what lens to buy for excellent video 'film like' result on Canon EOS 7D

[Liam Hall]

James, could you post a link to some of your work?

I think it would be helpful to many people, particularly newbies, to "judge the source".

I'm all for long winded arguments, technical or creative, but I think this community is best served when we know who each other is.

Cheers,

[James Donnelly]

Originally Posted by Liam Hall

James, could you post a link to some of your work?

I think it would be helpful to many people, particularly newbies, to "judge the source".

I'm all for long winded arguments, technical or creative, but I think this community is best served when we know who each other is.

Cheers,

I am more than happy to allow my statements to be evaluated without being backed up by evidence of my work. In my opinion, the points I make are obvious, and not rocket science, and stand up without any need for source to judge. If anyone feels that somehow they are less valid because of this, I will have to just say so be it.

For the record, I am not short of experience, having started as a runner for a video editing suite in Poland Street in 1991, and progressed in to editing, telecine and camera work from there. My father was a television and film actor, and I have been lucky enough to have spent some time on various sets and getting to know some knowledgeable people. I understand the technical and creative processes very well.

These days I am not in the industry. Instead, I am in the software business, which allows me to focus on film making as a hobby, and contribute freely to local community projects.

[Liam Hall]

Well, so be it:)

In 1991, hmm. I'll take a guess at Palace Video or Dubs?

[Dylan Couper]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Agreed..
Dylan, you seem like an intelligent fellow.

No, but i play one on TV.

Given that, I think it's important to note that there are probably more event shooters on this forum than indie filmmakers. At least based on my observations during my time here. In a large proportion of cases, event guys cannot light. Just can't. I constantly go back and forth between the two worlds. I shoot event work at my job, and indie film for my hobby. I light everything I can.

There's more everything here than indie filmmakers! :)
So... Event shooters can be broken up into several different categories. yes, wedding shooters shooting low light receptions is a great example of where an extra stop would be helpful. On the other hand, there are a greater number of event shooters who shoot full time in full light, who would suffer from the limitations of this lens because... the 24-70 is a really bad event lens in the first place! Especially on a 7D... Short reaches, too little DOF, no IS for on the fly.. the 24-105L IS is a much better tool for the job in most people\s cases.

Plus when you look at the other people shooting here, corporate video, commercial video, industrial video, etc... which represent a major demographic on top of the indie film scene who can light (whether they *cough* choose to or not), then the extra stop of the 2.8 is barely relevant.

My point is that it is ridiculous for James to completely dismiss the 24-105L for the 24-70L for everyone in this forum, just because he represents a small niche.

[Perrone Ford]

Both of you are making valid points, from differing perspectives. But I think the points are both understood by those who need them. So I vote shake hands and let it go...

[Dylan Couper]

Originally Posted by Charles Papert

The concept of not lighting night exteriors is a whole new choice--no, it's not an excuse for not being able to light them if you needed to, but it is an opportunity to experiment and break some "rules".

After being involved with "Reverie" and a subsequent job in NYC with Vincent Laforet, I decided I had to get a 1DMKIV. Shortly thereafter I was up to shoot a music video with a well-established director; frames I showed him from the NYC job got him excited enough that I won the gig. Cut to: standing in a graveyard on a cloudy night (seriously!), shooting the lovely young lead singer as she strode half-dressed through the mud. It wasn't all available light--had a ring light on the camera, and four to six road flares carefully placed in the background of each setup, but the results were still amazing at 3200 ASA (this was just before we learned about the good and bad ISO settings). Had we had to hot-light the background, it would have required a ton more gear and crew and rigging and time, none of which we had; the road flares did an admirable job. The director loved it and I've done several more jobs for him.

Moral of story: shooting in ambient light at high ISO's is a great new weapon--but agreed, it's not the be-all and end-all.

And did you shoot anything slower than f1.2 this time? Just kidding... mostly... :)

I'm actually totally in favour of more "natural" light shooting, done properly, with the right tools for the job. Having said that, I've been holding off buying a 1D4 for months of Photokina/1DsIV rumours. If it doesnt come out then, I'm caving and getting the 1D

[Dylan Couper]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Both of you are making valid points, from differing perspectives. But I think the points are both understood by those who need them. So I vote shake hands and let it go...

Agreed! People can read both points and make their own judgments based upon what they shoot.
(cough)FILMMAKERS BUY PRIMES!(cough)

[James Donnelly]

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

My point is that it is ridiculous for James to completely dismiss the 24-105L for the 24-70L for everyone in this forum, just because he represents a small niche.

Look, as silly as this is getting, as long as you keep mis-representing me, I will happily set the record straight. If you stop putting words in my mouth, making false claims about what I have said, I will fall silent on the issue forever more.

I like the lens. It really would be ridiculous if I had dismissed it. I never did. I believe the question arose 'what is a good alround lens for the 7D'. I simply stated that most people would recommend an f/2.8 zoom over an f/4 zoom for DSLR videography. I stand by that statement for all the previously listed reasons, and I genuinely believe that would be supported by a consensus of DSLR users.. I am frankly incredulous how much this simple expression of opinion has bothered you Dylan. Do you own a 24-105L by any chance?

[Dylan Couper]

So much for ending it with class.

This is what you wrote, and this is what I refute.

