Hi all,

What lens would you recommend a beginner videographer with a very tight budget? I've seen few around the forums such as the Canon 24mm f1.4 or 70-200mm f2.8 for the zoom and Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. But prices on those are quite expensive.

Main purpose are for making short pre-wedding clip (so may need one with shallow DoF) then also for future may start on documenting wedding.

I need to keep it in budget as I need to save money to invest on other things as well such as steadies etc. (including my own wedding in the future :))

How much money do you reckon I should spare to get into videography in 7D?

Cheers,


John

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II....can be had for $70 off ebay.

Canon | Normal EF 50mm f/1.8 II Autofocus Lens | 2514A002 | B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12142-USA/Canon_2514A002_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_8.html)


Really shallow DoF, and a classic wide shot, though on the crop sensor it shoots a bit longer than that...

But as a budget starting point? Can't be beat.

I have this lens and it is quite nice but I will say that it is very limiting. Obviously, most shots are somewhat tight and the shallow depth of field is insane coming from the video world. While I do love it, I miss the flexibility of mutilple focal lengths. I cannot afford additional lenses just yet so I am currently stuck with it. I debate wether I should have gotten the kit lens just to kick around with and use for outdoor shots since it is so much slower.

Edit: I have only had the camera for 4 days now so it's all still new to me.

I love my nifty fifty, but like others have said, it's quite tight on a 7D, and you can't use any audio because the focus ring makes a ton of noise. Plus, there are now distance markings for your focus and it can't be used with a follow focus (at least not easily). For stuff like dancing I use it on my 5D and it is awesome, but for pre-wedding stuff when you will want to make use of some audio, it's not the best bet.

I think the best budget bet is the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 which can be had for a reasonable price at B&H, is fast, and goes from a nice wide shot to a flattering telephoto. It's not long enough for a ceremony where you can't be close to the couple, but for any other part of the day it does the trick.

Shallow DOF = fast lens.
Event videography = Zoom and IS preferred.

You have some options:
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. A lens in its own class. Silent, quick, but big and heavy. About $1k.

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. This comes with and without VC (Image Stabilization), which you may or may not want. It's noisy for one. $450-650 depending on with or without VC.

This gets you up to about 80mm in the 35mm equivalent. Telephoto for sure, but not what you'd call real narrow. For that you have some other options but they're slower. Check out the Canon IS USM 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6. It's $720 and you have good range, quick autofocus and quiet, effective IS.

For the budget videographer these are my recommendations.

On a budget, I'll agree that the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 is about the cheapest low-light zoom lens you can get that offers some variability. Obviously, it doesn't provide a solution for all shooting situations, but its still pretty versatile.

But as a budget starting point? Can't be beat.

For photography, no it can't be beat - but it's a terrible lens for video, primarily due to the tiny focus ring. It's too small to get a good grip on, too close to the front of the lens (easy to get fingers in the shot), has a ton of play and a short throw so it's difficult to be precise for it.

Best budget option for video is to get an old manual lens, 50mm pentax 1.4 or a nikon 1.8. With an adapter it shouldn't cost you more than about $100 and it'll be far more useable for video.

I have the Tokina 16-50 f2.8, which has a nice fat focus ring on the front where it belongs. It's heavy and solid. Uses 77mm filters. But if money's tight, go for the cheapo 50 f1.8, which feels like a toy but is sharp and good. Then maybe look for a used 28mm, which would be more like a "normal" lens on the 7D.

Wow thanks guys! Seems like a lot of recommendation here. Summarizing I've got:

50mm pentax 1.4 - about A$400
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM - about A$1000
Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 - about A$400
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 - about A$700
Canon IS USM 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 - about A$900

All brand new prices from AU eBay.

For my pocket, I think I might go down the path of Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 as two members in the thread have given the thumbs up.

Now, Ben and Ryan did mention it won't cover all shooting situation. Can someone please elaborate more into it and perhaps suggestion for a second lens that can cover this?

Thanks, really appreciate it! :)

Cheers,


John

I don't own it, but that Tamron 17-50mm is one of the most recommended lens on this and other forums.

Just make sure you get it with "VC" their version of image stabilization.

Here's what I have:

Canon 17-55 f2.8
Canon 70-200 f2.8
Canon 50mm f 1.4
Tokina 11-6 f2.8

I also bought some Nikon to Canon adapters so that I can use some of the primes i already use with my letus.
One zoom that gives some range overlap (compared with teh 17-55) is the Tokina 28-70 ATX 2.6-2.8.

