DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/)
-   -   Lenses for EX3 (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/429089-lenses-ex3.html)

Dave Tyrer September 23rd, 2009 02:08 AM

Lenses for EX3
 
What Telephoto lenses are available for the EX3. I have a Nikon telezoom, but it's a pain to keep changing between that and the stock lens. To get even more reach I would need to go to the Nikon 600mm. Is there a long 1/2 or 2/3 lens that would suit wildlife, with a built in extender. I'm just looking at options.

Thanks

Doug Jensen September 23rd, 2009 04:51 AM

The Fujinon 18x5.5 with 2x extender is your best choice if you want to keep one lens on your camera all the time.
FUJIFILM USA FUJINON |
$17K

But even at full-zoom, with the extender, it won't get you any closer than a 200mm Nikon.

Dave Tyrer September 23rd, 2009 04:57 AM

Thanks..Doug...I just saw the price of that. The Nikon 600 suddenly isn't looking that bad.

Vincent Oliver September 23rd, 2009 05:58 AM

Just be aware that you will need a rock solid tripod when using lenses over 300mm the slightest puff of wind will cause camera shake. I find it almost impossible to use my 500mm Nikkor lens take a look at the long lens shots on this video - I was using a sturdy tripod too.

Sony EX3 Nikon mount

Steve Phillipps September 23rd, 2009 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver (Post 1387659)
Just be aware that you will need a rock solid tripod when using lenses over 300mm the slightest puff of wind will cause camera shake. I find it almost impossible to use my 500mm Nikkor lens take a look at the long lens shots on this video - I was using a sturdy tripod too.

Sony EX3 Nikon mount

You are getting into fairly seriously big magnification though so a little wobble is excusable. What tripod head did you use? I've used a Canon 150-600 on the EX3 (briefly) and found it OK if not too windy on my O'Connor 2060 (but that is a 9kg head!).
Steve

Doug Jensen September 23rd, 2009 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Phillipps (Post 1387982)
You are getting into fairly seriously big magnification though so a little wobble is excusable.

Not really. Maybe "understandable", but not excusable. There is not a single 500mm shot in Vincent's demonstration that could be used for anything except breaking news.

Please don't take offense, Vincent, because I know you were just demonstrating the challenges of big lenses. I know you were not trying to present those shots as being pretty pictures. :-)

Vincent's demonstration is a perfect illustration of how too much of a good thing isn't so good. At some point you have to back off and admit you don't have the right tripod, the weather conditions are too windy, etc. and NOT shoot.

Wobble is understandable, but not excusable in a finished production unless it is a really important news event or something like that.

I use a 300mm Nikon with an Adaptimax on my EX3 and it is rock-solid with my O'Connor 1030B head -- even for smooth panning and tilting. But I have no desire to go with bigger lenes unless I want to lock the shot down and don't move the camera.

Steve Phillipps September 23rd, 2009 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen (Post 1388107)
Not really. Maybe "understandable", but not excusable. .

Yes, you're right, much better choice of word.
Steve

Vincent Oliver September 23rd, 2009 10:07 AM

The 500mm is an amazing lens, although I have never used it that much, even for still photography. Yes, I know my tripod is due for an upgrade and I will probably spend my profits in the next few weeks on a better one. I will publish a "more creative" and colour graded video in due course and illustrate what does work with each of the prime lenses.

btw. all the Nikkor lenses used were the old series. Optically they are superb and work a treat with both the Adaptimax and Mike Tapas lens adaptors. The best bit is that no-one wants the older manual lenses anymore so you can pick them up for a song. The 500mm reflex Nikkor cost me 200 (about $328).

Steve Phillipps September 23rd, 2009 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vincent Oliver (Post 1388434)
The 500mm is an amazing lens, although I have never used it that much, even for still photography. Yes, I know my tripod is due for an upgrade and I will probably spend my profits in the next few weeks on a better one. I will publish a "more creative" and colour graded video in due course and illustrate what does work with each of the prime lenses.

btw. all the Nikkor lenses used were the old series. Optically they are superb and work a treat with both the Adaptimax and Mike Tapas lens adaptors. The best bit is that no-one wants the older manual lenses anymore so you can pick them up for a song. The 500mm reflex Nikkor cost me 200 (about $328).

Definitely true Vincent, and there are some real gems in there - 55 micro, 180 f2.8, 300 f2.8, 50-300 f4.5, 400 f3.5, 600 f5.6, all are cracking lenses and ridiculously cheap - seen 300 f2.8 at 300-400 before now and for optics and build quality they don't get much better than that.
Steve

Steve Phillipps September 23rd, 2009 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen (Post 1388107)
.

I use a 300mm Nikon with an Adaptimax on my EX3 and it is rock-solid with my O'Connor 1030B head -- even for smooth panning and tilting. But I have no desire to go with bigger lenes unless I want to lock the shot down and don't move the camera.

I love my 1030B too, and it's probably ideal for the smaller cameras, but there is no doubt (and no surprise I suppose) that the 2060 is far more stable with bigger rigs, I notice it immediately.
Steve

Vincent Oliver September 23rd, 2009 12:03 PM

1 Attachment(s)
I have had my collection of Nikkor lenses (16 in all) for a number of years. I was tempted to part exchange the lot a few years back, but was offered such a poor price for them. Needless to say I turned it down and they have just sat in my office doing nothing, until I purchased the EX3. Now I have a great collection that have a second life.

Shown here is the 200mm f4 Nikkor lens with a haggard looking owner

Doug Jensen September 23rd, 2009 02:25 PM

Vincent, that 200mm f/4 looks a lot lighter than my 80-200 f/2.8
Being a prime, it's probably sharper, too.
I'm going to have to find one of those. Nice.

Steve Phillipps September 23rd, 2009 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen (Post 1389248)
Vincent, that 200mm f/4 looks a lot lighter than my 80-200 f/2.8
Being a prime, it's probably sharper, too.
I'm going to have to find one of those. Nice.

I'd go for a 180mm f2.8, it's beyond amazing optically!
Steve

Vincent Oliver September 23rd, 2009 03:53 PM

Doug,

I also have the same 80 - 200mm 2.8 Nikkor, and yes the 200mm f4 lens is a lot lighter, and sharper. Call me old fashioned or what, but the older series of Nikon lenses were built like tanks - they probably used the same metals too.

Alister Chapman September 25th, 2009 08:47 AM

As well as a decent tripod you also need to do something about the small tripod mount. A DM reinforcing plate or similar is essential along with support rails for the lens.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:24 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2021 The Digital Video Information Network