A manifesto for the humble zoom lens

[aaa123jc]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who really enjoys using kit lenses. I have a Canon EFS 18-55mm which I use all the time, both causally and professionally. I've changed camera bodies many times throughout the years, yet this lens still stays on.

Kit lenses are lightweight, sharp and most importantly for me, often have image stablizations (because I don't like IBIS).

Low light is an issue though, but for more serious works I'm going to light the scene anyway, and for less serious works, I can always denoise the footages in post if they are too noisy. I've found the denoising in DaVinci Resolve more than enough to clean up a moderately underexposed image.

Of course, primes and fast zooms are nice to have, but they are much more expensive. The money could be more well spent on other things, such as lighting equipments and production designs.

 

 

[Mark Romero 2]

Forgot to ask: Does the Panasonic Lumix 24-105 f/4 that came with my S1 count as a "kit lens" since they were bundled together (this was before the launch of the 20-60 and the 50mm f/1.8, which are currently sold as a kit)?

New, it sells for $1,300. I like the lens a lot, but if I hadn't got a great deal on it in a kit, I am sure I would just be some vintage primes with it.

And speaking of kit lenses, Adorama has a kind of weird Panasonic S5 kit that is bundled with a FREE copy of... the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 lens (a $374 value), which sounds great until you realize the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 is an aps-c lens, not full frame  😕

https://www.adorama.com/pcs5.html

 

[kye]

3 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Forgot to ask: Does the Panasonic Lumix 24-105 f/4 that came with my S1 count as a "kit lens" since they were bundled together (this was before the launch of the 20-60 and the 50mm f/1.8, which are currently sold as a kit)?

New, it sells for $1,300. I like the lens a lot, but if I hadn't got a great deal on it in a kit, I am sure I would just be some vintage primes with it.

Kind of, as it'll meet some but not all of the criteria I laid out in the first few posts, but it's pretty darned expensive and so doesn't really require any "help" in being recognised for its strengths and advantages.

Of course, lenses are lenses and everything from the $10 lenses on eBay to the $100,000 lenses you can only rent but not buy still obey the laws of physics, operate under the same principles, and suffer from the same aberrations (to a greater or lesser extent).

3 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

And speaking of kit lenses, Adorama has a kind of weird Panasonic S5 kit that is bundled with a FREE copy of... the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 lens (a $374 value), which sounds great until you realize the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 is an aps-c lens, not full frame  😕

https://www.adorama.com/pcs5.html

LOL..  there's a trap for new players!

Another win for kit lenses - they always have coverage of the camera they're supplied with!!

[Mark Romero 2]

16 hours ago, kye said:

Kind of, as it'll meet some but not all of the criteria I laid out in the first few posts, but it's pretty darned expensive and so doesn't really require any "help" in being recognised for its strengths and advantages.

Of course, lenses are lenses and everything from the $10 lenses on eBay to the $100,000 lenses you can only rent but not buy still obey the laws of physics, operate under the same principles, and suffer from the same aberrations (to a greater or lesser extent).

LOL..  there's a trap for new players!

Another win for kit lenses - they always have coverage of the camera they're supplied with!!

Yeah, regarding the sigma lens given away with the s5, I guess for people who want to shoot 4K 60 / 50fps, it might make sense. I was shooting video on my 24-105 f/4 at 60p two days ago and realized just how much tighter 36mm is than 24mm when filming indoors. 

[MrSMW]

Hmmm, yes, define ‘kit lens’ but the Panny 24-105 is in one though a pretty exceptional one.

[amweber21]

On 11/24/2021 at 12:43 AM, MrSMW said:

Indeed. This is a feature of my full frame Panny cameras that I have been using recently.

For stills anyway…

For video, I’m already shooting APSC crop mode because I shoot 4k 50p as my default, but for stills I have a fn button assigned to crop mode which can be set as APSC or 1:1.

With my S5, I’d set it to the 1.5x crop mode but with the S1R and it’s 47mp, the 1:1 mode makes for a great option with about the same resolution as your average 24mp camera!

The added bonus is that when shooting raw, the full res image is preferred and you only see the crop in your image editing software.

I shot my most recent wedding this way using the Sigma 35mm f2 as my indoor lens and at 35mm and ‘70’, plus the 65mm f2 outdoor as 65mm and 130.

