Lens recommendation for tight budget videographer

[Marty Hudzik]

Originally Posted by Bruce S. Yarock

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

[Johannes Soetandi]

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...

[Evan C. King]

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.

[Jay Houser]

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.

[Manus Sweeney]

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!

[Michiel van Baasbank]

Originally Posted by Manus Sweeney

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

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?

[David Chilson]

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.

[Manus Sweeney]

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

[Mike Peterson]

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

[David Chilson]

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

[Manus Sweeney]

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?

[Manus Sweeney]

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)

[Marty Hudzik]

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.

[Marty Hudzik]

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! :)

[Manus Sweeney]

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..