Lens purchase for 5D, recommendations

Dan Brockett · July 27th, 2009, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Woo

Dan, what is the usable range of the Tokina 12-24 on 5DM2? I heard is 16 or 17mm. Did you see black borders at 12mm?

Hi John:

The widest I can get on it without vignetting is about 18.5 to 19mm with no filters.

With the Singh-Ray Vari ND in place, I had to go to around 22mm to get rid of the vignetting. I would not recommend this lens as optimal for the 5D MKII, I used it only because I had it laying around for my Nikons and I had not yet bought a Canon W/A lens. I have since purchase the Canon 17-40 f4 L and it is a much better lens on the 5D MKII. With the Hong Kong Fader ND filter on board, I can shoot the Canon lens at 17mm with no vignetting, which is superb, plus I have autofocus for stills, which is also important, as Nigel alludes to. Also, I am not thrilled about using the Kawa Nikon F mount to EOS adapters with wider lenses although they seemed to work better with my Nikon 50 and 85mm lenses. On the Tokina, the Kawa adapter totally screwed up the focus scale so many of the shots that I guessed focus on were way off, whereas with a native mount wide angle, I have had a higher success ratio in guessing focus distances using the lens scale.

Dan

Osmany Tellez · July 27th, 2009, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Barker

I agree with much of this.

The 24-105mm F4L IS USM kits lens is a super lens in good light. The image is sharp & the zoom range with constant aperture is perfect for use as a general purpose 'walking around' lens. The extra bonus with this lens is the Image Stabilisation which is invaluable for handheld shooting.

I bought a whole bunch of mainly Nikon manual lenses cheap from eBay just to experiment & discover which ones suited what I was filming. Now that the 5DII firmware update has gievn us manual aperture control I prefer to stick with EF mount lenses as fast AF is very nice to have for stills & the ability to take great stills & great video at the same time is an enormous advantage of this camera.

My primes are the Canon 50mm F1.2L (amazing for filming in low light) & the Canon 24mm F1.4L which works so well for interiors with no additional lighting.

I don't as yet have any great use for a telephoto longer than the 24-105mm zoom.

As I'm going through the same dilema trying to learn as much as possible before I spend my money...I came to a question I was hoping someone will help me clarify...

If I'm using a 24mm lens..which is meant to be for spaces, landscapes etc... will having a fast 1.2 or 1.8 be usefull? I mean..will the DOF be so small that will interfere with the purpose of seen the whole space? if so ...and the DOF is so small ...where do you focus and stuff..

hope this is no a dumb question.... I hope someone will explain..

I'm reading here everyday...thnks to all of you.

O

Chris Barcellos · July 27th, 2009, 08:34 PM

Wide angles have very deep depth of field.

I have an 24mm f 2.8 wide Nikkor Wide. According to the scale on the lens, it will be in focus, if I focus the lens at infinity, from 15 ft to infinity. Racking the lens over just a bit, I can get it in focus from 7 ft to infinity, according to the scale on the lens- again at F 2.8. At F11, I can stay in focus, 3 feet to infinity, according to the scale on the lens.

Nigel Barker · July 27th, 2009, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osmany Tellez

If I'm using a 24mm lens..which is meant to be for spaces, landscapes etc... will having a fast 1.2 or 1.8 be usefull? I mean..will the DOF be so small that will interfere with the purpose of seen the whole space? if so ...and the DOF is so small ...where do you focus and stuff..

As Chris notes the wider the angle of the lens then the deeper the DOF. You don't need a wide aperture for shooting landscapes in sunshine but you do when shooting indoors wthout extra lighting.

Peer Landa · July 28th, 2009, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

I also have a 80-200 Nikon that I purloined from Chris Swanberg. [...] The long teleshots in this video were from that lense: Lake Tahoe on Vimeo

Hey Chris, I wonder if you shot that little girl (towards the end at the campground) handheld at 200mm, or is it perhaps a "shaky/pan" tripod shot? Very nice, I also like the DOF and its blue color bouquet (with a hint of yellow from her board game). Asking since I'm impatiently waiting for my new 70-200 and a tiny run & gun tripod: THK Photo Products, Inc.

-- peer

Chris Barcellos · July 28th, 2009, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peer Landa

Hey Chris, I wonder if you shot that little girl (towards the end at the campground) handheld at 200mm, or is it perhaps a "shaky/pan" tripod shot? Very nice, I also like the DOF and its blue color bouquet (with a hint of yellow from her board game). Asking since I'm impatiently waiting for my new 70-200 and a tiny run & gun tripod: THK Photo Products, Inc.

