What lense to get?

P

paintball_kidz

Member
Well I'm planning on buying a 7D soon mainly for video purpose, but I'd like to keep my photo options open also. I am a complete noob when it comes to lense so please help me out.

I love DOF feel so I plan on getting a:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
for video purposes.

And what can you guys recomend for a budget lense for all around general use, For both photog and video with some zoom and good DOF. I'm looking at the 70-200 f4L non IS lense for this purpose but I'm not sure if its any good for video.

Thanks for your help.
 
Thats an awesome lens (70-200F4)

the 50 is too - the 50 1.4 or a nikkor has better focus feel

and a tokina 16-50 will see you good at the wide end

S
 
You may be looking a little too much at the long lenses. With the 1.6x crop factor the 70-200 while a nice lens, won't be very useful for general filmmaking purposes. You want to cover the basic 35mm cine kit range of 25, 35, 50 and 85 as a basic range, then possibly add something wider or longer if you have extra money. Personally I went with the 17-40 F4L and primes at 35, 50, 90 (also have 135 and 180, but they hardly ever get used and I do most of my shooting with the 5d mkII which has a full frame sensor so all of my primes act much wider then they would on a 7d). Hope this helps!
 
paintball_kidz said:
...I'm looking at the 70-200 f4L non IS lense for this purpose but I'm not sure if its any good for video.
Click to expand...

Get IS or the 2.8 if you can afford it. I've had the f4 for about a year; it's exquisite outdoors on a sunny day and for the first 45 minutes of magic hour but you will quickly have a hankering for the 2.8 or IS or both.
 
No one is going to mention that a 70-200 is too long for a general purpose video or photo lens on 1.6x crop camera? The main thing that would be useful for is sports or birding.

I am not saying it isn't a great lens, it is just not the right choice for your first lens. It would be great to round out the long end of a kit.

If you want 1 lens that does it all the 24-105 f4L would be a good choice, though not wide enought for my taste on a crop body.
 
Last edited:
Personally I find the 70-200 F4 a great lens to use - for corporate or journalism

Yes i would prefer IS, but you can get the non Is versions very cheap - well I did

I assume money is a factor for the OP

OK 2.8 might be nicer but it is also a lot heavier

You are saying it is too long - I disagree

I like a long lens because it has what i might call coverage

Step into an office to shoot little corporate and put your stick in one spot

pan around the room and pick up all those little details of people at work tight heads, hands on mice etc

So fast

Tracking someone from A-B - step back with a long and focus beomces easier, and the fact that the camera is on sticks becomns less apparent because their straight track deviates less from the arc described by a pivoting camera

Again with a long tripod height is less critical and has to be changed less often

Then of course there is sheer reach - you can film stuff that is a long way away

If you have time for dollies or even a lot of tripods resets short lenses can be good, for for speed that lens on sticks is the king

S
 
Last edited:
paintball_kidz said:
Well I'm planning on buying a 7D soon mainly for video purpose, but I'd like to keep my photo options open also. I am a complete noob when it comes to lense so please help me out.

I love DOF feel so I plan on getting a:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
for video purposes.

And what can you guys recomend for a budget lense for all around general use, For both photog and video with some zoom and good DOF. I'm looking at the 70-200 f4L non IS lense for this purpose but I'm not sure if its any good for video.

Thanks for your help.
Click to expand...

Probably the 17-40mm F4L. It's a better built lens than many. It's more versatile than a straight EF-S being able to use on a FF camera but still wide enough for a 7D. It's not really that expensive for what you get. The resale will also be higher if you decide to upgrade to a 2.8 later because every EOS camera can use the 17-40mm. The 50 1.8 can't miss because it's so cheap and light to have in the bag when you need it .

One note however about general use of the term DOF.

Good DOF used to mean that your lens is able to keep more things in focus in a deeper field of view as with wider lenses. When a lens is stopped down it increases your focus depth of field which is "Good DOP" When your lens is open and the DOP becomes shallow, then the DOF becomes worse and not better even thought it creates an effect that is useful and can look great and cinematic. Probably the correct way to put it would be "Has great shallow DOP"
Saying a lens has "Good DOF" when it is more shallow would be the same as saying a fast lens can shoot at f22 and a slow lens only shoots at f1.4. These are just terms but not a bad idea to understand the correct use of them. Sorry for the lecture, have fun with your new camera.

