Which wide angle lens for 60D

[mdcosmo]

I just got back into filming in after over 30 years. Yes I am a bearded pudgy 50ish geek from 70s film school. I am going to be shooting a a series of DVDs for a successful Aquaponics personality. In september I will shooting about 9 different greenhouses around the country in a tour-interview documentary style. I won't have my main budget available to me until right before the trip so I want to get familiar with DSLR's. After countless hours of online research and a few hundred hours of shoots I have done recently with a sony HDRFX1, I have decided with my limited budget in had my immediate camera will be the following. Canon 60D with the Canon USM L EF 24-105f/4 from the canon refurb program with the loyalty discount for $1374.00.
This will future proof my lens choice so I can later get a 5D Mark?. Now the dilemma. I will also need a good wide angle lens to shooting in the greenhouses when they are small. I realize I may not be able to future proof this choice as I don't want to spend $2000 for a lens yet. These shoots will be in bright light and I want to shoot some slider and jib shots. Later on those choices. Maybe I should just buy this lens for the APS-c camera. These are the ones I have been looking at.

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16 2.8
Tamron SP 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 DI II Canon-ef
I realize I will need a ND filter most of the time so I am going to bite the bullet and buy the Heliopan 77mm Variable Gray ND Filter.
I believe the Canon USM L EF 24-105f/4 will be used for most shots and interviews.
I have listed below the other gear I have chosen for these field trips. Trying to remember I will be flying a lot and shooting by myself for most of the time.
Please comment on these if you wish.
Monopod Manfrotto Fluid Video Monopod W/Head 561BHDV-1

Tripod Manfrotto 055CXPRO3 3-Section Carbon Fiber Tripod with
Manfrotto MH055M8-Q5 Photo-Movie Tripod Head - good for low shots and over the grow bed shots.

 

[preppyak]

Get the Tokina 11-16 if you're doing video. For one, being able to go the lowest light can be useful when you need it (I shot a music video where F/4 wouldn't have gotten me the shots), and the constant aperture is useful as well. If you find yourself zooming in and out a bit to get the right framing, it won't change aperture on you. Also, in terms of future-proofing, the Tokina can be used on full-frame at 16mm, the EF-S 10-22 can't. I have a 60D and I find the Tokina indispensable for wide shots.

Also, some of the elements of the 10-22 are optimized for stills. Obviously the variable aperture, but also flare control. There are times you want that flare across the frame for video, and the Tokina will allow that.

 

[spinworkxroy]

i too say the Tokina…
When i was using the 60D, the Tokina was almost my primary lens 70% of the time i used the camera…
It's a great lens and the f2.8 really helps indoors and in dark scenes.

As for your mention of the Variable ND…well, do read up on Variables ND filters..they don't always work for wide angle lenses…especially that wide at 11mm…even with the crop factor.

 

[Loswr]

I realize I will need a ND filter most of the time so I am going to bite the bullet and buy the Heliopan 77mm Variable Gray ND Filter.

I'd get 1-2 standard ND filters instead, perhaps a 3-stop and 6-stop. A variable ND filter is actually a pair of stacked polarizers, and related to the uneven polarization you get with a CPL on an ultrawide lens (<24mm FF-equivalent), a variND produces a 'Maltese cross' artifact with an ultrawide AoV, especially at the darker settings.

 

[RC]

Regarding WA lens:

Adding the 10-22 to go with your 24-105 is practically the perfect choice IMO. If you are really concerned about purchasing "future proof" lens then either rent the 10-22 for the job or sell it when you get your 5Dx ( I'm assuming you will sell your 60D). The 10-22 seems to be a great lens (have not owned one) and has excellent resale for a non L lens.

The other Canon option is the 16-35. But I really don't think 16mm will be wide enought for green houses. If you can, you ought to rent these lens and test them out on site.

Personally I would purchase the ideal lens for today's job instead of compromising some to fit the future.


Good luck

 

[Random Orbits]

I realize I will need a ND filter most of the time so I am going to bite the bullet and buy the Heliopan 77mm Variable Gray ND Filter.

I'd get 1-2 standard ND filters instead, perhaps a 3-stop and 6-stop. A variable ND filter is actually a pair of stacked polarizers, and related to the uneven polarization you get with a CPL on an ultrawide lens (<24mm FF-equivalent), a variND produces a 'Maltese cross' artifact with an ultrawide AoV, especially at the darker settings.

True. I tested a 11-stop Schneider variable ND filter on a 24mm lens (my widest lens that accepts a screw-on filter) and was able to get a couple stops before banding set in (while trying to get banding by aiming the camera at large sections of sky). At 200mm, I was able to get about 6 stops before the same phenomenon set in.