It’s like having a twin lens set up on your camera but ideally, the harder you crop, the more megapixels help with quality!

I just received my 65mm f2 yesterday to pair with the 35mm f2. Great lenses!

How was your experience using them on a job? This was exactly my thinking for a two camera setup.

Later I want to add the 18mm 1.8, whenever that comes out, and have a 18+27, 35+52, 65+97 kit with 3 lenses.

Good for my S1, but even better for my fp L which I use 1.5x but also 2x on. Being from m43 the 2x 15mp image isn't something I'm scared of. Most of the time for video I would use the 24-105mm for it's OIS, which has crazy good stabilization even without dual IS.

I just wish the 28-70 had OIS. I'd have no problem cropping to get the 105mm.

[MrSMW]

10 hours ago, amweber21 said:

How was your experience using them on a job? This was exactly my thinking for a two camera setup.

Excellent.

If I had a pair of 24mp bodies, I’d run the Panny lens pairing of: 24 + 50 indoor and 35 + 85 outdoor.

But I don’t and use just the one S1R body as my primary and only stills body so utilizing the 47mp capability, happy to use the 35mm as both a 35 and as a ‘52’ or ‘70’ indoor and the 65mm outdoor as; a 65, a ‘100’ and as a ‘130’.

Some might consider a 65 too long in itself, but in this day and age of social distancing, whilst my subjects may not be practicing it themselves, I can myself…and outdoors, a 65mm can be quite wide for social work without too much distance.

But having said all that, may go 28-70 next year as it offers a bit more flexibility for stills and shift the primes back over to dedicated video use or even pick up that new APSC Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 which might be perfect for my 4K 50p needs…

[amweber21]

Nice to hear! The Panny 1.8's might have made more sense, but I can't get over the build and craftsmanship of those Sigma I series lenses.

I've always felt a 50mm was the odd one. Not quite wide enough for wide shots, not quite long enough for portraits. And the 85 is a bit too long for general use. So the 65 for me has become the sweet spot sitting exactly in-between.

I'd like to try the 28-70, but I worry the CAF wouldn't come close to my 24-105 or even my 20-60, but I've noticed the Sigma zooms do a little better than their primes in this area. Should be faster in 4K 50p/60p as well.

[MrSMW]

I have both the Pan 24-105mm f4 and the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 and would say that the Panny is the better video lens…just…but…if you don’t mind the size/weight/length it extends over the Sigma.

Plus it has greater range…but sacrifices a full stop.

So pros and cons.

I personally find the 24-105 just too big for my tastes. 

If it was 2.8 and even if it cost twice (or more) as much and was slightly bigger and heavier still, I’d then probably go for it because if I was a Canon user, I’d make a case for their 28-70mm f2 despite the cons.

But based on what exists, the 28-70mm f2.8 from Sigma is currently the sweet spot of: range, f stop, size, weight, how far it extends (not very) and cost, though the latter is the least most important factor to me.

Folks often criticize the S1 series for being ‘too big’.

With smaller lenses, I disagree.

S5 with 24-105 compares size & weight with an S1 with Sigma 28-70, but I feel loses out on balance and handling.

The bottom line…as is always the case, is that word ‘compromise’, because it always is a factor!

And yes, comparing the looks/feel/build quality of Sigma’s f2 primes with Panny’s f1.8 primes, it’s no contest, - the Sigma’s are on another level.

I suspect the Sigma’s are also optically ‘better’ but cannot prove that statement though I own the Panny 85mm f1.8 as well as the Sigma 35 and 65 f2s.

Again, compromise and as above, if I was shooting on paired bodies, I’d go Panny…because it makes more sense (for me), but shooting specific bodies tasked for specific shooting (S1R stills, S1H video and S5 hybrid) using the Sigmas works better right now.

[noone]

Great thread.

A few thoughts from a 99% stills shooter.

Sony Clearzoom.    How much I use depends on the lens used.    With a better lens I am fine with 2x as for example my Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 is still better at 110mm than many old lenses of that focal length (or similar).

I use primes mostly for specific purposes, Tilt shift, macro, super telephoto, shallow DOF (including portraits) and in the case of the 55 1.8 for IQ and as a body cap.       It helps that all of those CAN be used with clearzoom.

