List of great EOS lenses

J Davis said:
I forgot the Sigmas! 30mm f1.4 and 24mm f1.8 are great too, also sigma 50-150/2.8 zoom
Click to expand...

Ha! Was just about to question you on this.

For night shots, I use my Sigma 30mm F1.4 almost exclusively. I love the lens and everybody that's seen footage I did loves it as well. Amazed they go used for around $400 or less.

For more lit scenes I also have the Sigma 10mm-20mm F4-F5.6. It too is really nice and I've compared it to a Canon 10mm-22mm and we use them together (since we have more than one 7D).

I will say this with my Sigma's though, they have no image stabilizer. This hasn't been a problem since I am shooting so wide, but for hand held or with little weight on the camera, you can and I have made jello! That said, I love them both and have no desire to change out either.

I did buy a Sigma 70mm to 300mm and hate it. Definitely going to a Canon with image stabilzation. I tell people only get sigma's with a gold ring, I've not been happy with ANY I have used with a red ring (more specifically, the Sigma's designed for use with an APS-C sensor have been best).

I can attest too that the Tokinas all I have see, 11mm zoom, is beautiful as well and worth it. VERY GOOD ultrawide.
 
Sigma has had image stabilization in quite a large number of their lenses now. They recently just announced a high end 70-200/2.8 with IS.
 
Ahh, must not be in their wide ones that I found. Thanks for that note, I will check out the rest of their offerings!
 
Most lens makers have been staying away from putting IS into wide lenses. However, Sigma also just announced that their 17-50/2.8 would be getting IS.
 
So, I find myself coming back to this post every couple of days to compare lenses/prices, check which ones are favorites and generally drool. Any way we can make this a sticky as it was about to drop out of the first page? It seems like a very useful post.
 
drcheese said:
So, I find myself coming back to this post every couple of days to compare lenses/prices, check which ones are favorites and generally drool. Any way we can make this a sticky as it was about to drop out of the first page? It seems like a very useful post.
Click to expand...

Maybe PM a mod or just visit the thread and type bump if you feel like it !
 
I just realized I could click on the "Rating" tab and, since it's one of only 3 threads with a rating in this forum, it would bring this post to the top.

I still think it would be helpful as a sticky to all the new DSLR people with lens questions!
 
So you've prompted me to bring over some of what I wrote in another thread because it belongs here as well. Other thread was here.
I think it can really help out those film makers starting out on a budget with a t2i/550d.



The usefulness of the 18-55mm IS f3.5-5.6mm (t2i kit lens)


... when I zoom in or out when recording video the brightness either increases or decreases real quick. I don't know if it is the lens causing the issue or a setting.. Either way, I need to figure this problem out fast since it is ruining my shots...
Click to expand...

Use it as a variable prime.
eg shoot at 35mm/f5.6 and cut to 50mm/f5.6 and exposure will be the same.

However – you cannot leave the aperture on 5.6 and record while zooming from wide to tele
as you will see a flicker at the points where max aperture changes and the flicker will be recorded.

If you want to record a zooming shot you will need a fixed aperture zoom like 17-55/2.8 and then the best way is to attach a follow
focus to the zoom ring so you can precisely control the zoom. Even with this control results are patchy. To do a zoom shot properly you need
a cine zoom and they cost truckloads of money.

Actually, on this note of using a variable aperture zoom as a variable prime.
The 18-55mm / f3.5-5.6 is a very good starting out lens for independent film makers.

New it can be bought for $140, as a kit lens with the t2i it is $100 and there are plenty of people selling them on craigslist in brand new condition for even less.

Its useful because sharpness tests place it better than the 28-105 (var. aperture) and the 28-135 IS (7d kit), when tested at 28mm, 35mm and 50mm.
Also it covers 24mm which the other two don't.

So you have three prime focal lengths that are often used in film making (24mm, 35mm, 50mm) all with more than decent quality and a perfectly
workable f5.6 aperture on all three lengths and all in the one lens. The zoom is built for 18-55 so if you stay at 24, 35 and 50 you are never shooting at
its widest (avoiding barrel distorion) or longest (avoiding pincushion effect).

Image Stabilization for hand held shots as well.


@J Davis: I have the 18-55 Canon but not the IS version (I have the AF one). How does it compare? Do you know if that performs the same in terms of IQ?
Click to expand...

