E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS

Gabe Strong · January 31st, 2014, 10:49 AM

I've heard the Sigma 24-105 may be a good alternative to the Canon 24-105. Wonder if that
would help with distortion at the wide end?

Jon R. Hand · January 31st, 2014, 02:07 PM

There is distortion on the VERY wide end of the Canon 24-105 with the Speedbooster. For this reason, I never go fully wide with it. It IS correctable with Mocha (either standalone or within After Effects) but time-consuming. Can also fixed editing the video in Photoshop, again time-consuming! Canon lens is superior to the Sigma in my view (have shot with both on the EA50) but not by much.

Steven Digges · February 1st, 2014, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik Wittbusch

It's the electronic correction of distortion and vignetting that makes the picture less wide and a touch darker.
That's the cost...

I adapted a Canon EF 24-105/4,0 L IS on a speedbooster. It behaves as a 17-75/2,8 now but was a costly alternative. Know what: There's distortion on the wide end too - not correctable...

Eric, correct me if i"m wrong, but I think you are mistaken. The speed booster does not widen a lens beyond it's 35mm specs, it brings it back to them. The APS-C sensor in the EA50 has a 1.6 crop factor. Using your 24-105mm lens with the speed booster removes the crop factor so that it behaves much closer to it's 24-105mm designation.

Steve

Chris Harding · February 1st, 2014, 07:36 PM

Hi Steve

That's the way I see it as well it only reduces by 0.72 .. it would have to exceed 1 to go wider that the 35mm lens spec which it doesn't but 0.72 brings you back quite close to original.

According to the manual the crop factor on the EA-50 is actually 1.5 which is the same as Nikon APSC cameras ..AFAIK only Canon use sensors that have the 1.6 crop factor.

Chris

Steven Digges · February 1st, 2014, 07:59 PM

Thanks for the clarification. Chris, I always have thought of it as 1.5 But for some weird reason this morning I thought is was 1.6 Must have been a hangover from my Canon days. I still love Canon cameras but I was let down when they abandoned the XL series body style and went so heavily into DSLR ergonomics.

The EA50 was my first return to Sony other than all my years working with their broadcast cameras. The EA50 is perfect for my needs. I get a form factor I like. I get all the benefits of a DSLR without all of the things I don't like about DSLR video cameras. And I get to keep using all of the very expensive Canon lenses I invested in over the years, which I could not use on my Canon video cameras.

Strange....Sony body, Metabones adapter, Canon lenses and I finally have exactly what I want. And that is coming from a guy who is generally opposed to adapters and weird marriages!

Steve

Edit: Weird marriages....I was not referring to people, I was referring to contraptions adapters can facilitate. People can do whatever they want, as long as they leave me alone :0 BTW Canon lenses on a Sony camera is a broadcast standard.

Chris Harding · February 1st, 2014, 09:13 PM

Thanks Steve

Just another point that I know precious little about and that is the fact that Erik no longer uses an EA-50 but an FS100 or 700 (don't know which) ..the point being here that those cameras are full frame sensors not APSC so a 24-105 without an Metabones would actually act as a 24-105 ... with the booster added it could therefore make a 24mm lens a 17mm due to the fact that the camera doesn't have a crop factor??

Or am I wrong?? Erik might still have his EA-50 but on his example I think he is talking about the FS series.

Chris

Christopher Young · February 2nd, 2014, 01:27 AM

Primarily for my own benefit I compiled a Sensor Crop Factor Chart as I was never sure exactly what crop to apply to any particular camera lens combo. Not that the info is of any major benefit in the practical sense it was just nice to get it straight in my head and know what the factors were. If it's of any interest I have attached a PDF of my chart.

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Gabe Strong · February 2nd, 2014, 02:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Thanks Steve

Just another point that I know precious little about and that is the fact that Erik no longer uses an EA-50 but an FS100 or 700 (don't know which) ..the point being here that those cameras are full frame sensors not APSC so a 24-105 without an Metabones would actually act as a 24-105 ... with the booster added it could therefore make a 24mm lens a 17mm due to the fact that the camera doesn't have a crop factor??

Or am I wrong?? Erik might still have his EA-50 but on his example I think he is talking about the FS series.

Chris

FS100/700 are Super 35 not full frame. Super 35 is close to (but not the exact same as)
APSC. As for if the Speedbooster makes a 24mm lens a 17 mm, it depends on your 'frame
of reference'? If you are a Super 35 shooter then yeah, the 24mm lens with speedbooster
will be wider than a normal 24mm lens on the Super 35 cam....about equal to what a 17mm
lens looks like on a Super 35 cam.....and about what a 24mm lens looks like on FF.

Steven Digges · February 2nd, 2014, 04:46 PM

Christopher, thank you for the chart. The only thing I would add to it is the names those sensors go by IE: APS-C, Super 35 etc.

And you are correct, I assumed the 5D was exactly 35mm.

Chris H, "Just another point that I know precious little about". Sometimes, I think I know to much about things that don't mater, but I always know I don't know enough about everything that does matter!

