Best PL Zoom for hand held / Steadicam

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Like a lot of camera operators I have spent many a day shooting off the shoulder using B4 mount optics on 2/3" video cameras. With the highly developed servo mechanisms, hand grips, etc I am able to make a decent day's pay by consistently crafting smooth shots.

I would like to be able to do the same thing with a PL mount lens on a RedOne or Epic. Is this too much to ask? I can easily recite the specs I would like:

12mm on the wide end (I would settle for 18mm)
12X zoom ratio (I would settle for 8X)
10 lbs or less in weight (under 6 lbs would be much better)
T2.4 WFO (anything over T3 really limits types of applications/genres)
$16K or less (up to $25K if it can hold T2.4 end to end with no ramping)

Since waiting for Canon or Fujinon or Angenieux to make this lens is taking far too long (how many frakkin' RedOnes do we have to buy to prove there is a market :unhappy I was wondering...

What is the best PL mount zoom for hand held currently available?

Is it the Optimo Rouge? 30-80mm is not much of a zoom range but its lightweight 4.2 lbs, sharp and pretty fast T2.8. I think the price is around $20K which is not bad for an Optimo but still a lot of cash. They also have a 16-42mm version but I really want something with legitimate reach. No ENG style hand grip with servo.

Red Pro 18-85mm? If I'm going to lug 10 lbs I'd like more than a 5X zoom, T2.9 is borderline for verite, excellent value at $10K, no ENG style hand grip with servo.

Here's the core question - a producer/director you respect offers you a show at a good rate that will require tons of hand held operation (RedOne at 4K) - what lens would you choose?

 

[Nick Gardner]

Howdy,

I really like the The elite 25-80 for hand held. It's really light, and very sharp.

http://www.slowmotioninc.com/sales/zoom_lenses.htm

I have 2 of the older ones. I use Long Valley's LWS, and an ARRI SR handgrip with the built in zoom control. The camera is very small, light and reminiscent of an SR or a Varicam this way. Here's a pic.

Cheers,

Nick

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Optimo 15-40 is "the standard" for wide zooms that can go hand-held. The Optimo Rouge 30-80 is great. I'm eagerly awaiting their 16-42. Another really nice one is the Arri LWZ-1, not too many people are really familiar with it. It's very light and compact T2.6 with a 14.5-45 range, very sharp and matches the Master Primes very well.

If zooms were a must and no swapping primes all the time, need for handheld and steadicam work a lot of the time. I think I would take a serious look at the Optimo DP Rouge lenses. $20K each.

There are also two new zooms that I'm aware of coming out sometime soon. This year is all I know, to be announced at NAB. I think they're about $10K each and both together would cover focal lengths from 14mm to 70mm. I'm of the opinion that they may just be re-housed Nikons (Nikon's amazing 14-24 and 24-70). But I don't know anything about this more than what I just typed.

If you're not going hand-held, the Optimo 17-80 T2.2 is an amazing piece of glass. But it's heavy at 11 pounds.

Nick's Elite zoom looks interesting. Never seen one of those myself.

 

[Jens Jakob Thorsen]

I am starting a feature just like that in a few weeks. All handheld.
I opted for the 16-42mm(if Ican get it in time) and a 30-80mm + my set of T1,3 Elites (18-135mm), for low light.
I think we would all love a really good 15-100mm T2 that weighs 2,5kgs, I know I would pay up to $100K for one, but Im afraid its not comming any time soon

JJ DP

 

[Jens Jakob Thorsen]

The Elite is T3,2.
I also think the Cooke 15-40 T2 looks REALLY nice, but its 3,5kgs.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Canon? Fujinon? RED? Help...

Canon? Fujinon? RED? Help...

Nick - thanks for the idea and the pic. This is not a lens I have ever seen, let alone worked with. The T3.2 is an issue for verité work under available light. What do these go for used? I like the set up with the pistol grip / zoom control.

Jens - the Cooke 15-40 T2 is such a nice lens I drool just thinking about it but it is heavy for such a short throw and pricey.

