time to build a lens set

[Darren Levine]

My lens collection since switching to the c100 from full frame is now lopsided.

my sigma 28mm 1.8 remains my favorite glass, but instead of my wide, it's now my normal

i recently acquired the 70-300 IS (non L) which im loving for all of my reaching needs, IS is indeed invaluable.

my 28-135 is still a damn sharp lens, and i have a tokina 19-35 lying around collecting dust. and then there's the nikon ais 200/4

for general purpose shooting/client work, im fine, i have what i need, except a bit more wide.


But it's the cinematic end that i'm looking to build, and as everyone goes through the tedious decision process.

i've been intrigued by the usual suspects, the contax zeiss, the nikon ais, maybe even new zeiss zf2/ze for everything but the wides (too darned $$$)

but then again, my sigma 28 is great, they have a great 50mm, and a 20mm which is great if i hunt for a good copy, and a cracking 85mm.

now to my question: other than which you prefer for cinematics, which do you think cut well together, or don't cut well. for instance, contax zeiss should cut well with zf2/ze because they're zeiss, but how might zeiss cut with sigma?

i've been overly tempted by the contax 35-70 3.4, would that cut well with my sigma?

leica i believe to be out of price range

or, i could just get the always recommended 24-105 and call it a day and probably be rather pleased.

and now i've gone to rambling...

[Gary Huff]

Darren, do you have the Tokina? Mine gets used all the time, and I don't think any proper lens collection should be without one.

I'd start with the regular version unless you have the cash to plunk down for the sexy Duclos version.

[Matt Davis]

Also, bear in mind that 'Glass is the new film stock' - I get a different look from Nikkors to Canon glass, and a big difference between older FD lenses and the newer L glass.

With the exception of the Tokina (Gary's right - it's a gorgeous lens) I am sticking to modern Canon glass to keep consistent colour, contrast and sharpness between lens changes. A colleague (with an F3) has done much the same thing but with Nikkor - and relatively modern Nikkor at that.

On the other hand, we're shooting and editing for money - I don't necessarily want to spend the extra time in the edit suite to balance colour between lenses (which the client won't pay for - so it's my Nickel, so to speak). I'm also shooting on zooms - or 'variable primes'. I have Samyang and Sigma primes, but they tend to stay in the bag these days because, unlike narrative, I can't necessarily always get the camera to where it should be.

But for narrative shooters? It's still about 'invest in good glass' and a Nikkor can fit a Canon where a Canon won't fit a Nikkor, and Nikkor mount lenses still have iris rings, it seems (I'm talking broad-brush BS here), so I see more Zeiss ZF than ZE.

What I found happening was that I bought older/cheaper glass to start with, then replaced the lenses I used a lot with higher end glass. A prime per year means you could have your own trunk of Cine glass in 4-6 years. Starting with the 'house' Tokina, and working out at the end whether you want the Duclos version!

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Matt Davis

and Nikkor mount lenses still have iris rings, it seems (I'm talking broad-brush BS here), so I see more Zeiss ZF than ZE.

With the ZF, yes, but modern Nikon lenses (G mount) don't have manual iris, though they are easy to adjust with a cheap adapter.

However, I like to see where my aperture is at so that it's another tool instead of just a turning ring that adjusts exposure with no numbering system, so I use vintage Nikkors (F mount) that have an actual aperture ring that is labeled with F-stop. All de-clicked of course!

[Sareesh Sudhakaran]

Originally Posted by Darren Levine

My lens collection since switching to the c100 from full frame is now lopsided.

my sigma 28mm 1.8 remains my favorite glass, but instead of my wide, it's now my normal

i recently acquired the 70-300 IS (non L) which im loving for all of my reaching needs, IS is indeed invaluable.

...i have what i need, except a bit more wide.

...

leica i believe to be out of price range

or, i could just get the always recommended 24-105 and call it a day and probably be rather pleased.

and now i've gone to rambling...

If you're happy with f/4, take a look at the 17-40mm f/4 L. If you need f/2.8, then the 16-35mm f/2.8 L, but it's expensive.

That, and what you already have, should cover all scenarios. If you need an f/1.4, the Samyang 35mm f/1.4 is excellent.