Steve

Craig Marshall · February 4th, 2014, 07:17 PM

Steven wrote: "Strange....Sony body, Metabones adapter, Canon lenses and I finally have exactly what I want. And that is coming from a guy who is generally opposed to adapters and weird marriages!"

Back about 18 years ago in my TV commercial facility, I was assembling 3 CCD Ikegami broadcast cameras to Sony Betacam SP recorders (via suitable adapters) and shooting through Canon and/or Fujinon 'broadcast' ENG zoom lenses. (IMHO the Fujinon broadcast lenses are superior to the Canon product but hey, I'm biased there as I was once Fujinon's Australian National Sale Executive!)

It often pays to buck the 'all from one manufacturer' temptation. It can mean some extra research and some trial and error too but the benefits often outweigh the usual result. Many international post houses used to working with Sony cameras of the time often rang to ask us how we got the 'film look'.

Some industry 'seniors' may remember Ikegami produced one of the first video cameras (the EC-35?) designed with a unique (at the time) 'knee clip' circuit to better emulate a 'film look' and they would take Panavision lenses too I think, via a PL mount.

George Kalogeris · February 24th, 2014, 05:39 AM

Let's not start a new thread.
I own both SELP18200 and SELP18105 on the NEX-EA50
I don't really care for the long zoom end.

Which one do you think I should sell ?
Are there any MTF charts about them out there?
I use them always wide open and I am not sure which one is sharper

Nino Defra · February 27th, 2014, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Berger

Just received this E Mount lens today and on first look I am quite happy. You can Google it and read about the specs. Also there are two rings, Focus and Zoom. The focus is similar to any other servo focus. The zoom ring is also a servo, but it's fairly responsive for quick focal length changes. It has a zoom lever on the lens, but it works with the zoom lever on the EA50. There are a few things I am pleased with 1) The servo zoom works much better than the original 18-200mm lens. There is no jerky start and stop, and no shift in focus. It's smoothness is quite comparable to the lens on my V1U and Z7U. Also the zoom elements are internal so there is no extension to the lens as you zoom. 2) I also like the constant f4 aperture. 3) The price point is very affordable. I'll post some sample video in the next few day. Sorry about the upside down photo. When you click on it it appears with the proper orientation.

Hi, I'm interested in optics, autofocus and tell me how it works if you can Correct focus when the camera is in autofocus ... thanks

Christopher Young · March 5th, 2014, 12:08 AM

The lens is acceptably sharp and the auto focus is pretty quick and accurate. While in auto focus you can manually override and roll the focus ring but it will come back to whatever the auto focus circuit decides is correct. The focus ring is pretty narrow and has no feedback feel whatsoever. I found manually focusing with it to be a hit and miss exercise. It was much quicker in manual mode to use the momentary focus press button on the camera for quick focus changes. The servo zoom is quicker than the 18-200 and doesn’t seem to have to have the momentary shift and lateral ‘jink’ in movement when zooming back from full zoom that many operators have experienced with the 18-200.

It is nice that it has constant aperture and is parfocal, good features for a video lens. The lens has its place I guess and will work with the NEX still cameras and the EA50 without distortion. On the FS700 I found it to be totally unacceptable due to the excessive distortion especially at the long end. Check out some of the videos in this posting and you will see that the distortion is quite bad. There again for the price it sells for and if used on a camera that has firmware that will correct the distortion it produces it’s probably not a bad deal as there is nothing out there to compete with it.

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

George Kalogeris · March 5th, 2014, 06:13 PM

I have to decide to sell one of the two.
Any advantages in terms of clarity SELP18105 over SELP18200 ?
If they 're the same, the cheaper wins!
Distortion is not an issue here.

January 31st, 2014, 10:49 AM	#16
Gabe Strong Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Juneau, AK Posts: 814	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS I've heard the Sigma 24-105 may be a good alternative to the Canon 24-105. Wonder if that would help with distortion at the wide end?

January 31st, 2014, 02:07 PM	#17
Jon R. Hand Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Buffalo NY Posts: 33	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS There is distortion on the VERY wide end of the Canon 24-105 with the Speedbooster. For this reason, I never go fully wide with it. It IS correctable with Mocha (either standalone or within After Effects) but time-consuming. Can also fixed editing the video in Photoshop, again time-consuming! Canon lens is superior to the Sigma in my view (have shot with both on the EA50) but not by much.