 

[aznable]

tokina 11-16 if you need large apertures or sigma 8-16 if you want to go very wide/smaller level of distorsion @12mm

 

[NormanBates]

the usual recommendation is the tokina 11-16
it's very sharp, and has nearly no distortion (except at the widest end, and still there it's relatively minor)

but I learnt one thing recently: "no distortion" is not an absolute thing

the tokina will show no distortion when shooting architecture, but will show lots of distortion when people appear in the sides of the frame
the samyang 14mm f/2.8 will show lots of distortion when shooting architecture, but people on the sides of the frame will look a lot more natural

what are your needs?

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/379-tokina_1116_28_canon?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/533-samyang14f28eosapsc?start=1
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?281994-I-need-a-cheap-wide-angle-lens-Recommendations
http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html#samyang

 

[paul13walnut5]

I would +1 for the Tokina wide, as it's a great UWA for APS-C - do be aware it won't transfer to full frame if you ever go that way in the future.

I would also reconsider the primary choice of kit:

60D? For video purposes the 600D / T3i is as good. You lose intermediate ISO's, but if you are willing to load Magic Lantern, you get them back. It's a big cost saving, and the other benefits of the 60D (pentaprism, faster top shutter) don't apply to video users.

24-105 f4?

A few problems here. If you go for the 11-16 (which you should, there are no other fast aperture UWAs for APS-C) then you have a big gap. And 16-24mm on APS-C is a big gap in the wide angle.

Not that 24 on APS-C really is wide angle. 1.6x factor rememeber, so your expensive 24-105mm f4 becomes something more like an expensive 38mm-170mm f4.

It's just not a lens I would choose, either for APS-C or for video.

f4? For video? No. You want f2.8. Even if only so you can get the best out of the lens by shooting at f4.

If you switch between your Tokina f2.8 and the Canon f4, thats you got a stop of light to make up somewhere. Fine in daylight etc, not fine if you have set up interview lighting. Shots from an f2.8 and f4 will not cut nice.

I shoot with the older Sigma 18-50 f2.8. It's not the IS version, though that is the current model. This is an APS-C lens too, do you see a pattern.

If you want to shoot full frame, start full frame, buy full frame. Theres nothing wrong with APS-C. The 5D2 gets markedly better from around ISO 1600, up until then theres little video benefit.

If anything the 5D2 is trickier to use because of the even shallower depth of field.

I would sit down and think about this now. There are full frame lenses that excel on APS-C but fall apart a bit on full frame (17-40 f4L, 28mm f1.8 etc)

Before you spend any cash decide on what you are going to shoot on and decide your lenses from there.

If you are going to shoot on a 5D2 or 3 and you want an UWA, then you need a 16-35 II f2.8, used 16-35 mk1, or used 17-35 f2.8L.

Supports:

Manfrotto video monopod are great. Ditch the 701 head version, just get the basic tripod or the basic tilt QR version. If you are panning or tilting, you need a tripod.

The Sachtler Ace is the best without going mad money. Very very nice movements, better than anything else I've used at the price point, and better than anything I've used for my ENG camera, except for adult Sachtlers.

You don't mention sound.

You will want to mic off camera close to the subject, and you'll want a way to record the sound. Some folks go down the zoom route, I prefer the in-camera route. I recommend a beachtek DXA-SLR or DXA-5Da, which is an XLR interface for your DSLR. The SLR version provides phantom power -essential for lavalier mics. I prefer boomed hypercardiods, either on a stand or actually boomed.

I used two kinds, the Sennheiser K6/ME66 combo with Rycote softee and rubber mount. Not cheap, but will get great sound in 99% of situations.

I also use a Rode NTG-2 which is largely the same idea, but at a reduced price. The Sennheiser is 10% better. The Rode is 50% cheaper.

Would be happy using either.

Good luck, I hate to sound negative, but I really think you have to commit to a format now and stick with it. Picking lenses for a 60D on the basis that you may use a 5D2 in the future is just going to compromise your choices so much.

Either or, and budget from there.

 

[preppyak]

I would +1 for the Tokina wide, as it's a great UWA for APS-C - do be aware it won't transfer to full frame if you ever go that way in the future.

Actually it will, you can use the Tokina at 16mm with no vignetting.

I agree that there is a gap between the Tokina and the 24-105, but, I'm not sure how particularly useful it would be for his purposes. A wide shot on the Tokina at 16 would cover establishing, and any details would be well within the 24-105 range. Getting a lens that covers 17-55 would be just as limiting, as now he would lose the 55-105 range without buying another lens.

The f/4 is a concern for interviews, but, I assume he'd be using his Sony cam for them anyway. Shooting an interview on a DSLR, with stopping every 10mins, would be a huge pain in the ass anyway.

