refocusedmedia
Veteran
And my brain has melted after spending an afternoon here:
http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html
My budget is as much under $1500 as possible and I plan to use the T2i I will purchase as a way for me to adventure into basic photography and begin shooting films. With all this info on lenses I'm beginning to feel a bit overwhelmed and wonder if I should just get an HV40 or HFS200 or similar camcorder. That way I just have to worry about filters and possibly a wide-angle adapter.
I'm trying to stick with EF and not EF-S lenses just in case I end up getting a 7D or EF-mount DSLR in the future.. I'd rather have lenses compatible with both body-styles. However, the prices are seriously having me reconsider that and just get the cheaper priced EF-S lenses (that still have IS and ring USM) and then sell them to purchase EF lenses down the road if and when I get an EF-mount DSLR. Anyway.. I was just wondering if my lens selection here is well-informed or misguided, please let me know.
First off, is a lens NOT having IS a deal-breaker? Does anyone have any footage of a tracking or hand-held video shot with IS on and off so I could see the difference? I tried to find some but was unable to. Regardless, I'll include both so you can see what I'm considering (avg prices found in parenthesis):
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM ($300)
Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM ($275)
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM ($375)
Canon EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM ($325)
Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ($400)
Secondly, I'm also unsure if I am OVER-valuing USM. Having never used a DSLR I have no idea if I really need the ability of full-time manual focusing nor do I know if BOT having it will be a headache when trying to shoot video. I havent even really looked at lenses that DONT include ring-type USM, but here are few possibilties that I've found:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II ($100)
Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 ($200)
Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 ($300)
Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS UD ($350)
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS ($225)
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS ($500)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS ($125, or included if I buy the kit obviously)
And possible third party lenses (which I know practically nothing about):
Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM IF ($500+)
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM ($400+)
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 SLD DC OS HSM ($150+)
Sigma 18-125mm f/3.8-5.6 AF DC OS HSM ($300+)
Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro ($550+)
Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP ZL Aspherical IF ($400+)
Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF Macro ($225+)
Tamron AF 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di-II LD Aspherical IF Macro ($300+)
God, this could go on forever! I'm thinking of getting 2 lenses.. one for wider shots (like a 17-50ish) and then a decent mid-zoom (20ish-200ish), but then I'm also thinking of getting a dedicated prime (the $100 50mm f/1.8) and just backing up when I want a "wider" shot and investing the rest in a quality zoom. On the other hand, why dont I just buy the kit and make do with that and spend the money on quality zoom (50ish-250ish). AHH!
I really believe that having a better foundation in real photography will benefit me as a director\cinematographer, but its so damn intimidating and confusing to jump in head-first and not screw yourself in the process. I dont want to end up with lenses that suck for filming, but are great for photography or vice versa. I dont want to purchase a lens that might not have IS and\or USM only to realize the benefit of it later. I also dont want to just load up on "slow" lenses because theyre cheap, lol.
Is there a ray of light out there, anywhere? Thanks for reading my nonsense.
(P.S., omg on top of that a local CL ad just appeared with a 7D + kit lens for $1500 total asking price!!)
http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html
My budget is as much under $1500 as possible and I plan to use the T2i I will purchase as a way for me to adventure into basic photography and begin shooting films. With all this info on lenses I'm beginning to feel a bit overwhelmed and wonder if I should just get an HV40 or HFS200 or similar camcorder. That way I just have to worry about filters and possibly a wide-angle adapter.
I'm trying to stick with EF and not EF-S lenses just in case I end up getting a 7D or EF-mount DSLR in the future.. I'd rather have lenses compatible with both body-styles. However, the prices are seriously having me reconsider that and just get the cheaper priced EF-S lenses (that still have IS and ring USM) and then sell them to purchase EF lenses down the road if and when I get an EF-mount DSLR. Anyway.. I was just wondering if my lens selection here is well-informed or misguided, please let me know.
First off, is a lens NOT having IS a deal-breaker? Does anyone have any footage of a tracking or hand-held video shot with IS on and off so I could see the difference? I tried to find some but was unable to. Regardless, I'll include both so you can see what I'm considering (avg prices found in parenthesis):
Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM ($300)
Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM ($275)
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM ($375)
Canon EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM ($325)
Canon EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM ($400)
Secondly, I'm also unsure if I am OVER-valuing USM. Having never used a DSLR I have no idea if I really need the ability of full-time manual focusing nor do I know if BOT having it will be a headache when trying to shoot video. I havent even really looked at lenses that DONT include ring-type USM, but here are few possibilties that I've found:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II ($100)
Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 ($200)
Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 ($300)
Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS UD ($350)
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS ($225)
Canon EF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 IS ($500)
Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS ($125, or included if I buy the kit obviously)
And possible third party lenses (which I know practically nothing about):
Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM IF ($500+)
Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM ($400+)
Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8-4.5 SLD DC OS HSM ($150+)
Sigma 18-125mm f/3.8-5.6 AF DC OS HSM ($300+)
Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical IF Macro ($550+)
Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP ZL Aspherical IF ($400+)
Tamron AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical IF Macro ($225+)
Tamron AF 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di-II LD Aspherical IF Macro ($300+)
God, this could go on forever! I'm thinking of getting 2 lenses.. one for wider shots (like a 17-50ish) and then a decent mid-zoom (20ish-200ish), but then I'm also thinking of getting a dedicated prime (the $100 50mm f/1.8) and just backing up when I want a "wider" shot and investing the rest in a quality zoom. On the other hand, why dont I just buy the kit and make do with that and spend the money on quality zoom (50ish-250ish). AHH!
I really believe that having a better foundation in real photography will benefit me as a director\cinematographer, but its so damn intimidating and confusing to jump in head-first and not screw yourself in the process. I dont want to end up with lenses that suck for filming, but are great for photography or vice versa. I dont want to purchase a lens that might not have IS and\or USM only to realize the benefit of it later. I also dont want to just load up on "slow" lenses because theyre cheap, lol.
Is there a ray of light out there, anywhere? Thanks for reading my nonsense.
(P.S., omg on top of that a local CL ad just appeared with a 7D + kit lens for $1500 total asking price!!)
