Thread: Lens Indecision 2011-12

Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1 Lens Indecision 2011-12 
    Senior Member Brian Pascale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland
    Posts
    212
    I am leasing my gear and therefore had to order everything at once. I would have preferred trying out the lenses before I bought, but then I would have to come up with the money at that point and it was easier and cheaper to do as a package order from two venders. Therefore I have ordered and received the following lenses:

    Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
    Canon 16-35mm f/2.8
    Canon 24-70mm f/2.8
    Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L EF II

    I do a lot of quick shooting, documentaries, and the dramatic work I do is low budget.

    Given some negative feedback on the Canon 16-35mm and 24-70mm being soft, I have been considering returning those lenses, which I can do with a $195 penalty. What I would replace them with depends on what time of day you talk to me. Some footage I have seen posted with Canon lenses that has been processed look pretty good (at least on the web), so am I worrying too much?

    I was going to go with Nikon lenses initially as my research found them to be regarded as sharper, but since I want to do time-lapse and control exposure, I will be getting a Canon camera for that, most likely a 60D. And since the Scarlet came out with the Canon mount first, I went the Canon lens route and have order the TI mount.

    Would I jumping through hoops using Nikons on Canon cameras? I think I loose the autofocus ability doing that. And I worry if I mix too many brands, color grading could be a problem. I have heard great things about the Nikon 14-24mm lens, super sharp, but many people donít like the range and you cannot put filters on it. I do have a matte box, but it would be nice for protection and when you donít want to use a matte box.

    Or I could fill the gap with Canon primes since it looks like I would be using the Zoom lenses to get multiple focal lengths and not trying to zoom while shooting.

    Or Leica M lenses that people seem to just love.

    Donít think I want to go the PL mount route as I want to stay light and compact, not to mention donít want to screw up my order and go back to the end of the line.

    So many choices and too much time on my hands to make a quick decision, but I do have to decide in a couple weeks or I will not be able to exchange them. Any advice is appreciated.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Josh Negrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    294
    The Canon 17-40 L f/4 is tack sharp, as is the 24-105 L f/4. But you're losing an f-stop because they're both f4 lenses. For the 70-200, I'd suggest you get the IS version, if you're doing handheld shooting. IS is Image Stabilization, and helps a lot.
    Josh Negrin
    All your base are belong to us
    IMDB page
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Brian Pascale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Silver Spring, Maryland
    Posts
    212
    Thanks, I did get the IS version. Would hate to loose a stop, but I will try those lenses when I get my Scarlet.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,503
    The 16 35 and 24 70 are sharp. They might be different between examples but they are good lenses.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5 Don't worry be happy 
    Senior Member Tom Gleeson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    599
    Do not worry they are all good lenses. Don't get freaked out by the pixel peepers who are zooming into the images looking for the ultimate sharpness. In real world shooting and presentation these tiny differences between quality lenses are not visible and sharpness is only one of the parameters for good glass.
    Tom Gleeson
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Brian Iannone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles & France
    Posts
    1,501
    Canon's 24-70mm f/2.8L, in my opinion, is not a sharp lens. It does, however, have a nice range for a general-use lens.
    A 19-year-old student with a love for cinematography and a passion for geophysics.

    Personal: www.brianiannone.com, Portfolio: visuals.brianiannone.com, Business: www.ik3.co, Twitter: @brianiannone

    The List of Scarlet Names | The List of EPIC Names
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member paulherrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Johnson City, TN
    Posts
    3,342
    they're all sharp enough... you're never going to know the difference in real world video shooting, i promise. if you want them to be even sharper... stop them down, which you'll likely be doing anyways running around.

    if you do want to trade them out, which i would if you don't want/need zooms - look at leica, zeiss, or nikon lenses over the canon L's - or if you want something much cheaper get some canon mid-range primes.

    for quick shooting it's nice to have a good range zoom, or a couple of them... right now i'm running around with a wide-range zoom (28-135) and 28, 50, and 135 primes. i'd like to have another prime in the 85-100 range as well, and maybe a 200/300 - but honestly, it's pretty easy to move around and get what you want... it's also really nice to have that tokina 11-16, def hold onto that :)

    in short, relax - your lenses make good images. i'd look more into cost/performance and what fits your shooting style more than anything...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    833
    Brian-
    your over thinking this.
    Your list is identical to my wish-list.

    we're good.

    Worst case you try them, then sell off for something else. Lots of folks will step up to buy your lenses. Canon glass has good resale value.

    Stu Aull
    Alaska
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member Julio Quintana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    1,614
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Pascale View Post
    I do a lot of quick shooting, documentaries, and the dramatic work I do is low budget.
    For those sorts of projects, you have a great lens package. You are covered from 11-200mm for $6000. That is the best value you are likely to find for your Scarlet.
    Julio Quintana
    www.juliomquintana.com

    EPIC-X DRAGON #560
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Gleeson View Post
    Do not worry they are all good lenses. Don't get freaked out by the pixel peepers who are zooming into the images looking for the ultimate sharpness. In real world shooting and presentation these tiny differences between quality lenses are not visible and sharpness is only one of the parameters for good glass.
    I'm not sure if I would take that position. This test (which I have posted on a different thread) says a lot about how poor the 16-35/2.8 L is wide-open, even in the centre:

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/zeiss/slr...comparison.htm

    Of course it could be sample variation, but that is not a get-out-of-jail card.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts