The range of supplied lense of PMW EX3
 

I am new to this camera lense world but I have a PMW EX3 and planning to buy one wide convetor, may be I will by from century optics(#0HD-75CV-EX3) I am also thinking of buying a reasonable tele lense .i dont know if I buy AF NIKKOR 80-200mm f/2.8D how much i will be benefited, I mean what is the supplied 14x lesnse's capecity in terms of mm ?

Hi Ramji,
if you use the 80-200mm 2.8 ( a great lens by the way) with a camera adaptor like the Adaptimax, the range of your lens would be 432-1080mm. Far more telephoto than the standard EX3 lens. The magnification is X5.4 meaning it's great for wildlife and getting shots where being up close isn't a wise move. (man eating tigers, rioting, war zones etc)

Hope that helps.

Ramji

This was taken with the 80-200 f2.8 and extension tubes so it's good for close-up also. I think it's a very nice sharp zoom.

Dragonfly

.

Thank you so much for the response steve and dave .Do you suggest any good wide lense for PMW Ex3?

Zoom understanding
 

How much longer or shorter is the 500mm Nikkor lens to a standard 20x video lens?

SEASTAGE — Boston Video Production | Non-Profit & Corporate Promo Videos

The mm is always the same for any chip/film size. So on the Canon XL the 20x goes to about 100mm or so, so the 500mm is 5x stronger.
Steve

The Fuji W/A that is made with the EX lens mount is an excellent choice. Has all the features of the standard lens.

Zeiss planar series
 

I like to shoot wildlife films with the EX3 and the Zeiss Planar series. Example: Makro-Planar T* 2/100, good optical resolution and f 2.0

Very limited reach with 100mm though - good luck with lions and bears at that range!
Steve

I am also very happy with my 80-200/2.8 and consider the quality al least as good as the EX3 standard lens, if not better. Hardly see any difference in quality with primes like 400/3.5. Some other good news: I also own a TC-14B nikon teleconverter. This once was the prime x1.4 converter for Nikon's prime tele lenses. This converter also works with the 80-200 and turns it into a 112-280 of good quality. Note: the 14B is not the same as the 14A. I believe there was a big difference in price and quality.

Dave

Anything I should look out for in shopping for extension tubes? Found a set on e-bay for $10.

How did you get the dragonfly to pose for you? Nice work.

Ed

And is (relatively) extremely cheap too.
Steve

It's not a quality thing as such - the TC14a was made for lenses less than 300mm, the TC14b for those over 300mm.
Steve

I stated in this thread that the 80-200mm f/2.8 is very good as well. However, at wide apartures the image is quite a bit softer than with my 300mm f/4. I wonder how the 180mm f/2.8 compares to the 80-200 f/2.8, in terms of picture quality. Steve, can you shine a light on that, or does someone else have a side by side experience/comparison?

QUOTE: I stated in this thread that the 80-200mm f/2.8 is very good as well. However, at wide apartures the image is quite a bit softer than with my 300mm f/4.

I agree 100%. I have both of those lenses and the 300mm looks sharper and has better contrast. I think it's the contrast that I notice the most.
Sorry, can't answer your question about the 180mm.