C300: Lens purchasing strategy.

iijohnkeatingii

iijohnkeatingii

Member
Hi guys. Thank you so much already for the great leads on gear in my last thread. I feel like I have reached a great jumping off point with regards to the rig. The lens choices are not as clear. Let me provide some information. This film will be shot by my DP/producer. There will be an element of run and gun but we will have time for a tripod and monopod as often. I won't have a crew so lighting will be minimal most of the time. I don't expect a lot of dark locations but I'm sure there will be a few.

Im purchasing a c300 with an EF mount. The 24-105 seems to be as loved as the 24-70. I would love to have the extra aperture but the lack of IS has me concerned. In the debate I keep telling myself that I am purchasing the best low light camera on the market so sacrifice the stop for steadiness and extra throw. Is this sound?

I have 20k to spend on the whole camera package and I am faced with picking a wide zoom, a long zoom and maybe a fast 50mm for portraits. There hasn't been any clear cut winner for those lenses. Can I get some suggestions. I will def need to get to 300mm in the long lens.

Thanks a bunch.

John
 
Well all I can say is that the 24-105 is a MUST with all C line cameras. Since you have about $7000 for lenses "I" would buy the 16-35V1 used, 24-105, and the 70-200 II 2.8. For the 300mm reach maybe think about the 100-400mm IS used. Then go make some money with this system and buy specialty glass like primes and such....
 
Get the 24-105 or 17-55 if you prefer wide stuff.

Rent the rest. If you're shooting a film you'll want the best glass on hand IMHO...
 
dustylense said:
Well all I can say is that the 24-105 is a MUST with all C line cameras. Since you have about $7000 for lenses "I" would buy the 16-35V1 used, 24-105, and the 70-200 II 2.8. For the 300mm reach maybe think about the 100-400mm IS used. Then go make some money with this system and buy specialty glass like primes and such....
Click to expand...

Pretty much describes my working lens set. Re the 100-400 IS, I'm a big fan - very sharp and usable. However, at the "workman" end of things, I'd still definitely consider the 17-55/2.8 as an alternative to the 24-105. I always find the 24-105 "OK" rather than the, "wow" I get from the 70-200/2.8.

If you can cope with the gap from 55 to 70, you could feasibly cover most eventualities with a 17-55, 70-200/2.8 and the 100-400. The latter two are definitely long term "keepers" IMO.

Ben.
 
For run -n-gun the 24-105 helps a lot. It gets the job done without much fuss. My thoughts in this link: http://www.indiawilds.com/diary/canon-ef-24-105-f4-l-is-usm-lens-review/

I feel it would be good if you get the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM lens and also get a EF1.4xIII TC. With that combo you can get 280mm f4 when you use the 70-200 +1.4x tc. The 70-200 f2.8 IS version II works well with the TC. So you won't need the 100-400 lens. If you often use the telephoto focal lengths then it would be useful to buy the 100-400 f3.5-5.6 L IS USM lens.

I also use the 2x TC with the 70-200 f2.8 L IS II USM lens and it gives good results.

I also agree that the 100mm macro IS lens of Canon is very good for handholding and also very sharp.
 
If this is all for a particular project, renting is the way to go. Good as most of the zooms mentioned here are (I picked the 17-55 for general use myself, crappy construction, but the best looking image to my eye) there is a magic in good primes. And that gap from f2.8 to f1.4 is more significant than you think. In an unlit apartment the former will get you useable footage, the latter great footage. And that's aside from the sharpness and bookeh benefits. There is just some x-factor to fixed glass. A 35mm L, the 85mm L or the Zeiss 50mm f2 Makro - all subtly but fundamentally different from any zoom in my experience. Fundamentally better.
 
Last edited:
Before I bought my Canon Cine primes, my most used lens was the 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II, with others mixed in. I just did a two cam shoot yesterday that was a lot of "walk 'n talk" and while both of us have a full set of the primes, we both shot all of the "walk 'n talk" with the 24-105. VERY versatile range, just slow(f/4).

I think we've all heard that Canon will be making a cine lens announcement by NAB. I recently spoke with a very reliable source and that was one of the things that came up. If their info is correct and you have been wanting something like that, but more "ENG" (think Cabrio), you'll probably be happy.
 
Surprised the Canon 24-70 f2.8 hasn't come up. Lose a bit on the range, but I think the image is much nicer than the 24-105, and range can be made up with others lenses (especially if you go 70-200 f2.8 II as well)
 
I also have the 24-70 f2.8 I, and never choose it above my 17-55mm. Largely because of the IS (even though the IS can cause slight vignetting on the C300 when pushed), but I also just dislike the 24-70mm, something dull about it. Haven't tried the version II however, which is supposedly a significant notch up from the I. To me, 17-55 is just a much better range than 24-70 on a 1.5x crop.
 
My two favorite lenses are the Sigma 18-35 and my Zeiss 50mm Makro.
The Zeiss is just beautiful and both are a pleasure to use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top