Questions About Lenses...

A

Anthony Arago

Member
Hey all, I’m fairly new here and I have a few questions about DSLR’s. Before I even begin though, I have looked through a number of threads already, so I’d rather not hear a bunch of responses telling me to “use the ‘Search’ button”. ;) I just have a few specific questions I’ve had a tough time finding the answers to.

First off, this will be my first DSLR camera and I am pretty dead set on getting the Canon 60D. The extra features on this model compared to the T2i, justified the slightly higher cost for me. Second, I will generally be using the camera for video. Considering it’s a still photography camera at heart, I know I’ll end up taking photos as well, but the video comes first.

Most of my questions are about lenses. Since this is my first interchangeable lens camera, I’m not too knowledgeable in this area yet. As you’ll be able to tell by some of the lenses I list, my budget is moderate, and I don’t think I need any crazy lenses (super wide angle or telephoto).

1. Is it worth it to purchase the kit with the 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom lens, or would I be better off getting just the body and spending the money on a different lens?

2. I am planning on getting the Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens, however, I do currently own a Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 lens already. Would it be better to purchase a Nikon to Canon adapter and use the Nikon lens instead? If so, what kind of adapter should I get (that won’t break after 3 uses)?

3. Are there any other lenses you would recommend? Also, are there going to be any problems with vignetting, etc. with any of the lenses?

4. I will also be shooting in a variety of environments (outside & indoors). Should I purchase some ND filters, etc. for outside shooting?

Alright, I think that’s it. Sorry if the questions seem kind of ridiculous, again, I’m just not too knowledgeable with the lenses yet. Any help is GREATLY appreciated. Thanks! :)
 
Personally, if you are going to get a zoom lens, I would get one with a constant aperture, as you are using it video. I've found constant aperture lenses are much easier to work with for video, as you do not have to worry about exposure changes through the focal length. Invest in a constant aperture zoom and some nice primes as opposed to the kit lens.
 
Anthony Arago said:
1. Is it worth it to purchase the kit with the 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom lens, or would I be better off getting just the body and spending the money on a different lens?
Click to expand...

If you don't have any other zoom lenses like the 18-135, get the kit, IMO. Reason: You want to cover as many focal lengths as you can to start off. Down the line, you can invest in a set of primes or specific zooms, like 17-50, 11-16, etc. With the 18-135, you cover a huge range that is equivalent to the field of view of ~29-216mm on the 60D.

Anthony Arago said:
2. I am planning on getting the Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens, however, I do currently own a Nikon Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 lens already. Would it be better to purchase a Nikon to Canon adapter and use the Nikon lens instead? If so, what kind of adapter should I get (that won’t break after 3 uses)?
Click to expand...

Save money and stick with your Nikon, again, IMO. Here is the adapter that everyone uses. It is solid metal, no moving parts, and works great.

You may also want to read this thread. Vintage lenses are a way to go for the cash-pressed videographer, and you'll find there is a plethora of them on the market. Most lenses can be accommodated by relatively cheap adapters, anywhere from $10-50. Just an option.

Anthony Arago said:
3. Are there any other lenses you would recommend? Also, are there going to be any problems with vignetting, etc. with any of the lenses?
Click to expand...

I only use vintage primes, outside of my 28-135mm kit lens for some stuff, so I can't help you with recommendations unless you go the vintage route. If you do, there are a lot of great lenses and DVXuser reviews in that above thread.

There will be no vignetting because the 60D's sensor crops the lens by 60%, unlike the 5DII which has a full frame sensor.

Anthony Arago said:
4. I will also be shooting in a variety of environments (outside & indoors). Should I purchase some ND filters, etc. for outside shooting?
Click to expand...

I do not have the experience to comment here in detail, but I would recommend looking into them, as others will strongly recommend it, and the Vari ND filter has been a huge hit. However, it will somewhat depend on your setup, since filters are made for specific lens diameters, and lenses with different diameters will require a step-up/-down adapter, etc., if you use a fixed stop ND filter.
 
Last edited:
Something to keep in mind, the added sharpness you get from a really nice lens will not significantly help you with video, since you are losing a lot of resolution when shooting video vs. photos. Not to say that the nicer lenses don't have a lot of other advantages, just that sharpness should not be the deciding factor if video is your main goal (especially considering the Canon 2.8 zoom is around $1000). If you really are just getting into this, stick with the kit 18-135 until you have a feel for what else you want. If you really want to get another lens, find one of the cheap 50mm 1.8 lenses used, and spend some time with that. Keep in mind, though, on that camera, your 50mm lens will give you an image similar to an 80mm lens on the 5D, so you may end up wanting to spend your money on a 35mm rather than a 50.
 
photos v video

photos v video

Just out of interest where does the extra sharpness in photos as opossed to video actualy go,prints only have so much sharpness but i guess its more than video ,is there not a limit to how much sharpness /resolution pcs can store
 
flinty said:
Just out of interest where does the extra sharpness in photos as opossed to video actualy go,prints only have so much sharpness but i guess its more than video ,is there not a limit to how much sharpness /resolution pcs can store
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you're asking.

Do you mean to ask "How can a photo have more sharpness than a video?"

If that's the case: Photos have far greater resolution than videos. Photos from the 7D, for example, have 9 times the resolution of full HD video. This means that the sharpness of the image can be heightened considerably more than the video because there are more pixels to work with.

It doesn't have anything to do with PC storage...I'm not sure I understand your question there.


