Fujinon HA vs ZA LENS

[Paul Cronin]

Hi Paul, I own an A13x4.5 that i have used on the Sony PMW-350, the lens is ok for non commercial/broadcast work in HD however I am looking for a HA or ZA.

The HA14 is just sillly money when the ZA sounds good VFM. I can't find any technical information on the Fujinon range, I'm aware that you have done some testing so I was wondering if you are aware what the optical and physical differences are between the ZA12x4.5 and the HA13/14, it's said "you get what you pay for".

The Fujinon HD lens supplied with the 350 is ok as "my first HD lens" but has a slow focus ring and we all know what that means when trying to snap focus.

The Canon HD's are cheaper but it means having a remote zoom for both makes.

Regards, David

[Paul Cronin]

HI David,

I posted your question that was hijacking a thread here in the proper spot. Let me find the link to the HA ZA info and post it.

I have not tested the HA and ZA wide glass but with the 17, x18, and 22x i think the ZA is the winner for the dollar value.

[Paul Cronin]

Dave here is the link to all the Fujinon lens info.

http://www.fujinon.com/pdf/FUJINON_Product_Guide_09.pdf

[David Hart]

Paul, many thanks

[Paul Cronin]

Dave shot again with my ZA 17x today after shooting all weekend with a HJ40x. The optics on the ZA really are amazing for the price. I would be surprised if the 12x was not the same. If you can rent one I would suggest it and would look forward to your comments.

[Doug Jensen]

David,

Are you considering using the ZA12x4.5 as your main lens? The 54mm limitation of that lens would drive me crazy if I had to use it as my primary lens. I have the ZA22x7.6 w/2x and even that seems too limiting on the telephoto end. For wide, it is just right. I have never wanted or needed something wider for the type of shooting I do.

I guess if you've used the A13x4.5 you know what to expect, but even If someone gave me a free 12x4.5 I bet I'd never even use it. Definately a case of different lenses for different uses.

[Paul Cronin]

Agree Doug long is the way to go. Now if someone wants to give me a 40x or 28x18 I am all ears.

[Shaun Roemich]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

I have the ZA22x7.6 w/2x and even that seems too limiting on the telephoto end. For wide, it is just right. I have never wanted or needed something wider for the type of shooting I do.

WOW... 167mm (334 with doubler) is too limiting?!?!?! What are you shooting? (No disrespect intended - merely curious)

When I was shooting ENG/EFP with 2/3" BetaSX cameras, we had 18x 7.6 (ish... may have been 7.5... too many years) Fujinons with doublers and I agree MOST of the time, that was wide enough... UNTIL IT WASN'T. Thankfully we had a 13x 4.6 (again I BELIEVE) in the truck for change outs. Almost never used it but went on an ox drawn cart historical ride and the wide angle was ABSOLUTELY needed.

Never felt limited by the 137mm (274mm doubled) telephoto capabilities of the lens in normal usage.

[Doug Jensen]

Hi Shaun,

A lot of of my shooting is outdoors scenery, landscapes, wildlife, transportation, and sports where telephoto is king. I love the look of a long lens and shallow DOF. Even when I'm doing a headshot, it's not uncommon for me to have the camera 20-30 feet away from the subject so I can really separate them from the background and/or compress the background and foreground elements.

I prefer not to use the extender on a routine basis because it does degrade the picture a little. Although when necessary, I'll not only put in the extender I'll also turn on the F800's digital extender. I just got back from Yellowstone and there were a couple of shots I did with the 22x7.6 + optical 2x + digital extender that would not have been possible otherwise. The wildlife I was shooting was over a 1/2 mile away and you barely tell with the naked eye what I was shooting. The picture quality is not perfect, but it's not bad.

I've never been fan of extreme wide angle lenses even back in the Betacam days, and especially not today where the 16x9 aspect ratio is naturally wider anyway. People work hard to get a "film look" by shooting progressive, using narrow DOF, and choosing the right paint settings -- and then they destroy the whole illusion by going with extreme WA lenses. Nothing screams "video" like using extreme WA lenses Okay, maybe shooting interlaced is worse.

If I shot in cramped quarters all the time, and avoided doing any camera moves. maybe a WA would come in handy, but that's not the shooting I do.

[Bill Ward]

Doug/all:

I've got the ZA 12 x 4.5, and it's one of my all time favorite lenses. However; I shoot a lot of handheld reality/inside houses kinds of gigs. It's a killer lens for those applications. It also shoots great WS scenics, but it is pretty helpless for extreme tight shots or telephoto work.

I keep an SD 22 x 7.8 with a 2X and matte box in a Pelican case for when I need longer legs on the lens. But I don't find myself taking it out as often as I originally thought I would. I'm that happy with the ultra wide ZA.

[Shaun Roemich]

Doug: thanks for the input. And yes, the doubler is a poor solution compared to a longer lens. I guess I just got used to using what I HAD to work with. And yes, the wide angle was LITERALLY for when I had no room to work BUT it was a tool nevertheless. Never been a big fan of wide lenses... until I NEEDED one! <laughs>

At the focal lengths you are talking about, how do you even begin to focus? The viewfinder would be a seriously limiting factor I would think. Or are you trying to shoot at f8 to get a BIT of DOF?

[Doug Jensen]

Hi Shaun,

My target f-stop for everything I shoot, with any camera, is f/4 to f/2.8. I would rarely, if ever, use a smaller f-stop than f/5.6, and I don't find focusing very hard at all. I guess 30 years of experience has given me plenty of practice. Plus, my F800 has the HDVF-C35W color viewfinder that is better than most field monitors. It really is an an impressive device.

[Shaun Roemich]

Doug: again, thanks! I've recently moved to a new and bigger market and as soon as purse strings open up a bit around here, I'm looking forward to renting some of the Big Dogs again. The F800 sure is exciting...

[Paul Cronin]

I agree with Doug that focus is not that hard with good glass. I just shot with a Canon 40x and was tight on subjects 1 mile away who were moving. The focus was easy the hot air was a problem but not the focus. I use the same HDVF-C35W viewfinder which is excellent and a Marshall monitor often which has its own peaking. This lets me have peaking on the Marshall and crisp clean picture on the VF flipped out with a hood.

As for F stop I try to stay between 4-8 and try to stay away from 2.8 but there are times I don't have a choice. Either way the f800 is amazing with its latitude, I have never used a camera that is even close.

I purchased the ZA17x which is great and if I need really long I rent for now. My work is more long glass work and also if I need wide I will rent a 4.5 lens which will happen next month.

[David Issko]

I recently took delivery of my 17x ZA lens for my PWM350 camera. It was hot off the production line. It is the most solidly, well made lens I have owned. Every knob, every switch, every button has perfect finger feedback. It performs beautifully. CA is pretty much non existent thanks to ALAC on both camera & lens. Picture quality is terrific. You can really snap a picture into focus quickly & easily. Variable zoom speed is essential for controlling the mood. Great bang for bucks HD lens mated with a great bang for bucks camera!