Which lenses to buy, my thoughts...

[Phil Bloom]

I would like to have this across the three EOS forums as it's not specific to the 7D this but I can only post on one.

This is not the definite list, just a list compiled from my own experience. There are hundreds of lenses I have never seen or used which are not mentioned so feel free to add your own experiences here too...

It's a list designed to help out someone starting out with Video DSLRs.

Which…lenses to buy? | Philip Bloom

[Michael Ojjeh]

Great info as always Phil and many thanks for your time and effort for putting this together.
Greatly appreciated !!!!!!!

[Chris M. Watson]

Fantastic article Phil. Happy to see some love for the old lenses in there. If you're on a budget (or if you just like the look like I do), it's really a no brainer to look at legacy glass from Nikon, Pentax, Carl Zeiss, and even some of the Russian lenses out there rather than get something that costs $200 or $300 and is dreadfully slow and cheaply built. This is a must read for anyone asking the age old question of "Which lenses to buy?"

EDIT: Your post brings to light a forum I wish was on here. Namely lenses. There really should be a lenses forum on here to discuss glass. Great conversations about glass are split among three forums nowadays and it should really be down to one.

[Peer Landa]

Originally Posted by Phil Bloom

I would like to have this across the three EOS forums as it's not specific to the 7D this but I can only post on one.

Yes, I agree. So I'm glad I stopped by the 7D forum to find your bloglink.

However, in this blog post you wrote:

A zoom must have a constant aperture to be useful in video.

Even though all my current zooms are L lenses (i.e., they're all constant apertures), I still don't agree with the premise that all zooms "must have a constant aperture to be useful in video." For instance, when I shoot with my 70-200L, I would just park it at one focal point, and shoot, find another focal point, and shoot, etc. Hence, I treat the zoom lens as a multi prime lens, i.e., almost never do any zoom pulls while shooting.

IS is image stabilisation and I believe is absolutely essential for video work as it reduces the rolling shutter artefacts that we can get.

Well, I now tend to believe that the usefulness of the IS might be an urban legend -- at least I'm definitely sure that it's not "absolutely essential for video work." This I found out in a flukeish way after shooting an interview series, when halfway into it realized that I had forgotten to engage the IS (again using the 70-200L handheld). I was about to kick myself, embarrassed of my negligence, (I even contemplated to re-shoot the interviews that were now IS-less). However, when I got to the editing phase, I could not see any difference between the non-IS footage and the one shot with IS activated. (And yes, the IS in that lens works, or at least I can hear the motor).

One of my favourite L series zoom lenses is the 24-105 f4 IS.

I don't get this lens choice at all. By contrast, I could think of a few, faster, and hence more versatile zoom lenses than this f/4L, (lenses that could also overlap its focal length).

I love the Zeiss ZE (The ZF’s are Nikon mount). [...] but they focus in the opposite direction to Canon lenses so it may do your head in!

I too hate the opposite direction focus pull, (to me it feels like driving in Tokyo). But why why why would you then "love" the Zeiss' with Nikkor mounts?! Here you are, the most brilliant DSLR cine-person, now sounding more like a complete novice. You never heard of Contax/Yashica Zeiss', et.al...?

The Zeiss lenses are probably the best there are for video

Yea, I'll second that -- I got two f/1.4 (55mm & 85mm) and those are my absolute favorites (especially the old & quirky radioactive 55).

In closeing, I must say that man am I happy that your cine work isn't as sloppy as your writing. I'm sorry, Bloomboy, but when even I (a pure bread, almost illiterate foreigner) cringe while reading your comma deprived post/blogs, I suggest that you at least proofread them before they go in print:
"no using with a matte box is tough"
"Great it you have the budget"
"This one of the only EF-S lenses I recommend getting."
etc., etc., etc....

But please realize that if you weren't my hero, I wouldn't bother mentioning any of this ;^)

-- peer

[Laurence Janus]

Thanks for the article Philip, you have taught me a lot.
Please try and realize that most people like Peer are trying to offer constructive criticism so they are completely different to the haters you have been getting on your blog recently.

Just to throw in my dream list.

Canon 7D (of course)
Tokina AT-X 11-16mm f/2.8 PRO DX
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM

In Japan's cramped spaces I am often restricted with where I can position the camera so primes are tough to use.
For run and gun (often I literally do have to run) I think IS is important as my hands get a little shaky from either tiredness or adrenaline.

I hope f/2.8 is enough, but I guess for the price of a fast L-series prime I could buy a really nice light!

[Peer Landa]

Originally Posted by Laurence Janus

Please try and realize that most people like Peer are trying to offer constructive criticism so they are completely different to the haters you have been getting on your blog recently.

Thank you Laurence -- as you say, I'm far from a "hating" person, and Phillip Bloom is indeed a hero of mine (along with guys like Laforet, Fairhurst, Hudson, etc. -- all very smart & helpful people).

-- peer

[James Donnelly]

Thanks for the article Phil. It's a shame some people don't seem to appreciate that you did it for free, and no one had to read it.

What's great about this forum is that until now, I have not once seen a difference of opinion descend into a break down of basic respect for other individuals.

In the context of this thread, terms like 'complete novice' and 'Bloomboy' have no place in this forum in my humble opinion, whether your comments are valid or not.

Also, if you're going to criticise spelling and grammar, perhaps you should make sure your own is beyond reproach, even if you offer the excuse of illiteracy.

[Jon Braeley]

I agree with James - the comment by Peer is not warranted - its embarassing. I hope he removes it.

[Peer Landa]

Originally Posted by Jon Braeley

I agree with James - the comment by Peer is not warranted - its embarassing. I hope he removes it.

Although I think it's a bit peculiar when someone feels offended on behalf of someone else, I'd like to offer my sincere apology to Phillip in case he felt insulted by my silly quips, (although I bet he was called Bloomboy back in school, striding around in his Crombie and Doc Martens ;^)

Love, peace and understanding,

-- peer

[Liam Hall]

I find it peculiar when people sincerely apologize in such an insincere way. Still, it made me laugh...

[Peer Landa]

Originally Posted by Liam Hall

I find it peculiar when people sincerely apologize in such an insincere way. Still, it made me laugh...

HA! And shouldn't it be even more peculiar that some people here wouldn't pickup on my true admiration for Phillip Bloom, even after I wrote this: "Phillip Bloom is indeed a hero of mine (along with guys like Laforet, Fairhurst, Hudson, etc. -- all very smart & helpful people)."

-- peer

[James Donnelly]

I think Phil needs to come on here and refute these defamations of style character.

I had him down as more of a beatbox toting electro rude boy, like myself.

[Peer Landa]

Originally Posted by James Donnelly

I had him down as more of a beatbox toting electro rude boy

How dare you call our beloved Phillip a "rude boy"?! Your comment is not warranted - its embarrassing. I hope you remove it.

-- peer

[Laurence Janus]

Is this forum DVinfo or DVemo? Seriously, I come on here to read about cameras, not feelings. Grow up.

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

fantastic advice phil! Thank you.