P.S. Do yourself a favor and invest in a good fluid head tripod early in the game, it will be with you through many years of camera upgrades. This is something else that will hold it's value as cameras become worth less. I bought a Baby Sachtler at the beginning and it has supported many camera formats that are long gone and forgotten. I got a great deal and would never want sell it.


http://cgi.ebay.com/SACHTLER-7x7-TR...emQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item414c34b9fd

http://cgi.ebay.com/Sachtler-DV6-Tr...emQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item2304e68c0a















 
Last edited:
Why not the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 with VC? I just ordered this after getting fed up for the last time with Canon's 17-55 kit lens. Yes, it's EF-S; however, it's only about 600 bones.

And yes, get the 50mm 1.8.
 
Jordan_Sopinsky said:
Why not the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 with VC? I just ordered this after getting fed up for the last time with Canon's 17-55 kit lens. Yes, it's EF-S; however, it's only about 600 bones.

And yes, get the 50mm 1.8.
Click to expand...


I'm curious to know what made you fed up with the Canon 17-55mm I thought it was sussposed to be a great lens just too expensive. How does the Tamron compare is the VC as good at stabalisation as the Canon?
 
The canon EF 1.8 is $100 and it feels like it. build quality is god awful.

I have the Tokina 11-16 and that is effing amazing.

The Tamron is on it's way as well. All great lenses for the money but I would spend the extra $250 and grab the Canon 50mm 1.4 all day.
 
my Canon IS 15-85mm kit lens is like a 24-136mm on the 7D.....saaaaweeeetness...it's $1000 tho...
 
I may be reading into your comments too much but it sounds to me like you are fairly new to both photo and video (please forgive me if I am wrong). If that is true, and perhaps even it's not true, I would actually recommend that you buy just one lens to start with, the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 and really learn how to use your camera with that. At $100, the 1.8 is great but you will eventually want to go with the 1.4, ~$300 more. You aren't likely to move up to the 1.2L anytime soon so the 1.4 would last you quite awhile, possibly forever.

If cost is a concern, I'd stick with the 1.8. You can get almost full value upon resale.

But before you go buy a bunch of lenses (or even 2), I'd learn how to use the 7D and then expand your lens kit to need and taste.

paintball_kidz said:
Well I'm planning on buying a 7D soon mainly for video purpose, but I'd like to keep my photo options open also. I am a complete noob when it comes to lense so please help me out.

I love DOF feel so I plan on getting a:
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
for video purposes.

And what can you guys recomend for a budget lense for all around general use, For both photog and video with some zoom and good DOF. I'm looking at the 70-200 f4L non IS lense for this purpose but I'm not sure if its any good for video.

Thanks for your help.
Click to expand...
 
The lens I find myself using most often is the Sigma 20mm 1.8. I don't know why everyone mentions the 30 1.4 but not this lens. I find 20mm to be infinitely more useful than 30mm. I personally don't own the 30 1.4. I have canon's 28mm 1.8 instead which is great too. But 20mm is such an amazing focal length.
 
Since video is the primary use for the camera, a versatile walk around lens should be your first priority. As others - many others in fact - have said, the Tamron 17-50mm VC is a solid choice. For video you really need image stabilization.

Replace the Canon 50mm 1.8 with the 1.4 - it has a proper focusing ring.

On the 70-200mm, check your budget vs light levels and buy the IS version of either or be prepared for lots of jerky video. You will also need either a good loupe or a monitor to accurately focus.
 
I've been looking at the Tamron 17-50 VC. But mixed reviews.

Jay H said:
Since video is the primary use for the camera, a versatile walk around lens should be your first priority. As others - many others in fact - have said, the Tamron 17-50mm VC is a solid choice. For video you really need image stabilization.

Replace the Canon 50mm 1.8 with the 1.4 - it has a proper focusing ring.

On the 70-200mm, check your budget vs light levels and buy the IS version of either or be prepared for lots of jerky video. You will also need either a good loupe or a monitor to accurately focus.
Click to expand...
 
If your budget is limited, the tamron 17-50 vc is great, but I totally disagree about the image stabilization being an absolute must on a lens that short. As long as you have a good loupe like an lcdvf or a z-finder, you should be fine up to 50mm or so. At least that's my experience.

When it comes to a longer lens like a 70-200, image stabilization obviously becomes a lot more important. Then again, you should probably be on a tripod at that point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top