Jump to content


Photo

Lenses for Panasonic GH5...native?


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 Austin Pink

Austin Pink

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 August 2017 - 12:45 PM

Hey guys,

    I'm looking to get lenses for a new GH5 body. I was wondering if anyone had advice regarding first lens purchases. Would it be smarter to just get the Lumix line of lenses so I don't have to get an adapter right away. Or for future abilities, should I just get, for example, an EF adapter and some Canon glass. I do have somewhat of a limited budget and I would prefer to buy two or three primes instead of a zoom. Also any advice on the speedbooster and its value would be appreciated. I realize that was a lot, but any help is much appreciated. Thanks!


  • 0

#2 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1160 posts
  • Director
  • Og from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 13 August 2017 - 01:20 PM

Speedboosters get the job done, although is it $400 for one? Depending on your budget, may not be worth it.

 

I've yet to encounter a single person who's given the Lumix line praise. To me they come off as a proprietary throw-in.

 

If you elect to get EF glass you'll find it more useful in terms of compatibility with other cameras down the line. Also there's simply far more EF glass out there.

 

PL is another thing to entertain if you have the cash.


  • 0

#3 Austin Pink

Austin Pink

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 August 2017 - 01:30 PM

Yeah thats pretty much what I was thinking. Also, when picking lenses, should I consider the crop factor of a micro 4/3. Like, for example, if I was considering a canon 50mm 1.8, should I basically consider that a long lens on the micro 4/3? I know the whole idea of converting it based on what a full sensor sees doesn't change the nature of the focal length, but I just want to be strategic about picking first glass.


Edited by Austin Pink, 13 August 2017 - 01:31 PM.

  • 0

#4 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1735 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 13 August 2017 - 01:50 PM

I've yet to encounter a single person who's given the Lumix line praise.

 

Glad to be the first...

 

There is nothing at all wrong with the Lumix line of lenses. Short of spending thousands of dollars on real cine-lenses, the HD-series, namely to 12-35 and the 35-100 are perfectly sharp, capable lenses. Are they perfect? No, but they are great lenses that work just fine and produce a perfectly pleasing image. Of course, each lens will run you about $600 or more (I paid $1,600 for my set), so they are far from the cheap $200 or less Lumix lenses that most people consider for the camera.

 

Don't get me wrong, there are better lenses. If you can afford it, a speedbooster in combination with a really nice cinema lens or maybe even a high-end photo lens will give you great results as well, but hardly results I'd say are light years better than the HD-series of Lumix lenses. 

 

There are major advantages to the native lenses as well - namely no crop factor to consider, stabilization, auto-focus support (if you need it), glass that is designed to work with the camera, and the need to not have to deal with adapters.


Edited by Landon D. Parks, 13 August 2017 - 01:53 PM.

  • 0

#5 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Moscow

Posted 13 August 2017 - 02:43 PM

Unless you've bought a GH for stills, look for lenses you can pull focus on.


  • 0

#6 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 13 August 2017 - 02:51 PM

Were I you; I'd look into the Rokinon line of cine lenses for EF Mount. They're cheap, and they rang from a 8mm to a 10/12/14/16/24/35/50/85/100/135. The wider end lenses are vital on a M4/rds sensor, and what's nice is you can even throw them on other EF cameras when you need a light, cheap, disposable, almost lens.

The fact they are fully manual is also very helpful as you don't need to worry about adapter compatibility.

They're really not spectacular in any way; but for the price, can't really be beaten. I've even used them on the Dragon etc before and unless I told you it was a $300 lens, no one would notice, nor care.


  • 0

#7 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1735 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 13 August 2017 - 02:52 PM

Proper cine-focus lenses are, well, expensive.... Otherwise, your stuck with still photography lenses, which aren't much better at pulling focus than the GH line. I mean, it seems kind of overkill to stick a $10,000 cinema-zoom lens on a $1,500 GH5. I still own my Sigma 18-35 and a M43 speedboosters, but rarely use them any longer.

 

Edit: The Rokinon are nice lenses, but then you have the crop factor issue on a GH line camera.


