Assuming my EX1 sells on eBay, I'm hoping to get myself a 7D—I think it's a better fit for me and I like the lens options I have (never could get my Brevis35 adapter to work right).

Anyway, if everything goes according to plan, I was probably going to get a 7D body by itself so I can have more for some nice prime lenses. If I can get the body for $1,700 from B&H that should leave me about $3,300 leftover for lenses. Unless I'm missing something here, that may be enough to get two Zeiss prime lenses.

My question to you all is: if you could only get two primes, instead of a whole kit, which ones would you get?

Andrew,
What are you getting it for, indi, weddings? GH2 is best image from what I've read, but GH2 owners will have to comment. For me, I think 7d is possitioned for indi work as it has hdmi out during record. For weddings I would suggest t2i just for magic lantern to save money and invest in glass. With the magic lantern hack it makes it as good as the more expensive cams. And its better weight wise on a stabilizer. Then later on maybe full frame sensor and use the t2i as a b cam. For lenses, this is what I posted elsewhere:

Why not go vintage? You can get the Zeiss in c/y mount for $300. You can also get the zeiss 100mm for $600. You might loose a bit on the lens coating, but you can get a mattbox instead. Similar IQ. Also if you don't get a chip adapter you lose exif data.
EventDV.net: The Event Videographer's Resource (http://www.eventdv.net/Articles/News/Feature/Vintage-Lenses-in-the-DSLR-Age-68120.htm)



To see whats compatible,
M42 lenses on Canon EOS 5D (http://www.panoramaplanet.de/comp/)

My list. I shoot handheld more, so my list is under 85mm:
85's
Rokkor 85mm 1.7 <- Not easily adapted?
Rokinon 85 1.4
Mamiya 80/2.8 N
Zeiss N85/1.4
Leica Apo-Summicron-R 90/2 ASPH
Olympus OM 85/2
Pentax A* 85mm f/1.4.


Fotodiox (http://www.fotodiox.com/)

Contax Zeiss Planar 85/1.2

Oly 24/2.8

Pentax 85/1.9 Super Takumar
**search for spotmatic camera

50's
SMC Pentax-A 50/1.2 $600
Rokkor 58/1.2 $200 <-needs modification
(search youtube)
Georg Pillwein :: Photographien | MC Rokkor 58 f1.2 to MAF Conversion (http://georgp.zenfolio.com/mc_rokkor_58_conversion)
Noctilux 58mm 1.2 (expensive)
Leica R 50/1.4 (expensive)
super takumar 50mm f1.4
Zuiko 50/1.4
Zuiko 50mm f/1.2
Mamiya 55mm f1.4 ($20-70)
Yashinon DS 1.4 / 50 mm
Voigtländer 58 1.4 ($400)
olympus OM zuiko 55 1.2 ( leitax conversion,) $250
tomioka/mamiya/chinon 55mm 1.4 (cheap)
Planar C/Y 50mm f1.4
ZEISS PLANAR 1.4

------------
80's
mamiya 80 2.8 w/ Mirex adapter also have 1.9
Rokinon 85mm 1.4 ($250)
Summicron-R 90

Do you really need the Zeiss lenses for what you are shooting?

I agree that quality glass is always a sound investment, but it's not worth it if it means limiting yourself creatively. Personally I would only use Ziess lenses if I was renting or if I was not buying them myself.

For $3300 you could get some a couple of really nice zooms as well as a full set of Nikon primes.

It makes sense only if you are planning to move beyond DSLR's ... but considering you are only just buying a 7D this is not the case.

To me the images coming out of the 7D will not be improved significantly with Zeiss glass. It is too compressed with a limited dynamic range. The 7D is not a cinematic camera by any means. There are too many arttifacts to deal with.

