Vintage Zoom Lenses with IBIS

[MrSMW]

I am eyeing up a Contax Zeiss 40-80mm f3.5 to have a dabble in this vintage lens for video thing that some folks do.

40mm (indoor) and 80mm (outdoor) are two near perfect focal lengths for me hence why this lens and using it like a twin prime lens would work for me.

I have EF-L Mount adapter with the built in VND from…the name escapes me and I am on my Summer hols, but worked very well with the Meike cine lens I tried.

So I just need to work out how to adapt a Contax lens to EF Mount but believe it’s easy to do?

My big Q however is IBIS. I know I can set a specific focal length which is what needs to be done with any non-native manual lens, but is there an option for something like this 40-80 or do you need to set 40 and/or 80?

I would be using it on the S5ii if it makes any difference.

One of my S5ii’s has lost it’s half-press shutter button AF ability and needs to be sent off under warranty to be fixed, but I cannot do this until after my season finishes early Sep.

It still works in every other regard but I may as well use this time to at least try this set up for, ‘sinematic’ (TM) effect.

If I can’t set IBIS for both 40-80 then I guess I’ll just make a custom mode for each and switch it each time which is no massive deal because as above, it would typically be a couple of hours indoor followed by typically 6-8 outdoor followed by a couple of hours back indoors.

Finally, probably no one has experience of this lens being a bit obscure and a photo lens, but any info of interest. 

The other contender was the 35-70 but the longer reach of the 40-80 ‘sold’ the focal length to me.

[MrSMW]

I may even have a dabble with Braw but we’ll see about that as I’d rather not invest in an appropriate monitor if an S2H is coming which would probably have that internal…

[bjohn]

Try using this tool: http://aggregate.org/DIT/IBIS/

It's quite clever, and the developer explains its limitations and goes into the mechanics of IBIS in some detail.

[MrSMW]

9 minutes ago, bjohn said:

Try using this tool: http://aggregate.org/DIT/IBIS/

It's quite clever, and the developer explains its limitations and goes into the mechanics of IBIS in some detail.

Cool and thanks, bookmarked that link to have a play when the lens and Contax to EF adapter turn up, which hopefully won’t be too long…

[kye]

8 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I am eyeing up a Contax Zeiss 40-80mm f3.5 to have a dabble in this vintage lens for video thing that some folks do.

40mm (indoor) and 80mm (outdoor) are two near perfect focal lengths for me hence why this lens and using it like a twin prime lens would work for me.

I have EF-L Mount adapter with the built in VND from…the name escapes me and I am on my Summer hols, but worked very well with the Meike cine lens I tried.

So I just need to work out how to adapt a Contax lens to EF Mount but believe it’s easy to do?

My big Q however is IBIS. I know I can set a specific focal length which is what needs to be done with any non-native manual lens, but is there an option for something like this 40-80 or do you need to set 40 and/or 80?

I would be using it on the S5ii if it makes any difference.

One of my S5ii’s has lost it’s half-press shutter button AF ability and needs to be sent off under warranty to be fixed, but I cannot do this until after my season finishes early Sep.

It still works in every other regard but I may as well use this time to at least try this set up for, ‘sinematic’ (TM) effect.

If I can’t set IBIS for both 40-80 then I guess I’ll just make a custom mode for each and switch it each time which is no massive deal because as above, it would typically be a couple of hours indoor followed by typically 6-8 outdoor followed by a couple of hours back indoors.

Finally, probably no one has experience of this lens being a bit obscure and a photo lens, but any info of interest. 

The other contender was the 35-70 but the longer reach of the 40-80 ‘sold’ the focal length to me.

There's a technique called "back button focus" which I have enabled on my GX85 ( @mercer told me how to set it up but google should also know how) and would side-step your issue.

Basically the camera is in MF the whole time except when you hold down the button you configure for it.  So the button is like having a hold-to-focus option.  Choosing one you can hit with your thumb seems to work quite well ergonomically.

I use it all the time because it means that you can focus on something and then use the shutter button to capture things without the camera having to refocus every time you go through the half-pressed position, and making the shutter button far more responsive too.