@OP:

The wonderful, never-understated point that Mark made was that new and crispy Canon EF(-S) lenses are chiefly built for photographers, not cinematographers. They are designed to provide greater sharpness than a forty-year-old lens; and they have a lot more pixel depth to work with when you're shooting 15-24 Megapixel stills.

Using these "sharp" lenses for video can cause aliasing, especially along solid, sharp lines in your video, because the camera is downsampling from 18 MP (I think its 15 MP on the 60D, forgive me...) and having to derive information from small samples of color in the frame, which creates color aberration like moire.

This is part of the argument for the camp who shoots with vintage glass. These old lenses have no designs on increasing sharpness, and few affect contrast much. They are also built like tanks and can be had for next to nothing. It is for these reasons that I shoot with vintage glass.
 
I also agree.. to go with zoom lens, get those with constant aperture. Otherwise, when shooting indoor, you will have to constantly changing the exposure to compensate the increase/lost of light when zooming in and out.
 
Jordan_S said:
Incorrect. First of all, 18mm is 18mm and 135mm is 135mm. While using an EF lens on a 1.6 crop body like the 60D, the field of view will be affected but the focal length remains the same.
Click to expand...

Correct

Jordan_S said:
Secondly, the Canon 18-135 is an EF-S lens and so it is made for the 60D and other 1.6 crop bodies and therefore, the field of view will be unchanged.
Click to expand...

Wrong wrong wrong. Focal length is focal length whether its EF or EF-S lenses. The crop multiplication factor still applies to lenses made for aps-c camera.
 
"Field of View" was a phrase I left out of my post by mistake.


@OP: What I mean to say is that the cropped sensor gives you an effective field of view of your lens's set focal length times 1.6. You may or may not already know that, but I may have muddied the clarity, nonetheless. It's something you have to take into account no matter what when framing your shots. I.e., to achieve "Normal" on the 60D, you need to set your lens to around 30mm; 50mm for 80mm; 80mm for 128mm, etc.

I apologize for the confusion.
 
saneproductions said:
Don't get the kit lens, go for the canon 17-55 2.8 IS or the tamron 17-50 2.8 VC of the canon is too much for you.
Click to expand...


the tamron 17-50 2.8 VC is absolutely awful; it's the older, non-VC version, that rocks; they threw all their sharpness out the window in exchange for the VC
 
Couple thoughts - (prefaced by: shot Nikon for a living for 15 years, if you're an American consumer you've seen my work, etc... that is to say, the things that work for me "work" for me, these aren't opinions formulated from nothing but reading forum posts) (and I'm not suggesting any of the opinions on this thread have less merit than my own.)

Get the kit zoom. Unless you can afford a constant ap. lens and you're throwing zoom shots in your videos ala the 70's, it can be very handy when you need a fairly wide angle - your 50mm will functionally be a 70-ish mm on the 60D. It really won't work with a follow focus though.

ND: if you're really into DOF looks, yeah. But a set of 4x4's and a matte box can add up - even the plastic 4x4's like Lee get pricey. Screw-on cheapies really aren't bad for video. I've shot pro VDSLR jobs with them in a pinch. I suggest that because the original post suggests you're about to start dumping money into gear, and there's no end to it. Some say "buy quality stuff you'll use forever", but a great fluid head and some cheap ND will take you much much further than no ND at all.

Lens adapters - yes to the Fotodiox "no play", $70ish. No the the $20 Chinese/Adorama jobs. They wobble.

Yes to older glass - especially Nikon mount as there seems to be a lot more of it. If shooters raved about a Nikon (or Canon or Vivitar) lens in 1975, the newer crop of lenses doesn't make the lens any less effective than it was. But fungus, dirt, and dried up lubrication will. So buy carefully.

Get some cheap lenses and test the damn things. Shoot a test chart or pin up a magazine page or packaging with lots of fine text and varying size fonts. Shoot a few video frames at every aperture - adjust shutter so the exposure is the same - stick post-its with the aperture noted in the frame. Zoom in on your computer. Make note of which apertures look best (often around 5.6). Note which just absolutely suck.

Look for Nikon Series E lenses on eBay. Great primes for video.

Sharpness - it's more than a resolution issue - I can reduce a D90 still from 16mpx down to 1080 and it's sharp as hell - it's the massive amount of compression applied.

And finally - can we stop jumping down everyone's throats about FOV conversions? It's extremely handy shorthand to say "your 50mm lens will effectively be a 70mm" or whatever. That's all it really comes down to on set - what do I need in frame, what kind of look do I want? Get to know your lenses and how they look and feel for your work. a 200mm at f2.8 and a 28mm at f16 can give me very similar framing, but massively different style. Sharing all this lens nomeclature knowledge and devoting 6 posts to the "right wording"... well, it gets kind of feminine-hygiene-hardware-ish to me.

Just sayin'...:smile:
 
The field of view will be affected the exact same way in an EF-S lens as an EF lens on a crop sensor body. A 50mm EF-S lens and a 50mm EF lens will give you the exact same field of view on a crop body.
 
what i mean jscottprice is photos from the 7d may have 9 times the res of video but how can it be displayed to be seen, or is my Epsom photo PX650 not doing its job.
 
I bought the tamron 17-50mm vc to replace the kit lens 18-55mm. All I can say is what a waste of money. Using the exact same settings (iso, shutter, f3.5 18mm, f5.6 50mm) the kit lens is so much sharper than the tamron, it's not funny. This was tested over and over again with the same results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top