Wide-Normal Zoom Reccomendations (All mounts)

[B-9]

Heyo!

We FINALLY nailed down our honeymoon plans- Amtrak from the Mitten to Washington State. We are keeping it light by only allowing each of us a backpack for the week and no checked luggage. This had me locked last night searching for decent cheap zoom lenses to throw on my Panasonic GH3.

The mount is not so important, although I prefer to keep things in Nikon F/AI as I already own a speedbooster, but im considering Canon EF/EFS as well as Pentax, Canon FD, and Minolta MD all having a speedbooster available for MFT.

Some lenses I have found:

Tokina 11-16/2.8 ATX
Tokina 24-40/2.8 AI/MF
Tokina 20-35/2.8 ATX

Nikon 12-24/4.0 AFS
Nikon 18-35/3.5-4.5 AFD
Nikon 25-50/4.0 AI
Nikon 28-85/3.5-4.5 AI
Nikon 35-70/3.5 AI

Tamron 11-18/4.5-5.6
Tamron 10-24/3.5-4.5
Tamron 17-35/2.8-4.0

All of these seem more or less fair/good at very affordable prices (under 400$) can you add any more? No preference for FX/DX/MF/AF here so shoot away! No fly-by-wire focus MFT lenses please!

Thanks in advance!

 

[presspass]

The Nikon 25-50 ais is a wonderful lens. Not small, and a bit awkward with the hood, but stellar results if you can live with the 4.0 maximum aperture.

 

[B-9]

The Nikon 25-50 ais is a wonderful lens. Not small, and a bit awkward with the hood, but stellar results if you can live with the 4.0 maximum aperture.

I think f4.0 will be plenty for 90% of the clips I hope to grab. Ill likely sneak my 50/1.8 AI into a sock for anything "low-light" its just a stellar and tiny lens.

I owned the Nikon 28-50/3.5 for many years and loved it. The 25-50 was always the big brother lens that got better marks and less flare but added size. Lending to why this lens stuck out in my memory for this post. Alternatively the Tokina 24-40/2.8 adds speed with some added softness. Although I cant seem to find out if this lens "breathes" when zooming in/will the focus change as the lens zooms.

Thanks! thats +1 for the 25-50/4.0 AI

 

[Roger Hicks]

My darling wife would go for a wide-angle Tri-Elmar (WATE), possibly instead of the honeymoon. Yes, she's as keen on photography as I am.

Cheers,

R.

 

[B-9]

Lucky Man you are Roger!

I have so few photography items these days. Only the little Ricoh GRDIV for stills and the Orange Leica for RF fun. Ive been enveloped by video! The fiance still loves to take photos with the Nikon V1 I got her for Christmas a few years ago. She refuses my offers to upgrade!

The call for a zoom is really my only option to travel light. One camera, zoom attached, and the nifty little fifty packed into a sock. Im also planning to grab a Rode VideoMicro so I can leave the VideoMic Go and Pro at home. No room in my pack for camera gear its all on the neck!

 

[ruby.monkey]

Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ. It's tiny, weighs about as much as a gnat's testicle, is dirt cheap, and honestly isn't a bad little lens.

 

[ptpdprinter]

If you are so concerned with size and weight, I don't get why you are considering putting a big FF lens on the GH3, especially with its 2x crop factor. Go with one of the small MFT lenses. Both Olympus and Panasonic offer a 14-42mm that better fit the bill.

 

[B-9]

Not interested in the kit lenses from Pana-Oly. Focus rings are to small for my hands and I refuse to use Fly-by-wire focus. Small is not exactly my ethos rather keeping it simple and on the neck.

Only 1.42 crop with my speedbooster. (0.71 x 2)

---
Oops I did say "travel light" when responding to Roger. Light or small neither are criteria in my OP or the planned trip. Although I appreciate the input! Thanks!

Anyone have recommendations on Canon FD or Minolta MD zooms?

 

[raid]

I do. I have used a Canon FD 28-50 macro for many years. It is a much better made lens than the Canon 28-55. The 28-50 SSC is a very well built lens. Its only negative characteristic is a rotating lens front. It is not easy to use with a rotating polarizer filter.

 

[Darthfeeble]

I just got a 12-32 Panasonic lens for my newly IR converted Oly EPL1 and love it. Tiny and sharp.

 

[kxl]

Nikon 20-35mm/2.8

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Why don't you just use a Micro Four Thirds lens? I have the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro lens and it is incredibly sharp, even wide open. It would be easier to use and smaller & lighter than using a 35mm format lens on an adapter. The only downside is cost, its an expensive lens, but it is worth it. Right now, 90% of my work is shot with it.

 

[Rob-F]

I have both the 28-105mm AF-Nikkor and the 20-35mm 3.5-4.5 Tokina (not the f/2.8, which I believe is not as good). Both are good, but the Nikon is certainly the better lens! I also have the prime lenses in this range, but the Nikkor is good enough that I often don't bother with the primes. I had the 20-35mm AF-Nikkor, but it had a little too much CA and he edges were not all that sharp.

 

[B-9]

The Oly 12-40 is a wonderful lens (so I see online) but it’s well over my budget at about twice my cameras value.

I had overlooked the Nikon 28-105AFD! Another stellar lens, I am rather fond of the 28-85AFD that is of similar age. Tack sharp lens throughout its range. I see the 28-105 gets similar rave reviews. It’s also cheap cheap cheap. Thanks!

Anyone have experience with the Nikon 18-70 kit lens? Good range and very cheap.

 

[Gerry M]

I have had a Nikkor 18-70 for quite a few years and would not recommend it. On my Nikon film and FX bodies, my most used zoom is a Nikkor 28-50 f3.5 AIS. Image quality equals my primes. But, that's just my experience. For M4/3 zoom, I use mfg lenses.

 

[madNbad]

Recently, I bought a refurbished Nikon 5300 for my wife to use. It came with the 18-55 zoom which, in limited use, seems to be a fair performer. Plus it's small and light. I was warned the stop that keeps the lens locked in the retracted position isn't particularly strong and is subject to breakage. Being a G series lens it may not fit your parameters.

 

[B-9]

Ive been stuffing in reviews of the Nikon 18-200 V1 as it looks like a promising range. It also had me thinking about the older 28-200G ED. I was surprised to see the 18-200 is much cheaper used than older 28-200 ED. I cant really see why (other than being FX) the 18-200 also has ED element with VR at half the price of a used 28-200G. Strange!

18-200 is around 150-200$ used right now with the 28-200 around 350$


Also I forgot to mention, I do have a Nikon D300s, its on loan to my brother (for life) and I could steal that for my trip BUT that would limit me to 720p and the camera is much heavier than the GH3 with speedbooster.

Although I do agree with the MFT zoom reccomendations as being both small and of good IQ there are major drawbacks for me and my intended use (video) it just makes a lot more sense for me to have both a focus ring with mechanical stops and a larger easier to grab (and modify) surface area for both zoom and focus. I would even go as far to say that I do not need a optically superior lens shooting 1080 at 24. Things like moire and rolling shutter tend to be bigger distractors than sharpness. The speedbooster will make the corners look soft regardless of the crop and that is even more compounded by a ND filters inevitable vignette and color cast. This makes whatever combination I use a balance of compromises. I know! Not exactly the norm around here but its all the same if not very similiar equipment.


Heres a fun link to a Leica with a PL mount lens 🙂
https://cinescopophilia.com/leica-m-pl-mount-from-cw-sonderoptic-and-an-nab-show-special/