5 hours ago
11
For the last couple of months, I’ve been trying out the Nikon 28-135mm PZ lens to see how it might fit into my workflow. Here’s what I found.
First, as always, we’ll set the table. I am a Los Angeles-based director/DP and shoot both narrative films and commercials. I don’t usually shoot events or weddings, more on that later, but I am a big fan of efficiency and like to build out my kit with speed in mind.
I am a longtime Nikon user on the photo side and have also used their mirrorless cameras quite a bit for independent film projects, the Z9 and ZR especially. While most of my work requires working with extended teams, I also often self-assign projects that find me working as a one-man-band filmmaker. So I put a heavy emphasis on tools that allow me to move quickly and remove as much friction from the process as possible so that I can clear mental energy to wear multiple hats during a production.
This is one of the reasons why I love zoom lenses. It’s not that I’m too lazy to use a prime. It’s just more practical for me at times to be able to change focal lengths without the sometimes time-consuming process of making lens swaps between takes. My default lens, in the Nikon world, is the 24-70mm f/2.8. It lets in plenty of light and covers my most-used focal range. It focuses fast and is sharp as a tack.
But that last part is one thing that, on the cinematography side, isn’t always the blessing that it sounds like. Oftentimes, when acting as a cinematographer, as opposed to a still photographer, I am in search of glass with more “character” as opposed to clinical sharpness. It’s part of the reason why filmmakers often opt for manual cinema lenses or even vintage glass. They are searching for the right kind of lens that will add something to that particular story.
https://youtu.be/ImDJoEXTOBk
This is exactly the type of thinking that led me to seek to borrow a NIKKOR Z 28-135mm f/4 PZ lens to see where it might fit in my kit. With the more video-focused lens, I was wondering what type of character it might possess versus the lenses I already own. Thankfully, I had a very busy month of shoots, both commercial and narrative, so I had plenty of chances to test it out and see what it would and would not offer me in comparison. After multiple shoots, I discovered there were three key areas where the PZ lens held an advantage.
Events and Documentaries
Now, as I mentioned earlier, I am not an event or wedding videographer. I only mention this because of two things. One, it explains why 24-70mm is my default as opposed to a longer range. And, two, I think that event work or news gathering is where the 28-135mm shines.
During my time with the lens, I had a rare opportunity to test out this theory. I had a commercial campaign shoot where the client wanted me to shoot the key art alongside an actual live event. This is not the way I like to work, and I’m not sure I would do it again, but that’s a story for a different day. Yet, because of the nature of the shoot, I knew that I would need a more flexible lens that would be able to capture action that, quite often, it was physically impossible for me to get close enough to due to the chaos of the event itself.
So, for many of the shots, I decided to treat the shoot as if I were doing an event shoot and simply let the action unfold and try to capture my key shots from the actual live action in front of me. The 28-135mm PZ came in handy here, as I could quickly switch from wide angle action to closeups with the flip of the switch. With the Hi-Res Zoom function built into Nikon cameras, which integrates with the 28-135mm PZ, my zoom range is extended even further in one fluid motion, saving me time and complexity. If you want to sharpen the fundamentals behind that kind of run-and-gun coverage, Introduction to Video: A Photographer’s Guide to Filmmaking is a useful primer.
Speaking of complexity, there is one small gripe I have with the lens. This is more an issue with narrative production as opposed to event or news gathering, but since I just talked about the flexibility benefit, it’s only fair that I identify something I wish were different. I mentioned this in my first impressions article when the lens was initially announced, as I predicted it may be an obstacle, and, in actual practice, it did, in fact, pose a challenge. Thankfully, it has little to do with the glass itself.
The hood of the 28-135mm PZ is excellent. It’s large and has one of those peekaboo ports on the side to be able to manipulate your variable NDs or polarizing filters. The hiccup I had was entirely personal, yet I doubt I’m the only one, so I thought it pertinent to mention it here.
The interior filter thread is 95 mm on this lens. If you’re like me and your owned filter sets top out at 82 mm, then you’ll need to find a solution. If I owned this lens, it would be simple to buy 95 mm filters, but since I was only borrowing this lens, that didn’t seem to be a prudent investment.
