Best lenses for FF video?

N

nanixliquid

New member
Which among these lenses you think they are the best for FF (H)DSLR video? I made lot of research but I can't choose! I want at least 1 wide (18-25mm), 1 "normal" (35-50mm) and 1 zoom.


Sigma - Super Wide Angle 20mm f/1.8 EX Aspherical DG DF RF Autofocus Lens
Sigma - 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM


Zeiss - Distagon T* 18mm f/3.5 ZE
Zeiss - Distagon T* 21mm f/2.8 ZE Lens
Zeiss - Distagon T* 25mm f/2.0 ZE Lens
Zeiss - 28mm f/2.0 Distagon T* Lens
Zeiss - Distagon 35mm T* f/2 ZE Lens
Zeiss - Normal 50mm f/1.4 ZE Planar T* Manual Focus Lens


Canon - Super Wide Angle EF 20mm f/2.8 USM Autofocus Lens
Canon - EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Autofocus Lens
Canon - EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens
Canon - EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Autofocus Lens


Tamron - SP 24-70mm f/2.8 DI VC USD Lens


EDIT: I just realised there is a Lenses sub-forum under Cinematography. I don't if this is the right place for this discussion.
 
Last edited:
It largely depends on what you shoot and how you want to shoot it.


The biggest issue I see with your list is there's nothing particularly long. Often I swap between 70-200mm f2.8L IS and Tokina 11-16mm (using it as a 16mm prime). Other times I might stay on my Canon 24-70mm f2.8L. Then again, I once shot a 40 minute documentary using just a 50mm f/1.4.
 
David W. Jones said:
Zeiss Contax.
Click to expand...
Agree - most economical with really high quality. $1600 for 25/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.7, 85/1.4.

Edit: The ZE lenses that nanixliquid posted in the opening thread are newer Zeiss versions that, while excellent designs and great lenses, cost about the same for one lens as a set of vintage Contax lenses.
 
Last edited:
From that list, Zeiss 25mm and 50mm, and for a zoom either the 24-70 f/2.8L II or the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. But that is if you can spare the chash, because yes: there are cheaper options out there that are awesome too, specially if you're ready to risk it by going vintage (http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsc.html). I absolutely love my vintage Leitz lenses for the Leica-R mount: sharp, amazing bokeh, I haven't tested them side by side, but they're probably better than most modern lenses costing 4 times as much (they can even trade blows with the big boys: http://gettingelemental.blogspot.com/2011/12/portland-lens-test-2011.html). And they work on nearly any camera you can think of, including Canon EF and M, Nikon F, Pentax K, Sony A and E, m43, anything (http://www.similaar.com/foto/lensmount/lensmount.html). Sharpness tests: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/lenstestsa.html Bokeh tests: http://www.similaar.com/foto/lenstests/bokehtests.html
 
Where I can find those vintage zeiss lenses?
Click to expand...

KEH.com. They are listed under "35mm" and "Contax." Just plain ol' "Contax." Don't get Contax N or Contax G- they are very difficult to mount without some serious lens hacking by professionals. Plain ol' Contax is C/Y mount which is easily adaptable to EOS via a Fotodiox adapter

Or eBay if you are feeling adventurous.
 
Just checked KEH, they are currently pretty low (only the 35mm 2.8 available). But if you are patient and wait, they will pop up.

Also, forgot, check B&H used department as well.
 
I currently have a 50 1.4, the 24-105, and a 70-200 F4 IS. What would you guys think about selling the 24-105 and buying several of the contax lenses?
 
DevonH said:
I currently have a 50 1.4, the 24-105, and a 70-200 F4 IS. What would you guys think about selling the 24-105 and buying several of the contax lenses?
Click to expand...

The 24-105 is a handy zoom to have around, is there a particular reason you want to get rid of it? Contax lenses have a different aesthetic from Canon. Whereas Canon's saturate the reds a little more, Contax Zeiss lenses are slightly less saturated but they "pop" a little more (known as the Zeiss "3D" effect, from the T* coating). Compared to Zeiss ZE/ZF, Contax are slightly softer but still very sharp nonetheless. Many people think of it as "filmic" (including myself), however you want to quantify that meaning.

