the system I'm currently using is more complicated with IBIS, and unfortunately the lenses which allow all of the settings to be used (or even a simple one like just being able to turn off the vertical or horizontal panning) are foolishly pricey.
Click to expand...

what? what about Sigma and Panasonic lenses for L mount?
 
NorBro said:
Could be, but it's unclear how much of a difference you'd really notice.

It's been recommended to set it in the middle around 50mm to compensate for both ends in something like a 24-70mm.

But that might get more complicated with adapted super-zooms (or even a 24-105mm).
Click to expand...

I think that if you have the focal length set wrong, you will see the image slowly dance around a little. But the jitters will still be removed.
 
junct said:
Ta. I’m curious to try putting a Contax zeiss zoom on and see how it compares to the native (non dual IS) lens of similar range. But the 24-105 likely makes the most sense for my needs.
One hang up is getting tied into a specific system, a relatively new mount with electronic features that only really work on a native mount. My lumix 12-35 is tied into a Panasonic m4/3 system. It has a dent on it so the resale value is buggered and it’s not really viable on any future camera system I’ll likely own. Ah well.
Click to expand...

I'm a big fan of buying used because a lot of the hit to the price has already been taken
 
ahalpert said:
I think that if you have the focal length set wrong, you will see the image slowly dance around a little. But the jitters will still be removed.
Click to expand...

I don't know...on the SL2-S it's dancing around with the correct focal length (a wide one too), but I had to manually choose the lens model setting as a Leica lens for IS to work so maybe there is still some sort of miscommunication there.
 
ahalpert said:
I'm a big fan of buying used because a lot of the hit to the price has already been taken
Click to expand...

Yup. Sadly small used market over here, but may look to eBay if I do go with the 24-105 and hope for the best with import duties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top