The next big purchase

iplaysnowboards

iplaysnowboards

Active member
So I just ordered an LCDVF and am planning to get the Rode Video mic pro soon. My major debate right now is where do I go with my lenses.

Currently I have a nikon 50mm 1.8 and a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8

I'm mostly filming narrative shorts right now for my own work and for college.

I have my eye's on the Tokina 11-16, Sigma 30 1.4, and one of the canon 70-200's.

Which do you guess think would benefit my type of filmmaking the most right now? I just don't know how practical each of these would be to me and am looking for people's opinions on what focal length they use most often or which will be most useful. Or if there are other lenses you would recommend other these go right ahead.
 
I would say maybe a light kit?
I know that learning to light stuff has made my work ALOT better.

Also, if you end up looking at 70-200s, I would point you towards the Tamron. Very sharp and great images and, seeing as you do video, the autofocus difference isn't that big.
 
JPM Photography said:
I would say maybe a light kit?
I know that learning to light stuff has made my work ALOT better.

Also, if you end up looking at 70-200s, I would point you towards the Tamron. Very sharp and great images and, seeing as you do video, the autofocus difference isn't that big.
Click to expand...

Yea playing with lights i've certainly noticed that good lighting makes the hugest difference. But being at a university I do have access to arri light kits, 650's, 1k's, bounce boards, fills, and flags of all sorts. So mainly i'm looking at lenses right now.

And honestly i've played with the Tamron and I think the canon sold itself. Even though it would mainly be used on a tripod the IS in the canon is certainly something that has made me believe it is worth the money. Also the focus ring on the canon has a lot longer throw than the tamron making it better for video and when it reaches infinity it does not stop. The ring keeps rotating which helps insure there is no 'bumps' in your footage. I know there is a huge price difference, but I really think i would regret not buying the canon.

With that being said i'm mainly looking for people's opinions on what focal range they use the most for short films and if something like the Tokina 11-16 even has any place in a short.
 
The IS can be useful, but I've found it does not make as much of a difference if you are using the camera on a proper mount (shoulder, steadycam, and obviously tripod). It really only comes in handy when going hand-held, but even doing that with IS looks pretty crappy in my opinion and testing so far. So, it was an easy decision for me not to spend that extra money on canon-branded glass- just don't see the value in it.

However, once you are going fully manual, don't forget to consider those vintage Nikkon/Olympus/Etc manual lenses with an adapter. Check the 7D Lens subsection for the Vintage Glass thread, you can find solid metal Nikkor lenses with a glassless ring adapter pretty cheap and get pretty amazing looking results.

I've seen a lot of indie films choosing to use them lately.
For example, the DP of this short film said the only lenses their crew used were the Nikon 35 f2.8, 50 f1.5, 50 f1.4, 60 f2 using F-mount adapters for EOS Canon DSLR.
http://vimeo.com/14445196

Here's another example, a bumper made for and played at the New Orleans Film Festival, also shot on Nikon glass with a T2i:
http://vimeo.com/14672109

It may not be your thing, and the autofocus does come in handy when actually using the device as a still camera, but you can buy all the vintage Nikon lenses you'd need for a fraction of the cost of one of the IS Canon lenses. Oh, and they will probably last longer being that Nikon made them out of metal and not plastic like the newer ones. Just food for thought.


EDIT: I missed the part about you already having Nikon lenses. This is what I get for posting half asleep. Sorry...
 
Last edited:
Narratives focal lengths are usually 24/28, 35, 50, 85 and maybe 100/135. and if i HAD to pick a few i'd say 24, 50 and 85. You dont need the tokina..thats more of a specialty lens.
 
I use the Canon 50mm F/1.8, Canon 35mm F/2.0, & a Rokinon 8mm Fisheye as my primes. I am still looking to buy lenses also.
 
Generally, there are the 3 minimum lenses used for video that jambredz already mentioned. Problem is that on a cropped sensor, wider tends to be more useful at times. But I've found the most useful are the 28mm range and the 50mm range for my interview style docu shots.
I have a zoom 75-150 for when I need it, but it gets rarely used compared to the others.

