Recommended zoon lenses for film use? at DVinfo.net

Jackie Morton · September 20th, 2009, 10:21 PM

I'm not looking to buy a set of primes right now - one or two good zoom lenses should do the trick for now. The one that comes packaged with the cam looks good, but having something a bit wider and faster might be cool, maybe a 17–55mm 2.8 IS? Should I just go for the body alone and pick up one of these babies on the side?

Roberto Lanczos · September 20th, 2009, 10:43 PM

I'm on the same boat right now.

Since i don't have the budget to go for the L series, i'll probably go with the tamron 17-50 because of the crop factor. it will translate to 28-80.
i would like to believe this is the "one and only" choice on a budget.

the canon 70-200 F4 is my main second choice to cover from 112-320mm.

Check out the tamron, i think it's a beautiful alternative on the WIDE section to cover from 28mm at least.

If you wanna go safe, go for the EF 17-40 F/4.

Hope that helps.

Jackie Morton · September 21st, 2009, 07:59 AM

Do you have a link to the Tamron and are there any major differences between it and the Canon?

Mitja Popovski · September 21st, 2009, 08:08 AM

I use tamron on D40 and it is great, if you go into details, cannon is of course better, but for video on 7D, i don't think there will be much difference. Tamron is very sharp on f2.8. I also have canon 70-200 F4L and fixed canon 85/1.8 but mainly i use tamron and for video, i would use it even more. I am also waiting for 7D body, but not imediately, i want to see more tests. My glass is already here and waiting.

Bill Pryor · September 21st, 2009, 08:34 AM

Tamron has a new 17-50. Same lens but with IS, which they call VC, for vibration control. Of course it's more expensive, but still $300-$400 cheaper than the Canon equivalent. I have a Tamron 17-35, the one that's for full frame cameras. It's 2.8 at the wide end and sharp. No OIS. It's a heavy sucker.

Roberto Lanczos · September 21st, 2009, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackie Morton

Do you have a link to the Tamron and are there any major differences between it and the Canon?

Comparison between the 2: ( you be the judge )
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lens - Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM Lens Comparison - ISO 12233 Resolution Chart Results

Amazon reviews:
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP ZL Aspherical (IF) Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

A Review on youtube:
YouTube - Tamron 17-50, f2.8, XR Di II Lens Review

Shaun Walker · September 21st, 2009, 11:47 AM

The newspaper where I'm a photojournalist has a 16-35 2.8L that will be sweet and very useful until I get my 17-55 2.8 IS Canon (highest-priority lens for my 7D), and a 100-400 IS L-series that will spoil me for telephoto usage outdoors, but I think a key part of my kit will be my personal 70-200 2.8L -- faster and longer zoom for indoor and other low-light usage is harder/pricier to do, while you can get a good 17-? 2.8 like the Tamron zoom for much cheaper, though the non-constant aperture would get very old and frustrating.

My best overall zoom combo for the 7D:
17-55 IS 2.8 Canon + 70-200 IS 2.8L Canon, and add 30mm 1.4 Sigma, maybe 1.4x and 2x teleconveters ...

IF on smaller budget:
17-35 or 17-50 Tamron and 70-200 4L Canon, 50mm 1.8 Canon, cheaper 2x.

I will likely get a Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM and its sweet 13.8X zoom range for the brighter parts of my upcoming Thailand vacation -- I even hope that lens will be OK for occasional bright-condition pro usage, too, like weddings on a sunny day or anything being delivered in NTSC DVD or web form.

The upcoming wider 15-85mm Canon IS USM will be a tempting lens, too, and will almost certainly be nicer/sharper overall for stills than the 18-250.
And then Canon is also coming out with the seemingly cheapo 18-135 IS lens, but I think the Sigma 18-250 might be a tough comparison for it, especially as the Sigma is only a tiny bit pricier.

Good lens reviews:
FM Reviews - Main Index

Bill Pryor · September 21st, 2009, 01:17 PM

The new Tamron 17-50 VC (vibration compensation) lens is 2.8 all the way. I'm not pimping Tamron, I like the Canon lenses better for the most part, but i think Tamron's a pretty good value for the money. This new lens was only available for the Nikon as of last week but they say the Canon will be on the market very soon. Probably by the time the 7D gets here.

A 15-85 would fit my needs perfectly. Wider is better for me, generally. Assuming I can get something that gives me a 2.8. I've become accustomed to shooting people in video with LED or fluorescent lights and normally shoot at f2.8 or even more open. I could live with 2.8 for most things.

