L Mount Zoom Lenses
Magdalen Dano
Lets start with the 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN Contemporary lens. This is my go-to lens when I need to set the scene and tell the story of where we are in a single shot. I have used this lens for numerous big adventures including backcountry skiing, fly fishing, landscapes, mountain biking, travel and more! The 16-28mm fits nicely into my smaller pack, and when traveling internationally I can even bring it as a backup to the 14-24mm F2.8 DG DN Art. It is incredibly sharp and handles flare very well, which is great as I love shooting into the sun for dramatic sunstars.
The 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN Contemporary lens is a standard zoom that I use for a variety of situations. This is my latest addition to the trio so I have not pushed it quite as hard as the other two, but so far it has proven itself fully capable in demanding situations. Its diminutive size and weight make it ideal when you need to be light and fast. Image quality is truly professional level, and I would not hesitate to bring the lens with me on any editorial or commercial shoot.
c and cs use the same screw thread and diameter, it's the back focal distance that differs. c is 0.690", and cs is much shorter. cs was only used on low end security guard type cameras, definitely lenses to avoid.
c mount TV lenses were designed for SD -- NTSC or PAL. So, they might not give you the resolution you'd get from even average lenses intended for film. Then again, testing is the only way to know for sure.
TV c-mount lenses are of sufficient quality for shooting on B&W, but for color you may notice their weakness; more color abberations, lack of sharpness, even when shooting at deeper apertures.Test test test.
Absolutely, especially if you already own the lenses. However, one concern is that older SLR lenses are a bit more contrasty than built-for-16 lenses like the switars. They can still give you pretty sharp results though. Nevertheless, on any black and white reversal film, like plus-x, added contrast is usually the last thing you want. Additionally, the focal length of any given 35mm SLR lens on a 16mm camera is effectively doubled. 50mm becomes 100mm, 25mm becomes 50mm, etc. etc.
Yeah, if he's going to be getting 2k Arriscans from his footage, or projecting his reversal film on a big screen then the flaws in those TV lenses will certainly be apparent. Most SD telecine transfers probably wouldn't even pick up the theoretical resolution/sharpness capable in Plus-X shot with switar primes. It's such a picky filmstock that the quality of your image is more dependent on how you expose it, not what lenses you use. Aronofsky and Libatique may disagree with me, but this is coming from my experience in film school, where, once projecting our projects shot on Plus-X, it was clear that the best looking projects were ones that were exposed and focused properly.
Dennis, if you're going to keep this camera for a while and shoot a lot of film, I would save yourself the hassle and save up for some 16mm lenses/or a 16mm zoom. You never know when in 10 years, hi-rez 4k scans maybe as affordable as SD transfers today.
I have used no-name TV lenses with my Bolex and the footage I shot looked good to me. I was using colour film (Fuji 64D) EXT./DAY and the footage looked sharp and natural enough to me. I bought these lenses from ebay member that goes by the name "filmfinds" --EVERY lense I got from him was in GREAT shape, clean and just well cared for, so I HIGHLY recommend him. He is safe to buy from.
I bought some primes from him and a zoom as well. The lenses I used when taking my footage were the primes (mainly a 12.5). But again my luck with these lenses was quite good. But I would still recommend testing and if possible save your money for the Switars and other lenses as others here have advised.
Note: Many zoom lenses possessfront filter threads that rotate while the lens is focused. Thisoften is annoying if you want to use a polarising filter, forexample. Whenever a zoom lacks this trait it is explicitelystated.
More frequently than otherlenses, zooms do display product variability and you may have totest several before getting a perfect sample. This resultsbecause of their complex optical design. Remember that suchlenses also would be more susceptible to knocks and blows thanare primes, so treat them with real care. They are prone to showadverse effects from flare (stray light spilling over the glasssurfaces to create a low-contrast veiling of the image) and/orghosting (those nasty, often brightly coloured, spots showingreflections of the aperture opening). Despite today's highlysophisticated lens designs and recent advances in lens coatingtechnology, such distracting phenomena are virtually avoidableunder certain shooting situations, for example, when you shootinto the sun or experience strongly back-lit subjects.
Please note I now have brokendown the former review page for zoom lenses into three differentranges, as follows from the Table below. You can either accessthe entire section by clicking the appropriate header, or godirectly to any lens of particular interest. Since zoom lensesspan a considerable focal range, the classification of them intosensible categories is not a simple task. I have taken theintended use of the lens into consideration more than the focallengths as such.
The newest feature is theaddition of IR rates for some of the lenses. Be aware that thereis a strong interaction betwwen camera and lens in this case, soeven though a lens is listed as being good for IR, it perceivablymight show an issue (hot spots being the most common flaw) withanother camera model. I cannot test all combinations, that is aninsurmountable task for the unpaid reviewer.
I really enjoy shooting with the M System and learning each day to be faster with the "Messesucher", but going around I miss a zoom lens that can give me the possibility to "take some facial expressions"...I studied in the Leica offer and I need your help to understand the differences between the Leica 75mm f2,0 and the Leica 90mm f2,0...Looking to my previuos experience (I was using very often the Canon 70-200 f2,8) I would buy the 90mm f2,0 but It would be interesting have more information from your personal feeling and experiences...
Using a gentle wide-angle means you need to get closer than with a long lens. That means usually becoming more involved, less detached from the subject, or at least in my experience it means that you need to think more about the subject and your relationship to them. But that's a matter of style and personality and opportunity.
Lots of people will make different suggestions but it really comes down to what you're trying to achieve and how you like to work. But I do think that using a rangefinder instead of a DSLR gives you the chance to work more closely with people in a less obtrusive way, and I like that feeling of intimacy that getting closer gives you, whereas using a long lens only gives the appearance of being closer, but avoids the reality of it.
It may need a clean(window washing as my camera repairman calls it) but then the quality is more than acceptable and the vintage rendering makes it a great portrait lens -nothing wrong with other uses either but it distorts quite a bit on straight lines at the edge which is no problem in postprocessing at all.
I've had the 75 APO for 7 years now, and it's my most used lens (just in front of my 28). I've had three different 90's and in the end I've always sold them because I wasn't using them (nothing to do with the quality).
c80f0f1006