(The right) Prime Lens.

S

Snapper123

Well-known member
Hey guys, I want to start using my T2i for a professional short film but the thing that is holding me back is that with the lens I have now (and the camera, which I personally hold a grudge against too) shooting in any sort of indoor situation isn't possible. At 3.5 apeture and 50 shutter for video, I have to raise my ISO to 1600 just to 'see' anything in my own extremely well lit room, and as yall know, 1600 is unusable for video.

So while I may send my camera in to make sure it's sensabilities are correct, in general what is the best prime lens to get? With the T2i, it's sensor turns a 50mm into a 85mm prime, and to me, that is probably not useable for videos, for perspective reasons, nor is 50mm even if it didn't. Also, since the 50mm prime does not have IS, the videos will be very jerky, since 85mm is usually where IS starts to really matter.

So to be honest, I'd love it if someone could recommend a very cheap prime at around the 18mm or 35mm range. Sigma has a good 1.8 prime range for the T2i, a 20mm, a 24mm, and a 28mm, but they are all 400$+ with the 28mm being 345$. They also have a 30mm 1.4 for 450$. But to be honest, these prices are slightly over my budget (since I'm also buying equipment) and to be honest, I'm the type of person who'd rather use much cheaper vintage primes and I'd have no problem using manual focus or adaptors. The only thing is, the one thing I can't do is handywork, I can't shave any metal off anywhere or cut anything, I need it to be a easy fit. I also would have a bit of trouble deciding between exactly what length of prime, 20, 24, 38, and 30 is a tough range to pick!

So in all honesty, what exactly would you recommend for my purpose? I need a lens for true low light situations (a supermarket is low light to the T2i) where it would be impossible to have set lighting, I can't let my ISO go above 200, and I also need a prime that gives that perspective 'umph' to a video...which a 50mm would not do. I like to get close to my subjects, and I also like a very 'wide angle' background, although I probably do not want the curvation that a 18mm brings.

P.S. I'm probably going to go ahead and buy the 50mm (as it is only 100$) but I still think I need a bunch of advice on what primes to really use.
 
Last edited:
Snapper123 said:
Hey guys, I want to start using my T2i for a professional short film but the thing that is holding me back is that with the lens I have now (and the camera, which I personally hold a grudge against too) shooting in any sort of indoor situation isn't possible. At 3.5 apeture and 50 shutter for video, I have to raise my ISO to 1600 just to 'see' anything in my own extremely well lit room, and as yall know, 1600 is unusable for video.

So while I may send my camera in to make sure it's sensabilities are correct, in general what is the best prime lens to get? With the T2i, it's sensor turns a 50mm into a 85mm prime, and to me, that is probably not useable for videos, for perspective reasons, nor is 50mm even if it didn't. Also, since the 50mm prime does not have IS, the videos will be very jerky, since 85mm is usually where IS starts to really matter.

So to be honest, I'd love it if someone could recommend a very cheap prime at around the 18mm or 35mm range. Sigma has a good 1.8 prime range for the T2i, a 20mm, a 24mm, and a 28mm, but they are all 400$+ with the 28mm being 345$. They also have a 30mm 1.4 for 450$. But to be honest, these prices are slightly over my budget (since I'm also buying equipment) and to be honest, I'm the type of person who'd rather use much cheaper vintage primes and I'd have no problem using manual focus or adaptors. The only thing is, the one thing I can't do is handywork, I can't shave any metal off anywhere or cut anything, I need it to be a easy fit. I also would have a bit of trouble deciding between exactly what length of prime, 20, 24, 38, and 30 is a tough range to pick!

So in all honesty, what exactly would you recommend for my purpose? I need a lens for true low light situations (a supermarket is low light to the T2i) where it would be impossible to have set lighting, I can't let my ISO go above 200, and I also need a prime that gives that perspective 'umph' to a video...which a 50mm would not do. I like to get close to my subjects, and I also like a very 'wide angle' background, although I probably do not want the curvation that a 18mm brings.

P.S. I'm probably going to go ahead and buy the 50mm (as it is only 100$) but I still think I need a bunch of advice on what primes to really use.
Click to expand...

100% incorrect , you must have a faulty camera. My Canon t2i doe snot experience noise until 3200 iso and even then it's not that bad, but at 1600 iso the image quality still looks beautiful. Now instead of getting faster lenses invest in some lighting equipment.
 