February 1st, 2014, 07:36 PM	#19
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Hi Steve That's the way I see it as well it only reduces by 0.72 .. it would have to exceed 1 to go wider that the 35mm lens spec which it doesn't but 0.72 brings you back quite close to original. According to the manual the crop factor on the EA-50 is actually 1.5 which is the same as Nikon APSC cameras ..AFAIK only Canon use sensors that have the 1.6 crop factor. Chris

February 1st, 2014, 07:59 PM	#20
Steven Digges Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,828	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Thanks for the clarification. Chris, I always have thought of it as 1.5 But for some weird reason this morning I thought is was 1.6 Must have been a hangover from my Canon days. I still love Canon cameras but I was let down when they abandoned the XL series body style and went so heavily into DSLR ergonomics. The EA50 was my first return to Sony other than all my years working with their broadcast cameras. The EA50 is perfect for my needs. I get a form factor I like. I get all the benefits of a DSLR without all of the things I don't like about DSLR video cameras. And I get to keep using all of the very expensive Canon lenses I invested in over the years, which I could not use on my Canon video cameras. Strange....Sony body, Metabones adapter, Canon lenses and I finally have exactly what I want. And that is coming from a guy who is generally opposed to adapters and weird marriages! Steve Edit: Weird marriages....I was not referring to people, I was referring to contraptions adapters can facilitate. People can do whatever they want, as long as they leave me alone :0 BTW Canon lenses on a Sony camera is a broadcast standard. __________________ www.CorporateShow.com Been at this so long I'm rounding my years of experience down...not up! Last edited by Steven Digges; February 2nd, 2014 at 04:37 PM.

February 1st, 2014, 09:13 PM	#21
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Thanks Steve Just another point that I know precious little about and that is the fact that Erik no longer uses an EA-50 but an FS100 or 700 (don't know which) ..the point being here that those cameras are full frame sensors not APSC so a 24-105 without an Metabones would actually act as a 24-105 ... with the booster added it could therefore make a 24mm lens a 17mm due to the fact that the camera doesn't have a crop factor?? Or am I wrong?? Erik might still have his EA-50 but on his example I think he is talking about the FS series. Chris

February 2nd, 2014, 04:46 PM	#24
Steven Digges Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,828	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Christopher, thank you for the chart. The only thing I would add to it is the names those sensors go by IE: APS-C, Super 35 etc. And you are correct, I assumed the 5D was exactly 35mm. Chris H, "Just another point that I know precious little about". Sometimes, I think I know to much about things that don't mater, but I always know I don't know enough about everything that does matter! Steve __________________ www.CorporateShow.com Been at this so long I'm rounding my years of experience down...not up!

February 4th, 2014, 07:17 PM	#25
Craig Marshall Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Blue Mountains, Australia Posts: 170	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Steven wrote: "Strange....Sony body, Metabones adapter, Canon lenses and I finally have exactly what I want. And that is coming from a guy who is generally opposed to adapters and weird marriages!" Back about 18 years ago in my TV commercial facility, I was assembling 3 CCD Ikegami broadcast cameras to Sony Betacam SP recorders (via suitable adapters) and shooting through Canon and/or Fujinon 'broadcast' ENG zoom lenses. (IMHO the Fujinon broadcast lenses are superior to the Canon product but hey, I'm biased there as I was once Fujinon's Australian National Sale Executive!) It often pays to buck the 'all from one manufacturer' temptation. It can mean some extra research and some trial and error too but the benefits often outweigh the usual result. Many international post houses used to working with Sony cameras of the time often rang to ask us how we got the 'film look'. Some industry 'seniors' may remember Ikegami produced one of the first video cameras (the EC-35?) designed with a unique (at the time) 'knee clip' circuit to better emulate a 'film look' and they would take Panavision lenses too I think, via a PL mount.

February 24th, 2014, 05:39 AM	#26
George Kalogeris New Boot Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Patras, Greece Posts: 14	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Let's not start a new thread. I own both SELP18200 and SELP18105 on the NEX-EA50 I don't really care for the long zoom end. Which one do you think I should sell ? Are there any MTF charts about them out there? I use them always wide open and I am not sure which one is sharper

March 5th, 2014, 12:08 AM	#28
Christopher Young Trustee Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 1,567	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS The lens is acceptably sharp and the auto focus is pretty quick and accurate. While in auto focus you can manually override and roll the focus ring but it will come back to whatever the auto focus circuit decides is correct. The focus ring is pretty narrow and has no feedback feel whatsoever. I found manually focusing with it to be a hit and miss exercise. It was much quicker in manual mode to use the momentary focus press button on the camera for quick focus changes. The servo zoom is quicker than the 18-200 and doesn’t seem to have to have the momentary shift and lateral ‘jink’ in movement when zooming back from full zoom that many operators have experienced with the 18-200. It is nice that it has constant aperture and is parfocal, good features for a video lens. The lens has its place I guess and will work with the NEX still cameras and the EA50 without distortion. On the FS700 I found it to be totally unacceptable due to the excessive distortion especially at the long end. Check out some of the videos in this posting and you will see that the distortion is quite bad. There again for the price it sells for and if used on a camera that has firmware that will correct the distortion it produces it’s probably not a bad deal as there is nothing out there to compete with it. Chris Young CYV Productions Sydney

March 5th, 2014, 06:13 PM	#29
George Kalogeris New Boot Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Patras, Greece Posts: 14	Re: E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS I have to decide to sell one of the two. Any advantages in terms of clarity SELP18105 over SELP18200 ? If they 're the same, the cheaper wins! Distortion is not an issue here.