[MrSMW]

2 hours ago, kye said:

There's a technique called "back button focus"

Yep, but never really got on with it because mainly having to relearn a muscle memory thing of around 2 decades.

I mean I can do it in a pinch, but I’ve always preferred the half press and the AF set up for focus rather than release.

But going to take the opportunity to try an older lens to see if the magic really exists with this particular unit.

[kye]

3 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Yep, but never really got on with it because mainly having to relearn a muscle memory thing of around 2 decades.

I mean I can do it in a pinch, but I’ve always preferred the half press and the AF set up for focus rather than release.

But going to take the opportunity to try an older lens to see if the magic really exists with this particular unit.

How is your muscle memory for manually focusing?  

As someone who has shot exclusively for several years using MF lenses handheld in fast-moving real-world situations and trying to get a bit of background blur, my advice is...  get lots of practice beforehand!  For what I do, I shoot a lot, I get what I get, I miss the shots I miss, and I have an infinite time in the edit to make it work.  If I was shooting a wedding I'd be very nervous about using MF!

[MrSMW]

8 hours ago, kye said:

How is your muscle memory for manually focusing?

Absolutely fine, I use MF about 90% of the time for the exact opposite reasons which is I don’t trust anywhere near as much AF. Or at least didn’t with the S5 and previous Fuji cameras such as the XT3.

With focus peaking, it’s just a reliable way to work most of the time.

For anything that requires tracking however, such as; entrances, exits, couple walking shots, AF, principally because I will be shooting stills at the same time so the unit shooting video will be on sticks.

There is also a certain purity and ‘craft’ about shooting anything and everything as manually as possible which for me = almost everything video and just auto ISO and AF stills.

MF just removes uncertainty for peace of mind when working so actually removes a layer of thought process and that is an overall ethos I am always working on which is removing as much ‘stuff’ that gets in the way as possible.

My current ‘dilemma’ is the gimbal. I only use it for one thing which is tracking couple shots which I can do on the S5ii it’s IBIS being so good.

Not as good, but close/good enough so it begs the question why charge up, transport, set up, carry, use…something if so little value, or is that tiny bit of value sufficient to warrant it’s place.

Still debating that one with my alter ego, Mr Kit…

[kye]

3 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Absolutely fine, I use MF about 90% of the time for the exact opposite reasons which is I don’t trust anywhere near as much AF.

With focus peaking, it’s just a reliable way to work most of the time.

For anything that requires tracking however, such as; entrances, exits, couple walking shots, AF, principally because I will be shooting stills at the same time so the unit shooting video will be on sticks.

There is also a certain purity and ‘craft’ about shooting anything and everything as manually as possible which for me = almost everything video and just auto ISO and AF stills.

MF just removes uncertainty for peace of mind when working so actually removes a layer of thought process and that is an overall ethos I am always working on which is removing as much ‘stuff’ that gets in the way as possible.

My current ‘dilemma’ is the gimbal. I only use it for one thing which is tracking couple shots which I can do on the S5ii it’s IBIS being so good.

Not as good, but close/good enough so it begs the question why charge up, transport, set up, carry, use…something if so little value, or is that tiny bit of value sufficient to warrant it’s place.

Still debating that one with my alter ego, Mr Kit…

Cool - MF and the IBIS settings are the only downsides I can think of to going this direction, and it seems they're both in hand.

I'll be curious to hear your impressions of the setup once you've put it through its paces - weddings are at the serious end of being able to work fast in challenging conditions so it's definitely a rigorous real-world test!

Have you settled on which lens?  I don't know anything about it specifically, but the CZ 40-80/3.5 should be a stellar performer so I would imagine that you'll be reporting good things...

[MrSMW]

Well my ‘favourite’ focal lengths just happen to be 40 and 80 as in if I had to choose a pair of primes, these would be them.

40’s are rare and I can’t think of an 80, but 35’s common, otherwise it’s 70 (just a teeny bit too short) 75 OK, 85 OK, 90 getting a teeny bit long indoors.