^^well, he did say he was on a tight budget.

there's a lot of people talking good things about old Nikon primes. adorama and b&h have a used inventory you might want to check out.

i wouldn't bother with the 50mm 1.8, since you were complaining about the field of view (you might have limited use of it).

i'm not personally sure about these two lenses, but i just found them on ebay, they're cheap and relatively fast:

Nikon 24mm f/2.8 $120
Nikon 35mm f/2.5 $90
 
Well if a F2.8 is fast enough, then just buy a nice zoom and call it a day. If F2.8 is not fast enough, I'd be looking for F2.0 and F1.8 Nikon glass with adapters. And in fact that is EXACTLY what I am doing.

ISO 800 is about as noise free as I like to push things typically. ISO 1600 is usable, but I prefer not to go there unless I have to. However, if you have fast glass (F2.0 or faster), you'd nearly need to be shooting in the dark before that's necessary.
 
Cieloent said:
Now instead of getting faster lenses invest in some lighting equipment.
Click to expand...

This is the best advice your going to get. No matter how fast your lens is, if there is no light on your talent they will never look as good as when you light them properly.
It doesn't take much light power to light up a small room for one of these cameras.
Soft lighting looks best because the digital sensor doesn't handle contrast the way film does. You could probably get away with 3 / color balances florescent tubes in different places around your subject, possibly a single spot 100w from over head in the background to add highlight.
The whole deal could be done as cheap as a few hundred bucks to start.
Outdoor work lights are another cheap option if you can get the right color balanced bulbs. Get some Lee 216 or maybe a less dense diffusion for every lamp. You need diffusion to kill hard shadows. Lee filters are very tough and heat resistant. Clip them on with common wood clothespins.
These type of lamp usually come with a steel light stand which you will need
 
Noel Evans said:
Is there a Canon FD lens adapter?
Click to expand...

Not without glass which will degrade the image.

I've held off from purchasing lighting equipment in favor of faster lenses. Come on, which is more fun? With your budget (or not), people are correct to recommend manual Nikon lenses. The 24mm f/2.8 is great. The 35mm f/2.0 is very good. The older ones may flare more easily but that should not impact your purposes.
 
I second the use of vintage Nikon lenses. I have a T2i and have picked up a 24mm F2.8 pre-AI, a 35mm F2.8 pre-AI, a 50mm F1.4 pre-AI, a 100mm f2.8 Series E, and a 200mm F3.5 Nikkor Q, pre-AI lense. I use inexpensive Kawa adaptors, bought off of eBay. I love the lenses. The 24mm F2.8 is my favorite, I love the angle of view (38.4mm on the APS-C sensor), it is plenty fast for most use, especially under artificial lighting that is bright enough for normal use. The pre-AI lenses were all manufactured prior to 1977, and are of wonderful construction, all metal and work fine. The AI lenses are supposed to have better coatings and handle flare better, but I have not encountered any problem with flare on the pre-AI lenses that would not cause problems for any other lenses, except very high priced lenses. I actually found that the lens flare from the pre-AI lenses looks more "Organic", or more like a bloom of light, rather than the move prismatic type of flare that is common with more modern lenses. The E series lenses, by Nikon, were a series of lenses that were produced for low end Nikon SLRs in the 1980s. They use some plastic in their construction, and simpler optics, but they have been kind of rediscovered lately and are fine lenses, especially for the price. I have bought all of the above lenses off of eBay, and have paid less than $100.00 for each of them. I am very satisfied with the lenses. Now they are not bleeding edge sharp as some modern lenses my be, but I personally find this to be one of their advantages. I think that the vintage Nikkor lenses, especially the pre-AI lenses, have a certain "Mojo" about them, especially when used to shot HD with a modern video DSLR that I really like. I believe that when it boils right down to the cost to quantity ratio of lenses you can get, the vintage Nikons are hard to beat.
 
