C100: Something wider than 24mm

Doug_EX

Doug_EX

Well-known member
Hi,

I own a C100 with 3 lenses (11-16, 24-104 and 100-400). I was on top of a wind turbine (270 feet high) yesterday to shoot a video about security. The 24-105 wasn't wide enough at 24mm for the wide shots that I needed and I had to do some close shots, so the 11-16 would've been useless. For safery reasons (and convenience), I could not change lenses on top of the turbine (can't have anything loose and didn't want to drop my lens)...a bit frustrating (I should've brought my HPX250 for those shot but wanted to have the same type of image than those I took for the interviews). So I decided I would by a standard zoom lens that is wider than my 24-105 on the wider end. Canon's 17-55 would be nice but 55mm is too short for my needs. Is the Canon 15-85 a good partner for a C100/300?

thanks!
 
Hey, Doug.

Have you considered the canon 10-18 stm? Very sharp little lens and nice on the c100. Super-fast focusing, completely silent, and great if you want to hand hold without a rig. Plus ... $279. Oh, and very, very lightweight. Hard to beat it.

Yes, there's a bit of distortion at the wide end but I suppose you can't get away from that. And if you're a prurist you might take issue with the plastic mount. But again ... 279 bucks.

I bought one and liked it so much I ended up buying it's bigger brother, the 18-135, also nice.

Hope this helps.
 
ideafarm said:
Hey, Doug.

Have you considered the canon 10-18 stm? Very sharp little lens and nice on the c100. Super-fast focusing, completely silent, and great if you want to hand hold without a rig. Plus ... $279. Oh, and very, very lightweight. Hard to beat it.

Yes, there's a bit of distortion at the wide end but I suppose you can't get away from that. And if you're a prurist you might take issue with the plastic mount. But again ... 279 bucks.

I bought one and liked it so much I ended up buying it's bigger brother, the 18-135, also nice.

Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Hummm...if 55mm is too short for me, 18mm would not be an option. I already have the 11-16 which is excellent.
 
I'm a little bit sheepish about recommending this lens, but it's been my 'get out of jail free' lens for some time - the lens you attach when you don't know what's going to happen next. It's not an exciting lens in terms of image quality, but it has a great range, works extremely well with DPAF and once you engage the iris correction thing, that tames its very odd zooming behaviour.

The Canon 18-135mm STM is a cheap and plasticky lens that is 'fly by wire' - software driven - but on a couple of longer term documentary style shoots, it's been one of the two lenses I used throughout (the other being the 100mm 2.8 L Macro which is awesome). The key being that I'm often sent into situations that are fast moving and unstaged. It all just happens, and you're battling to get coverage. You really can't stop the action to change lenses, and at times I've wanted to call 'Time out' and dig out my EX1Rs but if you need part-EX1, part-DSLR style coverage, I'm very glad to have the 18-135 in the kit bag.

FWIW, I keep the lens on my 550D/T2i DSLR as a 'director's viewfinder' but swap it over to the C100 if the actual shoot is looking hairy or I need its wide range. It's not parfocal (!!!), don't think you'll get ENG style performance out of it, but it means I can take a C100 to more gigs and into more situations (like your venture atop a wind turbine).
 
Sorry, never touched a C100, but I can vouch for the 15-85 as working great on my 60D. It's a very sharp lens and is the 35mm equiv. of a 24 to 136 mm. It is not fast (3.5-5.6) but I shoot with it wide open 95% of the time with great results.
 
The 18-135 STM acts parfocal for me. It's not actually parfocal, but on my C100 it will refocus whenever I zoom to maintain the same focal plane. Therefore, as I zoom it will go out of focus depending on how fast it zooms and then it will come back into focus at the end. This is happens on all of my ef-m STM lenses as well. The lens also has the same behavior in regards to aperture. Darkens while zooming and then brightens back up for obvious reasons. Therefore, the lens is fantastic if you are covering an event without expecting to use any footage taken while zooming. If you expect to shoot with a wide DOF, the 18-135STM is better than any standard Canon L Zoom since it actually maintains a constant aperture while zooming over f/5.6 unlike the L zooms that have noticeable light loss.
 
Doug_EX said:
Hummm...if 55mm is too short for me, 18mm would not be an option. I already have the 11-16 which is excellent.
Click to expand...

Then I suppose I'd second Matt's rec on the 18-135. All the usefulness and simplicity that you'd expect of an everything lens with a nice, clean look (not for high-end narrative) and reasonably priced.