But I cannot see why anyone using DSLR's thinks that a limited maximum aperture is a good thing. If you're happy with slower glass, you are throwing away one of the advantages of these cameras, and lets face it there are plenty of disadvantages.

You ask why I've been so irritated by you... it isn't really your point that bothers me... it's your condescending attitude. As I pointed out a half dozen times, not everyone shoots no-light indie film, and if they do, they should be shooting fast primes so they can get ISO into at least the low 4 digits.

Clearly I know which lens you own, but for the record I own BOTH 24-105 f4 and 24-70 f2.8 lenses (and about 12-14 more). I probably shoot a wider range of stuff than anyone on here, and I've never wished for just one more stop (3 or 4 stops, yes), but I've often wished for IS and extra reach when I had the wrong lens with me.

Perrone made a nice attempt to close this discussion with class. We've both made our points. Let's try it one more time.

To the original poster... what lenses do you buy to get a film look out of a 7D?

Best bang for the buck (all AI or non-AI glass)
Nikkor 24mm f2.8
Nikkor 35mm f2.0
Nikkor 50mm f1.4
Nikkor 85mm f2.0
(the last one I don't own, but am taking Ken Rockwell's word for it).
You can get that set of lenses, plus adapters, for $600-$800 off eBay or Craigslist, and they will outlast your 7D.

Or if you want AF lenses:
Canon 28mm f1.8
Canon 50mm f1.4
Canon 85mm f1.8
Will come to $1400ish, but will deliver great low light and insane DOF when you need it.

[James Strange]

Originally Posted by Ian Holb

These lenses are very good. I have the 85mm.

Samyang 85mm f/1.4 MC lens for CANON 500D 1000D 5D 7D - eBay (item 110491955266 end time Sep-06-10 06:02:35 PDT)

You can also check out their 14mm rectilinear lens.

I hear they are coming out with a 35mm f1.4 by the end of the year, so if you can wait for it, I would see what they have to offer.

All their lenses are full manual, so you get hard focussing stops and manual aperture rings (you can de-click them) so they act just like cine-style movie lenses. The quality is surprisingly good for such low-cost lenses. I've been very pleased with my 85mm.

Hi guys, how do you go about 'de-clicking' the samyang 85mm.

Just got mine, love it, great build, focus is so smooth, apetture ring not so much

Cheers

James

[Wajahat Abbasi]

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

So much for ending it with class.

This is what you wrote, and this is what I refute.


You ask why I've been so irritated by you... it isn't really your point that bothers me... it's your condescending attitude. As I pointed out a half dozen times, not everyone shoots no-light indie film, and if they do, they should be shooting fast primes so they can get ISO into at least the low 4 digits.

Clearly I know which lens you own, but for the record I own BOTH 24-105 f4 and 24-70 f2.8 lenses (and about 12-14 more). I probably shoot a wider range of stuff than anyone on here, and I've never wished for just one more stop (3 or 4 stops, yes), but I've often wished for IS and extra reach when I had the wrong lens with me.

Perrone made a nice attempt to close this discussion with class. We've both made our points. Let's try it one more time.

To the original poster... what lenses do you buy to get a film look out of a 7D?

Best bang for the buck (all AI or non-AI glass)
Nikkor 24mm f2.8
Nikkor 35mm f2.0
Nikkor 50mm f1.4
Nikkor 85mm f2.0
(the last one I don't own, but am taking Ken Rockwell's word for it).
You can get that set of lenses, plus adapters, for $600-$800 off eBay or Craigslist, and they will outlast your 7D.

Or if you want AF lenses:
Canon 28mm f1.8
Canon 50mm f1.4
Canon 85mm f1.8
Will come to $1400ish, but will deliver great low light and insane DOF when you need it.

Is this list good for Canon 5D as well ???? i end up buying 5D and was wondering it same lense would work with 5d as well .

[Charles Papert]

Wow, this spicy old thread.

FYI I just finished shooting a project in a submarine that required me to shoot at 1250 ASA (on the 1DMKIV's) to work with the existing light as much as possible (I did a lot of shaping and re-lit the foregrounds anyway). Shooting stop was generally around a 2.8 to a 4 as I needed the option of shooting with zooms. I used the Canon 24-70 and 70-200, the Focus Optics Ruby 14-24 and Zeiss CP2's. After living on the zooms for the first day for working speed, I finally broke out the CP2's on some of the "larger" sets on the sub and the difference was readily apparent on the monitor. It wasn't just an issue of sharpness but clarity, smoothness of tone and an overall cleaner image. While that may suggest to some a more video image than filmic, in this instance it just made the camera look better.

[Perrone Ford]

Charles,

I don't think your finding would come as any surprise to anyone with a healthy background in photography, cinematography, or extended use of the DSLRs.

Whenever I put on one of my nicer primes, I am astounded by how marvelous they look. As you say, it's just "obvious".

But people do what they can do. Working on primes is a heck of a lot easier when you control the framing! :) I had to use the butt-zoom last night on my shoot. For those unfamiliar with that term, it means moving your butt further back or closer to get the framing you need instead of twisting the zoom!

Charles, you'll understand the challenges when I say that one of my weekly shoots is of high motion sports in an facility with about 1.5-3 candlepower on the floor! And I need slo-mo from it!