 

[Astro]

i tried the tokina 11-16mm and the ef 10-22mm.

f2.8 compared to f3.5 was not a big deal for me.
i shoot from the tripod most of the time with a wide angle lens.

but distortion was less and CA was much less on the ef 10-22mm.
flare was also a bigger problem on the tokina 11-16mm.
so i decided to go with the ef 10-22mm.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Actually it will, you can use the Tokina at 16mm with no vignetting.

I would just love to see the corners. The lens just isn't designed for this.

I agree that there is a gap between the Tokina and the 24-105, but, I'm not sure how particularly useful it would be for his purposes. A wide shot on the Tokina at 16 would cover establishing, and any details would be well within the 24-105 range. Getting a lens that covers 17-55 would be just as limiting, as now he would lose the 55-105 range without buying another lens.

My kit is Tokina 11-16, Sigma 18-50, Canon 70-200, all f2.8's, small, but not critical gap between 50 & 70.
3 lenses covering 11-200 all at f2.8 throughout. If the OP wants my advice, then thats it, and it works for me.

The f/4 is a concern for interviews, but, I assume he'd be using his Sony cam for them anyway. Shooting an interview on a DSLR, with stopping every 10mins, would be a huge pain in the ass anyway.

Depends on how long the interviews are. With a 16GB card you are pretty much at the same capacity as a miniDVCAM cassette anyway. A wee break every so often with these kind of interviews is probably welcome anyway.

I would miss servo zoom, I would miss things like built in ND's. Wouldn't miss things like bad upscaling (FX1 has 960 x 1080 native resolution pushing it at aspect corrected 1440, just will look nasty intercut with 1920 from EOS DSLR) Wouldn't miss horrific rendering times in HDV. Transcoded APR is much nicer thank you.

Interviews are also the one situation where the large sensor comes into it's own, for focus fall off and background seperation etc. The FX1 is a 1/3 type sensor, so you need to be far back and zoomed in at f2.8 to get anything approaching nice background blur, by which time you've screwed up the perspecitve.

I would only use the FX1 for covering much longer sequences such as events, or where servo zooming is required, at a push. It really is showing it's age these days. I say that as a FX1 owner.

 

[paul13walnut5]

@Astro

i tried the tokina 11-16mm and the ef 10-22mm.

f2.8 compared to f3.5 was not a big deal for me.
i shoot from the tripod most of the time with a wide angle lens.

but distortion was less and CA was much less on the ef 10-22mm.
flare was also a bigger problem on the tokina 11-16mm.
so i decided to go with the ef 10-22mm.

The f2.8 vs f3.5 becomes f2.8 vs f5.6 when you start zooming.

Not had a problem with flare with the Tokina when I use the hood and don't do things like shoot into the sun without flagging the lens.

CA can be a problem particularly at smaller apertures. Not really affected my video so much to be fair, and for stills its relatively easy to fix. There is an mk2 of the Tokina on it's way that pledges to combat the CA issue.

 

[preppyak]

Depends on how long the interviews are. With a 16GB card you are pretty much at the same capacity as a miniDVCAM cassette anyway. A wee break every so often with these kind of interviews is probably welcome anyway.

There's a physical file size limit of 4GB for video, which amounts to about 12 minutes in normal 1080 recording. A break here and there is nice...every 10 minutes though? And what happens if the person goes on a long tangent and you're running low on time?

I agree with you on the ideal for interviews, the DSLR would be great, but it has limitations that camcorders don't have. Can't speak for the FX1, but it's why I'll shoot with both a camcorder and my DSLR for an interview. I can get the shot I want most of the time from the DSLR, but be guaranteed not to lose something important as my camcorder runs all the time

 

[paul13walnut5]

Yep, I know about the FAT32 limitations. I've been doing video long enough to remember when you couldn't have a sequence any longer than 17mins because the OS could deal with anything bigger. And the very early days when even shorter DV tapes cost a fortune. In fact I don't think I've ever used a tape longer than 32 mins in my digibeta come to think of it.

Yet, funnily enough, I got by then, and get by with the 12 minute limitations. Yes there are caveats, but interview isn't one. When are you ever going to have a 12 minute uncut interview in a programme? If you can make a cut in editing then you can just as well make a cut in shooting. Some answers will be three minutes, some 30s some an hour. It's not really all that much of a pain to stop and start recording. I really think you are overstating the issue.

And if the person goes off on a tangent and you are running low on time... what do you mean time? Time allocated to do the video? Running time on your battery? (Surely why they sell spares?) Recording time on your media (could as easy be tape, could as easy be xdcam, could as easy be Sd cards)? Surely a preperation issue.

And if your subject goes off on a tangent, then it's up to the producer to get them back on track, it's interview skills. Diplomacy goes a long a way, as does technical preparation and researching your questions properly and briefing your subject. If you are doing your job properly the recording cap really shouldn't be an issue in practise. It takes 2s to take a break between questions and stop start record. It takes 10s to switch cards. If your subject is going great guns then they'll be cool with going back a sentance and starting again.