Please recommend me a wide angle lens

A

andrew00

Well-known member
Hey,

Firstly, this is for the 5d.

Lately I've fallen back in love with wide angle shots, specifically the ability of a lovely wide angel to give you lots of space in a frame for great landscapes and contrast with near and far objects.

It's that ability to have an actor in the foreground, but not too close, and also have space to have action going on in the background.

I've also fallen back into naturalistic, almost documentarian/journalistic styles of shooting. Where you are just close enough to the action to show what's going on, but close enough that you are able to give a nice blur to the background to really bring the action out.

I feel the combination of these two things can give some lovely images. I was wondering if anyone could please recommend which lens I should get to give me this ability, to summarise:

1 - nice wide angle
2 - can focus decently close for contrast of foreground/background
3 - gives dof control to blur background, if desired.

Two films, also films I love, that sprung to mind instantly when describing this were Childen of Men and The New World.

I dug out some photos and youtube clips for people to check out.

Please can you suggest what lens I should get. I'm currently eyeing up the Canon 28mm f1.8, there's also the Sigma 24mm f1.8. As I said I'm on the 5d so no crop!

Oh and I did once own the Sigma 20mm f1.8 for the D90 (has a crop), but took it back after seeing the poor focus control - it was 0-1 foot then infinity, not really useful in the above sense.

Examples:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NikEQy1XxDE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zLPM8FLMtk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lfs1UIKALQ

http://andrewsidea.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/vlcsnap-14506018.png
http://www.ejumpcut.org/currentissue/ChildrenMenLegend/JCpics/22.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2006/12/children-of-men-12252006.jpg
http://www.moviecitynews.com/arrays/images/2004/new_world/new_world_650.jpg
http://disguisedgods.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/new-world9.jpg

Cheers,
a x
 
24mm's should generally cover full frame, or most will, anyway.

What you're searching for isn't always the proponent of a wide angle (wide meaning 24mm to 35mm) but if you're searching for a wide angle, the investment to make would be one that matches the rest of your lens set.

If you can find a good deal on the 24/1.4 Canon that would be a nice lens to have, or the 28/2 Zeiss ZE. Not sure what glass you're using, though, so again I suggest you get what matches the rest of your set.

Outside of the Zeiss setup, though, try not to expect the best focus throw. They're SLR lenses first and foremost, so...
 
If the Canon and Zeiss lenses are too expensive, you might want to look at the 24mm f1.8 sigma. It's actually not too bad, and a lot cheaper.
 
Also, you're shooting on a 5D... A 24mm is gonna be crazy wide. Still looks awkward as hell to me, personally, but try a 24 or 28 out and see how you like it.

You really probably do NOT need a 1.8, either. A 2.8 should do.
 
Hey, thanks for the replies.

Here's some details I posted on cinema5d about why I want this look:

I'm definitely into having a lens wide enough to have both background action and my main guy framed nicely in the foreground, but also having a lens fast enough to give a nice blur of said background. From using my Sigma 20 1.8 I saw I couldn't get enough focus control to choose my focus and therefore what was blurred, it was basically 0-1foot or infinity, which isn't good (albeit on a cropped d90), hence why I'm asking for opinions because a 24 might still not give me this, I don't know, maybe I'll have to go to the 28, or maybe the 24 is just right, I'm not sure. I've no camera shops with decent stock near me you see.

For example, in the two shots below (and the top one is really the best example I just couldn't find a bigger, higher quality screen grab) you've got the focus being on the character in the foreground, but there is also action going on in the background. You also have the ability to blur the background if you want, so you can either fill the background with action and also grab the actors reaction/movements/actions nice and wide, or you can blur the background to show a nice contrasty and dynamic scene.

In the top picture, for example, you have Clive Owen basically listening in on a conversation and reaction to what he's hearing, hence the need for the wide angle, to get all that in, but also to give selective blur to focus our attention on Clive, both visually but also from a reactionary pov.

22.jpg


new_world_650.jpg


The below is another example, here something bad has happened and you can get the other characters running around and fussing in the background, whilst also getting his reaction. You can get it all without getting too close, but do have them in the background blurred to focus the attention on him. In this particular scene they basically want to get going and he's having a moment of crisis and trying to keep it together. If you used a tele you'd have issues, hence why I'm loving the wides because you can do both (theoretically, my quest is to make it reality heh) but as I said it needs to be able to have the focus control to choose your blur as needed.

vlcsnap-14506018.png


In other occasions, you want to have the character existing whilst in the background things are occurring. It's all about wide enough to show lots if desired, but also having that blur when desired to focus attentions. In the above images you've got significant to minimal blurring, but at least it lets you focus attention where you want it to be.

childrenofmen3.jpg



...

