What Lens?

[Jon Fairhurst]

Yes, that's the lens.

BTW, I see that it's compatible with extension tubes. That would be the cheap way to get macro capabilities. You lose light and the image will be a bit softer than with a real macro lens, but it would be an inexpensive way to get closeups of faces and props. Being able to show a handwritten note, a ring, or a spent shell can be important for storytelling.

I'm hoping that Canon will eventually release a 28-70/2.8 IS as that would be the equivalent solution on my 5D2.

[John Wiley]

Originally Posted by Oliver Darden

John, would you go for the 17-55 2.8 IS or the 24-70 2.8L?

I'll be going for the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non IS version) when I get my DSLR setup soon. That's just personal my preference though - one of the many reasons I want to go to DSLR's is to get a wider view than my camcorders. So a lens with an equivelant FOV at full wide to my FX7 defeats the purpose!

I'm planning to get the Tokina 11-16mm and a 70-200 f/2.8 as well (not sure which one yet). That way I'll have f/2.8 aperture available from 11mm-200mm with a bit of a gap from 50-70mm. For weddings I'll have several bodies though, so I'm not concerned about having to change lenses on one body all the time. If this is a concern for the work you're doing, then the 24-70mm with it's wider zoom range might be a better option.

[Jon Fairhurst]

The 50-70 gap shouldn't be a concern. I generally shoot with primes. Between work and home, I have access to lenses of 21, 28, 35, 50, 85, 100, 200, and 400mm (200 with doubler.) One could say that I cover 21-400 with gaps from 22-27, 29-34, 36-49, 51-84, 86-99, 101-199, and 201-399. Reading it that way makes it feel like I hardly have any coverage at all. In practice, I don't feel the gaps at all.

FWIW, 21-400 on the 5D2 is like 13-250 on the 7D.

[Chris Westerstrom]

gotta agree with Jon above me about the gaps.

I just got the Tamron 17-50 2.8, and am pretty happy with it so far.
and for the price, that is an unbeatable combo. The Tamron with my 7d is my personal set up, the company I work for has the 5d with a Canon 24-70mm 2.8 and with the full frame sensor, that is a pretty similar field of view (though the 5d absolutely trumps the snot out of my 7d in low light)

I have a couple of vintage primes and I can say that you can get away with quite a bit with a prime that matches the natural eye, which is roughly 30 mm. I just shot a little documentary shoot with a 30mm and was so happy with it that it never came off of my camera. Back up for wider shots, move in for close ups. Stable enough for handheld (with some rudimentary shoulder support) and working with a prime actually forces you to think a little bit more about composition.

So far my kit is:
7d
Tamron 17-50 2.8 for it's convenience
Canon 15-85 3.5/5/6 it was the kit lens, not fast, but fine for outdoor work and at 15 has a considerable wide on it, which is why I am probably keeping it. At 15, it's sort of hard to prioritize a true wide angle lens.
30 mm 2.8 Pentax prime

I also have access to a 70-200 2.8 that I can use when I want

So my shopping list, in order of priority is:
- 30 1.4 Sigma
- 50 1.4 Sigma (although, for the price, I am still considering that cheapy Canon 1.8)
- 11-16 Tokina 2.8
- maybe a macro, although I think those little screw on filter converters might work fine enough considering it's a shot I don't take that often

[Oliver Darden]

Thanks for your info Chris, and I agree about prime lenses making you think more about your shots etc, but for my 1st lens I think I should go with a zoom.

All I need to do now is man up and make a decision about which lens to buy.....I think I've narrowed it down to the Tamron 17-50, Canon 17-55 or 24-70. I need to spend some time on Vimeo comparing all these.


Thanks for the help everyone!

[Jon Fairhurst]

As I recall, you mentioned that you plan to use the lens handheld on a shoulder rig. IMHO, you will want IS for that. When looking at videos, make sure to look for shoulder rig, rather than tripod, stuff.

The other thing to consider is the focus ring. I haven't used the Tamron, so I don't know if it's better or worse in this regard. Canon's focus rings aren't all that good for video, so there's not much margin for a lens ring that's worse.

If you're shooting photos - especially wides with deep focus - glass quality is critical. For video? Not so much. When you've highlighted your actor, the eyes need to sparkle, but if the shot has darker, blurry corners, it's no big deal. On the other hand, if the lens vignettes too much, this will show up when you pan.

I found this vignetting comparison...
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens - Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD IF Lens Comparison - Vignetting Test Results

Frankly, the Tamron vignettes less than the Canon, though neither lens is bad. For photos and budget, I'd get the Tamron. For handheld video, I'd lean toward the Canon.

[Oliver Darden]

Jon, I have the Redrock microFollowFocus v2 so I'm not terribly worried about the focus ring, other than it fitting correctly on the Redrock rig. Thanks for the vignetting comparison that's definitely something I'll want to consider, and I'm also leaning toward the Canon myself.

[Jon Fairhurst]

I've also got the RR v2.

The Canon lenses don't have hard stops, and aside from Macros, the travel of the focus rings is pretty short. I'm not sure about the 17-55 focus ring though. Without hard stops it can be hard to do things repeatably.

With Zeiss lenses, I feel the RR gears, but the lenses are like butter. With Canon, things feel more coarse.

One trick is to focus close to the right distance and then focus with your feet. I shot the video here with the 5D2 and the EF 85/1.8 wide open(!) and mainly used the foot focus method. FWIW, this is the equivalent of shooting at 53mm on the 7D. I also used a Glimmerglass filter for diffusion. Anyway, it should give you an idea of how steady you can get with a shoulder rig at 53mm without walking. I just leaned fore and aft for focus.

Melissa Fairy

[Roger Shealy]

You may want to consider the Tamron 17-50 VCII (with IS). I've purchased two of them and like it very much and its one of the highest rates lenses on SLRGEAR.com:

Tamron Lens: Zooms - Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II VC LD Aspherical IF SP AF (Tested) - SLRgear.com!

You may find the site very helpful for researching any and all lenses. Here's the 24-70 you are considering:

Canon Lens: Zooms - Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (Tested) - SLRgear.com!

The 24-70 will be a better build quality, being dust and weather resistant. L-Glass is also very good! On the Tamron's side, it's specifically designed for EF-S, so there are some advantages to that with the APC sensor.

[Chris Westerstrom]

the 24-70 is an amazing lens, I only use it on the 5d however

If you are on a 7d, I'd stick to something wider, IMO, you'll have more use for the wider ends than longer ones, and you'll have much less shaky hand held footage to boot.
The 24-70 is magic on the 5d, but I only use it for closeup shots on my 7d.
17-50 (or 55) is a perfect range on a crop sensor for most of what you want to do
You have a nice wide at 17, a normal lens at about 30 (like Med shots) and a short tele at around 50 for portraits/CU shots.

[Oliver Darden]

Thanks for the links Roger.

Chris, yeah I'm going for the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS.

Buying it tonight, thanks again for all the help everyone!

[Oliver Darden]

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

One trick is to focus close to the right distance and then focus with your feet.

Yeah, I am totally going to try to master that, I have a friend that always films this way and his stuff looks great for indie film work.

[Roger Shealy]

The Canon 17-55 is a great lens, I think you'll enjoy it. When you find you need even wider shots, take a very close look at the Tokina 11-16 f2.8. It's highly regarded for the 7D.

[Oliver Darden]

Roger, just looked at some footage from the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 on Vimeo and it looks awesome...I will def keep that one on the list to get, thanks.