Starting from scratch... Lens brand and mounts?

[Jon Braeley]

One extra concern...

I will choose adapters very carefully now. This is the only connection and this camera does feel weak here.

A big cinema lens, matte box, filters?... no way. Not without major support rails.

I have concerns over any lens set up heavier than say 2Ibs inc accessories. I will ask AbelCine about this and see if anyone has addressed this. I really do not want to see this cam go crashing to my concrete floor - it would shatter easily.

Otherwise... great ...!!

[Chris Lawes]

Can anybody comment on how/if the sony Zeiss ZA mount zooms 16-35 + 24-70 color-match the Zeiss ZF.2 manual prime lenses?

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Chris Lawes

Can anybody comment on how/if the sony Zeiss ZA mount zooms 16-35 + 24-70 color-match the Zeiss ZF.2 manual prime lenses?

If they don't match, I will buy your Sony Zeiss lenses and give you a great deal ;)

Both of those lenses are absolutely amazing. I used to shoot an A900 and owned the S-Z 24-70, S-Z 85/1.4, S-Z 135/1.8, Sony STF 135/T4.5, Sony G 70-200/2.8. I rented the S-Z 16-35 a few times and loved it. Some say the Nikon FX 14-24 /2.8 is the best wide angle zoom but it has a couple major flaws including major flare issues and no filter thread. However, another great option is the Nikon DX 12-24 f4 is an amazing wide angle zoom. Check out this test: Nikon Lens: Zooms - Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX Nikkor (Tested) - SLRgear.com!

If you look at other lens tests on that site, make sure you look at the APS-C camera and not the full-frame tests because the FS100 & F3 are similar in size to APS-C. Also, the smaller sensor is able to use the sweet spot of FF/FX/EF full-frame lenses.

For good Sony Alpha testing, go to photozone.de Sony Alpha Lens Tests (APS-C)

I have looked at many many tests of Zeiss SLR glass and I conclude that the Sony Zeiss glass is the best Zeiss makes for SLRs. An easy comparison is the ZF 85 f1.4 versus the Sony Zeiss 85 f1.4, which is a newer design; thus, explains why it is better.

Something else to consider is that SLR lenses do have random problems with manufacturing quality. In some tests on the aforementioned sites, you will see results on various lenses that are worse than they should be. On photozone.de, the author mentions when they might have a bad copy and when they have tried multiple copies.

Which brings me to another thought - I wonder if the level of manufacturing quality is the same with Cine lenses as SLR lenses. After all, many if not most Cine lenses are just re-housed SLR lenses.

So, when spending thousands of $$$ on lenses, it is extremely important to test them immediately for flaws. If I owned a retail store selling and/or renting lenses, I would setup a testing bay and include these results with all lenses. Personally, if I spent $5,000 on a couple lenses, I would pay an extra $50-100 per lens to see their individual testing results.

[Jon Braeley]

I tend to agree that the Sony Zeiss lenses are getting great reviews - and with the A to E adapter I am inclined to try one on the FS-100. The Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 16-35mm f/2.8 ZA SSM - Sony SAL-1635Z, would be my choice.

[Dan Asseff]

What about this lens 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC APO HSM II - Telephoto Zoom Lenses - SigmaPhoto.com
I like that I could use a matte box with this lens because the zoom is internal.

Dan

[Jon Braeley]

Dan I am told that this Sigma lens is no longer made and has been discontinued.

I agree the Sigma lenses are a good alternative for the FS-100. I am looking at two fo their zooms right now especially the 70200 F2.8 and the 17-50mm

[Steve Kalle]

The Sigma lenses are good if you don't need them wide open. Also, they have much higher failure rates than similar Nikon and Canon lenses. The best source for reliability that I have found is lensrentals.com which is the largest rental company in the country. Once a year they release the failure rate of their lenses and Tamron and Sigma have been the worst. Some Sigma and Tarmon lenses have had too high a failure rate that they stopped renting them. Also, Sigma's lens repair is by far the worst of any company. According to lensrentals.com, they are lucky if they get a Sigma back within 2 months whereas Canon and Nikon take only a couple weeks.

However, using these lenses for video, you would not be able to see certain flaws or damages such as the autofocus going bad or the IS/OS/VR not working, and these are some of the most common failures.

Personally, I base all of my lens rental & purchasing decisions on tests done by photozone.de and slrgear.com. For example, the Sony Alpha G 35mm 1.4 lens costs over $1000 but is a horrible lens by any standard, and $300 lenses are better in every category. Without seeing these tests, you would assume that a >$1000 prime lens should be excellent. Another good site is DxOMark but they don't have as detailed tests as the other two sites and they don't have as many lenses tested.