Jeff- LWZ-1 is a lens I have heard about but never shot myself. Some say it is really a variable prime and not a proper zoom (ramping & breathing issues). Anyone care to comment?


Cheers- Blair

 

[Evin Grant]

Blair, the ENG lenses you reference are only possible because of the small 2/3" chip.
In 35mm the closest you can get is a 24-290 Optimo, and we both know the trade offs.

 

[Karl Gustav H.]

Evin, did anything happen with that Zeiss zoom (x7 I think) you posted last week?

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

eff- LWZ-1 is a lens I have heard about but never shot myself. Some say it is really a variable prime and not a proper zoom (ramping & breathing issues). Anyone care to comment?

I have shot with it on one gig. It's no more a variable prime than the RED 18-50 is, if you want to put it in that context. The design and mechanics are great. Optically very sharp and matches the masters. It does breathe a fair bit, nothing like the RED 18-50 though. I didn't see any ramping issues. I probably wouldn't spend the money to own one of these. My money would be better spent on an Optimo I think.

The Rouge 30-80 is great. I've seen images from one and finally got to play with one last weekend. Their 16-42 model is to be released in May and I'm seriously thinking about buying that one. I think that along with the RED primes will fit my needs. I'll probably sell my Cooke 18-100 and pick up the Optimo DP 30-80 to round out my set. I love my Cooke 18-100, but it just doesn't fit a lot of the work I'm doing lately and it's not in high demand as far as rentals go. I'm conflicted though... It makes such pretty pictures.

 

[Douglas Underdahl]

Here's the core question - a producer/director you respect offers you a show at a good rate that will require tons of hand held operation (RedOne at 4K) - what lens would you choose?

Blair - I can't say enough about the Nikon 17-55. Very good at holding focus as it is zoomed, very little breathing, very sharp (I mean VERY SHARP), T2.8 througout, smaller and lighter than anything in it's range. You can do group and room defining wide shots at 17 and standard close ups at 35 or beauty close ups at 55. Now I know you said PL but there will be some new Nikon mount soon that will make this mount super strong and secure . . . Shot some doc stuff for Abel Ferrara with it in Little Italy NYC and it was a champ.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I'm cool with Nikon mounts and lenses designed for still photography as long as the zoom mechanism is smooth and breathing/ramping issues are minimal. Optically Nikon makes some terrific glass, as does Leica, etc.

I am not a PL snob, I just want full S35 coverage and operational characteristics that suit live zooming.

 

[Steve Gibby]

Just thinking out loud below...not trying to ruffle anyone's feathers...so take it as such.

For EFP style shoulder held work with RED One (and Epic/Scarlet) I'd like to see a 35mm stills lens manufacturer offer a 3-Way Utility Zoom, 10:1 or 12:1 ratio, with snap-on/removable gears, long focus throw with accurate markings, no click in the iris ring, and a removable EFP/ENG style servo zoom grip unit with a zoom rocker.

Such a lens would not be giant like an Optimo 12x, but would most likely weigh around 5 pounds - about the same weight/dimensions as the average B4 2/3" EFP/ENG zoom.

The features I mentioned above would enable the lens to be used in three different ways on cameras like RED One, Epic, and Scarlet:

1) Bare and lightweight stills lens mode, without gears or servo zoom unit. No matte box or follow focus.

2) As a cine lens when the snap-on gears are added, and a matte box and follow focus are also added into the setup.

3) As an EFP style lens when the snap-on gear for the focus ring is added, and the servo zoom unit is attached

The lens would have to hold focus throughout the zoom range, but would essentially be used as a variable prime for the genres of production where wide open apertures/prime usage isn't needed, and many genres where zooms are the norm for a camera setup.

I realize cine style purists, and union workers would not be using such a lens, because diversity of camera utility and lens re-configuration doesn't fit their scenario.

If we can now have cameras like Epic and Scarlet designed which emphasize modularity, utility, flexibility, and scalability, and lighter weight 35mm stills zoom can optically satisfy the needs of a wide range of the motion media production marketplace, then IMO there is no reason why a lens like I described above which compliments Epic and Scarlet's modularity and utility can't be designed.