That's really the problem I'm having, see, I know that as long as everything is 'bright' to the camera, you can unnaturally raise the ISO to a good 1600 and it won't at least look 'botched', as the overexposure will mask the noise. With that scenario, it's entirely possible that 1600 can even look better than 800, and I know how to use that trick (it's ok for test shots) But the thing is, for anything professional, I truly can't seem to go above 200, or else I get alot of very noticeble noise (and very degraded image quality). No matter what, 3200, and 6400 causes extreme jumpy lines on my videos, I've never been able to use them, and for getting clear, good video, anything above 200 just doesn't seem to be useable.

Now, photography wise, it's been a bit better, although 6400 causes some extreme checkering. Overall, just for photography, I probably would seek out a zoom before a prime, as with photography, I've always found myself needing a zoom above a prime. But the prime is mainly for two things; on-the-go video (I like shooting random videos in lower light areas) and also for some semi-professional stuff. I've really just played with my camera and I bet a 1.8 will at least let me go a step or two lower on the ISO, as long as the non-IS thing doesn't make me raise the shutter. (Overall, I'm also mad that the T2i doesn't have smaller ISO steps, bet they'd also help with the noise when you're in a pickle.)

For lighting, what would you recommend if I were shooting a short film in a department store with alot of light already? Automatically, I'm worried about harsh shines on the face, the shadows being too dark, blown out light...but at the same time, as I'll probably be filming while people are shopping, I can't really bring a whole set into it just for this one project. Defusers, reflectors, possibly one small light, ect ect are things I definatly would not mind using, though, if they would help.

In other scenarios, I really can't wait to start on lighting. One project I'm doing calls for many shots in an old grimey, tool filled basement. I'm probably going to go ahead and install some lights in the ceiling to help, but overall I bet it's going to be the experience where I'll really have to pull all the stops, lighting wise. One question I want to ask; if you're shooting in a small room that has a very bright ceiling light, and you want to get it all in the picture, would using a polarizer help to make the ceiling light dimmer yet the floor brighter?

P.S. @ David Smith thanks for the advice on the Nikons, I'm going to check out the Kawa adaptors right now!!
 
Last edited:
Snapper, you are doing something wrong man. Seriously. ISO400 on my T2i looks like my EX1 at 0 gain. And I am not kidding. If I set them both to the same F-stop, on a properly lit scene, the T2i just kills the EX1 all day, every day. I A/B tested them again tonight and am waiting to see the results. I may post them. I was shooting in a venue where I measure between 1.2 and 2.0 foot candles to the center of the floor, 0.7-1.0 on the edges, and 11.5-13.0 at the back of the venue under the lights.

I set both to the same ISO and the same F-Stop and took video. Then I walked the EX1 up in ISO to 1600, then reset it back to 400 and opened the F-Stop from F4.0 to F1.9. Then I did the same with the T2i. From what I can tell, the T2i is 2-3 stops faster than the EX1.
 
it gets softer. i hate noise. it gets fuzzy similarly to my hmc150 at +3 gain at ISO 400.

which is definitely noticeable. more so on a TV than on a computer monitor.
 
Cieloent said:
100% incorrect , you must have a faulty camera. My Canon t2i doe snot experience noise until 3200 iso and even then it's not that bad, but at 1600 iso the image quality still looks beautiful. Now instead of getting faster lenses invest in some lighting equipment.
Click to expand...

I've used a multitude of Canon t2i, 7D, 5D and 1D with video. I can say unequivocally that we NEVER go above ISO2000 as the noise at that level is about all we can take. Mostly, I try and stay below ISO1600 as how much noise is perceivable is still dependent on the content of what you are shooting. We would NEVER use ISO3200 EVER as it just looks horrible.

You can also use Neat Video to remove some noise, it's a pretty good plugin.

For shooting at night, or in dark areas, I use the Sigma 30mm F1.4. The lens is awesome and worth it. You can get one used for $350-$375. That's pretty cheap for a lens.

If you are REALLY on a budget that you cannot spend that, get the cheap 50mm Canon that is F1.8. Although I like having F1.4 as it really helps if I am too far from a streetlight.

This was all done with the 30mm F1.4 and a little 50mm F2.0

http://vimeo.com/8391499

(I'm the guy with the sunglasses on :) )
 
Hey guys, I just got my 50mm Prime in today (I ordered it so that I could test to see if a prime could really solve my problems) and while it 'helps', it no where near solves them. For instance, my parent's house is very, very open and large, with mansion-esque windows that let in tons and tons of light. (Not saying the house is really big, just it's the 'style' of the house.) and I figured I'd be able to get some decently lit shots under these conditions, with no ceiling lights on, just rays of light shining in. Wrong. I had to jack up my ISO to 800-1600 still (which is about what I was having to use on the 3.5 lens.).