I don't own both but I use this site for comparisons
(roll over/roll off, watch little white arrow)

18-55 non IS (30D) vs 18-55 IS (40D) LINK (the IS version looks better IMO)

and for the earlier post
28-135 f3.5-5.6 (7d kit) vs 18-55 f3.5-5.6 (2ti kit) LINK


I think the term "variable prime" is a bit confusing... Why not just say don't zoom while shooting?
Click to expand...


IMO its a great term because it describes exactly the intended purpose without hinting at other uses that the word 'zoom' implies. Also I'm not the only one to use the phrase, I've seen around here and there.

for example: wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_lens
Wikipedia said:
Lens manufacturers such as ARRI Media[5], ISCO Precision Optics[6], Schneider[7], Carl Zeiss AG[8], Canon[9] and others still make variable focal length cine and video lenses regularly catalogued as variable primes. A variable prime is sometimes distinguished from a "true zoom" in that the latter maintains focus as the focal length is varied.
Click to expand...


Need to see what the DOF is like from the t2i and the 18-55mm IS f3.5-5.6mm (t2i kit lens) at f5.6 aperture ??????
Some pics I took with this combo can be seen here -->> LINK (and scroll down)
 
Last edited:
... and be wary of the term 1.6 crop factor !!

A lot of sites that review still lenses will state that because of the 1.6 crop factor you will need a 15mm to get the equivalent of a 24mm on full frame.

IMO it is important to stop comparing to Full Frame!!

There is no point saying 'use a 15mm to get the equivalent of 24mm' as this makes no sense at all when it comes to making movies.

When I said above that 24mm, 35mm and 50mm were common focal lengths used in film making I was referring to the field of view that you would get
when using these focal lengths on super 35 film (ie most hollywood blockbusters)

Now super 35 film is almost identical in size to the aps-c sensor in the 7d and the t2i. So if you put the t2i kit lens on a t2i and shoot at 24mm, 35mm and 50mm
you will be getting approx the same field of view that a hollywood movie would be shooting as if they were using those focal lengths on super 35 film.

So don't compare to full frame. Its pointless. No hollywood film is shot full frame.
You will only confuse yourself.

Use 24mm, 35mm and 50mm focal lengths on a (7d/550d/t2i) aps-c sensor and familiarize yourself with the field of view.
Then you will then be spot on.



For reference look at these rental PL mount Zeiss Super Speeds and look at their focal lengths
http://www.fletch.com/rentalzeisssuperspeed.html
and here is another one but this time with rental rates
http://www.abelcine.com/store/35mm-Prime-Lenses/?page=2

396_Superspds.jpg


as you can see the zeiss super speeds are 18mm, 25mm, 35mm, 50mm, 65mm, 85mm

Now when using still lenses I use 24mm, 35mm, 50mm primes and a zoom 50-135/3.5 to cover 65mm, 85mm and 100+


For reference

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_35
super 35 four perf film is 24.89mm × 18.66mm

t2i
aps-c sensor 22.3mm x 14.9mm

7d
aps-c sensor 22.3mm × 14.9mm

now compare the width, as you can see its a pretty close to 1:1 so zero crop factor.
1.6 crop factor is for still photography, are we not filmmakers? :thumbsup: :beer:


4441061913_eb28a73dfb_o.jpg




edit: full list of specs for reference

Still Photography Film
Full Frame Still Film is 36mm x 24mm

Movies Film
Three Perf Academy 35mm is 22mm x 12mm
Four Perf Academy 35mm is 22mm x 16mm
Three Perf Super 35mm is 24.89mm x 14mm
Four Perf Super 35mm is 24.89 x 18.66mm

Digital Full Frame DSLR (canon 5DM2)
36mm x 24mm

7d and t2i
22.3mm x 14.9mm


2nd edit:
check out this marvelous chart just published by Mitch at Abel Cine!!!!
http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/08/18/35mm-digital-sensor-comparison-chart/
 
Last edited:
The stock 18-55mm focuses like crap. It has no usefulness for video IMO, unless you use it as a variable prime for static camera talking heads maybe.
 
