Whatever lens you buy, the camera will probably shoot the lens wide open in lower light. It set my 85L at 1.2 ISO 400. At ten feet dof is an inch or two. I've figured out how to work around this, but I only have coarse control over aperture. A lens like th 17-40 f4 is a good choice. It's probably sharp enough wide open, and slow enough at f4.

I don't know if I posted this here, but with EF lenses the camera wants to set shutter at 1/focal length.

my intent is to use the nikon/canon adapter with the following Nikon mount lenses use them on my mini35 already.(would use the 24/35/55/85/105 most often:

Budget solution is the f1.8 lenses ebay has some GREAT Nikon Kogaku lenses on the cheap the 85 1.8 is nice as is the 50's...

24mm f2
28mm f1.9 vivitar
35mm f1.4
55mm f1.2
85mm f1.4
105mm f1.8
135mm f1.8 sigma
180mm f2.8
300mm f2.8 (and a truck to move it around)

I'm excited to look at the Contax and Leica lenses as with any photo lens the wide open aperture usually leads to some softness. The Contax lenses are supposed to be really sharp.

Does anyone have any experience with how the cam handles shutter speed in movie mode? I'm really disappointed that this can't be set by the user. Much of the daytime footage I've seen seems to have been at 1/30 because there's so much motion blur. I really do not like motion blur unless it's for a particular effect, but surely not all of the time. I'd like to at least be able to at lock the shutter at 1/60 or faster for daytime.

If you using a zoom put the zoom at 60mm to get 1/60 and press AE lock. Then change to whatever FL you want. All this must be done with video running. You can't do the setting and then start video.

Should I buy the lens package....
 

If I want to use the Mark II for shooting video?

I don't know squat about still cameras or their lens. Thanks for any advice on this.

john

I got the lens kit... the lens is great for shooting stills, but might not be the best for video because there's no manual aperture ring. Most people seem to be going the route of older nikon lenses with an adapter for video use.

I agree with Evan. Nikon prime lenses are good (and cheap!) for shooting video.

I will also buy one Canon zoom with IS (image stabilization) for ease of use when shooting stills.

Probably not.
You'll need to decide between Canon and other glass.

this entire piece was shot solely with the kit lens:
5DMKII video of youth boxer on Vimeo

the lens has the range for a good all-purpose lens. not bad for an additional 900 bucks. however, if budget allows, there are faster, optically better zooms out there. it'll cost a small fortune, but i like the 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 IS kit as far as zooms go.

Nice video;
Let's not call it a "kit lens". It's one of two best normal range L zooms from Canon. I have the lens used in the clip: 24-105 f4 L IS
But one can see the problem with f4. DOF control. Some of those shots would have looked better at 2.8.
The other premium normal zoom - 24-70 2.8 L is a stop faster.
No IS and shorter reach.

fair enough, in case anyone confuses it for the ef-s 18-55. the lens in the kit then ;). it does seem to be a fine lens.

on a side note, does anyone have any experience with the older 28-70 f2.8L? it can be had used for a few hundred bucks cheaper than a used 24-70. i have the 16-35 f2.8L, so i don't think i'm going to miss the extra 4mm, if all else is relatively equal.

Nice job, Henry. Well done on all levels!

That stock lens ain't bad!

jon, yeah i'd be pretty proud if it were my video :). just a link as i think it showcases the lens pretty well.

It's almost as good as the 24-70. Very similar. The switch was about 2004.
The older version of the 70-200 2.8 is the 80-200.
But the IS version of the 70-200 is the most popular.

There is also a less expensive third party 24-70 that is suppose to be just as sharp as the Canon. Don't remember who makes it, but it would be in fredmiranda.com lens reviews.

I forgot the biggest problem with f4. Indoors without lights f4+ will often push the camera to ISO3200. ISO 3200 downsized to 720p is OK, but pretty noisy at full 1080p. I think one reason we did see Reverie at full 1080p was some of the clips were at 3200 ISO.

I have removed a post out of public view from this thread which said the kit lens was "rubbish... plastic and cheap" because that comment is just so completely wrong. The kit lens that's packaged with the Canon EOS 5D Mk. II is the EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens, which is actually a very nice lens (from Canon's high-quality "L" series), and in my opinion it's the best zoom lens for the kit.

Some folks might argue that the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L is a better lens, and having used one of those just last week, I can fully understand a preference for that particular lens. However it is not image stabilized, while the kit lens is; the kit lens also has a longer telephoto reach. As clean as the 5D Mk. II is at higher ISO levels, I don't consider the difference in the lens speed (f/4 vs. f/2.8) to be any kind of deal breaker. For what it's worth, if it were purchased separately, the kit lens is worth just about as much as the 24-70; there's only about $100 price difference between them (the EF 24-105 f/4 L IS retails for appx. $1300 while the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L retails for appx. $1400). The 5D Mk. II kit is actually a pretty good deal because you're getting that lens for about $300 less than it would cost separately.

I agree with the concept behind the Nikon adapters, to allow for Nikon glass with manual aperture rings, but in my opinion there's quite a bit that you can do with the kit lens. Of all the "L" series lenses, it really is the most versatile, and is the one zoom lens with stabilization that can serve as a multi-purpose lens for just about anything. For someone who doesn't already own any L-series glass, the kit with lens is an excellent choice.