Three light weight still zooms-range-11-105mm

[Sanjin Jukic]

Three light weight still zooms-range-11-105mm

Just to give you an idea below is "quick and dirty" test (1K snap shots) about three light weight still zooms

(the best for R1 handheld) at the range from 11 mm (extreme wide) to 105 mm (middle telephoto) size:

1. Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (Nikon G DX)

2. Nikon 17-35mm f/28 (Nikon F FF35)

3. Tamron 28-105 f/2.8 (Canon FD FF35)

Tokina @ 11mm

Tokina @ 12mm

Tokina @ 13mm

Tokina @ 14mm

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Tokina @ 15mm

Tokina @ 16mm

Nikon @ 17mm

Nikon @ 20mm

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Nikon @ 24mm

Tamron @ 28mm

Tamron @ 35mm

Tamron @ 40mm

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Tamron @ 50mm (sorry for out of focus! always rushing)

Tamron @ 60mm (sorry for out of focus! always rushing)

Tamron @ 85mm

Tamron @ 105mm

 

[Antoine Fabi]

Sanjin,

The Nikon looks warmer than the Tokina.(at least on these pictures)
Was it because lighting variations ?

Do you think the Tokina would match reasonably the Zeiss ZFs in color response ?

...ALSO, i saw in another thread that it was possible to fit an aperture ring on the Tokina. Did you do that modification ?
Is so, does it work well ?

Thanks

Antoine

 

[Jannard]

Sanjin... thanks for the post. Everyone needs to know as many options as possible.

Have you checked the breathing on these lenses? This seems to be where still lenses fall down pretty hard.

Jim

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Sanjin,

The Nikon looks warmer than the Tokina.(at least on these pictures)
Was it because lighting variations ?

Do you think the Tokina would match reasonably the Zeiss ZFs in color response ?

...ALSO, i saw in another thread that it was possible to fit an aperture ring on the Tokina. Did you do that modification ?
Is so, does it work well ?

Thanks

Antoine

Sanjin... thanks for the post. Everyone needs to know as many options as possible.

Have you checked the breathing on these lenses? This seems to be where still lenses fall down pretty hard.

Jim

Thanks guys for replays....

Especially from Jim...

and also from Antoine...

Just have got back from a nightlife....

More about all tomorrow... sorry...

 

[michael zaletel]

Light Falloff on Tamron 28-300

Light Falloff on Tamron 28-300

I don't know about the Tamron 28-105 but here's a couple recent still shots with the Tamron 28-300 (at different focal lengths) on a Canon 5DM2. The light falloff at the edges is unacceptable. I also own the Canon 70-200L which is worlds apart. The Tamron is definitely light weight, in every way.

1. RGB
2. Red Channel Only

 

[Kwan Khan]

Thanks for sharing...

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I'm back now in a daily life...

Sanjin... thanks for the post. Everyone needs to know as many options as possible.

Have you checked the breathing on these lenses? This seems to be where still lenses fall down pretty hard.

Jim

Jim,

as you know maybe the best from all of us that still lenses for a cine work are mostly "just and pure in a level of improvisation".

The most of still lenses are quite cheap and light-weight, also some of them have an extraordinary optical performance.

But the most of still lenses are "bumping" when you touch the focus or zoom ring, some of them are badly breathing, vignetting, have a lot of CA, have purple fringing, and the most of zooms have also "ramping".

I'm experimenting with them a lot and always talking about use of still lenses only as an alternative to the cine professional lenses just in a case if you don't have another solution.

Below is the link to the latest "quick & dirty" test about breathing of those three still zoom lenses.

Simply to say that they are all breathing badly.

Tamron is also "bumping".

The test starts with Tokina, then comes Nikon in the middle and Tamron is the last.

The samples were selected from 1K _M QT proxy files, then copied/pasted in the new QT file and exported in H264 at high quality compression... no CC,...


"Quick and dirty" breathing test 4.8 MB>>>click right button to download linked file>>>

Sanjin,

The Nikon looks warmer than the Tokina.(at least on these pictures)
Was it because lighting variations ?

Do you think the Tokina would match reasonably the Zeiss ZFs in color response ?

...ALSO, i saw in another thread that it was possible to fit an aperture ring on the Tokina. Did you do that modification ?
Is so, does it work well ?

Thanks

Antoine

Antoine,

as we saw it at the above pictures that those three still zoom lenses are not color matched just because they are all from different lens makers.

I do not have any ZF lens with me and cannot say anything about if they would or would not color match with Tokina.

The aperture ring on my Tokina is from 16:9 and is very simple, somehow a "primitive" and limited in a way that you mostly don't know in which aperture number you are and you must "guess" about it.

I don't know about the Tamron 28-105 but here's a couple recent still shots with the Tamron 28-300 (at different focal lengths) on a Canon 5DM2. The light falloff at the edges is unacceptable. I also own the Canon 70-200L which is worlds apart. The Tamron is definitely light weight, in every way.

1. RGB
2. Red Channel Only

Michael,

I'm sure your Tamron 28-300m has f/3.5-6.3 and that should be the main reason for that light falloff.

 

[Stefan Christou]

The Nikon's have a far more pleasing colours to me and seem to have more DR than the Tamrons. I wonder what the RPPs will look like?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

RPPs as we heard are the professional cine lenses that can be compared with Arri/Zeiss, Cooke S4s or Panavision prime lenses.

Here we are with still photo glass.

Btw, Nikon is the most expensive between all of them and at some cases also the best performer.

 

[Antoine Fabi]

Thanks Sanjin,

The ZFs have wonderfull optical quality.
Breathing is very acceptable Jim.
It is a superb alternative until someone can afford a set of top level cine lenses.

I use them until i can justify RED Pro Primes...Soon!
I can't wait to see real life footage with them.

Cheers

Antoine

 

[conrad gaunt]

Sanjin... thanks for the post. Everyone needs to know as many options as possible.

Have you checked the breathing on these lenses? This seems to be where still lenses fall down pretty hard.

Jim

To be fair, my £3000 set of 5 Zeiss ZF primes don't seem to have that issue. But then they're made with the same glass as cine lenses..

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

To be fair, my £3000 set of 5 Zeiss ZF primes don't seem to have that issue. But then they're made with the same glass as cine lenses..

Ronx,

I can understand you.

But the main purpose of this test was to show a possibility to have the range from 11mm to 105mm just in three zoom lenses with the same speed f/2.8 for an extreme sort of documentary handheld shooting.

You don't get this lightweight mobility and price/performance with any of cine zoom lenses.

The primes are always another lens story.

I had Zeiss ZF 50mm f/1.4 and traded with Leica R 50mm f/1.4 that found much better picture quality, metal housing, smoother focus ring in cine direction, etc.