So a lens that with a single push or pull is either 40 or 80 is kind of perfect for me.

The 35-70 was going to be the one I was going to try but a bit short and when I discovered the 40-80 existed, it was game set and match.

I started out with the Angenieux f2.6 28-70, but again, a bit wide and a bit short and slightly pricy because of the name.

Same with a lot of vintage glass such as Helios 58mm. Once something gains something of a cult following, prices shoot up.

These Contax Zeiss lenses seem to have a good rep, but don’t seem to have quite that level of cult worship yet, especially the 40-80 which has very little coverage.

The results I have seen from the 30-70 though look great.

I can’t see any scenario where I would move 100% to vintage glass, especially for stills, as I do have an AF requirement, but then never say never as there are clever LiDAR options so…

The bottom line is I don’t like following convention but simply for defying convention sake. If that makes sense?!

[kye]

On 7/9/2023 at 2:59 PM, MrSMW said:

Well my ‘favourite’ focal lengths just happen to be 40 and 80 as in if I had to choose a pair of primes, these would be them.

40’s are rare and I can’t think of an 80, but 35’s common, otherwise it’s 70 (just a teeny bit too short) 75 OK, 85 OK, 90 getting a teeny bit long indoors.

So a lens that with a single push or pull is either 40 or 80 is kind of perfect for me.

The 35-70 was going to be the one I was going to try but a bit short and when I discovered the 40-80 existed, it was game set and match.

I started out with the Angenieux f2.6 28-70, but again, a bit wide and a bit short and slightly pricy because of the name.

Same with a lot of vintage glass such as Helios 58mm. Once something gains something of a cult following, prices shoot up.

These Contax Zeiss lenses seem to have a good rep, but don’t seem to have quite that level of cult worship yet, especially the 40-80 which has very little coverage.

The results I have seen from the 30-70 though look great.

I can’t see any scenario where I would move 100% to vintage glass, especially for stills, as I do have an AF requirement, but then never say never as there are clever LiDAR options so…

The bottom line is I don’t like following convention but simply for defying convention sake. If that makes sense?!

Vintage lenses tend to be 10x the price for the "best" version compared to 2nd place, which is great if you don't happen to need the fastest/sharpest one.  Often, if you can find a lens test that does compare the "best" one with the "losers" then you'll find there's not much of a difference between the best one and the next best one (and maybe the one after that..).

A year or two ago I thought that Minolta glass was probably the next one that would become super popular, but I haven't kept up with it so I don't know if those have rocketed up yet or not.  They're spectacular lenses though.

Realistically, if you watch enough of those "OMG I found this incredible $30 vintage lens" then you realise that somewhere between half and three-quarters of all vintage lenses are actually great performers.  Even more than that if you're interested in lenses that have a more degraded set of optics, or are mechanically only so-so.  

[hyalinejim]

On 7/8/2023 at 7:47 AM, MrSMW said:

is there an option for something like this 40-80 or do you need to set 40 and/or 80?

If the lens doesn't communicate the focal length metadata to the camera body (which I guess this won't as it's an old lens) then you need to enter it manually. For a zoom, it's a nuisance as you would need to re-enter the focal length every time you change it.

There's a way to save a number of lens presets. So you could save 40 and 80 (if you're only going to use those two). Then there might be a way to assign the lens preset menu to a custom button. I'm not sure as I don't have my camera with me right now. But there would still be a few button presses involved.

If you were planning to use the lens at the same focal length for the whole shoot then it would be no problem. But switching from one to the other and back again might slow you down.

[MrSMW]

1 minute ago, hyalinejim said:

Then there might be a way to assign the lens preset menu to a custom button.

I’ll just use reconfigure the C1-3 custom modes but instead of settings for stills and video as I do now, base it on custom IBIS focal lengths.

Or the lens might just be crap and go straight back on Ebay!

I think it should work out OK actually, but we will see…

[MurtlandPhoto]

My vintage zooms hardly come out on shoots with me anymore. They don't have much of a place anymore. They're not as convenient as a modern zoom with AF and they don't have same IQ or character as a vintage prime. They're just sorta meh for me. I do still love my Tokina 28-70mm though.