The two Nikon primes that i'll probably use with the 7d are the 35mm f2.0 and my favorite , the beautifull 105 f 1.8 (love this lens). My other Nikon primes are f 2.8, so I'll stick with my Canon zooms.
I laso do event photo gigs, which is the main reason I bought the 17-55 and the 70-200, after selling my main Nikon gear in order to make the switch to the 7d.
Bruce Yarock

Don't forget to look at older version of the fast Canon zooms secondhand. The original Canon 20-35mm f2.8L, 17-35mm f2.8L, 80-200mm f2.8L and 70-200 f4L can all be found for good prices if you shop around. Whilst these lenses are bettered by the newer ones their performance for video is still excellent.

The Tokina 24-70 f2.8 is also a good bet if you can find one at the right price.

Used Contax/Zeiss lenses like the 50mm f1.7, 28mm f2.8 and 135mm f2.8 are also good bets as they can each be had for $100-200 if you are lucky and are simply adapted with a $20 eos adapter to the 7D.

Dan

Just got my Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC lens about 1/2 hour ago and I have 3 initial impressions.

1. The VC works like a dream. Handheld shots are stable and look good so far. This makes me feel a lot better about the 7d for handheld video.

2. The lens hood is small. The pinky of my left hand sometimes pops past the side and makes a guest appearance in the image when I am at the wide end. I am used to full lens hoods....not these wide angle doo-hickeys. :)

3. The lens seems heavy. Granted I have had the Canon 50mm 1.8 light little lens on there but now my should started to feel sore after just a few minutes. Ow!

More to come.

Dan,
I ended buying that used Tokina 28-70 that I asked you about several months ago, and have been very happy with it. I used it a lot on the Letus and am about to try it on the 7d. Loved your ice-sled cam:))

Marty,
Have you figured out any H1 presets to match better with the 7d? I just had your old truysty H1 serviced and it still shooting great images:))
Sorry about de railing the thread.
Bruce Yarock

For my pocket, I think I might go down the path of Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 as two members in the thread have given the thumbs up.

Now, Ben and Ryan did mention it won't cover all shooting situation. Can someone please elaborate more into it and perhaps suggestion for a second lens that can cover this?

Thanks, really appreciate it! :)

Cheers,


John

John, its definitely a great choice for a lens, but as others have suggested, if you are doing handheld work, get the VC version of the lens. It really makes a world of difference. As with any lens ever made, it's not made to do it all. It's not a fisheye. It's not a super telephoto. But I'm sure that a creative person working within the confines of a 17-50mm (27-80mm coverted with 1.6x crop) can find it has a lot of uses.

As for a second lens, no one lens will solve 100% of your shooting needs either. But since 17mm is relatively wide, I would recommend going further on the telephoto side. The cheaper route would be to get a 135mm or 200mm fast prime lens. Of course, this all depends on what you want to shoot.

For example:

Canon | Telephoto EF 135mm f/2.8 Autofocus Lens Soft | 2516A003 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12064-USA/Canon_2516A003_Telephoto_EF_135mm_f_2_8.html)

or

Canon | Telephoto EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Autofocus | 2529A004AA (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/129190-USA/Canon_2529A004AA_Telephoto_EF_200mm_f_2_8L.html)

or if you want the most bang for your buck, go with another zoom lens like a 70-200mm 2.8. Here's an example:

Sigma | 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF Lens | 579-101 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/533555-REG/Sigma_579_101_70_200mm_f_2_8_II_EX.html)

That should provide you with a good deal of coverage to start out with.

Dan,
Marty,
Have you figured out any H1 presets to match better with the 7d? I just had your old truysty H1 serviced and it still shooting great images:))
Sorry about de railing the thread.
Bruce Yarock

Bruce,
I haven't even tried yet. I have had the 7d for all of 6 days and I am just starting to wrap my head around its intricacies. Also, I am bit overwelmed getting used to relationships between Fstops and sendor size. I guess from the 1/3" world I am stuck thinking I need to be zoomed and at f1.6 to get a decent bokeh out of a clip. In the 35mm crop world I have shot some clips with f5.6 that have more shallow depth of field than my H1. So shooting a 5.6 and below may be more normal now whereas in the video 1/3 work it pretty much never happened. Are you seeing this?
Marty

Thanks gents for all the great help! I think I now have better idea of what I need to get for my DSLR. :)

Now... where's that piggy bank...

For crop sensors I definitely find that the Tamron 17-50 is the best bang for buck and I've suggested it to a lot of people.

