Lens for this application?

[Terry Lee]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Unless you are making an epic, or a special effects film, all you need are:

24, 35, 50, 85, 100-105.

And I can absolutely GUARANTEE you can put that prime set together for less than the cost of a good "L" zoom. And that zoom won't be any faster than F2.8. The prime set can be significantly faster in some places without breaking the bank. You lose AF (which doesn't work in video mode anyway), and you lose IS. You gain excellent glass, more money left in your pocket, and the pride and satisfaction of owning something made when lenses were made my engineers and artists, and not computers and robots. :)

Currently I have a Nikkor 28mm 1.8 on my T2i. Its awesome to say that I have a late model Nikon lens on my brand new T2i when people ask me what lens I am using after seeing my footage, though I need to get a bit better at setting apature and ISO for certain situations because alot of my footage comes out grainy or the whites blown out..atleast i'm guessing thats is what it is..

I totally vote going with old glass. Like you say, the build quality is way better and way cheaper. Though none of the old glass has viberation control which is a nice thing to have for film...

What do you think about old Cine lenses...like the Cine-Nikkor C-mount lenses... Has anyone tested these on the DSLR cameras?

[Dale Peterson]

Thanks again for all the thoughts. I'll hold on a bit and see about the 60D, as suggested.

[Sam Tansey]

x2 something around 30mm should be pretty good for what your doing. I have a sigma 30 1.4, and its my walk around lens. You can use it to get widish shots if you have enough space and because its a normal lens, it doesn't give the unflattering perspective distortion of an ultra wide. I try to avoid shooting below f2 and favor the DOF I get from f2-f3

I have found that it's normally easier to get closer to a subject than it is to get further away, which is why I prefer this lens over the 50mm 1.8 which I also have.

The Lens options you have thrown up confuse me a fair bit. The normal compromise people have to choose between is zoom or f stop, the tokina at an 11-16mm has a range of ultra-ultra-wide to very wide and is only an f2.8, the 50mm f1.8 is fast and cheap however its relatively narrow and considered a moderate telephoto or portrait lens.

imho if I were in your situation the choices would be
- Canon 17-55 f2.8 covers the range from very wide, through normal and portrait also has IS which is a big +
- Tamron 17-50 f2.8 Same as the canon only it is not rear focusing like the canon, meaning that the focal length changes more noticeably when you shift focus. (breaths, zooms slightly) Its not an issue if you are going to be shooting static objects from a tripod. It might not be an issue at all if you don't mind how it looks. (both lenses do it a bit)

-24mm prime
-30mm prime
Various brands and options, personal preference etc, f2 or below. Sigma or Canon dominate the new options, nikon and others are popular used. No IS on any of them is a bummer, speed and DoF is nice. Considering you have a black background anyway I would say DOF wont be a major concern for you.

[Steve Oakley]

well for another option - try the vivtar 35-105 3.5
my quick review here is Is the 1976 Vintage Vivitar 35-105 3.5 a Mini Primo ? and I'll have some real video up in a few days as soon as I can cut it together.