Oh really? How bad?Get a 5D MK II for video if you can't afford a 5D MK III. You don't want the Moire of a 6D. Google it, people are complaining all over, there is even a special filter to help reduce it, but why buy into a problem?
I just finished watching a movie on NetFlex "Indie Movie" for those who want to check it out.
It was shot entirely on two 5D Mk IIs and made with FCPX and Denoising software. I didn't see moire and such in that. Is it due to the Mk II being better in terms of moire problems?
July 28, 2014, 02:40:47 AM
Pages: [1] 2
Topic: Which pair of lenses to get? (Read 2638 times)
Mt Spokane Photography
- Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
- Posts: 8261
-
Logged
bigdogmn73
- SX50 HS
- Posts: 9
-
If you go with "THE MAN" Vincent Laforet who started the 5d Mark ii video fun he would say go with the 5d Mark II or III and get a 24-70 2.8. He says if if your into video the 24-70 and 70-200 are the first two lens to buy. Personally I'm thinking about doing the same thing as you, but I don't do as much video so I'll get the 6D with 24-105 and then a fast prime like a Sigma 35 1.4, Canon 50 1.2 or 85 1.2 if I have enough cash. Check out Vincent Laforet blog/The Gear Page....he talks about all his comments about lens. Great Stuff!
Logged
skitron
- 6D
- Posts: 509
-
Is it due to the Mk II being better in terms of moire problems?
The 5D2 is well known for it's moire issue, the 6D is somewhat worse. You can buy a filter to fix it for about $300. However, moire is dependent on what it is you are shooting, and if your content is such that it isn't going to provoke moire to an objectionable degree then 6D isn't so bad imo.
The plus side of 6D is its very good at high ISO and also does all I frame. So in those respects a definite step forward from 5D2 video imo.
Lens wise, I'd say it will depend alot on the kind of light you're planning for and if you're planning to use a steady-cam, tripod or do much handheld.
Logged
5D3, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100L, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4 DG, Canon TC 1.4x III
Halfrack
- 7D
- Posts: 441
-
Stop reinventing the wheel. The 5d mk2 is a known quantity, and a used body is cheaper than a 6d.
Read these:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/02/photo-lenses-for-video
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/photo-lenses-for-video-there-is-no-free-lunch
Read these:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/02/photo-lenses-for-video
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/photo-lenses-for-video-there-is-no-free-lunch
Logged
"Me owning a lens shop is kind of like having an alcoholic bar tender." - Roger Cicala
jhpeterson
- Rebel T5i
- Posts: 141
-
I, too, would recommend the 5D2 over the 6d, not only for its video quality, but also for its build. And, in a couple years, should you ever wish to trade up, it likely will be worth more.
As for choosing the 24-70/2.8 (original version) or the 24-105/4 IS, it's your call. I've had them both, and, in terms of IQ, my copy of the 24-105 is at least the equal of the 24-70 it replaced. The IS has come in handy far more times than I imagined.
But, I would caution you to stay away from the 70-200/2.8 IS unless you want to spend way more for the Mark II. (It's really worth the difference!) I've had almost all the iterations of this zoom range, including the now classic 80-200/2.8 "magic drainpipe" (over a decade I owned three of them), and you'd be far better served by the non-IS lens or the 70-200/4 IS.
As for choosing the 24-70/2.8 (original version) or the 24-105/4 IS, it's your call. I've had them both, and, in terms of IQ, my copy of the 24-105 is at least the equal of the 24-70 it replaced. The IS has come in handy far more times than I imagined.
But, I would caution you to stay away from the 70-200/2.8 IS unless you want to spend way more for the Mark II. (It's really worth the difference!) I've had almost all the iterations of this zoom range, including the now classic 80-200/2.8 "magic drainpipe" (over a decade I owned three of them), and you'd be far better served by the non-IS lens or the 70-200/4 IS.
Logged
1D iii (x2), 1DS iii (x3), 6D, 16-35L ii, 24-105L, 70-200L IS ii, 24/3.5 TS-E, 40/2.8 STM, 50/2.5, 100/2.8L IS, 135/2L, 300/2.8L, 500/4L IS, 430EX II, EF 1.4x ii, EF 2x iii
preppyak
- 5D Mark III
- Posts: 747
-
Another advantage of the 5dII over the 6D is that it has Magic Lantern right now, which is something you'd likely install on Day 1 if you are doing video work.
You don't mention what you are shooting videos of; that's critical to giving any advice on lenses. If it turns out you are shooting events or weddings, that's very different than shooting outdoors or sports.
A 24-105 won't cut it indoors, whereas it'd be great outdoors. Personally, I'd consider going the Rokinon/Samyang route if you are mainly focused on video. You can get their 14mm, 24mm, 35mm, and 85mm lenses for the price of the new 24-70 f/2.8 and still have some money left over for camera support.
But knowing what you'll be shooting is key to know.
You don't mention what you are shooting videos of; that's critical to giving any advice on lenses. If it turns out you are shooting events or weddings, that's very different than shooting outdoors or sports.
A 24-105 won't cut it indoors, whereas it'd be great outdoors. Personally, I'd consider going the Rokinon/Samyang route if you are mainly focused on video. You can get their 14mm, 24mm, 35mm, and 85mm lenses for the price of the new 24-70 f/2.8 and still have some money left over for camera support.
But knowing what you'll be shooting is key to know.
Logged
canon rumors FORUM
BokChoiTV
- Power Shot G16
- Posts: 28
-
Hey guys! Thanks for all the feedback.
So I went out and got the 5D MKIII.
Problem now is that I'm going to be lensless for the next two weeks, lol. (Though I might get a cheap nifty fifty for the time being).
As for what videos I shoot, I do mainly still video shots on a tripod/monopod. I plan to use a slider bar thing eventually and do some soft-stepping handheld shots, nothing too crazy. (By that I mean doing shots where I walk around a subject as opposed to spending hundreds on a slider, lol)
Someone said that I should get the 70-200mm NON IS as opposed to the IS. The Non IS is on average 1000$ on eBay as the IS version is around 1350$.
I'm probably going to invest straight into the 70-200mm and skip the 24-105mm for now.
I like to have a good amount of DoF, mainly to do those shoulder/head shots, almost like an interview type of thing. Would the F/4 suffice?
I haven't even opened my MkIII box yet! HAHA, I don't want to torture myself by turning it on and seeing how awesome it is
.
So I went out and got the 5D MKIII.
Problem now is that I'm going to be lensless for the next two weeks, lol. (Though I might get a cheap nifty fifty for the time being).
As for what videos I shoot, I do mainly still video shots on a tripod/monopod. I plan to use a slider bar thing eventually and do some soft-stepping handheld shots, nothing too crazy. (By that I mean doing shots where I walk around a subject as opposed to spending hundreds on a slider, lol)
Someone said that I should get the 70-200mm NON IS as opposed to the IS. The Non IS is on average 1000$ on eBay as the IS version is around 1350$.
I'm probably going to invest straight into the 70-200mm and skip the 24-105mm for now.
I like to have a good amount of DoF, mainly to do those shoulder/head shots, almost like an interview type of thing. Would the F/4 suffice?
I haven't even opened my MkIII box yet! HAHA, I don't want to torture myself by turning it on and seeing how awesome it is
.
Logged
BokChoiTV
- Power Shot G16
- Posts: 28
-
Omfg, now you got me thinking of the 70-200mm f/4 IS or 70-200mm f/2.8 IS.
Logged
canon rumors FORUM
Pages: [1] 2