Impossible? Nope. Is there a market for such a lens? With media and usage convergence, if there is a market for a flexible camera like the DSMC line (which there obviously is), it follows that there is also an equal demand for a 3-Way zoom like I described above. Does the end of the lens barrel have to be as big as a dinner plate? Nope. Will some entity make such a lens sometime soon? IMO yes - because there is a pent up demand and zero supply - we now have great flexibility in cameras on the horizon - but very little flexibility in lenses.

Who might be a logical "first mover" on making such a 3-Way utility zoom? Perhaps RED - I'd love that. If the new RED Electronic Lenses could somehow be offered as 3-Way utility zooms, they sure would maximize the utility and flexibility of some of the Epic and Scarlet models. If not RED, then I'd think that Canon is a logical producer of such a lens. After all, Canon has longtime experience producing all three lens types that can be used on R1, Epic, and Scarlet: cine lenses, 35mm stills lenses, and B4 EFP/ENG lenses. A 3-Way utility zoom should be well within their capability.

Nikon used to make EFP/ENG zooms, and they obviously have deep experience making 35mm stills lenses, so perhaps they will be the first mover on making a 3-Way utility zoom.

I wouldn't see traditional cine lens manufacturers making a 3-Way utility zoom, because its not in their best interest to make lenses which undermine their high-priced cine lens offerings.

In non-union environments there are a ton of shooters out there who, for various projects and genres, shoot 35mm stills as needed, cine style as needed, and EFP/ENG style as needed. Epic and Scarlet will be capable of quick re-setups for each of those disciplines - but as yet nobody has made a 3-Way, quickly adaptable, multi-use zoom to satisfy that pent up demand.

No, such a lens is not impossible. Yes, there is a big demand for such a lens to maximize cameras like Epic, and Scarlet. No, it doesn't have to be giant and heavy. Yes, some entity will be the first to corner the market for such. IMO its not a question of if a 3-Way utility zoom will be made - but rather questions of who and how soon.

 

[Evin Grant]

There's always the Nikon 18-200 or 16-85 VR zooms. Both are quite small and light, are plenty sharp enough for 4K and very affordable. The trade off is speed, they start at f3.5 and ramp to f5.6. I'm not saying they answer the question but best two out of three?

 

[Steve Gibby]

There's always the Nikon 18-200 or 16-85 VR zooms. Both are quite small and light, are plenty sharp enough for 4K and very affordable. The trade off is speed, they start at f3.5 and ramp to f5.6. I'm not saying they answer the question but best two out of three?

Both those are very good lenses for their price. At 11:1, the Nikon 18-200 definitely has the right zoom ratio. At 5.3:1, the Nikon 16-85 much less so. I've used the 18-200 on RED, with the Underdahl Nikon mount, and the optical results were surprisingly good in 4k HD. It is a little soft between 18-20mm, and also from 190-200mm, but in between those ranges it is quite crisp. Its a small, light lens. The strange thing about it is unlike most other lenses, the zoom ring is outermost on the barrel, and the focus ring is the inner ring. In manual operation that takes some getting used to. The zoom ring tends to be a bit sticky in the mid-range, with less friction on the long and short end of the zoom. The focus ring feels normal. It only costs $700, so if someone does real mobile work, needs an 11:1 zoom that is pretty darn crisp, a lens that will give good to very good 4k results on RED One, and they're on a budget, the 18-200 is worth a try. It ramps somewhat, but it holds focus surprisingly well throughout the zoom range.

Using the 18-200 with a Micro Force and clamp-on gear can be problematic though. The stiff mid part of the zoom ring rotation tends to bog down the Micro Force motor. The motor runs at normal speed for the first part of the zoom, slows down in the middle, and speeds back up toward the end. We tested more powerful motors than a Micro Force and had no problem whatsoever in power zooming the lens throughout its zoom range. I've tested out the View Factor Inclino motor, but not on the 18-200. I believe the Inclino has more juice than a Micro Force, so it should turn the trick on lenses with sticky zoom rings like the 18-200. A regular manual follow focus drives the 18-200 just fine.