There's a plethora of information on this very subject in the 7D lens subforum. In fact, someone should just rename it to "lenses", because its not 7D specific at all.
 
The main reason it's in here is because the lens form doesn't get quite as much traffic, but thanks for your responses. So general consensus would be to get 24, 28, 30ish primes, maybe an 85?

I just feel like the 85mm on the 1.6x crop would have limited use as well? Maybe i'm wrong. So not alot of people using the 70-200 range except for interview type shots?
 
With a crop sensor, the Tokina 11-16 is not a specialty lens. Its field of view is equal to that of an 18-26mm lens on full frame. So It covers your wide angle nicely. Then you need a 28 or 30mm for your "normal lens." You mention the Sigma, but if you don't need to shoot at f1.4 and you don't shoot stills, I'd skip it and go vintage (Takumar, Zuiko, or Nikon).

I shot some scenes the other day and used a Takumar 28/3.5 more than anything. I used lights and even with a max aperture of f3.5 on the 28, I still stopped down.

Then you can either use a 50mm as a short telephoto, an odd focal length like 58mm for a bit more of a portrait lens, or step up to a more common 85mm for a longer portrait with the crop factor. I don't see the need for 200mm for narrative work, especially with the crop factor, but that's me.

Do you have a problem with your current zoom? It covers all of the core focal lengths for a crop sensor.
 
nandreetta said:
With a crop sensor, the Tokina 11-16 is not a specialty lens. Its field of view is equal to that of an 18-26mm lens on full frame. So It covers your wide angle nicely. Then you need a 28 or 30mm for your "normal lens." You mention the Sigma, but if you don't need to shoot at f1.4 and you don't shoot stills, I'd skip it and go vintage (Takumar, Zuiko, or Nikon).

I shot some scenes the other day and used a Takumar 28/3.5 more than anything. I used lights and even with a max aperture of f3.5 on the 28, I still stopped down.

Then you can either use a 50mm as a short telephoto, an odd focal length like 58mm for a bit more of a portrait lens, or step up to a more common 85mm for a longer portrait with the crop factor. I don't see the need for 200mm for narrative work, especially with the crop factor, but that's me.

Do you have a problem with your current zoom? It covers all of the core focal lengths for a crop sensor.
Click to expand...

No problem really with the tamron 17-50 besides the fact that it has a short focus throw and was maybe looking for something a little faster. If i'm going with primes I would really like to get something that is at least 1.8 since the tamron is already 2.8
 
I'm in the same boat. I shoot with a 60D and have a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and a Canon 50 f1.4. I love shooting with the 50 but for the indoor shorts I'm shooting I need something wider. After looking at reviews I'm going to get the Canon 28 f1.8 in the near future. After that in the indeterminate future maybe the 85 f1.8 to round out a 28/50/85 set of fast primes.
 
Never used the canon 28 but I can attest for the sigma 30 in saying that it is sharp as crap even at 1.4 suprisingly.
 
I'd recommend the Sigma 24mm f/1.8 over the 30mm f/1.4. Seems to get a better image, macro focuses (not sure if the 30mm does this) and it covers the full frame sensor if you ever make that jump. Nice fast wide lens on FF.
 
If you're dissatisfied with the focus throw, then you might not be impressed by the Sigma 30mm. It has a short focus throw, isn't particularly smooth, and doesn't have hard stops for focus so it will keep turning past infinity or close focus distance.

I wouldn't put much stock in Ken Rockwell's reviews. He's the brunt of many a joke in various photography communities.
 
I'm sure you will be happy with either lens. The Sigma 30 and 50 are the ones people say alot of good things about but not the longer 70-200mm.
I think the strong point of the Sigma is it has a cool 'look'. Especially up close/bokeh. But i am guessing for outdoor wider shots...the Canon will be better. (I haven't tried the Canon 28/1.8)
The Sigma has a certain 'feel' that is different. I like the feel and build on the Tokinas and would guess the Canon 28 is better in this area. With that said, i received a gig from the images of my Sigma 30.
So,...even though its not a 'pro' or 'L' lens, it got me a job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top