Then I tried it out in the bathroom, which has 4 ultra-power lights that basically blind you when you walk into the room. For the very first time, with video, I was able to have my shutter on 50, the apeture on 1.8 AND the ISO on 100. For the very first time I could use ISO 100!! And the lights in this bathroom are basically stronger than studio lights!!

I just think there's something wrong with my T2i's light sensitivity, it works fine out in the day (any camera would) but as soon as you point this camera away from the sun, you have to jack the ISO up to 1600, which isn't useable for videos, and that doesn't make photos look outstanding, either. I also believe that my camera's noise and artifacting becomes harsher than many other T2i results I've seen in video mode (I have the right memory card.) Is there a possibility that either of these problems can exist (and could possibly effect each other?) I've never felt that both of these problems are 'severe', just I feel like my camera's light sensitivity may be a step or two lower, with the ISO being a step or two harsher, than other people's results, which makes a big difference for the type of stuff I do.

I think I just want to send my camera off and get it checked, I've read many people who have done this and it seems sometimes that the cameras have come back fixed and better at what they're supposed to do. And if the company says everything's perfect, then at least I can feel confident that I'm getting normal results (which will help me prepare for what I need to do to get around that.)
 
Last edited:
Also, one thing about the prime lens, I'm noticing that on my Live View mode, when I use manual focus, the object has to be in perfect focus or else it will have a vry severe red or green outline, abnormally worse than anything I've ever, ever encountered with the kit lens (and no doubt I encountered issues there too). I'm sure the 1.8 makes the depth of field a little like another world, but it doesn't exactly look awesome to me. Is this only some issue with the Live View, or will this be on my footage?
 
Snapper123 said:
Hey guys, I just got my 50mm Prime in today (I ordered it so that I could test to see if a prime could really solve my problems) and while it 'helps', it no where near solves them. For instance, my parent's house is very, very open and large, with mansion-esque windows that let in tons and tons of light. (Not saying the house is really big, just it's the 'style' of the house.) and I figured I'd be able to get some decently lit shots under these conditions, with no ceiling lights on, just rays of light shining in. Wrong. I had to jack up my ISO to 800-1600 still (which is about what I was having to use on the 3.5 lens.).

Then I tried it out in the bathroom, which has 4 ultra-power lights that basically blind you when you walk into the room. For the very first time, with video, I was able to have my shutter on 50, the apeture on 1.8 AND the ISO on 100. For the very first time I could use ISO 100!! And the lights in this bathroom are basically stronger than studio lights!!

I just think there's something wrong with my T2i's light sensitivity, it works fine out in the day (any camera would) but as soon as you point this camera away from the sun, you have to jack the ISO up to 1600, which isn't useable for videos, and that doesn't make photos look outstanding, either. I also believe that my camera's noise and artifacting becomes harsher than many other T2i results I've seen in video mode (I have the right memory card.) Is there a possibility that either of these problems can exist (and could possibly effect each other?) I've never felt that both of these problems are 'severe', just I feel like my camera's light sensitivity may be a step or two lower, with the ISO being a step or two harsher, than other people's results, which makes a big difference for the type of stuff I do.

I think I just want to send my camera off and get it checked, I've read many people who have done this and it seems sometimes that the cameras have come back fixed and better at what they're supposed to do. And if the company says everything's perfect, then at least I can feel confident that I'm getting normal results (which will help me prepare for what I need to do to get around that.)
Click to expand...


i'd send it out...or exchange it (depending on when u got it)
 
Yeah I think that there is a problem. I don't find my T2i gives appreciable noise until after ISO 800, and one of the thing I really dig about this camera is the very clean ISO 800. I don't care for anything higher than 800, and would reserve that for situations where nothing else will work. Even with the clean ISO 800, I can shoot in my apartment with just lighting from practical lamps, or window daylight at ISO 400 with no problem using my F2.8 Nikkors. I would have the camera double checked by a qualified service center. The T2i is an amazing little camera, but it is still a consumer electronic product, and sh*t happens. Ya know?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top