Normally this would be fixed with a matte box. I use a lot of filtration when shooting video, so I have plenty of matte boxes. But this is where I ran into problem number two. Due to the front element of the lens itself, my clamp-on matte boxes didn’t work. I have multiple sizes, which easily clamp onto the front of my other cinema lenses, but I couldn’t get meaningful grip on the front of the 28-135mm. I still had a solution. I could mount the camera on 15 mm rods and mount the matte box to the rods so that it sits in front of the lens as opposed to clamping onto it. This solution 100% worked. It just meant that I had to use a fully rigged camera with rails when I had this lens attached, which somewhat limited the compact run-and-gun promise presented by an all-in-one zoom. Again, this is a personal workflow issue and may not affect you at all. And were I to own this lens, I would just rebuy my filters in a larger size. But since I am someone who regularly uses filtration, I do wish the front element were more standardized to accept industry-standard clamp-on matte boxes for people like myself who use a lot of filtration in front of the lens.
Multicam
As a filmmaker, I am a big fan of multicam. This likely comes as no surprise. The word “efficiency” is my middle name. Being able to capture multiple angles simultaneously is a major time saver, as well as a great way to keep your actors fresh by limiting the number of repetitive takes.
But when trying to do multicam, it also often means that your remote cameras, the ones you aren’t physically operating, may be all the way across the set or in a position that’s difficult to reach. Here, I think, is where the 28-135mm PZ lens really earns its keep.
If you’re connected to your camera by SnapBridge or some kind of app, you can wirelessly send a signal to the camera to zoom in or out and have the power zoom make the adjustments without you needing to physically be in contact with your setup. You can quickly recompose on a remote camera without needing to disrupt production or change your lens. Because the PZ lens integrates with Nikon’s Hi-Res Zoom functionality, that gives you enormous range before having to reposition your B or C cam.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENkm-sPyvfI
Reliving the 1970s
Of course, there’s the obvious benefit. The “PZ” in the product title stands for power zoom. For those too young to remember early camcorders’ rocker switches, essentially this means that the lens itself can zoom with a little knob (forward or backward) as opposed to needing to physically manipulate the zoom ring.
Because the PZ is parfocal (you can zoom in or out without losing your focus point), it is particularly adept at doing in-take zooms. While this isn’t a style of filmmaking I do a lot, I did actually get a chance to use this function on a film I was shooting during my loan period, where I needed to draw the audience’s attention to a small detail on a bookshelf. The film I’m referring to, Bookmarks, is still in post and not for public consumption yet. But if you were alive then or have ever seen a thriller from the 1970s, you’ll know it looks a little something like the clip above.
Pros
Zoom range
Integration with Nikon Hi-Res Zoom
Good balance on Nikon cameras (and the newer RED bodies)
Focus speed
Silent focusing
Limited focus breathing
Peekaboo window in the lens shade
Relatively lightweight
Remote operation
Cons
Some complexity with matte boxes
f/4 versus f/2.8
Conclusion
Interestingly enough, since this was my initial question, from a “character” standpoint, I would subjectively consider the 28-135mm more in line with the precision of Nikon’s higher-end glass than toward the character end of the spectrum. That may be exactly what you’re looking for, so that’s not a negative on the lens. In fact, it’s a positive. Character is wholly subjective, so it’s not something that can be measured by shooting test charts. With Nikon announcing the coming line of cinema lenses, I am most curious to see whether those will lean toward “character” or “clinical.” That remains the great challenge for someone like me who produces narrative cinema but also works as a one-man band on occasion: the convenience of autofocus versus the character of manual focus cinema glass. If Nikon can thread that needle and offer autofocus cinema lenses with character, that would be something interesting to behold.
In the meantime, I really enjoyed my time with the NIKKOR Z 28-135mm f/4 PZ lens. It’s a solid addition to any Nikon shooter’s lineup, especially if you shoot live events or even broadcast television, where being able to remotely zoom and recompose would be a workflow advantage. Or if you shoot a lot of multicam and want total control of your composition when being in physical contact with your rig may prove a challenge. If those scenarios sound like you, the 28-135mm PZ lens could be a great fit in your kit.
English (US) ·