What lens should someone on a relatively smaller budget invest in?

Jon Fairhurst · February 18th, 2010, 09:44 PM

I had the 35/2 and sold it. It's not a bad lens though. The downsides are the cheap focus ring and build quality (it's an older design). On the upside, the images aren't bad and it has a very close minimum focus distance. I personally prefer the 50/1.4, which I got for $350 new, or the 28/1.8, which was about $400 used. With those two lenses, I found that I never reached for the 35/2. Then again, the 50/1.4 and 28/1.8 don't focus nearly as close as the 35/2.

James Dierx · February 19th, 2010, 03:51 PM

On a cheap budget I recommend the Sigma 1.4, Canon 1.4 and Tokina 11-16!

James Miller · February 19th, 2010, 04:25 PM

The lens I can't get off because I love it to much is an old nikon mount Sigma 50mm Macro 2.8. I removed the lens from a 1995 Leaf Lumina scanning back. It has a green IR filter that adds a bit a colour in a quirky way I love, so that stay on.

I used to carry the Canon 1.4 and compared to this even though it's a lot slower I love it. The sigma is much sharper on the edges even when the canon is stopped down.
The Bokeh is diffused as this is a macro lens.

Worth about £50 brass lens adapter £10

Here is the lens in action the other day.

James

Marty Hudzik · February 20th, 2010, 10:00 AM

James. Your footage looks awsome and I do like that odd green cast that you mentioned from the filter. It gives this footage a "historical" or "dreamy" cast to it. I almost felt like I was watching old film footage from the seventies or something.

The second clip has an large amount of optical anomalies.....lens flares that really obstruct and diffuse the image in a unique way popping in and out. Now don't get me wrong, as an effect this was great....I felt like I was watching someone's memories and the optical cues made it feel nostalgic. The question I have it was this on purpose? Or were these just side effects of the filter and glass of the sigma?

Even though it looked great and fit the piece as you edited it, if this were a narrative I would find myself getting pulled out of the story and being reminded that there is a camera...and thus a camera man filming this. In fact, as I think of it, that is what makes your piece feel kind of magical....I feel as though I am the person filiming it or living it....it is obvious that it is a first person perspective. At least to me.

Anyway....any insight on this would be grand. Thanks!

James Miller · February 20th, 2010, 06:13 PM

Hi Marty,

Thanks, you put that nicely.

It gives me that nostalgic feeling too, In a way that its hard to put your finger on. but to me reminiscent of my grandfathers 8mm reels, I found it hard to cut as I loved looking at it uncut. If you've ever edited your own families 8mm films they are hard to cut as you want to watch and include everything, well it felt like that to me with this one, so I left them all in.

The optical anomalies were intentional, I've been messing around with nikon mounts and screw M42 lenses with lots of adapters, letting the light leak from behind as if on a translucent bellow. I set the lens to infinity and focus by moving the lens physically forward or backward and rocking side to side, as if in a hip joint motion.

Nothing worth showing at the moment but once I've mastered the construction and mounts of the bellow I'll post a pic.

..not sure if any of that made sense, but you get the idea.

The other flick 'On Sussex Downs' is with the sigma directly attached as normal, just keeping on the IR filter to give a cookie colour.

P.S. sorry for moving off topic.

James

Kin Lau · February 22nd, 2010, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jared Costa

Did you know if this would be better? Canon EF-S 17-85 mm F4-5.6 IS USM Lens Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review. Article says it seems to be quite a good lens, just not sure about low light performance?

Thanks again

The 17-85 is _much_ better than stock 18-55 or the Sigma 18-55 (non-2.8 version).

Low-light stinks tho since it's f4-5.6. I have f2.8 lenses, but for video, I often come back to my Sigma 30/1.4.

Arif Syed · February 25th, 2010, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

Okay for stills but nearly impossible to get manual focus. Lousy for video.

Looking at this video:

YouTube - CANON EOS 7D TEST FILM LOOK

It looks like he is not having much trouble with the focus. What is he doing differently?

Norman Pogson · February 25th, 2010, 07:17 AM

I have the Canon 50mm f1.4 and love it, I'm new to Canon having been a long time Nikon user. I'm also going to get the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 I also use my old Nikon AI lenses with the Ebay adapter.

I have the Nikkor 200mm f4, 24mm f2.8, 75-150E f3.5. With the adapter I'm also using my Kenko extension tubes. All these type of lenses are availble used at very reasonable prices.

