Don, would that be the Sigma DG Series 24-70mm f/2.8 EX? It's less than half the price of the Canon:

http://www.sigma-photo.com/lenses/le...64&navigator=2

thanks for the info don.

regarding the third party 24-70s, i think both tamron and sigma both make well-reviewed zooms that fall into that range.

chris makes a good point about the IS on the 24-105. i wouldn't think it'd be that important on a lens in the 24-70 range for stills, but for video, especially from a cmos sensor camera, the feature can't be easily overlooked.

Well, my point about the kit lens having IS is that it's most useful for stills. I realize that John's original question was regarding video, but this camera is first and foremost a still photography camera, and unless you already have the lenses, then you're going to need at least one good, versatile still photography lens... and that's what the kit lens is, because of its zoom range and IS.

Just for video, IS isn't really needed, because you *really need a tripod* or some form of solid stabilization if you plan on shooting video with this thing. IS on the lens isn't going to cut it. Neither will a monopod.

And ... gotta stress here that anybody who buys it just for video is probably going to be disappointed. It's not a video camera. It's a still photo camera with a video mode. The kit lens is excellent for still photos, and fully usable for video as well.

Definitely, and that's why I ordered it. For stills it's great, although as mentioned f4 can quickly push you into high ISO shooting in available light, especially shooting moving subjects like kids where you need a faster shutter speed. The IS seems to work well for video, and the zoom range is great - far more useable than the range most video cameras use. I just wish I could control the aperture without having to resort to things like unlocking the lens from the body, so that's why I'm looking into the nikon options.

I was seriously considering the Tokina 50-135 f2.8. I got one for my Nikon D200 a while back and have been happy with it.
Does anyone have any experience with that lens (or know the reviews) for Canon? IS isn't paramount for me, to be honest. Unless I'm just having fun, I'm typically a sticks shooter. And I WOULD like the benefit of the extra stop, if at all possible...

The latest version (2008) has HSM, which is a faster, quieter autofocus:

Sigma - Lenses

But the Canon 24-70 is a better lens. By the time people get to the 5D price range few are using 3rd party normal range zooms. Or rather Sigma type lenses. Normal range zoom I have Canon 24-105, Contax 35-70 and Contax 35-135.

A less expensive Canon zoom option with image stabilization is the Canon 28-135 IS. Not as sharp as the 24-105, it does have more range and probably less than half the price.

Edit: The most Camcorder-like lens would be the 28-300 IS

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/s...&cat=27&page=1

Goes from wide to long. A more expensive lens setup might include this lens and some fast primes.

Also, the best 50mm is the new Sigma 50 1.4. Best because it's sharp from f1.4-f2. Better than the Canon 50L at <1/2 the price. It's the only sigma lens that better than the Canon equivalent. If you want to prowl around in the dark shooting sharp video on a budget the $500 Sigma 50 1.4 is the ticket. Good bokeh too.

Does that lens work on a full frame camera like the 5DII?

Good question. I'm glad I posted it here...
Any suggestions how I can find out?
(Edit: I just spoke to Samy's Camera and they said it will indeed work on a full frame camera. WOO HOO!)

Also (maybe I should make this next question it's own thread), are there any suggestions as to which Nikon to Canon EOS adapter is "good." I see the prices range from $6.00 to $250.00.
Fotodiox alone had 3 models! The two "pro" versions look good, but they're pretty pricey...
I have 6 Nikon lenses, so I'd like to be able to use those at appropriate times, and have one good universally usable Canon lens (so I don't have to tote the Nikons when I'm just having fun).

By the way, I've merged John Vincent's "kit lens" thread with Ray Bell's earlier "best EF lens" thread since they're covering pretty much the same topic...

Fully agreed... I've had photos published from that lens (and a lowly Rebel XT -- which proves content is king).

Nope. It doesn't cover a full frame sensor.

Be careful. Your source is wrong.

Truly I don't understand. I'll look more into it, but... if Nikon lenses work with an adapter, why would the Tokina not work straight?

Be gentle, I'm not DSLR camera tech savvy.

Back to the topic...
 

The cheapest lens I've used in terms of ROI (return of the investment) is the 85mm f1.2 brought from the bay for about 1100.- EUR.
The full body horizontal portrait magic at f1.2 is just killer for some customers, aesthetics are almost like in the big format (sensor size equivalent of 8"x10") photography, and the 1/8000th shutter helps me out in bright light too (not talking about motion pictures here)

Full open in daylight with 5D MKI t i i v i k: Mahhõl

Cheers,
T

Yes.... the 85mm f1.2 L II is a lens with a certain magic to it.... The results are a somewhat 3d quality of the images... much like fast medium format short tele's that we are used to seeing the results from in high end fashion spreads.

I just shot another music video yesterday with the 5d2 and used the 35mm f1.4 L and the 85mm f1.2 L II for most of it.... and this time was able to finagle both lens' to wide open without any twist or tape.

I'll post some results today....

I'd like to stress a few things about lenses....

You get what you pay for!

a cheap lens will have the following issues....

barrel and fish distortion....
vignetting... especially at fast apertures.
edge resolution problems... especially at fast apertures.

Also... they do not retain their value like good pro lenses....

For canon ef lenses... I would stick to primes and "L" zooms.

It can work with an adapter. Only the lens does not cover the full frame sensor. You need to crop. Your footage will be lower than 1080p. You can blowup though.