-- peer

I think I was actually on the tripod for that shot. I was setting up to do some moon shots, and I saw her and her grandmother (my wife) playing the game, and I grabbed the shot. No even sure what lens was on board at that point, but it does look like it was at a 100mm or better. I have a fixed 100mm Nikor Series E that I love, but I am guessing this is the 80- 200 as I was setting up for the telephoto of the moon overhead.

Shot before that (on beach) was hand held with my homemade shoulder mount.

Ryan Mueller · July 28th, 2009, 05:33 PM

I need to rent a wide angle lens for a shoot that I have next week. Any recommendations on which lens? I need Canon glass that shoots at the widest angle possible with no/minimal barrel distortion. I will be shooting kitchens indoors but will be lighting each kitchen individually. Any help would be extremely appreciated.

Ry

Jon Fairhurst · July 28th, 2009, 06:37 PM

Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II Rectilinear

Ryan Mueller · July 28th, 2009, 06:47 PM

Jon, enough said ^^^ Thank you very much!

Chris Hurd · July 28th, 2009, 09:05 PM

That's my photo. Originally posted to http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/1154486-post24.html

That 14mm was just a loaner, but I fell in love with it. Wish I could justify buying it.

And yet another shameless self-portrait there too. That lens is around $2500.

Jon Fairhurst · July 28th, 2009, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

That's my photo.

Chris, I knew it was your post, but didn't realize that you took the photo as well. Every time I think of that lens, your photo jumps to mind. It simply defines "rectilinear".

This lens and the Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L would cover just about anything an architectural photographer could encounter.

EOS (SLR) Camera Systems - Tilt-Shift - Tilt-Shift Lens - TS-E 17mm f/4L - Canon USA Consumer Products

Michael D. Shivers · August 6th, 2009, 10:28 AM

This is a great thread and I'm glad that it is here. A specific question on the Canon 85mm 1.8. I'm looking to get this lens to shoot indoor/outdoor low light shoots. I'll be filming a wedding and I've got the 17-40L 4.0 lens and several others, but I figured towards the late evening it may get a little too dark for that. I've filmed in very low light with that lens and the ISO/noise is actually pretty decent.

So has any one have experience with the 85mm 1.8 in indoor/outdoor low light party/wedding atmosphere with the 5D MkII? For the price do you recommend it? For now the 85mm 1.2 is out of the budget.

thanks again
Michael

Jon Fairhurst · August 6th, 2009, 11:42 AM

I have the 28/1.8, 35/2.0, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, and 200/2.8, and the 85/1.8 is my favorite of them all. First, 85mm is the perfect people-scale lens. It's got USM autofocus, and full time manual focus. Lines are straight, and f/1.8 is good enough in all but the lowest light.

The 50/1.4 is better in low light, but the angle of view can be boring, and it has barrel distortion, making it bad for portraits - not only do you have to get too close to your subjects, but the barrel distortion can make them look piggy.

My favorite foil for the 85/1.8 is the 28/1.8. Photographers don't rate this lens very high, but I find it sharp enough for video. The trick is to put something interesting in the foreground, like a table centerpiece or wedding cake, and show the people in the background. It's a very artistic look without being ultrawide. And with enough distance to your subjects, they won't display the big nose, little ears effect.

If I could only keep two of my lenses for video of people, the 85/1.8 and 28/1.8 would be my choices - in that order. The 200/2.8L has the sweetest look of them all, but it's best used in a big space on a tripod and doesn't touch the others in low light.

You'll have no regrets with the EF 85mm f/1.8 lens.

Michael D. Shivers · August 6th, 2009, 12:01 PM

Jon,

Thank you sir! That is very helpful. I've got the 50mm 1.8, so for this wedding, I think the 85mm 1.8 will be a great add on. I'll look into the 28mm 1.8 soon.

thanks again for the detailed response.

Marcus Marchesseault · August 6th, 2009, 02:31 PM

I have recently purchased the Canon 85mm f/1.8 and it is great for an affordable lens. It gathers lots of light and is the perfect focal length for medium-sized areas. I used it at night outdoors and it is great for people from about 5-50 feet away. This is right in line with what you want for unobtrusive tight shots at a wedding. You still must get in close, but you don't have to be right in their personal space. Like Jon, I am coupling it with a wider lens but I like my 35mm f/1.4 as it is super fast and doesn't distort much like a wider lens. This is a Nikon manual lens with an adapter and I find the manual focus is best in low light as the auto always has a tough time. Besides, the auto in video mode on the 5Dii is not really proper. Of course, I have 50mm lenses but I think they will stay in the bag most of the time.

