Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Suggestions for Nikon zoom that won't lose focus while zooming in or out

Stephen Pruitt

Stephen Pruitt

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Messages
3,309
Reaction score
40
Points
48
Website
www.thetreemotionpicture.com
Hi all. . .

Our REDs have the Nikon mounts, and I have a gorgeous collection of Nikon primes, but we would like one very good zoom to create zoom shots on occasion, not for use as a variable prime.

The question is this: Does anyone have any suggestions for a manual focus Nikon lens that keeps great focus as the lens zooms in or out?

Thanks very much.

Stephen
 
Don't think there are any really, they're just not designed like that. You tend to get variance between individual lenses of the same type and some hold better than others but I'm sure virtually none will hold all the way through. You also tend to find that it's not linear, in that you might focus at the tight end and then when zooming back it'll go out of focus, then in again, then out again, all over the place! This was a noted issue with the Canon 150-600 years ago when Optex started to motorise some, they trawled through all the ones they could find and picked the ones that held the best because there was a lot of variability.
Another thing is that the action on the zoom isn't smooth like it is on a cine lens.
Steve
 
I also have to say that I don't know of any... The 17-35 and 14-24 both drift noticeably. They're usable, it just depends on the look you're going for and what you can live with. Both are fine lenses, they're just not optimized for use in a cine application. I will never part with my Nikon 17-35, love the lens, but if I put it on a RED, it would be best suited as a vari-prime.
 
Still lenses are not made for zooming, for obvious reasons I suppose. I think in the cases where you will need to do zoom shots, you'll need either a PL mount cine lens, perhaps with a zoom motor, or an ENG lens using B4 adapter and shooting 2K. Still zooms are variable prime, which in and of itself is very handy for certain shooting situations.
 
Please note guys that the term Vari-Prime does not mean a lens that will not hold focus throughout the zoom. A Vari Prime refers to a lens that does not have enough zoom length to be useful as a zoom. ARRI makes a beautiful set of Vari-Primes that hold focus perfectly through the zoom.

As far as stills zooms go I do not know of one that will hold useable focus through the zoom throw.
 
Agree with Finner, basically you can rule it out - they won't hold well enough and the mechanism is not smooth enough either.
Anyway most producers hate zoom in my experience, I tend to avoid them.
Steve
 
Steve Phillipps said:
Anyway most producers hate zoom in my experience, I tend to avoid them.
Steve
Click to expand...
Maybe more for old fashion reasons than everything else, I mean, aesthetic ones. Popular 30, 40 years ago though.

I'd second the motion as director too. Not for the same reasons, I'm afraid. :sarcasm:

Antonioni used it. And he's still one of the most modern filmmakers (EDIT -- I mean, moviemakers :-) ever since. :)
 
I don't like zoom shots either but sometimes they are appropriate and you should be able to do one if director calls for it. But these things can be planned out ahead of time in most cases. Sports and nature shooting as well as some documentary probably have more of a need for zoom shots.
 
Bit of a no no in nature really, you hardly see any these days at all. One exception is the occasional long zoom with an HJ40 to reveal from CU of animal to wide landscape. Even these are really rare though.
Steve
 
Emanuel said:
Maybe more for old fashion reasons than everything else, I mean, aesthetic ones. Popular 30, 40 years ago though.
I'd second the motion as director too. Not for the same reasons, I'm afraid. :sarcasm:
Antonioni used it. And he's still one of the most modern filmmakers (EDIT -- I mean, moviemakers :-) ever since. :)
Click to expand...
Sergio Leone...Sam peckinpah...Tarantino
I personnaly like their old fashion zoom thought...
But back to the topic, if you finish in 2K maybe a digital zoom+after effect could make the trick.
 
Steve Phillipps said:
Bit of a no no in nature really, you hardly see any these days at all. One exception is the occasional long zoom with an HJ40 to reveal from CU of animal to wide landscape. Even these are really rare though.
Steve
Click to expand...
In terms of nature shots, I was thinking about when its used for practical reasons more than aesthetic ones. For example you are focused on a lion eating a meal but then see an elephant off in the distance that you quickly zoom in to capture the moment. Bad example but this is what I meant. You may keep the zoom during the edit because it works for that shot. But I agree that zooms are not as frequent these days.
 
IMO for a small zoom in ( up to 30%) - shoot 4k & do it in post = it holds focus ...
 
Yeah, since we are doing a 4K shoot with a 2K finish, we had already thought about using a digital post zoom, and that might be exactly what we do, but I had hoped that there might be a zoom that might work reasonably well.

Thanks very much.

Stephen
 
I think the second generation (two ring) 80-200 f2.8 Nikkor did pretty well in this regard.
It's not a bad manual lens because it has a locking focus collar unlike the later AFS models. They can be had fairly cheap used or under $1k new so it's probably worth a shot.
NA07999045197.jpg

Sharp lens too.

The 50-300mm f4.5 ED may also work, I don't think it's as sharp as the 80-200 but it does have a bigger range. I've seen these converted to PL but never shot one myself.
NK07010201471.jpg
 
Hey there, Evin. . . thanks for the tip. Is there anything in the short zoom range? 80 to 200 is a pretty long lens on the RED. . . I can't imagine what you folks are going to be using the 300 prime for except for nature work.

Thanks very much!

Stephen
 
I would guess the problem would be less with longer focal lengths and with a shorter range, but a Sigma 70-210 I once had on my Aaton didn't quite hold though was OK, the 50-300 Nikon I've used and it's OK but again not spot on and one of those that I found drifted off in the middle and then came back in again. I had a Leica 105-280 (gorgeous) in PL and even that didn't hold.
If you do go for a Nikon 50-300 be aware that there are at least 3 versions, 1 very old, then one modern that had ED glass (yellow ring on barrel and ED disgination) and one without ED glass. The ED one is definitely the one to go for. Also they don't have internal focussing so focus is slightly heavier than IF lenses, and may also be trickier if you want follow focus rigs on it?
Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top