Stock lens
Is the stock lens really that bad? For doing basic stuff like high quality interviews, etc.? I don't need anything wider angle than the stock lens, and I don't need to reach out any farther, so do I really need to worry about it?
I have heard though that the other lenses are brighter. Are they bright enough to give an easier time getting shallow depth of field? |
Re: Stock lens
It's not really that bad...but it's not really that good either. It's just okay.
Under well-controlled lighting it can look pretty decent. It really falls apart when shooting subjects against a brighter background. Lots of chromatic abberations - poor lens shading, etc. Here's a couple of samples shot with the stock lens: gregory bennett | director of photography and gregory bennett | director of photography |
If you live in the 6-45mm and watch your ND filters to keep the aperture around 4.5 or at most 5.6 you will be fine. I posted a few pics here click for the full res to see. But yes full wide and 3/4 or more tele and the lens falls apart. But it still fairly nice in the real world drama lengths, so all in all, it's a hell of a lens for what if costs.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/jvc-pro-h...tock-lens.html |
Thank you, this is great input. How is the depth of field at those apertures?
|
Quote:
You will get better depth of field at the wider end of the lens, staying away from telephoto. (Telephoto will decrease the depth of field and cause related focus problems.) |
to be honest, I've seen far more expensive SD lens do the same.... so really its not so bad, but yes there is certainly better.
its fine for SD deliverables. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:38 PM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network