HD 2/3" Lens Tests

[Mike Marriage]

I'm currently shooting with two PMW350s and HJ22s. I normally use the kit lens on my 350 but needed extra reach for this job. Now maybe I just got lucky with my kit lens but optically it knocks both the HJ22s for six. One of the HJ22s is sooo soft in the corners at about 75% zoom. I'm so glad that I saved my pennies and went for the kit lens. Also, CA is far more apparent on the HJ22s and they breath terribly, something I'd forgotten about using the kit lens.

Yes, the kit lens does flare easily and the servo zoom is a little sluggish but the optical aspect is simply incredible for the price. It's a very hectic shoot but if I get time I'll post some stills.

[Steffen Sailer]

Hi folks,

I'd like to pick up the question, Steve Philipps asked a view years ago :o)
He didn't get an answer, so I'll try it again...

Does anybody have any experience with this lens or/and can post any jpg at arround 6mm of this lens here?
I'm interested in buying one. I don't need an extender, or anything wider, and I wouldn't need it too often, so I thought, that this lens would be exactly made for me. If the performance is ok for broadcast work.

Thanks for any comments and have a great new year!
Steffen

[Luc De Wandel]

Originally Posted by Abdullah Alnoori

Thanks Luc,

After i used Zeiss digiprime 3.9 I was convinced with you answer. This lens is awesome and has zero distortion from middle to corner at all apertures.
you can check the frame grabs from the zeiss.

Abdullah

Fantastic results, Abdullah. Plus no flare, and very sharp. This is a top lens.

[Peter Corbett]

Just picked up this thread which is a great read. I have a Canon HJ21x7.5 which was slammed a bit at the start of the thread. I've always found it very sharp on a HPX2700 and H27 Varicam. It has a huge 117mm front element and is a serious lens. The main grip is that it is very heavy.

I'm looking at getting a new HPX3100 and PMW500, and would like to get a lighter HD lens. But I've been more than happy in the past with my 21x7.5. It's hard to know whether to spend a lot of dough in the current market where the client won't see the differences we (may) see.

Maybe I got a good one and should just keep it!

[Ronald Jackson]

So, over a year later I've joined this thread. I recently purchased a second hand EX3 as a replacement for my old XLH1, nanoFlash with both.

I used Canon "L" lenses with the H1 for my strictly amateur bird videos. Now I've got a Nikkor 80-400, the new one, with an Adaptimatic adaptor for my EX3. Can't say I'm fantastically impressed with the Nikkor albeit it is taking me a while to get the right settings on the EX3 (thanks Cees Van Kampen) and not easy to set the optimum lens aperture with the Adaptimatic.

Now thinking about a broadcast lens, 2/3 plus 2x convertor plus of course B4 to EX3 adaptor. Money very much an object, and looking at the newish Canon KJ20x8.2B. Useful very, inter alia, to have access to wide shots without that ponderous rigmarole when lens changing on the EX3.

A problem is that I cannot get to see or check a KJ20 prior to purchase, so risk handing over what to me is a lot of cash for something which may not be up to scratch.

Has anyone any experience with this lens or knows of anyone who has?

Ron

[Vincent Oliver]

The best Nikkor lenses to use with the EX3 are the old manual lenses (Ai) with an aperture ring. I also have a couple of adapters (MTF & Adaptamatic) to use with the newer auto lenses which do not have an aperture ring these lenses are not so good,as you don't don't know which aperture you are working with. Try to keep the lens at approx one or two stops down for best results.

[Ronald Jackson]

Yes Vincent, found that out the hard way. Try to guess via the Adaptamatic what is say F8 and then use a combination of B&W 8x ND filter, EX3s built in ND filters and a Genus ND Fader Filter, not all at the same time of course!

Trouble is round here that the weather not ideal of late, either gloomy like today or harsh sunshine, and the place I go to test faces into the sun if there is any.

Perseverance I reckon, a good camera, very good recorder, nanoFlash, and I think a good lens (not cheap in a SLR zoom context).