[hyalinejim]

I went through a phase of trying to find the perfect cheap (non-L) EF zoom to use for film photography. I was looking for something small and relatively lightweight. When I tested them on digital they were all kind of horrible, specifically in terms of veiling flare, which I dislike quite a bit.

I guess I am a fan of more contemporary coatings. But it is fun shopping for lenses!

 

[MrSMW]

2 hours ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

My vintage zooms hardly come out on shoots with me anymore. They don't have much of a place anymore. They're not as convenient as a modern zoom with AF and they don't have same IQ or character as a vintage prime

The convenience I don’t need so much working with 3 cameras as one of the others is dedicated to AF, but yes, IQ will be interesting…

From what I have seen, the 30-70 looks pretty good, but the only real test is how it looks when you shoot anything yourself.

The 40-80 will be especially interesting because I can’t find anything so that means it’s either very rare, or hasn’t caught on. Or is just a bit shit.

My other concern though is over this thing called ‘character’. From what I have seen with so many vintage lenses, is too much ‘character’.

The Helios 58mm f2 for instance. Waaaaay too much ‘character’ for me and I have seen it in a direct head to head with the 30-70 and for my tastes, the results from the zoom looked just like I’d want them to and the Helios like some weird surreal absinthe fueled dream 🤪

But we will see. If it works, then great but if not, it was a 330 euro hit including adapter, but I’ll get 90% of that back re-listing it back on eBay.

The Sigma’s that I currently use are often described as being a bit sterile, but I like them. A bit sharp but a 1/8th mist takes that edge off and this is where I am hoping that a more ‘clinical’ but older vintage lens might take some of that digital look out of that modern sensor and lens equation without having to resort to filters or in post.

[hyalinejim]

6 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

The Sigma’s that I currently use are often described as being a bit sterile, but I like them. A bit sharp

Yes, I agree. I used that liitle APSC one on a bunch of interviews and ended up blurring the footage.

[TomTheDP]

Sounds like a good setup. No auto IBIS focal length detection is a bummer but its not terrible like you said. 

I am getting out of using still lenses for video though, focus throw is just usually subpar. I did use the Helios 58mm for one scene on my last feature. Looked amazing but was annoying to work with. 

[MrSMW]

41 minutes ago, TomTheDP said:

am getting out of using still lenses for video though, focus throw is just usually subpar

I have tried a couple of cine lenses but didn’t really get on with them, especially for hybrid use, but if I only shot video, for sure I’d probably be using a set from someone like DZO or even Sigma, but the latter are a bit pricy.

Before I pushed the button on trying this 40+ year old lens, I was considering the DZO 35-80, but the cost size and weight put me off.

It’s 1.5x the weight of the Lumix 70-200mm f4 which I somewhat grudgingly have because I need it, but only use it at 3 specific times on a job.

The thought of using that 35-80 all day long, well just 🤪

The CZ 40-80, around 600g so probably around 700-750g with the adapters and is more compact than my 70-200, a nice balance of heft for stability but not taxing to use all day.

Just been eyeing up the CZ 80-200…but I’m not going to get ahead of myself!

[TomTheDP]

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

I have tried a couple of cine lenses but didn’t really get on with them, especially for hybrid use, but if I only shot video, for sure I’d probably be using a set from someone like DZO or even Sigma, but the latter are a bit pricy.

Before I pushed the button on trying this 40+ year old lens, I was considering the DZO 35-80, but the cost size and weight put me off.

It’s 1.5x the weight of the Lumix 70-200mm f4 which I somewhat grudgingly have because I need it, but only use it at 3 specific times on a job.

The thought of using that 35-80 all day long, well just 🤪

The CZ 40-80, around 600g so probably around 700-750g with the adapters and is more compact than my 70-200, a nice balance of heft for stability but not taxing to use all day.

Just been eyeing up the CZ 80-200…but I’m not going to get ahead of myself!

I think maybe they work better for weddings where you are sniping shots. I have to do focus pulls on dollys and such for take after take so more precision is required maybe.