C100: Long lenses for TV factual work?

A

analog_addict

Well-known member
I've gotten some work shooting factual TV on my C100. It's similar to local TV news style shooting, interviews with a handheld mic plus b-roll.

The only suitable lens I have is a Tamron 17-50 which is great for interviews, wides and mids but I need something longer for reaching into crowds. I can rent a Canon 70-200mm but I'm considering purchasing a cheap longer lens.

Is there anything like the Tamron 17-50 at the longer end? The problem is I have no budget so it seems any constant F2.8 lens is too expensive.

I was wondering if really cheap lenses like the Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 are any good? I would only need a long lens outside so being slow isn't an issue. I would just need sharpness and minimal optical problems (chromatic abberation, swirly edges etc)

Does anyone have any recommendation for cheap, long zooms? I would very rarely use it but it would be nice to have in my bag if I need to reach out to get shot. As I said before I would rent a Canon L when the budget is there.

I picked up my Tamron 17-50mm for £140 new (in Japan) and it's my favourite lens now, there must be some budget bargains at the long end as well!
 
I'm sure plenty of the cheaper long zooms from Sigma, Tamron etc. would be plenty adequate. If you look at reviews (like photozone.de for example) for me the main thing to look at would be chromatic abberation - this shows up more than a lack of sharpness on TV stuff - that's my thoughts anyway.
Steve
 
sigma 50-150 f2.8 (NOT OS)- crazy cheap. u could even look for the lens with broken AF as u dont need it. MOST IMPORTANT its the only consumer lens that i know that is Parfocal!! yes its 100% true its parfocal, i have it and use it often..... got for 80 or 100 usd from ebay, AF was not working... seems like my version is I, i cannot tell anything about II.

http://www.bythom.com/Sigma50-150mm_lens_review.htm

it has some breathing! i did not notice any light loss on longer end... also i mostly film inside, so not really sure how it acts outside....

also u may look for old but adopted canon lenses like 35-105 f3.5 - great, but closest focus distance is several meters... not good with everything.... still there is macro function at 105mm.

if u cant find it for Canon get it for nikon, and get china adopter to nikon, or even better i believe a permanent adapters to canon can be ordered from leitax
 
I do what in the UK is called "factual" work. What I find covers most situations is the Canon 24-105, sometimes I have to take two steps back to get wide enough. It loses a little transmission when punching in.

I also have the 70-200 which is my Go To lens for interviews if the room is large enough but you really can't use it as a main docu lens because it is not wide enough. t's great for certain b-roll like grabbing people unawares at tele.

I use the 11-16 as a wide establisher but then immediately go to the 24-105. I have a belt pouch case that will hold either and a separate belt pouch for the sunshades. This way I can go back and forth. Then when a talking head is called for I go to the 70-200 which needs a tripod.

I wish I could find ONE lens that is slightly wider and goes more tele, but I don't know of any.
 
Last edited:
I think the 18-135 stm is a great alternative. If I don't plan to shoot wide open at an event, it's the lens that I use.
 
If you're OK with changing lenses to go longer then there's a world of long lenses available. I'd get an IS lens if you're not going to be on a tripod. It's absolutely essential for anything over a 100mm.

But if you mean an all purpose wide to long lens, there isn't a better budget option than the 18-135mm STM for the C100, it's variable aperture though keep that in mind, the 18-200mm Canon is also very good but the 135 STM is better mechanically and optically, much better focus ring for video (even though it's fly by wire it'a very percise and smooth) and better IS.

If 24mm is wide enough and 105mm is long enough and you need to make slight zoom adjustments while filming, the 24-105mm F4 L is a very solid cheap lens now.

Anyone tried the 24-105mm STM? I've been looking at it since I broke my F4 L a few month back. I love STM lenses IS and Focusing motors/rings and don't really zoom whilst rolling. Never heard anyone talk about this lens here.
 
nedcam said:
I do what in the UK is called "factual" work. What I find covers most situations is the Canon 24-105, sometimes I have to take two steps back to get wide enough. It loses a little transmission when punching in.

I also have the 70-200 which is my Go To lens for interviews if the room is large enough but you really can't use it as a main docu lens because it is not wide enough. t's great for certain b-roll like grabbing people unawares at tele.

I use the 11-16 as a wide establisher but then immediately go to the 24-105. I have a belt pouch case that will hold either and a separate belt pouch for the sunshades. This way I can go back and forth. Then when a talking head is called for I go to the 70-200 which needs a tripod.

I wish I could find ONE lens that is slightly wider and goes more tele, but I don't know of any.
Click to expand...

any link for that belt pouche that can hold the 24-105 ? I'm interested in finding a way to switch fast
thanks !
 
nedcam said:
I wish I could find ONE lens that is slightly wider and goes more tele, but I don't know of any.
Click to expand...

There many lenses that do that. Cover from very wide (16-17-18mm to 130-200-300mm) for s35/APS-C size formats like the C100. However, only variable aperture, but then again the 24-105mm F4 is not that different, it darkens too.

There are no wider and longer lens with constant aperture however. Only constants have focal lengths of 17-50/55mm 2.8 and 24/28-105/135mm F4s.
 
Hey coutard,

Here is the pouch. In it is the 24-105, the 11-16 is outside it.

It is a Tamron pouch, model MX5378.

In the blue pouch I keep the sunshade that is not in use.
 

Attachments

  • Lens pouch.jpg
    Lens pouch.jpg
    197 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Thinking about it I need something longer than 135mm for those stealth crowd shots. I was using a 135mm prime and I didn't find it long enough. Something cheap-ish that goes to 200mm.

Are the 'kit' type Canon or Tamron 80-200mm lenses sharp?

I never bothered with kit lenses until I used the GH2 kit lens and it was really sharp. Is it the same for newer Canons?
 
OK, I think I'm going to grab a Canon EF-S 55-250mm. Ken Rockwell describes these lenses as optically superb and that's good enough for me. I just need something cheap, long and sharp. F4 upwards is fine.

Should I get the IS II version or STM? Apparently the STM version has delay when manually focusing?

I can get either one new for around £120.
 
Last edited:
I have the STM 55-250 and I love it. I always simply use push AF or even continuous AF, works great and the files are sharp and with great colour. I feel when you need to get closer, often even 200mm doesn't cut it so the extra 50mm is nice.The lens is also much lighter than the L zooms, a huge difference. It's pretty easy to handhold it even at 250mm because of the great IS. The IS on my 70-200 F4.0L lens would put an annoying noise in the on-camera mic. For non-controlled situations I would definitely go for the STM lens, and it's so cheap too. I think it also focusses closer.

I also like the 10-18mm IS STM and of course the 18-135mm STM, although I tend to stick with my 17-55mm 2.8 IS for generic shots and interviews.

I really feel I could do 98% with the following set:
10-18mm IS STM (or alternatively the 11-16 Tokina) for dynamic stuff or tight spaces, I can run around with this thing and it looks pretty smooth.
17-55mm IS USM for general use, low light, and shallow depth of field. I use this lens 90% of the time.
55-250 STM for stuff far away.
If I would add a fourth lens, I would probably go for the Canon 100mm 2.8L Macro IS. A lovely lens for proper macro/tight closeups, and a solid portrait/interview lens with even shallower DOF and terrific IS for handheld work. I think you can get the 100mm 2.8L Macro IS and the 55-250mm STM for way less money than the 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, and both lenses will weigh less TOGETHER than that one L Monster, amazing piece of equipment as it is though.
 
Thanks.

I just bought the STM version for £125 new. I have a Tamron 17-50mm that's nice but I kinda wish I bought the version with IS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top