Would still like to know the score with that Canon KJ20. Must admit gone off the idea somewhat after finding this thread but there must be someone out there's who's used one.

Ron

[Vincent Oliver]

I know exactly what you mean. Fortunately I also have the older Adaptamatic and MTF adaptors and about 24 Nikkor lenses (old style) these work very well with the EX3, but don't stop down beyond f8 and don't use the lenses at full aperture. I just tend to use the lenses from 85 to 500mm with a very steady tripod. I did do a video showing what can be achieved with them, will see if I can locate it for you.

Here we go

Sony EX3 Nikon mount


I did this test with a tripod that was not suitable, this has now been replaced, so excuse the shaky footage.

[Ronald Jackson]

Interesting Vincent. I used to have a bag of Nikkors in my "still" snapping days, all the way from 24mm to 600mm. Last "proper" still camera I purchased was a F4S.

Just had another go with my 80-400 and it's actually okay if it and the EX3 are set up properly. I found out yesterday that this old (2009) iMac display is not very sharp, properly calibrated, but not particularly sharp and I don't know whether it is possible to sharpen it.

I was getting what seemed to be sharp images in both EX3 viewfinder and my SWIT monitor which appeared a bit soft when back home viewing on my iMac.
Yesterday I connected my 22 inch desk top monitor to the EX3 and 80-400 and what was sharp in the viewfinder was sharp on the monitor. I played back the files out of the nanoFlash onto my 51inch plasma, also sharp. Same with same result on my new 13inch MBP Retina.

In future I will not be relying on the iMac image to judge sharpness or anything else. As for that broadcast lens, if someone comes along and says it's the dog's whatnot on the EX3 then I'm interested. Otherwise persevere with the 80-400 and maybe look for a "longer" Fuji or Canon EX3 dedicated 1/2 inch lens and see whether it works with my 72mm thread front mounted 1.5x teleconverter, which works well with the EX3 stock lens.

Ron

[Vincent Oliver]

The problem with the new Adaptamatic is that it has a long screw which could damage a lens if over tightened. The MTF adaptor is much better in this respect as it has a stop. Although you would still have to guess which f stop was being used. You could make marks on the MTF to indicate one or two stops down, regardless of which lens was in use. Of course a custom lens would be a better choice, but everything comes at a price.

Incidentally, I have been sent a Nikon D7100 for review, this accepts all the older style Nikkor lenses and can be used as a B roll camera for the occasional drop in shot or extreme wide angle shots.

[Uli Mors]

SD vs HD: Beneath all said things about sharpness, MTF and other things:
Dont forget that most nowadays Broadcast Cameras can minimize Chromatic Abberations when you use an HD lens with CA electronics (the lens "tells" the camera its actual focus/Zoom/Iris values and the amount of CA has been measured before)
No SD Lens provides such a tool.

Its very impressing to see how much (vertical) CA can be minimized when togglich ALAC on / off in a PDW700!

Also I found "cheap" HD Lenses to breathe a lot - for some people acceptable , for others not.

Uli

[Vincent Oliver]

Most CA can be corrected in post production. However, this is just another item in things to do. My Nikkor lenses do seem to be well corrected for CA, maybe I am just lucky.

[Doug Jensen]

On my Fujinon 22x7.6 I have never been able to detect any difference between ALAC on and off during my testing and close scrutiny. The lens looks great either way, so maybe it's good enough that it just doesn't need ALAC.

BTW, my F800 package is up for sale -- complete with lens, color EVF, matte box, etc.
Vortex Media Used Gear for Sale

[Vincent Oliver]

I was just looking at some comparison shots of the Stock lens and my Nikkor lenses. Here is a shot taken at Full zoom on the stock lens and the same shot with a 85mm f1.8 Nikkor lens, they both about the same focal length.. Notice how much C/A is present on the stock lens, partuclary at the right edge.

[Vincent Oliver]

Here is a range shot 85, 105, 135, 200, 300 and 500mm Nikkor lenses I have also included the scene taken with the stock lens at wide and telephoto. The 300mm is perhaps the weak lens in the line up, it displays some flare which looks like C/A