Canon 600D T3i - 50mm f1.8 OR 35mm f2.0 for FILMMAKING

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tom1597530

Active member
Hello... I need an advice... I decided to upgrade from a camcorder Sony HDR-XR500VE to Canon 600D DSLR for filmmaking, because I will definitetly get better image quality, nicer bokeh, better quality in low-light and so forth... but I can't decide, whether to buy a 50mm f1.8 lens or 35mm f2.0... the crop factor of Canon T3i is 1.6... so which lens will be BETTER FOR FILMMAKING?

Thank you very much :)
 
Last edited:
I would go with the 35mm, the 50 1.8 is a piece of crap. I mean it's build quality is so bad it could break just from looking at it. Although the odd part is that it has really good optics. I would look for some old m42 mount glass, there's some cheap stuff on ebay, and it's nice . just have to look around a bit.
 
The $100 50mm 1.8 is cheaply built, the 1.4 has much better built quality, but that is irrelevant to your question.

the 50mm 1.8 can make some seriously nice images.

as Im sure the 35mm can as well.
 
Hm... I think it really depends on shot... I think I'll buy the 50mm.... but while comparing 1.4 and 1.8... is 1.4 lot better than 1.8? Is it good for filmmaking purposes?
 
35 ftw... the 1.6 crop with the 50mm makes you either choose extreme closeup shots... or shoot everything from a distance.
 
The 35 will be more versatile with regards to video. The 50 is great, but you get a "zoom" from it with the 1.6 crop. So you need to stand pretty far away to get a good wide shot.
FTW is a common, "universal" video game and chat term meaning "For The Win".
Get the 35.
 
How about something else to think about?

Sigma 30/1.4 or Nikon 35/1.4. I have the Sigma 30/1.4, Canon EF 35/2 and 50/1.8. I've broken the EF 35/2 and the 50/1.8 is flimsy, and both have very small MF rings. The Sigma is much better built and wider MF ring. The Nikon 35/1.4 is manual focus, so it's nice and smooth, aperture is manual with a fat MF ring.... just tougher to find for a good price.

For a 50mm, definitely go for an old manual focus 50/1.4 instead, much nicer to handle with a smooth and wide focus ring, most are built like tanks, and you can find one cheaper than the EF 50/1.8.
 
Get the 50mm f1.8 its only a hundred bucks, like $85 used at B&H Photo if you scour their used section until you find one. If you don't like it people buy it for $90+ on ebay/craigslist all the time. Or you can just keep it. If you hate it, just get the 35.
 
tom1597530 said:
Oh thank you :) So I'll buy the 35mm then... thank you very much
Click to expand...

For still, you can safely forget about 35/2.0. 50/f1.8 is a VERY sharp lens built like crap.

But for video on a 1.6x crop body, 35/f2 is your only option here, unless you choose both. Not because it's sharper or optically better or anything, but because 50mm on a 1.6x body is equivalent to 80mm, leaving you no other option but to go for the 35mm one, which is optically inferior to and way less popular than the 50/f1.8.

Of course, it's better to have both.
 
The 50mm focal length on our APS-C sensor cameras with a 1.6 crop factor would be the film 35mm equivalent of an 80mm. A portrait perspective best suited for closeups to half length compositions. In medium to small rooms it would be most inconvenient as you would need more working distance that you could back up for. It would be fine in open areas where you could back up almost as far as you needed to.

The 35mm lens on the T2i/T3i/7D/60D would be the equivalent of 56mm on 35mm film cameras. Only a "tad" longer than the 50mm we used to get on those SLRs as a "normal" lens. It was called "normal" because the way it rendered spatial relationships in the frame was close to the "normal" perspective we saw with our eyes. Some camera brands used a 55mm lens as the "normal" one.

In your shoes, my choice would be the 35mm f2 as the most flexible lens allowing you to work in a larger variety of situations. You could still have a problem in small rooms but you could fall back on the 18mm end of the "kit" lens you should get with that camera. The F2 maximum aperture is only 1/3 stop smaller than F1.8 and will give very good low light performance and should have nice "bokeh".

For most video work I have 3 primes, all Canon EF lenses. 24mm f2.8 (wide normal), 28mm f1.8 (normal), and the original metal barrel EF 50mm f1.8 (portrait and very moderate telephoto). If something wider is needed I have both the 18-55mm "kit" lens and the 17-40mm f4L, for longer reach the EF-S 55-250mm f4-f5.6

But I feel the 35mm f2 is a good starter for a prime lens.
 
Hm... thanks for all the advices... I decided to exceed the limit of my budget a bit more, so I was thinking about buying BOTH 50mm f1.8 and 35mm f2.0

...but I'm still in a big confuse, because I'm buying also a 18-135mm KIT LENS with the camera and so I can't decide...

SHOULD I RATHER BUY BOTH 50mm f1.8 and 35mm f2.0 OR SHOULD I BUY 50mm f1.4 for better low-light perfomance and nicer bokeh and do all wide shots with kit lens???

The problem is, that the wide shots could be done with the kit lens, but I'm not sure about that... please help me with this.... thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top