|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
September 28th, 2009, 02:50 PM | #31 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Camas, WA, USA
Posts: 5,513
|
If you're shooting dramatic narrative and normal people-based stuff, get the 17-50. If you're doing more artistic stuff or handheld, up-close action, the wider lens is the better choice.
I haven't used either lens. I'm writing just in terms of the field of view.
__________________
Jon Fairhurst |
September 28th, 2009, 03:01 PM | #32 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 706
|
Quote:
|
|
September 28th, 2009, 06:36 PM | #33 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: California
Posts: 147
|
Quote:
what do you think of the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 over the Canon f/4 version? this lens has gotten excellent reviews and feedback from owners. it doesn't cost too much more than the Canon f/4 plus you gain the extra light w/ the Sigma being an f/2.8. thanks. |
|
September 28th, 2009, 07:05 PM | #34 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Kansas City, MO
Posts: 4,449
|
That 11-16 is pretty wide. If you can only afford one lens, I'd go for the 17-50. If you can afford it, Tamron has made a new version of that same lens that has IS. They call it VC, vibration compensation, or someting like that. Adds around $200 or so to the price. They hit with the Nikon version first but the Canon version is supposedly shipping and will probably be available about the time the camera is. I have a Tamron 17-35, which is 2.8 at the wide end. It's solid and heavy and seems reasonably sharp all the way through. The measurebators say it's not as sharp when wide open but you can probably say that about most lenses.
|
September 28th, 2009, 11:07 PM | #35 |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 643
|
I'm referencing to the kit lens being the 28-135 option. I am saying the tamron is a much better choice than that. In focal length, it's about the same but a bit shorter.
|
September 29th, 2009, 05:40 AM | #36 |
Major Player
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fayetteville, GA
Posts: 772
|
Lens adapter
Does the 7D use the same EOS adapters as the 5D for using older Nikkor or Pentax lenses? Not sure if the reduced sensor requires a special adapter.
|
September 29th, 2009, 08:58 AM | #37 |
Obstreperous Rex
|
Sorry, I have no direct experience with either lens... although the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L is on my to-buy list.
|
September 29th, 2009, 09:47 AM | #38 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 34
|
My Lenses
Hi all
I have a 7D on preorder (should receive it next week) and although I'm new to vidDSLR's my current main video camera is a Sony HVR-V1. I already own a number of lenses used for still photography and I'd really appreciate an opinion on how the lenses would perform for video and if there are any gaping holes that I'd need to plug. Canon EF-S 10-22mm Canon EF-S 15-85mm (shipping with the 7D) Canon EF 100 Macro Canon EF 55-200 Sigma 200-400 telephoto zoom (can't remember the exact specs) Any input would be really appreciated. |
September 29th, 2009, 10:09 AM | #39 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 205
|
What kind of shooting are you going to be doing? My one concern would be that both these lenses are 3.5-4.5/5.6 lenses. If you're planning to shoot a lot of stuff at night (which seems to be what everyone is doing with this camera :) !) you might want a lens or two that go wider in aperture.
|
September 29th, 2009, 02:27 PM | #40 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 34
|
Hi Michael
I'm mainly an underwater filmmaker/camera operator so low light performance is a high priority, but it will be awhile before a housing becomes available for the 7D. Until then I'll be using it for above water daylight 'scene setting', interviews and general stock shooting. I'm about to leave on a 4 month filming trip to Asia and the Pacific and ideally I'd like to have everything I need with me when I leave rather than get into the middle of the Pacific and find I'm missing something fairly essential! Thanks for your input. |
September 29th, 2009, 02:51 PM | #41 |
Trustee
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,589
|
Simon, I prefer full-frame cameras, especially for underwater, so I would have thought that you'd have gone for the 5D - especially for the absence of crop using wide lenses.
The Canon 10-22mm will probably be used a lot on your dive on the 7D, but you might also want a fixed extreme wideangle lens in some situations (although you can bump up the ISO a bit to compensate when using the slower zoom lenses - depending if you are surface diving using natural light or deeper with TTL flash). The Tokina Pro DXII 12-24mm f/4 is also a good performer. Regarding UW housings, quite a lot of the ones for the 5D should also fit the 7D. |
September 29th, 2009, 03:08 PM | #42 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Daegu, Korea
Posts: 180
|
I'll second the recommendation for the Tokina. That 12-24 has outstanding colour and contrast for its price point.
|
September 29th, 2009, 03:21 PM | #43 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 167
|
Canon 17-55 f2.8
Just got back from picking up my 7D and Canon EF-S 17-55 f2.8 lens. I'll do some test shooting tomorrow and try to post some samples for people to review.
--SM |
September 29th, 2009, 04:08 PM | #44 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Valencia (Spain)
Posts: 52
|
Sounds great Stephen!
I'm planning on buying the same kit plus a few lens more. Any feedback or samples would be very usefull. Looking forward to see the results. Enjoy your new purchase, Javier |
September 30th, 2009, 01:03 AM | #45 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 34
|
Quote:
|
|
| ||||||
|
|