Edited by Landon D. Parks, 13 August 2017 - 02:55 PM.

  • 0

#8 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Moscow

Posted 13 August 2017 - 02:57 PM

The aforementioned Rokinons are cheaper than Panasonic lenses. And usable focus mechanics aren't a luxury, they're a necessity.


  • 0

#9 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 13 August 2017 - 03:06 PM

Let's forget crop factor for a second. The main difference is that on a M43rds sensor the lenses have a smaller field of view than we'd be used to an APS-C or FF systems, fine, but in the cast of the Rokinons you still have viable wide lenses. IF we take a 35mm as a "normal" ish lens for a APS-C sensor, then the 24mm Rok will be roughly the same, and we can of course go wider, all the way down to 8mm, which is darned wide-- in fact it was about the widest I've ever shot outside of 1/3" and 8mm cameras was a 9.5mm on S16mm film. 

So, yes, there's a "crop factor" if you're trying to replicate a shot between 2 disparate systems' field of view, but that rarely happens. The real question is, can i find a range of lenses which'll give me the options to shoot what needs to be shot, and yes, you can in the roks. Mostly because they all produce an image circle which'll cover the M43rd sensor. I recall on the GH2 when I had one, lensing was a bit of an issue on the wide end, but this is mostly mitigated these days as many companies are making wide lenses (sigma, tonika, canon, and yes panasonic)

And, even without a speed booster, you have plenty of focal lengths to choose from as the case may be. Whereas a a lens set you'd take out for an Alexa may be 18/25/35/50/85, or something like that, on a GH you get just about the same wish a 10/12/16/24/50. (the 14 rok is kinda crap as is the 8 but they're there if you need them).

 

The whole crop factor business, when brought up, really muddies the water and gets people thinking there's no way to shoot on x or y system without things like a speedbooster.

 

edit-- fun fact-- the lens i have on that Sr3 is a canon zoom which I think went to 7mm! but alas wouldn't cover a m43rds sensor

.


  • 0

#10 Austin Pink

Austin Pink

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 August 2017 - 03:52 PM

Really appreciate the responses. Seems like the Lumix line can definitely be a viable option with its own advantages, but I think that going for a couple Rokinon lenses and potentially a speedboster will be by move. That way I can have prime lenses like I want; and I was probably going to get an adapter anyway.

 

Edit: And I think that's a good point about the crop factor being somewhat less relevant, considering you can go pretty wide with Rokinon anyway, granted with questionable quality


Edited by Austin Pink, 13 August 2017 - 03:53 PM.

  • 0

#11 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 13 August 2017 - 03:54 PM

tell you the truth; get the roks first and see if you can live without dropping money on the speedboster. EF to M43rds adapters (dumb) are dirt cheap and that $400 can be spend elsewhere (like a good on camera monitor) much better. In all my time I've used a speed booster once, and personally hated it.


  • 1

#12 Michael Rodin

Michael Rodin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Moscow

Posted 13 August 2017 - 05:19 PM

edit-- fun fact-- the lens i have on that Sr3 is a canon zoom which I think went to 7mm! but alas wouldn't cover a m43rds sensor

It's a 7-63. The best S16 zoom I'd say. Sharper and cleaner than many primes. BTW, that SR3 shoulder kit is okay, but the cushion kind of sucks... used an Arricam LT shoulder mount instead, works really well on SR.

 

There used to be a 3,5mm lens for B4, made by Abakus. Could be adapted to S16 too.

 

Sorry for off-topic.


  • 0

#13 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 13 August 2017 - 09:51 PM

Aye the cushion wasn't great. I have a shoulder-pad but it's filled with foam. I'm thinking, though of getting bean-bags and throwing them in there instead. I saw red-rock had something like that on a rails system, and it seems like a good idea-- more form fitting. Normally; though I just ball up a shemagh on my shoulder it keep in my bag.


  • 0

#14 Macks Fiiod

Macks Fiiod
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1160 posts
  • Director
  • Og from DC, Now in NJ

Posted 14 August 2017 - 04:21 AM

tell you the truth; get the roks first and see if you can live without dropping money on the speedboster. EF to M43rds adapters

Yeah sometimes people get way to concerned with the crop factors on paper. I shot a PL Zoom with a 2x crop factor on BMPCC and didn't feel constricted by the crop at any point.


