Lenses for the FS5

[Alexandru Cristescu]

I've got the sony FE 70-200 f4 and 16-35 F4 and so far so good. I had the canon equivalents in focal length( but the 2.8 versions). I'm happy to go with the native glass for sake of %100 reliability. I shoot weddings and having to reset adapters or cameras doesn't sit to kosher. I'm planning on adding the zeiss baits 85 and 25 and using them in conjunction with the clear image zoom function. I'll use these for the "beauty shots" I. E. portrait shoots, broll etc and also in low light conditions. The zeiss touit 12mm and also the loxia lenses look attractive as well.

[Mike McKay]

I was wondering if anyone would use FE lenses on this cam. Since I'd be more or less starting from scratch having sold all my nikon glass awhile ago, I like the idea of not having to bother with adapters, although the speedbooster does sound good. However, it will be nice to have lenses that switch seamlessly between my Sony A7s and the Fs5.

How do you find the 16-35 for distortion? Or does the built in correction help with that?

[Nate Haustein]

Wondering what you think about the Sony 70-200 F4. Have a canon F4 IS but aster using it yesterday I kind of miss the autofocus.

[Alexandru Cristescu]

The sony 16-35 looks great on both my a7sii and fs5. Distortion is controlled pretty good on the fs5 especially with the lens correction. Aperture looks constant throughout the zoom range and the af is acceptable for gimbal work and moderate tracking shots. On the a7sii the sony 70-200 f4 performs af pretty good. The face detection isn't bad either. I'm confident in using these lenses for my upcoming wedding shoots. I haven't used it too much on the fs5 so I can't comment too much.

[Dave Mercer]

I'd love to hear more about real world experiences with / comparisons between the Sony kit and Canon 24-105 with speedbooster 0.7x. These are the two I'm thinking about as main lenses for news / docs.

[Tom Gresham]

First shoot with two FS5 bodies with the 18-105mm Sony lens last Thursday. Shot HD, and 90% of the shoot was at 240fps.

Getting into the edit suite, the editor (who owns and shoots a Red), said, "This was with the kit lens?"

Me: Yep.

Editor, leaning closer to the big monitor. "Wow!"

Not scientific, but informative. ;)

Agree about manual focus being challenging with this lens. We also shot with 100mm Zeiss Macro f/2 (great manual focus) and 16mm Nikon fisheye. (Focus not that much of an issue ;) ).

[Jeroen Wolf]

I've used the Canon 24-105 with the CommLite adapter and I like the way it handles. I'd say that manual focus with the Sony is very hard. Especially if you're following someone moving around/are in an uncontrolled situation. The Canon not only feels better focusing but it is more precise. I'll see if I can do some sharpness comparisons next week. Bokeh is about the same, I believe.

I like the fact that you get an extra stop with the SpeedBooster. And obviously the MetaBones SB becomes more and more interesting if you have additional Canon glass. I also have the 70-200 F4. Used it today for the first time shooting doggies in the park.

I like to have both because the Sony is nice as a 'general purpose' lens. I like to bike around town and shoot all sorts of stuff for stock footage. The form factor, AF and (lack of) weight makes the Sony perfect for this.

[Slavik Boyechko]

Just got back from shooting docu with the FS5 for a couple days. The 24-105/Speedbooster was a pleasure to use and stayed on the camera for the majority of the time. We also used the Canon 70-200 f4 IS, the Tokina 11-16, Canon 35mm f2 IS, and even tried the Sigma 18-35 (which works but only at about 25mm and up). The Speedbooster worked flawlessly and the extra stop of light on the lenses was very useful.

The Sony kit lens is definitely lighter and maybe that is a preference for handheld-only shooters, but I find the combination of electronic zoom and electronic manual focus makes the lens frustrating to use - just takes the joy out of shooting. Especially for any kind of moving subject. The lens is always two steps behind what you want it to do. It is cheaper than the 24-105/Speedbooster combo, but it just feels like shooting with a giant point and shoot camera.

The one advantage of the kit lens is the Clear Image digital zoom kicks in seamlessly at the long end of the lens. On the 24-105 you can kick in the digital zoom anytime throughout the zoom range, and if you're not careful you'll forget it's on (the icon disappears from the screen after a few seconds).

Anyway, if you've got a 24-105 lying around already, I would skip the kit lens in a heartbeat and get the Speedbooster.

Cheers -

[Jody Arnott]

Interesting that most people agree that the kit lens is difficult to use. I wonder why Sony decided to basically ruin an excellent lens by implementing such an unusual method of focusing manually. I love the lens for the power zoom, but unfortunately I'll probably be selling it due to the inability to smoothly pull focus.

Slavik - how do you find auto iris using the Speedbooster + 24-105? Does it work smoothly?

[Jeroen Wolf]

Does anyone know the difference between the 'Speed Booster Ultra' and the latest version, the 'T Speed Booster Ultra'?

[Mike Watson]

Originally Posted by Jody Arnott

Interesting that most people agree that the kit lens is difficult to use. I wonder why Sony decided to basically ruin an excellent lens by implementing such an unusual method of focusing manually. I love the lens for the power zoom, but unfortunately I'll probably be selling it due to the inability to smoothly pull focus.

It's an autofocus lens with a crippled ability to manually focus. While I agree that it's crippled, I think we underestimate the number of people who manually focus versus autofocus. I bet 80% of the copies of this lens never come out of autofocus mode.

I bought it for the power zoom, but I can't say I've ever used it. Apparently 5 years without having a power zoom.. I just have learned to do without, and now on the (very) rare instance that I'd need it, the FS5 can do it without needing the servo zoom. So I may sell mine as well.

[Jody Arnott]

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

It's an autofocus lens with a crippled ability to manually focus. While I agree that it's crippled, I think we underestimate the number of people who manually focus versus autofocus. I bet 80% of the copies of this lens never come out of autofocus mode.

I bought it for the power zoom, but I can't say I've ever used it. Apparently 5 years without having a power zoom.. I just have learned to do without, and now on the (very) rare instance that I'd need it, the FS5 can do it without needing the servo zoom. So I may sell mine as well.

Great point - the clear image zoom works so well that a servo zoom might not even be necessary for the handful of times we need to use it.. I'm in the same boat as you, I haven't used power zoom for years, and I think I've learnt to live without it.

Does anyone have any recommendations for a good workhorse E-mount zoom lens with proper manual focus? Something similar to the Canon 18-135 would be ideal. I had that stuck to my C100 90% of the time.

[Tom Gresham]

I was asked, and I didn't know, what resolution the clear image zoom goes to.

That is, when you are shooting in HD, and use the CIZ to 2X, what do you get?

I think it looks good, but I didn't have any numbers to offer.

[Jeroen Wolf]

It's still HD, Tom.

[Ilya Spektor]

You can use clear image zoom also with 4K up to 1.5x...