That Tamron 17-50mm with VC should be your first priority in lenses. I have lenses covering this range already, but I will by one just to gain the IS for my 7D.

sorry if its been discussed before but any chance you guys could give a very brief word on why you'd recommend the Tamron 17-50 over the Canon 17-55?

Cheers!

sorry if its been discussed before but any chance you guys could give a very brief word on why you'd recommend the Tamron 17-50 over the Canon 17-55?

Cheers!

I'd like to know that too; the Canon costs almost twice as much as the Tamron, and apparently, may be more quiet, but image quality is comparable, at least for the non-VC (non-IS) version, as there are questions about the VC-version quality. See this link: Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II VC Lens Review (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-VC-Lens-Review.aspx)

What lens to buy remains a difficult and personal challenge; personally I'd like the Canon 15-85 IS lens for its versability and perhaps the Canon 50 1.4 or Sigma 50 1.4 prime for low-light situations.

I'm going to film an eductional program (ie two people giving feedback to each other), I'll be using a tripod, but I keep wondering if the Canon 15-85 IS will fast enough with only normal indoor room lighting (fluorescent tubes). Do you think I need extra lights or would it be a safer choice getting the faster Canon/Tamron 17-50? Or should I give up versability and just go with the prime?

For me the VC tamron was much softer on the edges than the canon at more open settings, which may not be a bad thing depending on your subject/setting. Having image stabilization on a lens for photography is a great asset, not so much for video because you should really have that camera supported shooting video. The unstabilized tamron which to me was sharper probably could be picked up at a good price from someone using the lens for photography only.

Zoom noise shouldn't be a problem because framing and composition should be done prior to pressing the record button. Buying a Canon 50 1.4 lens as a first lens and moving the camera/tripod closer or further from your subject both indoors and outdoors and really learning the effects that different f/stops have on lighting and depth of field will work wonders. Just like in photograhy having 2 or 3 primes can save tons of cash and can make for a great video lens arsenal.

If someone were to hold gun to my head and said I could only keep one lens for a crop camera shooting video, (heaven forbid) it would be the L series 20-35 2.8, which isn't made anymore, that another poster listed. I bought mine new in 1980 and that gives me a 32-56 and it's tack sharp edge to edge. Others would probably pick something else, it's just that I know what this lens will do.

Hi David,

Im curious if the image softness of the Tamron is an issue with video or just photos?

Also i'd have to disagree with the points about IS and zooming, although most shots are of course better locked down to a tripod, theres plenty of situations where hand held or shoulder supported video works great (eg narrative work - plenty of movies in the cinema these days are almost all handheld)

I personally like the odd quick zoom for effect (eg a fashion show i filmed last week)

Cheers,
Manus

The three lenses I have compliment each other well and are fairly cheap:
Tamron 17-50 (non-VC)
Canon 28-135
Canon 50 f1.8

These seem to catch any situation I've come up against in my first two months with the camera. The IS in the Canon is helpful and the cheap 50mm is great. The Tamron is a great all around lens and I would like to try out the VC version

Manus,

For me using the 7D as you would a dedicated video camera is totally different and I would never use a 7D hand held is what I was saying, and wouldn't recommend it to others. That is why I own both. For me any type of camera should ALWAYS be supported and you can pick your preference. Tripod, monopod, shoulder support etc.

And saying that people use hand held DSLR type cameras almost exclusively for most cinema filming is a stretch, but it has been several years since I actually was on a set but at the time I did see tripods, dollies and cranes.

As far as zooming goes I can apprreciate the snap zoom once or twice every other year but most movies you watch will be void of any zooming, snap or otherwise. I have shot hunting footage where zooming was appropriate and I'm sure there are others that I don't do but if I don't have to have zooming in a shot, I won't. Then again those are just MY preferences.

I love the footage from the 7D type of cameras and have many lenses that will be great fun seeing what they will do. But having the red record light on while handholding, zooming and focusing for me just results in footage I don't want to see, let alone show anyone else. And no, IS won't help me here either.

Thanks for your response, I know a lot of what I do is outdated but it works for me.

Cheers

Dave

no worries! i think we all forget sometimes how many different applications these tools get used for..

still curious if anyone has anything else to say on the tamron, my girlfriends coming back from japan next week and ive seen some really good prices, wondering if peoples preferences over the 17-55 canon are based mostly on price? I heard also the focus ring is not so smooth and the lens breathes a lot making rack focusing almost unusable, is this an exaggeration?

Anybody?!

If i go for the Tamron i'd need to make a pretty speedy decision.. at the moment thinking the Canon for the above reason.. thanks!