Shaun Walker · September 21st, 2009, 01:54 PM

The 15-85 Canon is a f/3.5-5.6, so I sure HOPE there's an EF-S lens that is a 15-55 2.8 constant coming someday. Or a maybe 12-35 EF-S??

I'm quite intrigued about what interesting higher-quality lens options Canon might have up its sleeves as video DLSRs get more serious and widely-used. I really want a fast prime wide :) ... and a sharp USM IS in the 12X to 20X range.

Full frame 5D,etc. shooters have the very nice option of the Canon 28-300mm L series -- I'm jealous!

Dan Brockett · September 21st, 2009, 02:36 PM

i own the Canon 17-40 f4 L. In the comparison that Roberto posted the link to above, the Tamron looks considerably sharper than my Canon, but who knows with sample to sample variation? That said, I have been very happy with the Canon but if I was buying again today, I would take a good close look at the Tamron, it looks really sharp.

*Edit - Ahh, just noticed that this lens is for APS-C cameras, I shoot with the 5D MKII, nevermind. Still looks like a deal for 7D owners.

Dan

Daniel Bates · September 21st, 2009, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun Walker

The 15-85 Canon is a f/3.5-5.6, so I sure HOPE there's an EF-S lens that is a 15-55 2.8 constant coming someday.

Doubtful, since there's already an EF-S 17-55/2.8.

Shaun Walker · September 21st, 2009, 03:06 PM

Canon had a 28-70mm L 2.8 constant, then they later came out with the 24-70 version ... This is what might happen for a few nicer EF-S lenses just like their 15-85 is about to replace the 17-85.

Jackie Morton · September 21st, 2009, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roberto Lanczos

Comparison between the 2: ( you be the judge )
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Lens - Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM Lens Comparison - ISO 12233 Resolution Chart Results

Amazon reviews:
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Tamron AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di-II LD SP ZL Aspherical (IF) Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras

A Review on youtube:
YouTube - Tamron 17-50, f2.8, XR Di II Lens Review

Wow, seems the Tamron is actually better?

Don Miller · September 23rd, 2009, 10:52 AM

Here's a piece shot with Sigma 24-70 on a 5DII. A good reminder to me that glass is a minor part of the craft.

Model Campus on Vimeo

Roberto Lanczos · September 23rd, 2009, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackie Morton

Wow, seems the Tamron is actually better?

you can expect amazing quality built with canon.
canon is top notch construction.

Tamron feels more cheap and plastic. i've seen several people on youtube with comments about parts falling off from the lens, sudden breaks, etc.

it depends on how you treat your equipment of course

for me is just a godsend lens. I'm an extremely delicate person, very small hands and i treat my stuff like a little princess.

But if you wanna go the tamron route, just be kind with the lens, treat it carefully, don't go around playing with the zoom like a nuts, and have fun ;)

-----------------------------------------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Miller

Here's a piece shot with Sigma 24-70 on a 5DII. A good reminder to me that glass is a minor part of the craft.
Model Campus on Vimeo

That sigma looks gorgeos. the only downside is the min lenght.
24 is like 38 at min on a 7D.... what a shame. looks beautiful

Hope to see some 7D work soon around here.

Peace

September 20th, 2009, 10:21 PM	#1
Jackie Morton Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Buffalo, USA Posts: 63	Recommended zoon lenses for film use? I'm not looking to buy a set of primes right now - one or two good zoom lenses should do the trick for now. The one that comes packaged with the cam looks good, but having something a bit wider and faster might be cool, maybe a 17–55mm 2.8 IS? Should I just go for the body alone and pick up one of these babies on the side?

September 21st, 2009, 11:47 AM	#7
Shaun Walker Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Eureka, Calif. Posts: 98	I want a 18-300 IS USM Canon with a constant F4 or 2.8-4 :) The newspaper where I'm a photojournalist has a 16-35 2.8L that will be sweet and very useful until I get my 17-55 2.8 IS Canon (highest-priority lens for my 7D), and a 100-400 IS L-series that will spoil me for telephoto usage outdoors, but I think a key part of my kit will be my personal 70-200 2.8L -- faster and longer zoom for indoor and other low-light usage is harder/pricier to do, while you can get a good 17-? 2.8 like the Tamron zoom for much cheaper, though the non-constant aperture would get very old and frustrating. My best overall zoom combo for the 7D: 17-55 IS 2.8 Canon + 70-200 IS 2.8L Canon, and add 30mm 1.4 Sigma, maybe 1.4x and 2x teleconveters ... IF on smaller budget: 17-35 or 17-50 Tamron and 70-200 4L Canon, 50mm 1.8 Canon, cheaper 2x. I will likely get a Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM and its sweet 13.8X zoom range for the brighter parts of my upcoming Thailand vacation -- I even hope that lens will be OK for occasional bright-condition pro usage, too, like weddings on a sunny day or anything being delivered in NTSC DVD or web form. The upcoming wider 15-85mm Canon IS USM will be a tempting lens, too, and will almost certainly be nicer/sharper overall for stills than the 18-250. And then Canon is also coming out with the seemingly cheapo 18-135 IS lens, but I think the Sigma 18-250 might be a tough comparison for it, especially as the Sigma is only a tiny bit pricier. Good lens reviews: FM Reviews - Main Index Last edited by Shaun Walker; September 21st, 2009 at 11:56 AM. Reason: .