I actually have the 24-70 f2.8 and I really like it, although it's too heavy for me, since I shoot handheld a lot, and with there potentially being an IS version on the horizon I'm tempted to sell it and wait for that.

I've ordered the 28 1.8 in the meantime. It's not vastly expensive and I thought, since I generally have Canon lenses, it would match up at least. I can't afford the L series 24 1.4 yet alas.
 
Well, if you were on a D90 that lens would be an 18/1.8 with a pretty rad macro/close focus distance.

On the MKii it'll be the a 24 or 28/2.8 or slower. Surprised you're not getting the wide angle that you want out of the 24 end of your 24-70, that should definitely do the trick. The rest is up to composition and lighting.

You'll probably be okay with the 28/1.8 if you've been mismatching glass this entire time. No sense in worrying about it now.

As obvious as this may seem, consider that every single still you posted exhibits plenty of "depth". If you're trying to do this in an interior, it would probably have to be a mansion. Although it should be easier with an MKii, not sure how I personally would feel about the look.
 
Aye the 24-70 optically was great, it's just too bulky and heavy for me, esp as it extends the wider it goes, it's not a small and light lens which is what I need.

And split diopter? Are you sure? Couldn't you just use a deeper dof to get it all in focus?
 
Here are six stills. All from the same camera.

These probably do not exhibit what you're looking for, but it may be interesting to see which ones you think are the wides and "super wides", as well as which one's are the telephoto-slash-longshots.

I will say that two stills are from a 21/2.8.


picture.php

picture.php

picture.php

picture.php

picture.php

picture.php
 
andrew00 said:
Aye the 24-70 optically was great, it's just too bulky and heavy for me, esp as it extends the wider it goes, it's not a small and light lens which is what I need.

And split diopter? Are you sure? Couldn't you just use a deeper dof to get it all in focus?
Click to expand...

You could, it would also mean a lot of light. However, that shot's not completely in focus on either side, it's just fairly deep; watch the actual movie.
 
I received the 28 1.8 in the post and made a little test with it, nothing fancy, just some random house/garden shots, with some cc to push things.



http://vimeo.com/8218417

So far I like it, it's light and small and seems to shoot nice bokeh. Although the manual focus ring is different to my Nikon 50mm's one. Whereas the Nikon is free flowing and quick, the Canon seems slower, almost as if it's 'servo controlled manual'.

I thought the 50 1.8 was this but didn't think the 28 1.8 was. For my next purchases I was thinking of the Canon 50 1.4 and 85 1.8 for colour consistency but am a little concerned re:focusing now.

I also used my Captain Stubling for the first time, which was nice but added extra weight so I'm not sure how stable it actually made things vs shooting handheld w/just camera+z-finder.
 
Glad you're liking your new purchase.

Is the vignette added in post?

As well, remember that weight is a major factor in being able to truly operate handheld. A viewfinder on the back of the Canon is way too limiting, in fact relying on the 7D LCD instead of an external monitor is going to hinder one creatively.

But, you definitely want to add weight, so long as it's balanced and the center of gravity isn't too high.
 
The Children of Man shoot used a tremendous amount of light. The shot in the house was done with something like 20 lights suspended canopy-like over the entire structure. There is a pic of it somewhere - I think the ASC site/magazine...
 
It's been snowing here last few days. I did the first little lens test on Monday and by Thursday we were covered in snow! So I did another, partly to just get some pretty footage, also as my sister lives overseas I thought she'd like to see how things are back home heh.

It was done all handheld this time and I used the fader nd to cut the exposure. It's not perfect and was a little difficult to judge how much to cut things, but the magic lantern histogram came into it's own in this instance. I used the dial on the fader nd to basically dial in an even exposure, at least what looked even. There were cases where it had too many bright spots so I tried to find a medium that worked, some shots successfully, some less so but whatever!

Again I did a somewhat ott colour correction to push it somewhat, see how it held up, and then added 2% film grain in magic bullets as I like it!

 
yoclay said:
The Children of Man shoot used a tremendous amount of light. The shot in the house was done with something like 20 lights suspended canopy-like over the entire structure. There is a pic of it somewhere - I think the ASC site/magazine...
Click to expand...

Figured. If you find that photo or article post it up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top