Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Lenses dilemma

Malik Tigrine

Malik Tigrine

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
249
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Paris, France
Hi,

I finally ordered two scarlets, i'm now purchasing the lenses, and after reading the forum during whole nights, i have chosen the best lenses for my budget (thank's to you), but i'm hesitate between some,

Safe (i'm sure to buy them) :

- Sigma 18-35 F/1.8
- Zeiss makro planar 50 mm F/2
- Rokinon 85mm


Hesitating (need your help) :

1) Sigma 8-16mm F 4.5-5.6 vs Tokina 11-16mm F 2.8
We need an ultra wide angle for landscape, ok the tokina is more faster but who need to shoot @2.8 when you use Lighting? 8 mm vs F/2.8 ? I would like to know wich is sharper ?

2) Canon 100 mm macro L IS f/2.8 vs Canon 135 mm L f/2 ?


Best regards,
 
Regarding the Canon 100 vs 135, i was in the same situation and i did choose the 100mm first, because it's more versatile, comes with IS and well is just great. But you should consider the Zeiss 100mm macro too, it would match better to the 50. I would probably skip the Rokinon as you can do most of the 85-shots with the 100. So safe the money here.

The Sigma 18-35 is great, i really like this lens. Get it! ;)

Regarding the Sigma 8-16 vs Tokina 11-16, i have no idea, so far. I've seen good and bad comments about booth, seen good and not so good samples for both and just don't know what i would prefer. But two notes, there are two versions of that Sigma 8-16, i've read some comments about the second/newer one having worse distortion. Not sure about it, but have a look. There is also a nice Canon EF-S 10-22 which should get your attention.

Well, i really hope Sigma makes a ART lens below 18mm. ;)
 
I would get the Tokina 11-16. The 2.8 is much more usable, and shooting at 8mm can quite extreme. 11 is more than enough for more situations.

As you already have a macro in the 50mm, perhaps consider the 135 f2, a super portrait lens unlike anything else in your kit.
 
A couple things to consider:
It's hard to fit a lot of lighting gear into tight spaces or to light a large area for a slow aperture. The faster Tokina 11-16 might be more helpful for some situations where you'd be using very wide angles on projects where you don't have a huge lighting budget.

You probably want to try to get some R3Ds shot through the different brands of lenses you're considering buying to see if you're in for any difficulties color-matching them in post (or at least consult with someone who has matched the lenses you're looking at).
 
sigma:yes!
rokinon 85...YES, YES, YES!
canon 100vs 135...tough one...the IS on the 100 comes in handy...it is a great, great lens and i would go with that one, especially if you have the 85 for tighter, shallow dof portrait.....if you don't need the macro...the 135 will obviously give you better reach but maybe consider the 70-200 as well if you need that longer reach....great lens as well....
for 50 i would recommend the nikon 50 1.2 over the zeiss....the zeiss is crisp but has too much CA in my experience....the nikon is beautiful wide open and crisp from 2.8 on....
 
If you're considering a 100mm macro, I would highly recommend the Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5 macro (I've never been compelled to buy a Vivitar either, but you need to look into this particular lens). I bought a mint condition M42 mount version for $450 on ebay. Incredibly sharp with beautiful bokeh and build quality - in the same league as the Zeiss 100mm macro but a lot cheaper. Here's a review:
http://makingnottaking.blogspot.com/2009/10/vivitar-series-1-90mm-f25-vmc-12-bokina.html

You can also use this lens in macro mode with a PL mount by using an inexpensive M42 to PL adapter:
http://rafcamera.com/adapters-and-mounts/m42-lens-to-arri-pl-mount-adapter

Mike
 
Wow ! Those lenses sound pretty good, the tamron and the vivitar change the dilemma, i will make a decision. The nikon 50 mm 1.2 is also interesting but more expansive than the 50mm Zeiss, is there any alternative to the Zeiss in the same price range? (Nikon 50 mm 1.4 ?)

And i think, i will add a tele-lens zoom to my kit, anyone have experience with the Sigma 70-200 F 2.8 ? I'm hesitating between this one and the canon 70-200 F4 (first version),
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Or also the sigma 150-500,
 
Last edited:
They might all be great lenses for a single stand alone shot but how are they going to cut in a sequence.
 
well, the tokina 11-16 is f2.8 but the sigma 8-16 is MUCH sharper and with MUCH LESS CAs!!!

It also have better flare resistance.

Ah, the 8-16 can't take round filters, the tokina can take 77mm ones.

I have both and I use 8-16 when sharpness is needed and 11-16 in lowlight.
 
ah, for 100-135mm, take the 100mm Zeiss ZE MP or the Canon L 100mm IS.

They are gorgeous and they keep value MUCH better than others IMHO.