September 20th, 2009, 10:43 PM	#2
Roberto Lanczos Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 113	I'm on the same boat right now. Since i don't have the budget to go for the L series, i'll probably go with the tamron 17-50 because of the crop factor. it will translate to 28-80. i would like to believe this is the "one and only" choice on a budget. the canon 70-200 F4 is my main second choice to cover from 112-320mm. Check out the tamron, i think it's a beautiful alternative on the WIDE section to cover from 28mm at least. If you wanna go safe, go for the EF 17-40 F/4. Hope that helps.

September 21st, 2009, 07:59 AM	#3
Jackie Morton Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Buffalo, USA Posts: 63	Do you have a link to the Tamron and are there any major differences between it and the Canon?

September 21st, 2009, 08:08 AM	#4
Mitja Popovski Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 38	I use tamron on D40 and it is great, if you go into details, cannon is of course better, but for video on 7D, i don't think there will be much difference. Tamron is very sharp on f2.8. I also have canon 70-200 F4L and fixed canon 85/1.8 but mainly i use tamron and for video, i would use it even more. I am also waiting for 7D body, but not imediately, i want to see more tests. My glass is already here and waiting.

September 21st, 2009, 08:34 AM	#5
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	Tamron has a new 17-50. Same lens but with IS, which they call VC, for vibration control. Of course it's more expensive, but still $300-$400 cheaper than the Canon equivalent. I have a Tamron 17-35, the one that's for full frame cameras. It's 2.8 at the wide end and sharp. No OIS. It's a heavy sucker.

September 21st, 2009, 01:17 PM	#8
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	The new Tamron 17-50 VC (vibration compensation) lens is 2.8 all the way. I'm not pimping Tamron, I like the Canon lenses better for the most part, but i think Tamron's a pretty good value for the money. This new lens was only available for the Nikon as of last week but they say the Canon will be on the market very soon. Probably by the time the 7D gets here. A 15-85 would fit my needs perfectly. Wider is better for me, generally. Assuming I can get something that gives me a 2.8. I've become accustomed to shooting people in video with LED or fluorescent lights and normally shoot at f2.8 or even more open. I could live with 2.8 for most things.

September 21st, 2009, 01:54 PM	#9
Shaun Walker Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Eureka, Calif. Posts: 98	The 15-85 Canon is a f/3.5-5.6, so I sure HOPE there's an EF-S lens that is a 15-55 2.8 constant coming someday. Or a maybe 12-35 EF-S?? I'm quite intrigued about what interesting higher-quality lens options Canon might have up its sleeves as video DLSRs get more serious and widely-used. I really want a fast prime wide :) ... and a sharp USM IS in the 12X to 20X range. Full frame 5D,etc. shooters have the very nice option of the Canon 28-300mm L series -- I'm jealous!

September 21st, 2009, 02:36 PM	#10
Dan Brockett Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 2,109	i own the Canon 17-40 f4 L. In the comparison that Roberto posted the link to above, the Tamron looks considerably sharper than my Canon, but who knows with sample to sample variation? That said, I have been very happy with the Canon but if I was buying again today, I would take a good close look at the Tamron, it looks really sharp. *Edit - Ahh, just noticed that this lens is for APS-C cameras, I shoot with the 5D MKII, nevermind. Still looks like a deal for 7D owners. Dan

September 21st, 2009, 03:06 PM	#12
Shaun Walker Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Eureka, Calif. Posts: 98	Canon had a 28-70mm L 2.8 constant, then they later came out with the 24-70 version ... This is what might happen for a few nicer EF-S lenses just like their 15-85 is about to replace the 17-85.

September 23rd, 2009, 10:52 AM	#14
Don Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 706	Here's a piece shot with Sigma 24-70 on a 5DII. A good reminder to me that glass is a minor part of the craft. Model Campus on Vimeo