  • 0

#15 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 14 August 2017 - 11:27 AM

I don't see why it would be; the reality is the crop is only there to get you equivalences between formats if you're trying to match them. Sometimes too; i feel people fall to these things are artificial excuses and barriers to their work. We never needed "crop factors" when we were using XL1s etc.


  • 0

#16 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3723 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 14 August 2017 - 01:43 PM

I agree with Adrian, I'm not a fan of the all-electronic glass at all. The big thing for me is that repeatable focus is impossible. Where the Lumix glass does "look" good and for a situation where autofocus is good to have, it's nice to keep the stock lens for those purposes. However, for everything else, it's wise to get manual glass. Of course, the cunundrum is what do you use for a zoom.
  • 0

#17 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 14 August 2017 - 01:48 PM

If i were in a situation of a zoom-- say some kinda event or whatever; I'd just suffer with the stock glass.

One of the shows I shoot uses the AF100 with the stock glass because that's what the producers like. It's a PITA, it really is, and the look of the shower suffers for it; but they're signing the checks and you just work with it as best you can (it's the 14~42 we use). It's not impossible, but doable.

However for MOST shooting, in a narrative world (the aforementioned show being reality-styled, but scripted) it's pretty common to just use primes. On the off chance you NEED a zoom, you can rent a EF Mount Cine soom, but rarely have I really NEEDED a zoom, though I've often used them because they saved somewhere else, typically in time.

 

Even the last shoot I did, where "zoom" was written into the script and given it's overtones as as Spaghetti Western we could've gotten away with a zoom, it became quickly apparent the director was more than happy to scrap that idea in in favor of a few dolly shots.

 

The Zoom on the film cam next to me, btw, was used for time's sake to save lens changes and because, well, it was all hand-held and we didn't have the time to wait for glass to fly in and we wanted WIDE-- most of that shoot on the SR in my avatar was done on the 7mm/8mm end of the zoom; or on the 50+


  • 0

#18 David Mawson

David Mawson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 79 posts
  • Other
  • Manchester

Posted 01 September 2017 - 11:45 AM

Speedboosters get the job done, although is it $400 for one? Depending on your budget, may not be worth it.

 

I've yet to encounter a single person who's given the Lumix line praise. To me they come off as a proprietary throw-in.

 

 

They have an absolutely excellent rep in the stills world for what they are for - AF lenses with secondary focus by wire.They don't work well for a lot of video purposes because focus pulls aren't repeatable, but they are excellent optically. Some are better than that - the 20mm is widely considered a classic. 

 

Some Oly Pro m43 lenses do have repeatable focus - the 12-40 is one, I think.


Edited by David Mawson, 01 September 2017 - 11:51 AM.

  • 0

#19 Santiago Bazan

Santiago Bazan

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Student
  • Beijing

Posted 25 September 2017 - 08:10 AM

tell you the truth; get the roks first and see if you can live without dropping money on the speedboster. EF to M43rds adapters (dumb) are dirt cheap and that $400 can be spend elsewhere (like a good on camera monitor) much better. In all my time I've used a speed booster once, and personally hated it.

Hi Adrian! Thank you for your suggestion. What you mean with "EF to M43rds adapters are cheap" ? Which adapter you recommend? I was thinking in buy a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and a Rokinon cine 12 t.2 for use in the GH5 by SpeedBuster Ultra 0.71x , do you think this can runs? 
Thanks!
Santiago.


  • 0

#20 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 25 September 2017 - 11:53 AM

I'm not a fan of the speed-boosters I would just get a regular dumb EF adapter-- most of them are very affordable.

I'm not sure if the 18~35 Sigma you're looking at is all manual, if it is it'll work fine, just stay away from electronic lenses if you can, that's when you get into the expensive adapters. Fotonix, I think, makes some reasonable adapters.


  • 2


Glidecam

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Opal

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

CineLab

Tai Audio

The Slider

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Opal