Im about to make the jump....HELP!

[Josh Dahlberg]

Hi Matthew,

Yes that's right, either set, not both. The 17-55 or 24-105 were mentioned at the start of the thread: you couldn't go wrong with either as the foundation for your kit. There are other options, but these two give you constant aperture and IS.

Personally I favour the 17-55 (it's faster and wider, a great handheld lens) but in some situations it doesn't have enough reach, which is why I'd probably only choose that in combination with something like the 70-200 f4 (useful for tight shots, interviews in larger rooms, filming seminars etc). You could go with the more affordable non-Is version of the 70-200 if it's tripod mounted.

Alternatively, the 24-105 is versatile but a tad slow (ie:, only f4). This is why I suggested pairing it with a fast prime (50mm or 85m) to cater for low light or tight depth of field shots. There may be occasions when it's not quite wide enough or not quite tight enough, which is why I'd probably favour the twin zoom option.

Matt's suggestion of the 18-135 is certainly an affordable option with a great focal range, but bear in mind as it's a variable aperture lens your exposure will change as you zoom in / out if you're shooting wide open.

You could always pick up a couple of options second hand, see how you like them, and offload them (at little or no cost) a month later if you find they're not your cup of tea.

But again, the 17-55 or 24-105 have proven to be the mainstay lenses for many many C series shooters and you couldn't go wrong with either.

Enjoy!

[Al Bergstein]

Matthew, your confusion is understandable. Lots of choices, but also lots of shooting styles. Almost everything I saw on your sample reel there could be done with the 17 - 55. My personal experience at large events like trade shows is that you are moving very fast. Not a lot of setup time. I often want a series of very wide establishing shots, so that's why, if I were still doing these, I'd likely invest in the 14. I can easily get signage in focus right or left side frame and the booth or other content in focus on the other side of the frame. Says a lot to the viewer. For the rest, which would include medium shots to short tele throws, I would use my 24 to 105. Two lenses for most of the days' shoot. Someone else might favor slightly wider shots overall and moving in closer for interviews. I tend to put a lav on the interviewee and stand back. Totally your personal style.

[Matt Davis]

Originally Posted by Josh Dahlberg

Matt's suggestion of the 18-135 is certainly an affordable option with a great focal range, but bear in mind as it's a variable aperture lens your exposure will change as you zoom in / out if you're shooting wide open.

And PMJI but the trick is to 'not film with it wide open' - clamp it to f6.3, and there's no variance in exposure.

But, I hear you exclaim, f6.3?! That's virtually a pinhole camera, is it not?

Well, no as a matter of fact.

When I got into the FS100 with its odd but functional 18-200 lens, I put it side by side with my trusty EX1 - a half inch camera that will film everything from a war zone to a wedding (lots of similarities come to think of it) to a chromakey shoot. At f8, the Sony E-Mount lens on an S35 sensor beat the half inch EX1 for DoF. It was absolutely fine.

Fast forward a bit, and I'm using my C100 which has a slightly larger sensor. I compare it side by side with the EX1 again, with the 24-105 to start with, then the 18-135, and the C100 is better still. Better separation through DoF. And the 18-135 at f6.3 had (ahem, Canon?) LESS ramping than the 24-105. I really hated the 18-135 when I first got it, but now I've got it working with the C100, with the exposure compensation and iris control, we're cool. But the 24-105 zoom losing 2/3 of a stop is something to watch out for.

Just sayin'.

[Matthew Stokes]

Just to update you all, I now have my C100 and I am waiting for delivery of my Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS.

Would a Canon EF 85mm f1.8 be a good partner lens to go with this? Its a good price, and I hear good things. Any thoughts? Or alternatives that cost similar? (£300).

Thanks!

[Matt Davis]

I have nothing but good things to say about the Samyang 85mm 1.4. Astonishing portrait lens when you have the room to use it.

[Matthew Stokes]

Matt, that does look great! So this and the lens I have ordered would be a good set for me to be up and running would you say? How are you next week for that drink and C100 tutorial session?! : )

[Matt Davis]

Would love to, but I'll be in Paris shooting small sparkly things! LOL

But good call - we do need to meet up, if only for a great beer or three.

I'd also point you towards the Samyang 35mm 1.4 - I've owned one before (Nikkor mount), I'm teetering on going for the Cine version on EOS mount, but with extra budget I'm also thinking about the Sigma 18-35 which everyone raves about. Nothing wrong with the Samyang 35! Figuratively on the knife-edge between them.

Also, there's the Sigma 50mm 1.4 - I love mine for video, hate it with a passion for photography, AF sucks, but great wide-open performance. Ideally I'd have stuck to one manufacturer of primes - either Sigma or Samyang all the way through. Samyang don't make a 50, Sigma don't have a cine outlook. Hmm. Come on Samyang, release a good 50 with cine iris and geared rings! That would make the choice easy. As would a cinefied 18-35!

