If you could only use 3 lenses....

[Kenneth Tong]

I have purchased the above lens for US$474.36 in Hong Kong. I like the lens.

17mm is wide enough for me. Images are sharp and bright. The VC is very effective.

But the auto focus is not very fast and the motor is noisy.

[Kenneth Tong]

Having used the Tamron 17-50 VC for a few days, I decided to keep the Canon 24mm 2.8f since it is light in weight and can be my one lens option for some shooting occassions.

My 3 lenses are :

Tamron 17-50 VC
Canon 55-250mm
Canon 24mm 2.8f

I have tried my friend's Canon 50mm 1.8f and I think it is a very goods lens in terms of the low price. However, it is not better than my Canon 24mm as it not wide enough for most shooting scene and the 1.8f is not that useful as I expected.

2.8f is already enough for video.

I will keep the Canon 24mm 2.8f and I don't think I need a Canon 50mm 1.8

An ultra wide angle is also not under consideration as the 17mm of Tamron is wide enough for me.

[Manus Sweeney]

Originally Posted by G. Lee Gordon

OK Guys and Gals... New to the HDSLR scene so I've been doing my home work and I have a question for you folks. Everywhere I've researched they all say the same, Canon 50mm1.8, 1.4 if you can afford it, the Tokina's, the Sigma's, Tamron's etc, etc. Pretty much verbatim of what has been mentioned in this thread. And, this is agreed upon, accross the board thoughout several forums and indie circles. I have even seen awesome footage!

I was ready to purchase my new lens, until I came across one blog that completely changed my perspective. I researched what he said and tend to lean toward his advice. Basically he mentioned the lenses that we all want and said that if you want to shoot for the big screen, none of them can hold thier weight. The Canon 50mm1.4 comes close but still doesn't look sharp(he used that word a lot) on the big screen.

For internet indie work, broadcast TV, they are fine, but according to him for the big screen you need to get into Zeiss or Leica. The only lens that came close to the ones we mention are the older Nikon lenses.

I'm apologizing beforehand because , for the life of me, I can't find that blog. But, was wondering what you good folks felt about that. And let me narrow my question to people who have successfully shot a film for the big screen or who's focus is cinematography.

from what ive read around here sharpness is almost never an issue shooting video on these cameras with any half decent lens as the amount of pixels used in full HD is very small compared to stills.. feel free to correct me if im wrong!

[Jon Fairhurst]

The main challenge in getting sharpness is to achieve accurate focus. A good, long-throw focus ring can be more important than having the very sharpest glass.

[Manus Sweeney]

indeed.. it can sometimes be quite hard to get the relevant info when youre researching lenses as stills photographers have very different requirements, sharpness for them is high up on the list but can often be unnoticeable in video

[Joel Peregrine]

Hi Aaron,

Originally Posted by Aaron Jones

....what would you choose and why?

For three bodies:
2 x Canon 70-200 f/4 L IS
Canon 24-105 f/4 L IS
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8

Why? I do events and I like the reach of the Canon 24-105 for close-ups more than I need the wide side and low-light ability of the Canon 17-55 2.8. I went back and forth on that decision for a while being that they're comparatively priced. I'd love to have the 2.8 IS version of the 70-200 but the weight and cost deterred me, especially because I wanted two. I like using the Tokina for dance floors, steadicam and detail shots. Its my favorite of the lot.

[Ruben Colin Gama]

So which are the best lens brands for this camera?...

What about the Zeiss...?

(I'm looking for a wide angle lens, and a normal lens)

[Francois Lacasse]

Hi all, first post here... so don't be too rude plz!

First off, I think this is a great forum, with lots of very useful infoz ... thanks to everyone who contributed to it!

I had to bump this one up because I would like your advice please, but first a short background (you can skip this part if you want to):
I don't make a living with my pictures/videos. I'm actually into the sound business(!) I do sound design/recording/mixing mainly for television. But I always loved cinematography and so I had a Canon HV20 and a Canon rebel xt. Sold both of them and bought a T2i...

Here's my list of humble little lenses: Canon 18-55mm IS kit, Canon 28-105mm mkII Japan, Canon 50mm f1.8 mkII, Canon 55-250mm IS.
So the first thing I'm gonna do is replace the kit lens with the ever popular Tamron 17-50mm VC (that's an easy decision) BUT::
Here's my dilemma: what prime should I choose?
I was looking into those:

Sigma 30mm f1.4
Canon 35mm f2
Canon 50mm f1.4
Tamron 60mm f2 macro

I'm really trying to stick with a maximum of 3 lenses that could cover as much as possible while still being as versatile as possible ... I like the fact that the 30 and 35 gives me almost a standard lens. I also like that the 60 doubles as a full macro lens. Arghhhh terrible indecision!

Any help is appreciated ...

[Kenneth Tong]

I do not own them but I believe the performance of Sigma 30, Canon 35 f2 and 50 f1.4 are quite similar in video. I have tried Canon 24mm f.2.8 and 50mm f1.8 and I found that there is very little difference in my video. The finishing and build of the lenses are of course very different. The Canon 24mm 2.8f is HK$2750 and the 50mm 1.8 is just HK$690!!!

I emphasis, little difference in in family video shooting only, not in photo or pro video.

The 60mm maco may give you a whole new dimension in video as it can shoot close-up. Perhaps you may consider a Canon 50mm 2.8 maco.

Besides, the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 VC is great. I have one.

[Jon Fairhurst]

I find that the EF 50/1.4 and EF 35/2 couldn't be more different. The main difference is the focus ring. The ring on the 35 is narrow and crummy. The ring on the 50 is wider and travels about 180 degrees. It isn't very smooth though. The extra stop makes the 50/1.4 superior in low light.

One advantage of the 35/2 is that it has a very short focus distance.

Optically, one thing I dislike about the 50/1.4 is that it has some barrel distortion. I want my normal shots undistorted. I can't recall if the 35/2 has much distortion. I sold it a few months ago.

[Ron German]

I got my T2i few days ago basicaly for video work and bought a new Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 zoom(full frame).
I `m very happy with this zoom regarding image - contrast, colour transmition, resolution.
I`s not wide enough for all requirements though. So I`m going to keep the kit zoom lens to use it`s 18mm and, latter on, I intend to buy a EF 50mm 1.4 for low light work / exterior location.

[David St. Juskow]

So no one's mentioning the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8 which, on paper, seems like a great deal for the money. Is it not very sharp? Made by terrorists? What's the story with this one?

[Francois Lacasse]

Thanks Jon for the info on the manual focus rings... that makes a big difference. I guess I should be looking into the Nikon manual focus lenses for a long and smooth travel ... (?)

@ David: If Im not mistaken, the Sigma 17-70mm f2.8 is not a constant aperture lens. It's only f2.8 @ 17mm. Its probably f4 @ 70mm. If you can live with that it has a very nice range for sure ...

[Kenneth Tong]

Originally Posted by Manus Sweeney

from what ive read around here sharpness is almost never an issue shooting video on these cameras with any half decent lens as the amount of pixels used in full HD is very small compared to stills.. feel free to correct me if im wrong!

I totally agree! A good external mic, stablization during handheld, panning on the tripod, and even the smoothness of the focusing ring can be more a concern for me in shooting video.

I have compared a Canon 17-40mm L lens with Canon 24mm 2.8f and found that the difference in stills is great. There is no big difference in video.

[Sam Kanter]

Yes - has anyone done any tests to see if "L" or Zeiss - quality glass really makes a difference when shooting video? I can see using fast lenses in low light, but not sure if really fine glass is needed.