Also, Contax have hard stops focus stops- much better for pulling focus with. Contax primes are good but their zooms are good too- I have the 28-85 3.3-4 zoom. Matches great with the primes and maintains sharpness throughout the zoom range (also constant aperture if you want to stop down to a 4, unlike Canon zooms where if you stop down to the smallest max aperture the iris still flickers). It is a push/pull design tho so not terribly convenient unless you are run-n-gun by yourself without a rig.
 
I'm transitioning from a focus that lies on both film and photography to just film, so while I agree the 24-105 is definitely a great lens, I want to have the best glass possible on my camera (and since I'm not in need of the AF/etc. the 24-105 offers, I'm willing to part with it). All of my work is web based, though I'm hoping to expand into doing some smaller TV spots.

My thought would be to lose the 50 1.4 (which I think is a tad bit wonky anyway, don't enjoy the way it focuses at all), and the 24-105, and snag the 35/50/85. Could that be done for around a grand?
 
DevonH said:
I'm transitioning from a focus that lies on both film and photography to just film, so while I agree the 24-105 is definitely a great lens, I want to have the best glass possible on my camera (and since I'm not in need of the AF/etc. the 24-105 offers, I'm willing to part with it). All of my work is web based, though I'm hoping to expand into doing some smaller TV spots.

My thought would be to lose the 50 1.4 (which I think is a tad bit wonky anyway, don't enjoy the way it focuses at all), and the 24-105, and snag the 35/50/85. Could that be done for around a grand?
Click to expand...

If you get the slower versions of each (35mm 2.8, 50mm 1.7 and 85mm 2.8) then yeah I think you can squeeze it all in for about one grand. You even might be able to find a 50mm 1.4 and fit it into your budget (usually goes for around $300-$400). The 35mm 1.4 is rare and expensive ($1000+) and the 85mm 1.4 is a bit hard to find (~$400-600). However, if you are using them for a full frame, 2.8 should be plenty fast.

Also, for anybody who doesn't know, the super-speed versions (1.4 or 2) of the Contax Zeiss lenses were re-housed into the ZE/ZF primes, and then subsequently the Zeiss CP2s. They have the same optical formulas, just they were made longer ago (my 35mm1.4 was made in "West Germany", to give you an idea). Like all Zeiss, they are solid metal. So they are basically the older versions of the modern ZE/ZF and CP2 primes that are so popular now

Get them used off a reputable seller (KEH or B&H used) or an eBayer with good feedback and a return policy).

EDIT: one last note, on some of the older primes made in West Germany, the bokeh has a ninja star/buzzsaw shape at f2 and f2.8. It disappears at 1.4 or 4. This happens on bothy my 35mm1.4 and 85mm1.4- the iris doesn't make a perfect octagon at these stops. Google it for more information. This may or may not be a turn off but I personally like it.
 
You should always try to buy the best lens you can afford. You are better off spending more money on your lens than getting an expensive camera body and a cheap kit lens. In most cases you get what you pay for, but there are always exceptions. If you only have enough money for a Canon 5DmkII body and a cheap lens, you are better off getting for example a Canon 60D and spending more money on a better piece of glass. You can keep quality lenses forever but your camera body can become outdated in a matter of years. Another very important thing to remember is try to buy a lens you can use on multiple cameras as this will save you a fortune down the track If you want lenses just for video then you need to consider other things. For example, if you buy a Canon EF lens for, say, your 7D you have no ability to change exposure smoothly during a shot as the aperture is controlled by a clicked dial on the rear of the camera. The other problem is that Canon EF lenses don’t work fully on anything other than a Canon body.
 
JoeJITSU said:
I own several L Lens and decided to give the Rokinon 85 a try, I was very impressed. Super sharp Lens.
Click to expand...

Excellent lens, another one I would try is the 35mm by Rokinon. I am using a 24mm by Rokinon and I must admit it is not as sharp as the 85mm, but it is excellent build quality and at f/1.4 it works great on my GH2. 35mm is to much of a crop factor for a standard lens and the Panasonic 25mm is not manual so it doesn't work for me.

But yeah for FF I would buy Rokinon 85mm and 35mm then probably a Nikkor Ai-S 50mm and a 105 - 135mm lens. Full Frame is awesome and I hope to purchase one soon to go along side my GH3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top