The 18-200 definitely has good optics. If it had a smooth- throughout zoom ring mechanism, a constant speed of f2.8, a longer barrel rotation for focus, barrel rotation the normal direction, and an option for accurate barrel markings, IMO it would be an good candidate to be converted into a 3-Way Utility Zoom I described in my previous post. In RED 4k HD, we've intercut mid-iris range footage shot using a $700 Nikon 18-200 directly with similar aperture footage shot using a $70,000 Optimo 12x - and they intercut surprisingly well - much better than most people would think. We also intercut 4k HD RED footage from the 18-200 with 4k HD footage from an Angenieux 25-250 - and again they intercut surprisingly well. I'm not talking about wide open, but rather footage of subject matter shot at mid-apertures.

Nobody would normally intercut footage from such lens extremes unless they had no other options, but then again because of the near total lack of high ratio zooms, and the need for lightweight/mobile zooms that will cover S35 (or FF35), we sometimes have to get real creative in the composition of our lens kits for mobile shoulder held cameras - at least until some entity produces the 3-Way Utility Zoom I suggested in my previous post

Fingers crossed...

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Ultimate PL hand-held zoom lenses (range from super wide 10mm to short telephoto 80mm):

Variant 1 (speed)

1. Vantage HAWK 10-24mm T2.5 zoom lens, weight 3.95 kg/8.7 lbs
2. Cooke S4/i 15-40mm T2 CXX Zoom lens, weight 3.6 kg/7.9 lbs
3. Angenieux Optimo 28 - 76mm T2.6, weight 2 kg/4.4 lbs

Variant 2 (a bit lighter)

1. Vantage HAWK 10-24mm T2.5 zoom lens, weight 3.95 kg/8.7 lbs
2. Angenieux Optimo 15 - 40mm T2.6, weight 1.92 kg/4.2 lbs
3. Arri/Zeiss LWZ-1 15.5 - 45mm T2.6, Weight 2 kg/ 4.4 lbs
4. Angenieux Optimo 28 - 76mm T2.6, weight 2 kg/4.4 lbs

Variant 3 (the lightest)

1. Vantage HAWK 10-24mm T2.5 zoom lens, weight 3.95 kg/8.7 lbs
2. Angenieux Optimo Rouge 16 - 42mm T2.8, weight 1.9 kg/4.2 lbs
3. Angenieux Optimo Rouge 30 - 80mm T2.8, weight 1.9 kg/4.2 lbs

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Ultimate still zoom lens for handheld with R1:

Leica Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm F/2.8-4.5 ASPH

Compare range and size to Nikon AF-S (DX G) 18-200mm that is at FF35 equal 27mm - 300mm you would get

with Leica Vario-Elmarit-R 28-90mm F/2.8-4.5, a manual focus, fast and optically superb zoom lens.

 

[Antoine MARTEAU]

Sharing experience (and some pict):
A couple of works hand held, documentary style, available light with Red zoom 18-50.

I'm very happy with the result, weight, price ratio of this lens... And a very close focus...

I don't know how performs the 50-150 from Red but might be an option to...

Don't know if it helps...

 

[Antoine MARTEAU]

Sorry for the heavy compression... Everything is sharp and clear...

 

[Rob Gardner]

Blair
Those Russian 25-80's that Nick was describing sell new for $18,000. Mathew Duclos had one used for $10,000 (maybe still does) and the older version (the Ekrans from teh early '90's) seem to sell for around $5,000 or so, but they don't pop up too often and, of course, they usually come out of Russia or the old Soviet countries. They are astonishingly small and light for a 35mm cine zoom lens.
Rob Gardner

 

[Dominic Jones]

Doesn't that 18-200 lack an aperture ring??! Or is there a non G-series version available?

How did you manage to stop down Steve?

Interesting discussion, by the way - can't agree more on the "utility zoom" Steve, although I think the name could do with a little work

Cheers,
Dom.