[Brian Drysdale]

I don't know about finding a used set, but the Olympus Zuiko OM manual focus lenses cover the usual range of primes 21mm to 100mm, all at f2. Any Zuiko lenses I owned were well built and they did well on most lens tests.

[Duncan Craig]

So just to confirm, if I'm buying modern DX lenses for my Nikon DSLR they will work (via an adaptor) on the FS100 without vignetting?

I understand autofocus and iris control are lost, but so long as you don't have edge to edge soften and vignette issues like you get in old style 35mm ground glass adaptors such as my Brevis.

I already have the Nikon 18-200 VR, is it likely this will give similar results to the Sony 18-200 lens sold for this camera?

Thanks!

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Steve Kalle

Which brings me to another thought - I wonder if the level of manufacturing quality is the same with Cine lenses as SLR lenses. After all, many if not most Cine lenses are just re-housed SLR lenses.

There are quite a few rehoused SLR lenses for cine work, but the high end purpose built cine lenses are different animals to these.

ZEISS Book | Film and Digital Times: News
http://www.fdtimes.com/articles/cook..._Web150dpi.pdf
http://www.fdtimes.com/articles/ange...ion-200dpi.pdf

It's very much a matter of carefully selecting the rehousing manufacturer if you plan to use rehoused SLR lenses, because you're paying for the quality of the mechanics. Some do a minimal job while say Zeiss do a major job on their CP2 range.

ZEISS Slice | Film and Digital Times: News

For many people this will come down to their budget, but a quality lens will out last the lifetimes of a number of these cameras, it's the long term investment

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Duncan Craig

So just to confirm, if I'm buying modern DX lenses for my Nikon DSLR they will work (via an adaptor) on the FS100 without vignetting?

I understand autofocus and iris control are lost, but so long as you don't have edge to edge soften and vignette issues like you get in old style 35mm ground glass adaptors such as my Brevis.

I already have the Nikon 18-200 VR, is it likely this will give similar results to the Sony 18-200 lens sold for this camera?

Thanks!

The amount of softness and vignetting is the same as you see on a DX Nikon camera because the sensor sizes are very similar. However, if you use FX full frame lenses on the FS100, then you are using the sweet spot of the lens and edge issues will be far less prevalent. This is why I want to use Sony Alpha lenses because most of their lenses are full frame, not to mention that their Sony Zeiss lenses are amazing.

The Nikon 18-200 is better than the Sony 18-200 so if you already have that Nikon lens, then stick with it. However, this Nikon lens has really bad distortion on the wide end and gets very soft past 135mm, not something I would ever use for video.

Watch out for the new Sony 16-50 lens which should be either a constant f2.8 or f4.0 and very cheap. It will be announced with the release of a few new Sony cameras, the A65, A77 and a 'Pro' NEX camera in early August. Sony will announce another lens or two and stock should be available in October. Another good and low cost lens is the Sony Zeiss 16-80 3.5-4.5 which gives you 24-120mm on the FS100 for $700. Also, they have a Sony G 24-70 2.8 for half the cost of their Zeiss 24-70 but I have not seen any tests of it yet.

[Dave Morrison]

A "Pro NEX camera"?

[Jon Braeley]

The Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 with A-mount is pretty good for the price and works well with exposure Iris control.

I may get another Sigma based on this lens alone - good bang for the buck.

[John Godwin]

Has anyone tried this lens|

Tamron Zoom Super Wide Angle 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) Macro Lens for Sony Alpha & Minolta Digital SLR

I assume you need the Alpha adaptor. It's a $300 lens and sounds pretty decent. I assume its varifocal and not parafocal... (Is the kit lens varifocal?)

In hindsight I wish I had bought the kit lens. I've now done a couple of shoots with my FS100 and first used the two Canon mount lenses I own. I was happy with the camera, but the lenses looked no better than the kit lens, and with no iris control it was a bit of a pain to work with them, even with a Genus variable ND. Nobody had the kit lens available locally, so I bought a NEX 5 that was available locally and got the Sony 18-55 and the 16mm as a package deal, and used those on the next shoot. Looked every bit as good as the Canons and I had full iris and focus control. Much better for what was essentially run and gun work.

But, I needed more reach, and will on other upcoming shoots. So the kit lens or equivalent begins to look much more attractive. The Tamron above may work if the Alpha adaptor provides iris control, and is cheaper than the Sony 18-200. I'd appreciate comments.

[Jamie Roberts]

Originally Posted by Jon Braeley

The Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 with A-mount is pretty good for the price and works well with exposure Iris control.

Hi Jon

I read on a site that this lens was meant for smaller aperture cameras. Are you using it on the FS100? Is there any vignetting or other issues?

Thanks

Jamie