You would get much more bang for your bucks with Canon L glass zooms.

i disagree. zeiss primes are amazing and preserve color across multiple lenses. something even canon lenses can't really keep up with.

also - canon zoom lenses represent a real problem for video. even high end fixed aperture L series lenses change exposure through the zoom range at all apertures. check this video:

7D + 14-40 f4L White Wall Test on Vimeo

this happens with every canon zoom i've used to some degree. some lenses are better than others but they all do it. it pretty much means you're forced to stop the shot and reset exposure anytime you change the focal length. not the way i shoot video.

i'd stay away from zooms (especially canon zooms) if you're shooting video that matters.

zeiss primes all the way! for me the 21mm is pretty much the standard lens i use for everything (35mm equiv field of view on the 7d) with the 18 used once in a while when i need a bit more space.

k

p.s. the camera was on full manual for that test. the problem has been recreated on several 7ds and 5d mkii using several L series canon zoom lenses. the problem is with the physical mechanics of canon zoom lenses and is not procedural.

Post deleted because it is actualy true. during video recording there is a difference in exposure that does not hapen in photo mode. I'll have to check that out.

When taking pictures there is no problem but in video mode it happens.

In the picture bellow the right side was at 40mm and the left at 17mm (croped) no difference. but in video mode it does happen unless you are shooting wide open (it DOESN'T happen when shooting wide open)

I shoot docs and primes are almost impossible to deal with unless I set up the shot beforehand which basically means its B-roll footage.
As far as Zooms, I have not suffered from any noticeable exposure changes on my L glass lenses. I usually set up my focal length first then set exposure, but even when I change this - say on an interview to go from tight head shot to waist, I have not seen the exposure change.

i disagree. zeiss primes are amazing and preserve color across multiple lenses. something even canon lenses can't really keep up with.

also - canon zoom lenses represent a real problem for video. even high end fixed aperture L series lenses change exposure through the zoom range at all apertures.

While both of these comments are true they are not necessarily a good reason to use zeiss primes on a 7D.

Yes, Canon zooms have been proven to have some strange exposure shifts in video mode, but that can be solved by using Canon primes or even old Nikon lenses at 1/10th the price of Zeiss glass. There is no need to use Zeiss glass to avoid Canon zooms.

As for the colour cast - this is not much of a problem in the digital age where we have precise control over white balance as well as easily accessible post-production colour correction tools. Most audiences would not even notice the colour cast differences between vintage Nikon glass and brand new L-series lenses in raw footage, let alone between two different L-series lenses after CC.

Using a Canon 5D or 7D for cinematographic purposes also means: no zoom. The kind of filmic look that these camera's are used for does not call for much zooming. If I want to zoom a lot and do it properly, I use my Sony XDCAM HD. Right tool for the right job. This said, I have 9 Canon L-lenses and except for the very wide zooms (17-40, for instance) they all offer me a better resolution than needed for 1920 x 1080. Better for CA and flare than most older Zeiss lenses too. I can especially recommend the older Canon 100mm Macro.

hey jon,

it's possible that you just aren't noticing the change. set up you canon hdslr in full manual mode with an L series fixed aperture zoom lens. point it at a wall and zoom in and out the change is there.

it varies from 1/3 stop to 2/3 stop depending on the lens used, and really becomes noticable when you move from the wide end of the zoom to the longest focal length.

k

hey john,

i'm afraid it's garbage in garbage out. hdslr video is currently at 8 bit. the closer you get in camera to matching your colors the better off you are. the current range of zeiss primes do an excellent job of matching color, saturation and contrast across different focal lengths.

canon L lenses are great but just don't do as a good a job in this respect.

k

this happens with every canon zoom i've used to some degree. .
i use 24-70, 70-200 and 17-55 mm every day, and I've never seen anything like this, but now i wonder, i will try to reproduce this and post results,

hey jon,
point it at a wall and zoom in and out the change is there.
k

But I do not film walls and I do not zoom in and out.