100mm L IS -> AF, IS, 1:1 Macro
100mm ZE MP -> SHARP!!! INSANE 3D EFFECT!!! Perfect match with the 50mm ZE MP.

OR you could go all Sigma 8-16 / 18-35 / 50 / 105 MACRO / 150 MACRO, a GREAT SET!
 
Dave Blackham said:
They might all be great lenses for a single stand alone shot but how are they going to cut in a sequence.
Click to expand...
Hi Dave, You think the difference will be shocking and inconveniant? I think there is a way to calibrate during shooting,



Tommaso Alvisi said:
well, the tokina 11-16 is f2.8 but the sigma 8-16 is MUCH sharper and with MUCH LESS CAs!!!

It also have better flare resistance.

Ah, the 8-16 can't take round filters, the tokina can take 77mm ones.

I have both and I use 8-16 when sharpness is needed and 11-16 in lowlight.
Click to expand...

thank's Tommaso, very useful, so the dilemma is 8mm+sharp vs F 2.8, complicated, but the Sigma 18-35 will be okay for the low light it's not 11mm but 18 mm is already wide .. Can you tell me more about the distortion?
And anyone have video with the sigma 8-16 and a Red (epic or scarlet), i can't find it on vimeo.

For the 100mm, the Zeiss cost 2000$ here in France, while the Canon 100mm cost 1000$, so i will go for the canon.


All your opinions are different and question me more but that is what it's very interesting, thank's you to everyone.
 
Malik T. said:
Hi Dave, You think the difference will be shocking and inconveniant? I think there is a way to calibrate during shooting,
Click to expand...
It's probably best to build a color profile for each lens in RCPX to get a matching baseline to work from in post. Color rendition can vary noticeably between suppliers - Zeiss and Sigma tend to render things on the cool side (the Sigmas shift a bit more toward cyan, but should be fairly easy to match to Zeiss). The Tamron zoom and oldschool Tokina macro lens I have tend to shift a bit reddish. This is why I recommended trying to get ahold of R3Ds from each of the lenses you're looking at buying to see if you have difficulties matching the footage.
 
Here's a quick test with my Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5 macro @ f2.5:
Not a very good eye light, I know. I highly doubt you will find a sharper macro lens than this. And for the price of one Zeiss ZF 100mm macro, you could buy four of these lenses.

Mike
 
MichaelJQuill said:
Here's a quick test with my Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5 macro @ f2.5
Click to expand...
That is a fantastic lens - it shares the same design as the Tokina macro I mentioned in my last post and I find myself taking it everywhere now.

However, it's very different in terms of color rendition and contrast from modern Zeiss and Sigma lenses. I still recommend getting one if you find a good copy, but a contemporary Zeiss/Tokina 100mm macro will cut better with the core set of lenses Malik is building.
 
Ok, this is my final list :

- Tokina 11-16 mm F2.8 (really, really hard to decide with the sigma 8-16)
- Sigma 18-35 mm F1.8
- Sigma 70-200 mm F2.8
- Rokinon 85 mm T1.5
- Canon 100 mm Macro Usm Is F2.8

For the 50 mm, i'm waiting, i will take an Hélios 58mm for the moment.
If you have any advice, don't hesitate.

Best regards,
 
Malik T. said:
Ok, this is my final list :

- Tokina 11-16 mm F2.8 (really, really hard to decide with the sigma 8-16)
- Sigma 18-35 mm F1.8
- Sigma 70-200 mm F2.8
- Rokinon 85 mm T1.5
- Canon 100 mm Macro Usm Is F2.8

For the 50 mm, i'm waiting, i will take an Hélios 58mm for the moment.
If you have any advice, don't hesitate.

Best regards,
Click to expand...

Hey,
the Helios 58 will be much different from the others, especially for its biotar-like bokeh.
I'd take all Sigma at this point to ahve primes with the 18-35 and 70-200 zooms.
The 8-16, the 50 1.4, the 84 1.4, the 105 macro are GEMS!!!
 
Tommaso Alvisi said:
Hey,
the Helios 58 will be much different from the others, especially for its biotar-like bokeh.
I'd take all Sigma at this point to ahve primes with the 18-35 and 70-200 zooms.
The 8-16, the 50 1.4, the 84 1.4, the 105 macro are GEMS!!!
Click to expand...


Hi Tommaso,

Yes i know for the Helios, but it's more for funny, i have check the Sigma 50 mm, very good sharpness, but build like a toy.
For the sigma 8-16 vs Tokina 11-16 mm, i'm always hesitate, but the Tokina is better build and F2.8 could be useful. The Tokina is very popular, and i have never seen any footage of the sigma 8-16 with Red camera (if you get one footage, it's welcome ! =) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top