July 27th, 2009, 08:34 PM	#33
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Wide angles have very deep depth of field. I have an 24mm f 2.8 wide Nikkor Wide. According to the scale on the lens, it will be in focus, if I focus the lens at infinity, from 15 ft to infinity. Racking the lens over just a bit, I can get it in focus from 7 ft to infinity, according to the scale on the lens- again at F 2.8. At F11, I can stay in focus, 3 feet to infinity, according to the scale on the lens. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

July 28th, 2009, 06:37 PM	#38
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II Rectilinear __________________ Jon Fairhurst

July 28th, 2009, 09:05 PM	#40
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,366 Images: 513	That's my photo. Originally posted to http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/1154486-post24.html That 14mm was just a loaner, but I fell in love with it. Wish I could justify buying it. And yet another shameless self-portrait there too. That lens is around $2500. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

August 6th, 2009, 10:28 AM	#42
Michael D. Shivers New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Atlanta Posts: 15	This is a great thread and I'm glad that it is here. A specific question on the Canon 85mm 1.8. I'm looking to get this lens to shoot indoor/outdoor low light shoots. I'll be filming a wedding and I've got the 17-40L 4.0 lens and several others, but I figured towards the late evening it may get a little too dark for that. I've filmed in very low light with that lens and the ISO/noise is actually pretty decent. So has any one have experience with the 85mm 1.8 in indoor/outdoor low light party/wedding atmosphere with the 5D MkII? For the price do you recommend it? For now the 85mm 1.2 is out of the budget. thanks again Michael __________________ Michael Shivers \| mdshivers Creative Media www.mdshivers.com Last edited by Michael D. Shivers; August 6th, 2009 at 11:58 AM. Reason: misspell

August 6th, 2009, 11:42 AM	#43
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	I have the 28/1.8, 35/2.0, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, and 200/2.8, and the 85/1.8 is my favorite of them all. First, 85mm is the perfect people-scale lens. It's got USM autofocus, and full time manual focus. Lines are straight, and f/1.8 is good enough in all but the lowest light. The 50/1.4 is better in low light, but the angle of view can be boring, and it has barrel distortion, making it bad for portraits - not only do you have to get too close to your subjects, but the barrel distortion can make them look piggy. My favorite foil for the 85/1.8 is the 28/1.8. Photographers don't rate this lens very high, but I find it sharp enough for video. The trick is to put something interesting in the foreground, like a table centerpiece or wedding cake, and show the people in the background. It's a very artistic look without being ultrawide. And with enough distance to your subjects, they won't display the big nose, little ears effect. If I could only keep two of my lenses for video of people, the 85/1.8 and 28/1.8 would be my choices - in that order. The 200/2.8L has the sweetest look of them all, but it's best used in a big space on a tripod and doesn't touch the others in low light. You'll have no regrets with the EF 85mm f/1.8 lens. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

July 28th, 2009, 05:33 PM	#37
Ryan Mueller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Highlands Ranch, CO Posts: 336	I need to rent a wide angle lens for a shoot that I have next week. Any recommendations on which lens? I need Canon glass that shoots at the widest angle possible with no/minimal barrel distortion. I will be shooting kitchens indoors but will be lighting each kitchen individually. Any help would be extremely appreciated. Ry

July 28th, 2009, 06:47 PM	#39
Ryan Mueller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Highlands Ranch, CO Posts: 336	Jon, enough said ^^^ Thank you very much!

August 6th, 2009, 12:01 PM	#44
Michael D. Shivers New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Atlanta Posts: 15	Jon, Thank you sir! That is very helpful. I've got the 50mm 1.8, so for this wedding, I think the 85mm 1.8 will be a great add on. I'll look into the 28mm 1.8 soon. thanks again for the detailed response. __________________ Michael Shivers \| mdshivers Creative Media www.mdshivers.com

August 6th, 2009, 02:31 PM	#45
Marcus Marchesseault Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 1,961	I have recently purchased the Canon 85mm f/1.8 and it is great for an affordable lens. It gathers lots of light and is the perfect focal length for medium-sized areas. I used it at night outdoors and it is great for people from about 5-50 feet away. This is right in line with what you want for unobtrusive tight shots at a wedding. You still must get in close, but you don't have to be right in their personal space. Like Jon, I am coupling it with a wider lens but I like my 35mm f/1.4 as it is super fast and doesn't distort much like a wider lens. This is a Nikon manual lens with an adapter and I find the manual focus is best in low light as the auto always has a tough time. Besides, the auto in video mode on the 5Dii is not really proper. Of course, I have 50mm lenses but I think they will stay in the bag most of the time.