I shoot with both L zooms and CP.2s on the C300, and to be honest I can't tell the difference half the time which is which. Hope this helps.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Looking at your existing lens set, I would suggest that you get the 24-105 f4 L IS USM lens. It is a very hand lens. It has far less chromatic aberration than your 28-135 f3.5-5.6 IS lens. I had that lens at one point of time. The 24-105 is good for handheld due to its IS and it also has a very good range. So you will not need many lens changes.

The 16-35 f2.8 L II USM is an expensive lens and will give you good wide angle. You would prefer the 16mm of that lens over the 24-70 f2.8 L USM lens. However, get the 24-105 first due to its good zoom range and ability to handhold. I use the EF 16-35 f2.8 and the EF 24-70 f2.8 when I am using tripod.

[Matt Davis]

Originally Posted by Darren Levine

or, i could just get the always recommended 24-105 and call it a day and probably be rather pleased.

If you haven't got this lens already, get it. It's the C100 'dream lens' for events. I'm now walking around with 17-55, 24-104 and 70-200 (two in pockets, one on camera) and could probably do a whole gig on an 24-105. It's got to be the 80% lens for events.

[Darren Levine]

seems pretty clear that the 24-105 just can't be ignored.

i'ts about a 37mm FF FOV on the wide(what im familiar with), so im guessing that works for many of you for many of your 'sorta' wide needs?

i just picked up my "vacation' lens, the sigma 18-250, so on my exploits in the tropics i'll get a feel for the s35 FOV world again, still can't shake thinking in FF terms.

btw, first time i noticed the lens distortion filter in premiere, and used it the opposite way to correct some distortion. not bad at all.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Darren Levine

seems pretty clear that the 24-105 just can't be ignored. i'ts about a 37mm FF FOV on the wide(what im familiar with), so im guessing that works for many of you for many of your 'sorta' wide needs?

When I get mine, I'll add it to my 17-40 and that should cover just about everything I would need for 90% of the time. The Tokina can go wider if I need (helpful for any projects where the client wants to matte to 2.40:1), and I have primes for more low-light shooting, but those two together will be a powerhouse combination for most shooting.

[Tim Bakland]

Originally Posted by Matt Davis

If you haven't got this lens already, get it. It's the C100 'dream lens' for events.

Ditto. That and the 17-55 and you're golden.

[Jim Martin]

We have a lot of reality shows buying here and for run & gun with the C300, many are using the 24-105mm.....they love the 24-70mm but need the extra range and, of course, the F4 is not a problem.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[Nate Haustein]

Ah yes, another vote here for the 24-105.

On another note, I just shot a short with the C100 and someone else's Nikon AIS primes. It should be known that with the "foot" of the C100, the shorter Nikon primes (20,28,50, etc) just don't fit when using a follow focus and/or mattebox. We made them work, but the rig was quite the contraption. The foot blocks the follow focus from getting law enough to the lens, and if you switch the gear to the front side, it hits the mattebox. Bummer.

We also used the Rokinon 35 and 85mm cine lenses, a combo which I like very much. I was first AC on the shoot, and pulling focus was kinda a mind-**** as the Nikons turn the opposite way as all your regular canon glass. Nikons are great, but in an ergonomic sense, not so much on the C100.

[Shaoyun Wang]

save the money and go for CP.2

or spend the money on accessories and lights, and buy some rokinon or samyang cheap cine T version lens

to be honest, you need cine lens instead of more zooms such as 24-105

[Erik Naso]

I have an on going comparison of the Rokinon 85mm with the Zeiss CP.2. Don't expect the Rokinon to win but it does pretty darn well for the price.

Rokinon 85mm T1.5 Cine Challenge With Zeiss CP.2 : Erik Naso

I like the Rokinon but it has it's faults and knowing the limitations of your gear can help you use it the right way.

[Al Yeung]

Originally Posted by Darren Levine

i just picked up my "vacation' lens, the sigma 18-250, so on my exploits in the tropics i'll get a feel for the s35 FOV world again, still can't shake thinking in FF terms.

Hi Darren, mind if I ask you how the focusing ring and OS of this lens are? Balances and handles well on the C100? The Sigmas I've tried have had rather negligible OS. Thanks