Next Zeiss lens?
- Thread starter Davephoto
- Start date
- Status
A normal lens kit for dramatic cinema is 18mm, 25mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm or 28-135mm on FF.
I find for music videos (on the 5D) I am likely to go very wide to make a space dramatic and make dolly moves feel "big" so I often go as wide as 14mm or 17mm, but then I usually crop to widescreen. For beauty I like to shoot as long as possible, 135mm or 200mm to flatten faces. So I don't think this is an easy answer. You need it all. For standard coverage of dance I like a UWA of the space, axial punch in that's just tighter than normal, mild WAs for the diagonals, and a portrait lens for the talent, straight on the face.
I also feel ZE lenses are very overrated (they're still good, but terrible values); that said they rent well and clients like them so they are good for pros who want a high end brand. But they're just average performers (with nice coatings, admittedly) and for shooting video at normal stops (f2.8-f8) you'll get the same results with anything. Since getting a 28mm, 35mm, 85mm, and 135mm to complete the kit is prohibitively expensive, I'd just go by feel. Take out a zoom for a while and see what you want. Focal length is all that matters; performance will be fine with anything. I'd go 28mm f2 since I like that focal length, but I also love 35mm on FF a whole lot. But then you don't have enough variation between that and the 50mm (which I also like on FF; 85mm is not as nice, but I use it occasionally).
So buy what you like and rent more when you shoot. If I am shooting a music video I'd like the 16-28mm or a 14mm L for the space, the 24-70mm zooms for coverage, and the 70-200mm zoom for additional coverage and beauty CUs. And three cameras, one with each lens. But I am not a pro so this is just...preference.
I find for music videos (on the 5D) I am likely to go very wide to make a space dramatic and make dolly moves feel "big" so I often go as wide as 14mm or 17mm, but then I usually crop to widescreen. For beauty I like to shoot as long as possible, 135mm or 200mm to flatten faces. So I don't think this is an easy answer. You need it all. For standard coverage of dance I like a UWA of the space, axial punch in that's just tighter than normal, mild WAs for the diagonals, and a portrait lens for the talent, straight on the face.
I also feel ZE lenses are very overrated (they're still good, but terrible values); that said they rent well and clients like them so they are good for pros who want a high end brand. But they're just average performers (with nice coatings, admittedly) and for shooting video at normal stops (f2.8-f8) you'll get the same results with anything. Since getting a 28mm, 35mm, 85mm, and 135mm to complete the kit is prohibitively expensive, I'd just go by feel. Take out a zoom for a while and see what you want. Focal length is all that matters; performance will be fine with anything. I'd go 28mm f2 since I like that focal length, but I also love 35mm on FF a whole lot. But then you don't have enough variation between that and the 50mm (which I also like on FF; 85mm is not as nice, but I use it occasionally).
So buy what you like and rent more when you shoot. If I am shooting a music video I'd like the 16-28mm or a 14mm L for the space, the 24-70mm zooms for coverage, and the 70-200mm zoom for additional coverage and beauty CUs. And three cameras, one with each lens. But I am not a pro so this is just...preference.
Upvote
0
The Zeiss 21mm is recognized as one of the finest lenses. I'm not a big Zeiss fan, but from what I've seen, it is not overrated.
Upvote
0
+1 on the 21mm f/2.8, excellent wide angle. I've heard great things about the 18mm f/3.5 also but never used it. Then of course there is the $3k 15mm f/2.8, which is absolutely outstanding from what I've heard.
I think the 21mm would be a great choice, and maybe a Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14mm f/2.8 for ultra wide shots. That lens is only like $400 and apparently performs as well (or possibly better) than the $2300 14LII (although it does have much more distortion than the Canon).
I think the 21mm would be a great choice, and maybe a Samyang/Rokinon/Bower 14mm f/2.8 for ultra wide shots. That lens is only like $400 and apparently performs as well (or possibly better) than the $2300 14LII (although it does have much more distortion than the Canon).
Upvote
0
Davephoto said:
There is a thread somewhere comparing the two Zeiss 35's with the Canon 35L.
I bought the Zeiss 35 F.2 because I loved the 50 and wanted something light and small.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
- Deleted member 399245
- EOS R