Not trying to be stroppy here but I make films for my audience and I assure you they have never been treated to mistaken exposure fluctuations with any of my lens choices. Having said that, I am not a lover of the 7D anyway - I do not even own one now although I have shot about one hundred hours on one this last year for a new doc, but much of it is B-roll. Not having the histogram running in video mode is too annoying beside the many other drawbacks that to me outweigh wether I am using Canon lenses.

in all fairness jon, nobody shoots walls unless they're trying to illustrate a problem with a specific lens. which is what this thread is about.

My point is that no matter what tests can be set up and res cards and color charts produced to show anomalies, the real test should and must be with the audience. They are the ones who buy my films. If I took notice of all the analytics and maths etc, I would hardly buy any lens ... and not even a camera.

The only test that concerns me, is how do I get a shot that is useable in the time I have. I will shoot through a glass jam-jar bottom if it gives me the result I am looking for. To advise everyone to not use Canon zooms is nonsense. There have been and will continue to be, some incredible footage from these lenses.

again, john...

we're not talking about movie making in this particular thread. it's a thread about lens choices and specifically the merits of zeiss of primes vs. L series zooms.

i'm not advising people to not use canon zooms any more than you're suggesting that every use the glass bottoms of jam jars. i am however advising someone who asked a specific question that there are specific issues with canon L series zooms when used for video that need to be taken into consideration when making a lens choice.

the discussion of the merits of canon l series zooms for shooting video is on topic. this isn't a story-telling thread.

k

"we're not talking about movie making"

Of course we are talking about movie making - what else is there?

And this is my point - the only criteria should be "will this work for the movie I am shooting for my client or my audience"

I am tired of talking to new film makers running around trying to raise money for a set of Zeiss primes when they should be out shooting instead. I had one tell me recently that zoom lenses are for consumer cameras! Ok, I am done with this topic - time to go shoot.

first of all, the full quote is "we're not talking about movie making IN THIS THREAD". selective ommision doesn't change the fact. my original post is directly above yours - look up and you'll see it.

this remains a thread ABOUT LENS CHOICES. a thread you originally participated in by stating: "You would get much more bang for your bucks with Canon L glass zooms."

were you sick of talking about lens choices then?

sorry man, but i can't help but think you're way off base on this. the original poster asked a reasonable question which was answered by a number of people with varying perspectives. it was only when someone presented a reassonable alternative to YOUR perspective that you argument changed and suddenly talking about lens choices was folly - we should all be out making movies.

great plan. i'd suggest starting a thread called "stop talking about lenses and start making movies".

k

I haven't had a chance to revisit my thread for a while been so busy, but I have a buyer for my EX-1 now so I thought I'd see if anybody had replied to my question.

So the 7D will be used for a little indie work but mainly work with a non-profit film company I'm starting up. I've always liked the results of primes over zooms from what I've seen used on 35mm adapters. Though I'm not certain as to the practicality of primes in run-and-gun situations, or documentary-style film work in general.

I'm contemplating a Zeiss 28mm f/2.0 Distagon and 50mm f/1.4 ZE, but I'm not sure just how versatile those would be—although I would also have the standard 28-135mm zoom lens that comes with the camera...

in all fairness jon, nobody shoots walls unless they're trying to illustrate a problem with a specific lens. which is what this thread is about.

No but the thread was a question regarding which two lenses he should purchase, not about exposure changes while zooming.

I have used both types of lenses and it really depends on what he wants to shoot as to what he should get.

I would look at a Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 ($600), Canon 70-200 2.8L MII ($2400) and a Canon 50mm 1.4 ($450). This would take him over his budget a little, but would give him good coverage.

To each his own though....

I stand by by the point I was making - You should not have a discussion on lens choices without talking about what films you are making and the target audience (web-theater-broadcast) - this has to dictate your choice. And if you buy lenses not knowing this then good luck!

Would I like to shoot on Zeiss primes ... of course! Are they suitable for Run and Gun work - hardly. Suitable for docs?.... it is possible but not easy - I've done it and I've missed some good shots because of it.

Now if I was working in fiction with a full crew and had the budget I would get a set of Zeiss CP2's for sure.