Old Canon 35-80mm kit lens = junk?

[Jordan Scott Price]

Also, I may be able to get a Canon EF 28-135mm (I think the old 7d kit lens) for $100, which would cover me pretty nicely for a zoom. I know this lens isn't as sharp as the 18-135 EF-S...

Sharpness is not a chief concern when shooting video. It subjects your footage to aliasing quicker than less sharp glass. Sharpness can and should be added in post; most video should be shot flat with little sharpness so this is possible. It is more of an in-camera factor in still photography.

I have the 7D kit lens. It is a great start-up lens. I replaced it for shooting video the second I bought a 28-90mm 1:2.8-3.5 vintage zoom for peanuts.

 

[PerroneFord]

Cool.

So in my situation, for a barebones basic 3 lens prime set, should I maybe just add a 20mm? The logic being, the 24 and 35 are sort of "intermediate" lenses given that I already have the 28mm and 50mm, and the 85mm and 105mm may be too long for common use?

If you already have a 28 and a 50, then I'd look at a 20 or 24. The problem with a 20, is that you're going to have to "control your frame", and honestly, most small productions have a LOT of trouble mastering everything in frame at very wide widths. Especially outdoors. Unless you have complete control of your area, you can necessarily tell the guy two houses down that his trash cann is ruining your shot, or at a park have people strolling randomly through frame. Many small productions are told "tight" because they just can't control the larger frame.

Also, I may be able to get a Canon EF 28-135mm (I think the old 7d kit lens) for $100, which would cover me pretty nicely for a zoom. I know this lens isn't as sharp as the 18-135 EF-S, and also it's going to be a 45mm-216mm because it's EF, but for $100 it's a great buy right? (It lists new for $400).

Forget sharp. Any glass made after about 1977 from Canon, Nikon, or any other reputable manufacturer is going to be sharp on a 4K sensor, much less with your line skipping 1080p. Sharp is nice if you've got something like film which can resolve it. On these cameras, the more forgiving nature of older glass really smooths things out and makes them look a lot nicer. At least in my view.

The problem with these AF lenses is the focus. Most are awful. If you're going to go this route, make SURE the focus ring is rather wide. Should you ever decide to use a follow focus, a focus ring like that of the EF 50mm 1.8 will do you NO good.

There's a LOT of decent zooms out there for $100. Do yourself a favor and get one with an aperture ring.

Would this be a good one zoom + barebones prime setup?

The premise of it is good. Just make sure to get a lens that meets the needed parameters. Decent focus ring, aperture ring if possible, focal length works with what you have, etc.

 

[PerroneFord]

Sharpness is not a chief concern when shooting video. It subjects your footage to aliasing quicker than less sharp glass. Sharpness can and should be added in post; most video should be shot flat with little sharpness so this is possible. It is more of an in-camera factor in still photography.

Keep telling 'em.

 

[miseducation]

To respond to the advice I got in this thread, I did finally end up buying the Tokina 11-16.

Haven't received it yet but I figure it's cheaper to find inexpensive vintage glass above the range of the Tokina.

Thanks for the advice.