I have never been a big fan of zooms but have always had a few including maybe a dozen or so  "kit" lenses and I have been happy with all of the kit lenses for what they are.

Some zooms I love are the old Tokina 60-120 2.8 (great as a portrait lens), my ancient EF 20-35 2.8 L (technically not great optically but i do like what it does even if hardly used).

I keep a Canon IS ii APSC kit lens as it is useful as a almost disposable lens that actually covers FF on my A7s from about 24mm and up and it is currently my only stabilized lens.

I have a few old MF variable aperture zooms and they are a mixed bunch some ok some just old but none used very often.

I work at a charity shop and handle the camera gear most of the time.....we have a few lenses in at the moment and if they do not sell will probably buy most of them.

Still have the Contax 50 1.7 and 35 2.8 I posted about ages ago in the lens forum.     Looks like they will be coming home at some point but just got an FD film camera with a 50 1.8, a 28 2.8 and a mint condition old Promura zoom in case. I would love to try the Promura but will probably pass but could get the primes for no reason.      

We also got three Pentax film cameras in last week and all had the same Sigma 28-70 macro zoom that was sold as a kit lens in Australia with Pentax (same distributor) and an old Russian Kiev camera with a Helios 58 f2 M .....This thread has me thinking i will buy one of the Pentax kit zooms and the Helios to compare them at 58mm.

 

[kye]

15 hours ago, noone said:

Great thread.

A few thoughts from a 99% stills shooter.

Sony Clearzoom.    How much I use depends on the lens used.    With a better lens I am fine with 2x as for example my Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 is still better at 110mm than many old lenses of that focal length (or similar).

I use primes mostly for specific purposes, Tilt shift, macro, super telephoto, shallow DOF (including portraits) and in the case of the 55 1.8 for IQ and as a body cap.       It helps that all of those CAN be used with clearzoom.

I have never been a big fan of zooms but have always had a few including maybe a dozen or so  "kit" lenses and I have been happy with all of the kit lenses for what they are.

Some zooms I love are the old Tokina 60-120 2.8 (great as a portrait lens), my ancient EF 20-35 2.8 L (technically not great optically but i do like what it does even if hardly used).

I keep a Canon IS ii APSC kit lens as it is useful as a almost disposable lens that actually covers FF on my A7s from about 24mm and up and it is currently my only stabilized lens.

I have a few old MF variable aperture zooms and they are a mixed bunch some ok some just old but none used very often.

I work at a charity shop and handle the camera gear most of the time.....we have a few lenses in at the moment and if they do not sell will probably buy most of them.

Still have the Contax 50 1.7 and 35 2.8 I posted about ages ago in the lens forum.     Looks like they will be coming home at some point but just got an FD film camera with a 50 1.8, a 28 2.8 and a mint condition old Promura zoom in case. I would love to try the Promura but will probably pass but could get the primes for no reason.      

We also got three Pentax film cameras in last week and all had the same Sigma 28-70 macro zoom that was sold as a kit lens in Australia with Pentax (same distributor) and an old Russian Kiev camera with a Helios 58 f2 M .....This thread has me thinking i will buy one of the Pentax kit zooms and the Helios to compare them at 58mm.

Some nice lenses in there...

As a ~100% video shooter, and one who is aspiring to make images that look like cinema and not at all like professional spec-driven videographers, I find that I'm narrowing in more and more on lenses that are high resolution but not sharp.  I'm still trying to understand what it is and how to get it, but I'm gradually making progress.

My latest purchase is a Tokina RMC 28-70 f3.5-4.5 M42 to mate with my GX85 and m42 SB.  That will make it a 44-109mm equivalent.

I'm planning to use it as an experimental walk-around zoom, and am hoping for a softer rendition with large complex flares.  I've found that my GF3 is too soft with any lens except the 12-35/2.8, the GX85 is too sharp (even on 1080p timelines) unless it's got a lens with some softening on it, and the GH5 in 200Mbps 1080p ALL-I mode is pretty darn neutral and the files are strong enough to grade however you like them.

I also have a number of vintage 50mm lenses, and have more in transit, so am planning on a head-to-head with them too.  Currently my Helios 58mm F2 copies are the clear winners, with their soft and almost painterly rendering.  My interest in the 28-70 is getting something with a similar rendering.