Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

LOOOONG LENSES! CANON

A

AlexJones

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
144
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hey Everyone!

Looking to upgrade my lenses. Right now, I have the Tamron 70-300 IS which sucks because the IS doesn't work on my SCARLET.. Only the Canon does, Canon 18-135 IS, Canon 50 1.8, Tamron 90 macro 2.8, and Tamron 10-24 3.5, 5.6 I also have the 21,50,85 mm CP.2's that I will want to keep.

So here's the deal, I was thinking of selling all of these lenses (except the Zeiss's) and put the money towards only 2 nice L series lenses. I film wildlife so I need to have as few lens changes as possible. I was thinking of getting the Canon 24-70 L series and the Canon 100-400 push and pull IS L series. I am huge on sharpness and this is one of my main reasons of getting the new lenses. Does anyone have experience shooting with the 100-400? Is it sharp at 400? also, I know the 24-70 is very popular and I like the Macro capability but is there any Canon lens better for cheaper? Also how does the sharpness compare with the 18-135? I notice mine is just not sharp. It's annoying that i feel I have to add sharpness in Resolve. I shouldn't have to do that with a RED. I need a full range from wide to 400. I know some people don't like the push pull on the 100-400 for video but frankly, I stay away from the PBS nature show zoom-ins ;) COOORNY! Any better suggestions from where I came up with?
 
I Also just saw the SIGMA 50-500mm...
 
The Contax 100-300 is insanely sharp and awesome. It's push pull though, and a little slow. But looks AMAZING. Has low-dispersion glass. And fully manual (great focus throw).
 
I got a discontinued 24-70mm Canon at much less the cost of the model from B&H Photo. I don't know if they have anymore tho. I also bought a PLMount BT from RED not long ago. So eventhough I got a Canon and a Zeiss recently, the battle tested is my favorite. Only thing is I can't use it on my Pilot.
 
When it comes to long lenses, I don't think the canon 100-400 or the sigma 50-500 are that sharp. Especially not if you need to shoot wide open. Have used both for still lenses, but still cameras add sharpening in camera. RED doesn't. I understand the budget side of that equation, but budget glass is going to get you budget sharpness. Try out a Canon 400 2.8 and you'll understand what a true sharp lens looks like.

As far as other lens options, Sigma's new 120-300 f/2.8 is pretty damn good. Its around $4K i think, but that's still less than the Canon 300 2.8 prime. Doesn't compare with the long canon primes, but it is sharper than any other similar zoom, and most of those other lenses you are talking about are f/5.6 at the long end. I just rented and used it on a shoot as a compliment to my Sigmonster 300-800mm. I don't think the IS works on the Epic, but for a long lens, I'd hope you were using a Tripod anyway.

Do you really need to OWN these long lenses? with all the great online lens rental options, you can rent the big lenses for decent prices. If this long lens is something you need every day, then spend big and get the right lens. If not, then just rent when you need them.
 
The Canon 100-400 is one of those lenses that can vary a lot between copies in image quality. The Canon 400mm f/5.6 prime is probably the best option for pixel-peepers in that price range. The Sigma 120-300 is definitely worth a look if you want to spend a bit more - I've been working with the second generation one (the pre-Sport OS model) and have been very pleased with it. It works very well with both 1.4X and 2X teleconverters if you close down a stop.
 
Does anyone know if the OS of the Sigma 50-500 works on the Epic ?
 
Les Dittert said:
Does anyone know if the OS of the Sigma 50-500 works on the Epic ?
Click to expand...

I dont know but I do have quite a few Sigma lenses, and about 1/3 of them have issues like IS/aperture doesnt work or aperture has bugs etc. They all work fine on all the non-RED cameras I've tried though.
 
I guess I'll visit my local camera shop and have a look see. I'm also looking at the Canon 100-400 f4. The Canon looks sharper at 400mm than the Sigma at 500, which means the the Canon image sized up to be the same zoom at the Sigma may still be sharper than the Sigma. But the Sigma offers the 'emergency option' of getting a wide shot without fumbling a lens change in the back of a truck.

Noah Yuan-Vogel said:
I dont know but I do have quite a few Sigma lenses, and about 1/3 of them have issues like IS/aperture doesnt work or aperture has bugs etc. They all work fine on all the non-RED cameras I've tried though.
Click to expand...
 
My friend just got the new Canon 200-400, seems like an amazing lens, and you pay the price for it. I have the canon 70-300 4-5.6 L. Super sharp and a nice small package. Not parfocal, but if I wanted to be doing zooms, I would get the 70-200 2.8. But I love the extra 200-300 range.
 
I owned a Sigma 120-300 2.8 (mine didn't have stabilization) before we switched over to Nikon. Wow. Fantastic lens!!!! Extremely sharp. Very good mechanically. I completely recommend it. usable wide open for sure. I didn't realize how much I'd prefer having a zoom at that length than a fixed 300.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top