Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I am buying a Canon 5d Mark II for video. What kinda lenses are best suited for video

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    I am buying a Canon 5d Mark II for video. What kinda lenses are best suited for video

    So I am buying a canon 5d mark II. But I am not sure which lenses to get since 80% of use is going to be for video. Is the 24-105 useful? Also I have seen the canon L lenses which cost like 1400$ and I love the look but I hate the deep shallow depth of field. If anything I don't want that much depth of field but I want the same sharpness and image quality. Are there lenses out there like that? 1.8. 1.4 or 1.2? Any help would be of help =). Thank you guys.
    What's Good if There's Excellent?

    #2
    Best lens to start out with would be the Canon 50mm 1.4. The Canon 24-70mm 2.8 is also a popular lens, and I personally love the 16-35mm 2.8 II.
    www.YouTube.com/JeremiahJW
    www.Twitter.com/JeremiahJW
    www.JeremiahJW.com

    Comment


      #3
      I'm usually a prime guy, but I recently discovered that the breathing characteristics on the 28-70L zoom are very good, pretty much imperceptible.

      The 24-70L is great also, but it appears to breathe a bit more than the 28-70L. Here's an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FYSrRYJqnM

      I was hoping it would extend to all L zooms, but my 70-200 F4 breathes quite a bit. So do all my primes. The only other lens I own that doesn't breathe is the Leica 19mm.

      Of course, breathing to me is no big deal... many Hollywood movies I see have breathing when they rack focus. But it's nice to have a few lenses on hand that don't. One day, I'm going to go to Calumet or Helix and just run through every single Canon lens to see which ones don't breathe.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by magid1020 View Post
        So I am buying a canon 5d mark II. But I am not sure which lenses to get since 80% of use is going to be for video. Is the 24-105 useful? Also I have seen the canon L lenses which cost like 1400$ and I love the look but I hate the deep shallow depth of field. If anything I don't want that much depth of field but I want the same sharpness and image quality. Are there lenses out there like that? 1.8. 1.4 or 1.2? Any help would be of help =). Thank you guys.
        Congrats I bet you're quite excited. I know you didn't ask for this in your post, but I feel it relevant perhaps to share it with you:

        I've got a 5DM2, and I love it. I also have these L lenses you speak of, and they are amazing.

        However, for video purposes they are actually too shallow at those wide open apertures that you are so excited about. You'll find for video purposes you'll keep your lenses at the 3.2 to 5 mark, especially for closeups. Otherwise you create a hyper shallow image (as far as traditional 35mm cinema is concerned, at least) and it will be a dead "oh he used a 5D" giveaway. Believe me -- I know first hand that you'll want to put that lens right open to 1.4 or 1.2, and then one little head-bob from the actor and it goes soft on focus. It won't look that bad on the little LCD while you're filming but you'll be cursing once you see it on a big screen.

        Further more, those expenses L lenses aren't going to be utilized for video. The 1080P resolution, combined with the compression, is going to virtually make any middle-range lens look just fine. The only reason to purchase those L lenses is for photography, where the full 21MP RAW data is making full use that expensive glass.

        If you are truly seriously about the image quality of your video I would humbly suggest waiting for that new Panasonic AF100. I'm not going to go into a huge debate about the hardware of the AF100 vs the 5DM2, but no one can argue that it over-all beats the 5D for video.

        That being said, I still use my 5D for the occasional video (I've shot about 10 short films on it), and love it. But I can't help to urge you to consider these factors when buying this piece of equipment purely for video. It's a lot of money you'll be dropping down.

        Oh, and if you still decide to purchase your 5D -- I wouldn't recommend the Canon 1.4 50mm lens, the Sigma 50mm 1.4 is better (although that's the only Sigma lens you'll see me advocating :P)

        Cheers
        Last edited by tfg; 11-08-2010, 03:48 PM.

        Comment


          #5
          One lens I have just fallen in love with the the 24-105 F4 L USM IS. It is so versatile and it has the BEST image stabilizing of any lens I have used. It is an amazing lens. Obiously not for low light but during daylight hours..I use a cheap sholder rig..and it looks like its on a tripod.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by magid1020 View Post
            Is the 24-105 useful? Also I have seen the canon L lenses which cost like 1400$ and I love the look but I hate the deep shallow depth of field. If anything I don't want that much depth of field but I want the same sharpness and image quality.
            Lenses work better at a mid aperture range. So an f1.2 will work better at f4, than an f4 at f4. So even if you dont like the shallow depth of field and what to go higher on the f-stop, an lower f-stop lens is going to do a better job for you. But honestly tfg is right, when shooting video, its not going to make much of a huge clarity difference shooting a non-luxury lens versus a luxury lens. I will say though that the focus and zoom on the luxury lenses is much smoother and consistent than the non-L lenses.

            Hope this helps...

            Comment

            Working...
            X