(Michiel my opinion is for indoor shooting a 3.5 is often fast enough but sometimes not, if the location you want to shoot in 'feels' brightly lit you will probably be fine, when a room 'feels' a bit less bright you'd often need to bump up the iso more than you'd like.. I'm still trying to figure out how far i can push the iso)

Manus,
I have the Tamron and I'll give you my brief opinion. I did just order the Canon 17-55 to try as I am not 100% happy with the Tamron. I will have both for about 3-4 days before I have to send back the Tamron, which I intend on doing, unless the Canon disappoints big time. Here are the reasons I am going for the Canon for now.

Tamron:
1. Focus ring is backwards relative to all other Canon lenses. Since I have been using XL series lenses, everything is turned around and confuses me.

2. Focus ring has very short throw so it feels less precise. It still works but I'd like it to travel more and have a little more resistance. Still better than on my Canon 50mm f1.8

3. The autofocus seems slow and misses. I read about this on many forums but I have now witnessed it myself. This is for still photos. I don't use autfocus for video.

4. Autofocus is noisy. I have heard nothing but great things about the USM on the Canons.

5. 2 times in my first week the lens has had errors talking to body of 7d. I read about this in a review and the guy said it happened once and then never again. Twice in a week is too frequent for my taste.

6. Auto focus or manual has to be engaged. You cannot overide autofocus as the motir is engaged. The Canon supposedly allows fulltime manual focus.

7. Focus ring is close to end of lens and I am used to big lens hoods, so my pinky keeps getting in the frame. On the Canon focus i further up the barrell toward the body

Having said all of this the images seems to be quite nice....at least for video. The VC works well albeit a little noisy. I hope the Canon is quieter.

In my situation, I found that I could return the Tamron and get the Canon used for about $175 more and decided it was worth it for me. I am used to Canon lenses and I like the feel of the focus on them. Unless the 17-55 IS lens is an exception, I anticipate being happier with the Canon. However it appears to be significantly larger too....so I'll need a new bag.

If you have any other questions, just ask.

Lens does breathe a bit. I don't know that is makes it unusable but it does change the zoom slighty. I kind of like it! :)

Ok thanks guys!

I'm sure it really is a good lens but I'm pretty sure I'll hold out now based on some of those points and look at picking up a 2nd hand canon around here if possible..

Actually the Tamron's autofocus is noisier so it SEEMS like it takes longer but in reality it is as fast as Canon's. Canon's is just quieter. Tamron's aoutofocus works great and I don't find the noise a problem at all. That being said, the Canon's quietness makes it seem like a better put together lens.

(Michiel my opinion is for indoor shooting a 3.5 is often fast enough but sometimes not, if the location you want to shoot in 'feels' brightly lit you will probably be fine, when a room 'feels' a bit less bright you'd often need to bump up the iso more than you'd like.. I'm still trying to figure out how far i can push the iso)

Thanks, Manus! I think that I'm going to go for a prime (50mm 1.4 Canon or Sigma) but still have to decide between the Canon 15-85IS or 17-50/55IS from Tamron or Canon. I think to have BOTH (15-85 and 17-50) lenses is not really useful (yet). This is also because I think I have to buy me a Zoom H4N for audio (put in another 350 euro).

Commited myself to a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC. Should arrive in a week. Can't wait to start practicing!

Thanks for the help guys I think I've made a wise decision and left me some spare money to get a steady and recorder :)

Not that I think the Tamron is a bad lens or anything like that, but I decided on the used Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS USM model instead, and sent the Tamron back.

I still stand by the things I said about the Tamron, but I found that I liked the focus mechanism on the canon better, the USM autofocus seems faster but for sure it is quieter and the image was overall sharper when zoomed. Also the fulltime manual focus is great.

Overall, the reviews and images I saw on the web of comparing the lenses at different focal lengths and apertures consistently put the Canon ahead. Many professional reviews claim the glass is "L" series quality, which is saying something! Less CA and fringing too.

The one thing I originally loved about the Tamron was the focus ring was smooth and easy to turn with little resistance. The Canon initially turned me off as the focus ring felt a little stiff and jerky. But it seems to have loosened up a bit and i now find that I overshoot focus with the Tamron. THe canon tends to stop more precisely when rack focusing and the Tamron slides right past the mark sometimes. Just a completely different feel, and if all I was going to use just the Tamron....that would be okay. I intend on owning several pieces of Canon glass and just thought for consistency with focal direction and feel....I'd stick with Canon. At a cost premium obviously.