[Matthew Stokes]

Too many options again!! Which one?!!

[Scott Bellefeuille]

Because of the crop factor on the C100 an 85mm is going to be the equivalent of about 127mm which is pretty long. It will be a specialty lens that will work for interviews & portraits when you have the room but won't be very versatile. I have the 85 f1.2 and it's gorgeous but just not that usable for run & gun and I'll leave it behind if I can only bring a couple of lenses. Since you have the 24-105 as your base lens I would suggest the Sigma 18-35 f1.8. That will give you the wide end you're missing from the 24-105 (36 equivalent vs 27mm on Sigma) and will give you a fast 35mm & 50mm equivalent for low light and bokeh.

The 24-105 is my base lens for the C100 and I had also bought a 17-55 to cover the wide end and give me an extra stop for low light. The 17-55 is a great lens but never impressed me on the C100 so I recently sold it and got the Sigma 18-35. The Sigma definitely has the wow factor that the 17-55 was missing. Great contrast and sharpness wide open and creamy bokeh. It's a good complement to the 24-105 and they make a nice 2 lens kit for run & gun. I can highly recommend the combination.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Scott Bellefeuille

Because of the crop factor on the C100 an 85mm is going to be the equivalent of about 127mm which is pretty long. It will be a specialty lens that will work for interviews & portraits when you have the room but won't be very versatile. I have the 85 f1.2 and it's gorgeous but just not that usable for run & gun and I'll leave it behind if I can only bring a couple of lenses.

So are you saying that the 85mm f/1.2 is totally useable in run-and-gun situations on a 5D Mark III? Is that your other camera?

[Scott Bellefeuille]

Originally Posted by Gary Huff

So are you saying that the 85mm f/1.2 is totally useable in run-and-gun situations on a 5D Mark III? Is that your other camera?

Ha, hopefully the post didn't read as a statement that the 85 1.2 is a "run and gun" lens! My other camera is a 5DIII and I would use the 24-105 and the 85 f1.2 with that as a "run and gun" kit in the sense that I'd use the 24-105 for all the hand held stuff and if there's an opportunity to lock off the camera on a tripod and grab some shots with more shallow depth of field or if I absolutely needed the extra stops I'd use the 85. 90% of the shoot would probably be on the 24-105 with some speciality pick ups on the 85mm. But even with either the c100 or 5DIII if I was limited to a 2 lens kit for run and gun I'd prefer to bring a fast 35 or 50 prime instead of the 85 because I consider those focal lengths more versatile for that type of shooting.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Scott Bellefeuille

My other camera is a 5DIII and I would use the 24-105 and the 85 f1.2 with that as a "run and gun" kit in the sense that I'd use the 24-105 for all the hand held stuff and if there's an opportunity to lock off the camera on a tripod and grab some shots with more shallow depth of field or if I absolutely needed the extra stops I'd use the 85.

That's exactly how I typically run-and-gun with the C100 as well, so I don't see what the crop factor has to do with anything.

[Noa Put]

If your camera has no inbuilt stabilization like the Olympus omd series or if you use non stabilized lenses, especially on the longer ranges, it will be far from easy to get nice and stable images from it if you are shooting handheld with a 85mm, if that is what you understand under "run and gun". On aps-c and m4/3 size sensor camera's with a cropfactor of resp 1.5 and 2.0 I would only use up to a 24/25mm non stabilized lens handheld, a 85mm lens would result if fairly unusable footage due to the vibration/shake you get in the image, not sure how that translated to a c100 as it has a different cropfactor but in any way a tripod would not be a luxury when using a 85mm non stabilized lens.

[Drew Curran]

Great advice here and all very workable to your needs. I give another vote to the 17-50 focal length -a Tamron in my case - plus a Canon 70-200 f4 L for close ups. This is a great base point I've used since the dslr days.

I recently bought a Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar for interviews (so sharp at f2.8) and have since added a Zeiss 25/2 Distagon Lens - I love the bokeh of the zeiss family of lenses. I have begun only using the Zeiss's on recent promo shoots and love them - ok there's a bit more lens swapping but I'm finding myself having to be more creative and therefore the footage is nicer IMHO. I'd become lazy with the Tamron! Lol

For the really wide end I'm looking at new Samyangs 10 or 12mm cine lenses.

More food for thought. :)

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

n aps-c and m4/3 size sensor camera's with a cropfactor of resp 1.5 and 2.0 I would only use up to a 24/25mm non stabilized lens handheld, a 85mm lens would result if fairly unusable footage due to the vibration/shake you get in the image

But on a 5D Mark III would you totally run-and-gun handheld with an 85mm?