If you want to see the look of it on a C100, see if you can find a travel vid someone here posted using the 18-135. It was an Eastern Europe locale he shot, can't remember exactly where -- a picturesque town with a cathedral or something -- and the look that he achieved was really outstanding.

it was the reason I bought one ;)
 
Since I managed to kill my 24-105 L, the 18-135mm has been living on my Canon DSLR practically all the time. Compared to the 24-105L, the zoom range is much more useful for a 1.6X crop. The lens covers everything from wide angle to telephoto. Optically, wide open at 3.5, in terms of sharpness, it's a bit softer than the 24-105, but the difference is quite small for 18 megapixel stills, and virtually negligible for 1080P video, stopped down to 4.5 they're very similar in sharpness, to my eyes anyway. Distortion is existent at the wide end, but quite better than the 24-105 at 24mm. Both have excellent IS. In short, if you're pleased with the optical performance of the 24-105mm, you will be pleased with the 18-135mm, not much difference.

Construction wise, it's worse than the L, by a good margin. But it's not cheap plastic 18-55 either. The plastic is quite solid, and has a metal mount. It's a solid lens. Zoom and focus rings are good and it has manual override.

If you're alright with a little drop in construction quality, and alright with being a bit slower at the long end, the 18-135mm is a better lens.

There's also the 18-200mm If you want more reach. Same lens but loses the STM for quiet autofocus and manual focus override.
 
I think 15mm at the wider end would be more useful than 18mm. Yes, I know that I would loose in telephoto (85 vs 135) but I think being able to zoom out to 15 is more benefic for my use.
i have a 18-55 and will be doing more test with it to see if 18mm is wide enough...but I doubt it, because I often use the 13-16 mm range om my 11-16 when I need those wide shots.
 
Oh the 18-135 is a winner for Run N Gun observational documentary shooting. Keep it at f5.6 and u have a constant aperture from 18mm to 135mm. Going wider than f5.6 in these situations your constantly chasing focus anyways so keeping it at f5.6 your all in.

But having said all that, from my tests i haven't seen much image quality from a Canon C100 at f5.6 to an wide open f1.9 Sony EX1, and the sony you can hand hold longer hrs without a rig...hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
 
BeeHop said:
i haven't seen much image quality from a Canon C100 at f5.6 to an wide open f1.9 Sony EX1, and the sony you can hand hold longer hrs without a rig
Click to expand...

I use both EX1 & C100 (about a 50%/50% split) , and have compared them often - I think you're being just a little harsh on the C100. :) I specifically put the C100 with the 18-135 (and the 24-105) side by side with my EX1R. The DoF at f8-f11 on the C100 matched the f2.8 of the EX1R. And, if you're judicious with the ABB, the image of the C100 is far less noisy. And all lenses benefit from nipping the iris in by a stop or two from wide open. I use my 18-135 at f8.

Yes, the EX1R can be used all day without rigs - as can the C100. After all, the EX1R is probably one of the very few cameras out there with a WORSE EVF than the C100. LOL For me, the choice of taking the EX1R bag or the C100 bag on an assignment is 'will I have time to select the best lens for the job?' Event coverage can be VERY challenging (closeup of presenter, whip back to wide shot of presenter on stage with audience, whip to med-telephoto of a line of the audience, scoot to front for TED style 'up the nose' BCU of presenter - rinse, repeat). OTOH, a day of interviews and B-Roll is the C100 comfort zone.


FWIW, WDR and CineGamma 3 are a good match but I find the EX1s a little noisy now. More to your point, if (maybe even 'when') my EX1s fall apart, I'd replace them with PMW200 or PMW300, or one of those and a PXW-X70, rather than stick with solely an S35 solution.

There is a reason why I frequently refer to this class of camera as 'a little black sausage of joy'.
 
No offense Matt but i have to disagree with f8 on C100 being same as EX1 wide open. Although u did say f2.8 on EX1.......try f1.9 on EX1 and f5.6 on C100 u might be surprised how close they are ;)
 
BeeHop said:
No offense Matt but i have to disagree with f8 on C100 being same as EX1 wide open.
Click to expand...

No offense taken - but allow me to post my results in testing the two side by side:

dof-c100-f8.jpg


dof-ex1-f28.jpg


I habitually use 2.8 as the widest aperture on the EX1 as it avoids the 'ramping' of brightness as you zoom, and quite frankly, I find the images lack bite at the wide end at 1.9 - all lenses get better by a little 'nip' from wide open to one or two stops extra.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top