All these lenses on the 7D are giving great results, in comparison to my trusty Canon HV30.

Jem Schofield of the thec41.com is using old Olympus OM1 lenses with his 7D, giving very good results.

Just make sure you get an aperture ring on the lens.

February 18th, 2010, 09:44 PM	#16
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	I had the 35/2 and sold it. It's not a bad lens though. The downsides are the cheap focus ring and build quality (it's an older design). On the upside, the images aren't bad and it has a very close minimum focus distance. I personally prefer the 50/1.4, which I got for $350 new, or the 28/1.8, which was about $400 used. With those two lenses, I found that I never reached for the 35/2. Then again, the 50/1.4 and 28/1.8 don't focus nearly as close as the 35/2. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

February 19th, 2010, 04:25 PM	#18
James Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Sussex, UK Posts: 317	The lens I can't get off because I love it to much is an old nikon mount Sigma 50mm Macro 2.8. I removed the lens from a 1995 Leaf Lumina scanning back. It has a green IR filter that adds a bit a colour in a quirky way I love, so that stay on. I used to carry the Canon 1.4 and compared to this even though it's a lot slower I love it. The sigma is much sharper on the edges even when the canon is stopped down. The Bokeh is diffused as this is a macro lens. Worth about £50 brass lens adapter £10 Here is the lens in action the other day. On Sussex Downs on Vimeo Crimson Skies on Vimeo James

February 25th, 2010, 07:17 AM	#23
Norman Pogson Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 140	I have the Canon 50mm f1.4 and love it, I'm new to Canon having been a long time Nikon user. I'm also going to get the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 I also use my old Nikon AI lenses with the Ebay adapter. I have the Nikkor 200mm f4, 24mm f2.8, 75-150E f3.5. With the adapter I'm also using my Kenko extension tubes. All these type of lenses are availble used at very reasonable prices. All these lenses on the 7D are giving great results, in comparison to my trusty Canon HV30. Jem Schofield of the thec41.com is using old Olympus OM1 lenses with his 7D, giving very good results. Just make sure you get an aperture ring on the lens. __________________ My Stock Video Blog Linkedin

February 19th, 2010, 03:51 PM	#17
James Dierx Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: IL Posts: 43	On a cheap budget I recommend the Sigma 1.4, Canon 1.4 and Tokina 11-16!

February 20th, 2010, 10:00 AM	#19
Marty Hudzik Trustee Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Canton, Ohio Posts: 1,771	James. Your footage looks awsome and I do like that odd green cast that you mentioned from the filter. It gives this footage a "historical" or "dreamy" cast to it. I almost felt like I was watching old film footage from the seventies or something. The second clip has an large amount of optical anomalies.....lens flares that really obstruct and diffuse the image in a unique way popping in and out. Now don't get me wrong, as an effect this was great....I felt like I was watching someone's memories and the optical cues made it feel nostalgic. The question I have it was this on purpose? Or were these just side effects of the filter and glass of the sigma? Even though it looked great and fit the piece as you edited it, if this were a narrative I would find myself getting pulled out of the story and being reminded that there is a camera...and thus a camera man filming this. In fact, as I think of it, that is what makes your piece feel kind of magical....I feel as though I am the person filiming it or living it....it is obvious that it is a first person perspective. At least to me. Anyway....any insight on this would be grand. Thanks!

February 20th, 2010, 06:13 PM	#20
James Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Sussex, UK Posts: 317	Hi Marty, Thanks, you put that nicely. It gives me that nostalgic feeling too, In a way that its hard to put your finger on. but to me reminiscent of my grandfathers 8mm reels, I found it hard to cut as I loved looking at it uncut. If you've ever edited your own families 8mm films they are hard to cut as you want to watch and include everything, well it felt like that to me with this one, so I left them all in. The optical anomalies were intentional, I've been messing around with nikon mounts and screw M42 lenses with lots of adapters, letting the light leak from behind as if on a translucent bellow. I set the lens to infinity and focus by moving the lens physically forward or backward and rocking side to side, as if in a hip joint motion. Nothing worth showing at the moment but once I've mastered the construction and mounts of the bellow I'll post a pic. ..not sure if any of that made sense, but you get the idea. The other flick 'On Sussex Downs' is with the sigma directly attached as normal, just keeping on the IR filter to give a cookie colour. P.S. sorry for moving off topic. James