Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. Collapse Details
    #11
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    11,404
    Default
    I am partial to the cheapo Canon EF S 10-18mm f.4.5-5.6 IS STM. It's slow is it's only downfall but it's a great lens for handheld wide stuff, I've shot some things with it that made it to theatrical
    and it looked great on the big screen. I too find the sweet spot to be about 13-14mm on the C200's S35 sensor. 10-12mm distorts people too much but at 13-14mm if you keep people away from the edges,
    not bad.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #12
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by dset86 View Post
    Such a cheap lens! I'll have two of them!

    Would be a dream to have one..... ;)
    Dreams can come true.

    It's rehoused Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 AF-S NIKKOR G ED N (Ruby).

    If you are fine with focusing in "wrong" direction, using adapter to mount it on your C100 and lacking some other minor cinema features.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #13
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Imamacuser View Post
    Were you planning to manually focus, or does the lens need AF? The Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 is a decent photography lens, but it has a very short focus throw, and I don't know how well its AF does in video.
    I actually have a Sigma 17-50 and I use it sometimes, great,wonderful and sharp lens! The reason I don't use it is because the IS is a bit challenging,and as you mention the focus throw is short. The AF does work but it's a bit noisy on this lens.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #14
    Default
    How about the Tamron 15-30 VC? It's 2.8 and could give you the range you're after (combined with a 24-70) without shelling out for an 18-80 (Hey, and 1 stop of light to boot). I've read remarkable things--when it works! It's fairly rectilinear (the straighter lines you're looking for) and considered quite sharp. BUT Tamron G2 lenses don't play well with the C200 and C300 mkii DPAF. However, I believe they work fine with C100 (83% sure). But PLEASE don't trust me on this. Also, the Tamron's focus in Nikon direction, which can be aggravating to use (but don't the Tokina's as well?) But if you often use AF, or if your 24-70 is also Tamron, then no problem. I've wished for awhile that it could play nice with my C200. Nothing else that I know of is that wide, bright, sharp and stabilized--even if you spend 10x the money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #15
    Default
    OTOH, If you don't need all the range, I think the Canon 17-55 is an amazing workhorse. I wish to H they would issue an update to this lens. I know Puredrifting on this forum doesn't love it, but it does a lot that nothing else does. Focus is pretty quick and quiet, unlike the equivalent Sigmas, Tamrons or Tokinas. It's 2,8 and the both the AF and IS are solid. You might want to buy 2 to compare and return the lesser copy. And also send it in for cleaning every 2 years (it breathes like a MF and collects dust like they're Poke balls). And then if you need wider with low distortion, get something like a Venus Optics Laowa 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D and put it on a tripod, gimbal or slider.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •