What is the best versitile quality documentary lens?

K

Krunko

Well-known member
I'm going to be shooting a documentary in Thailand at the end of the year. I have these primes already:

I have a 60D and these primes:
Tokina 11-16 2.8
Canon 28mm 2.8
Canon 50mm 1.4
Canon 100mm Macro 2.8L

I want to find the ultimate lens for just running around and shooting.

It must have image stabilization because I need to be very low-profile in certain areas and can't have a whole rig.

It also needs to zoom out as wide as ~20mm or maybe lower, and go up to at least 50mm.

I need it to be a 2.8 or faster.

What's the best zoom lens for my situation? I don't want to spend much over $1000 but I'm open to any suggestions anyways.
 
I am pretty happy with the canon 17-55 2.8 IS. I like the 2.8 aperture through all focal lengths. I think it is a nice sharp lens. It is as easy to manually focus as possible, as the stops are approx. 45 degrees apart. That means you can pull every focal length without having to readjust your hand.

It doesn't feel as fluent as the equivalent Nikon lens though. The zoom and focus rings are somewhat sticky.
 
Thanks for the info guys. I'm actually looking at the Canon you mentioned...only downside is I won't be able to use it on the 5D mk3 when it comes out (assuming I buy it). That's alright, because I'll probably keep my 60d as a second camera.
 
NormanBates said:
for full frame, it's the canon 24-70 f/2.8L
Click to expand...

that's right. But that lens won't have IS. For that you will need the EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 IS. But 3.5-5.6 is not really ideal for video shooting. And you wanted 2.8 minimum.

No lens is perfect and fits all needs. I'd go with the 17-55 2.8.
 
Canon 24-70 f/2.8L would be your best lens, if you want Is it doesn't exist, you want stabilization and want to maintain a low profile , buy a Monopod.
 
I'm currious on this question as well. I'd also like to know what focal lengths tend to work best for which parts of the documentary work? To me there is a radical difference in look between 24mm and 105mm.

Cheers,
Pete
 
If you can take only one lens it's got to be the 18-55 IS.

1) IS has been proven in many threads here (with actual footage) to make footage usable and remove a lot of jello. This would be especially applicable in documentary work where you might be forced to go handheld from time to time. Even on a monopod, at 55mm (equivalent to 90mm FF-35mm), you can get microjitter which will ruin a shot. The IS is a must on a DSLR. Shaky footage can be OK on film or "video", but it just ruins DSLR shots due to the jello. Also, the IS on Canon brand only has proven to be the most effective at helping neutralize jello, in case you're thinking of a Tamron, Sigma, etc.
2) You can't realistically use a variable aperture lens as your main lens. If you're shooting on the fly, you may decide to zoom, and the shot will then be ruined with any f3.5-5.5 variable type lens. They're OK only if you use them as "variable primes" without the option of zooming.
3) 24-70mm (FF equivalent to 38-112mm) is not wide enough on APS-C, you'd need to carry another wide lens.

If you had the 18-55 f2.8 IS, you could add maybe an 11-16 Tokina, a fast prime like the 35mm f1.8 or 1.4 for low-light, indoor work (50mm is too long for documentary on APS-C if you only have 1 prime), and a telephoto lens of some sort. As a telephoto, you could probably get away with a lightweight, variable aperture lens, like a cheap 55-250 Canon, as long as you don't zoom it. If you're doing more tele shooting, you'd have to consider a 70-200 f2.8 or f4, or something used from Nikon or Tokina.

Don't forget the option to rent, if budget is a concern. Especially if you have only a few days which are really important, you can rent as exotic and expensive a lens as you want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top