J Davis; Use it as a variable prime. [/quote said:
I got the 18-55mm with the 550D, because no body only available.
It's OK for the price, but cannot use a variable aperture lens effectively under pressure shooting HD. Having to change the f-stop every time you change focal length is a headache. If it had an aperture ring it would help, but not cure the fundamental problem.
Id rather think of it as an 18mm f3.5 is for a hundred bucks, that in itself would be hard to find. I also put my 77mm Century x.7 wide which gives me about a 12.6mm.
Click to expand...
 
USLatin said:
The stock 18-55mm focuses like crap. It has no usefulness for video IMO, unless you use it as a variable prime for static camera talking heads maybe.
Click to expand...

Hi Roberto, lets keep it positive for those starting out shall we? I assume you are talking auto focus and if thats the case then yes it does.

But we're talking video here not stills.

I've had no problems with manual focus and that's what I would recommend for anyone starting out making films on a budget.
 
Last edited:
ROCKMORE said:
I got the 18-55mm with the 550D, because no body only available.
It's OK for the price, but cannot use a variable aperture lens effectively under pressure shooting HD. Having to change the f-stop every time you change focal length is a headache. If it had an aperture ring it would help, but not cure the fundamental problem.
Id rather think of it as an 18mm f3.5 is for a hundred bucks, that in itself would be hard to find. I also put my 77mm Century x.7 wide which gives me about a 12.6mm.
Click to expand...


Yes, think of it as an 18mm f3.5 prime for $100 very useful !

To stop the lens changing aperture on you when shooting a movie. Place the lens at its widest focal length and move the aperture to f5.6. Then start playing with the zoom and you will see it won't change. Bingo ! You are good to go.

Its true you will be limited to f5.6 and not the low light apertures like f3.5. This is what I did mention in my main 18-55 post.
But there is nothing wrong with f5.6, I shoot at that f stop all the time as its a great f stop that prevents actors from drifting out of focus.

Out of focus actors are not cool!
 
Last edited:
There is a temptation for pro shooters here to really dump on this lens.

Remember it is a cheap lens and not anything like the L glass you are probably shooting with.

The purpose of those 18-55 posts was to help out beginners and those on a budget !!
 
J Davis said:
Hi Roberto, lets keep it positive for those starting out shall we? I assume you are talking auto focus and if thats the case then yes it does.

But we're talking video here not stills.

I've had no problems with manual focus and that's what I would recommend for anyone starting out making films on a budget.
Click to expand...

I am not being negative, just honest. Only adding my 0.02 to your thread Davis.

I was talking about video. I only used it once though, and briefly, but the focus throw was very short, and the feel was plasticy and down-right horrid. Add to that the fact that you are focusing with a very thin ring at the edge of the lens and --at least the focusing-- can start to be in the useless category for video. But, of course, that is just my opinion.

Now if you are just starting out and you want to test the waters I could see it as a nice initial investment since they are practically giving it away (as they should). It does has a very useful range,and great image quality. However, since focusing would be so hard for you, it might turn you off right away, also something to consider when you are starting out.

So I agree with you, and also disagree. It is a double edge sword with an amazing price tag.

J Davis said:
Yes, think of it as an 18mm f3.5 prime for $100 very useful !
Click to expand...

Great point!

Does it breathe much/at-all-noticeable (on a TV) at 18mm? I can't remember about its breathing for the life of me.
 
USLatin said:
Now if you are just starting out and you want to test the waters I could see it as a nice initial investment since they are practically giving it away (as they should). It does has a very useful range,and great image quality.
Click to expand...

Yes that's what I meant

USLatin said:
Does it breathe much/at-all-noticeable (on a TV) at 18mm? I can't remember about its breathing for the life of me.
Click to expand...

Y'know I hadn't even thought of breathing till I read your post.
I just did a quick check against my AIS primes. At 24mm its the same, at 50mm the AIS prime is significantly better.

You're shooting with a 17-55/2.8 on your 7d isn't it? Or did you end up staying with the 20-70/2.8?
 
Last edited:
shadowknight123 said:
so all the lens on the first post can all fit onto the 7d without any adapters ect?
Click to expand...

Yes. If it's an EOS lens, it's good to go (and all those are). You just cannot use the older Canon lens (not any listed here) without a spacer adapter, and even then, I hear the quality is very sub par. (I think they are FD mount if I am not mistaken?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top