Hello, im about to buy canon 70D. Unfortunately i cant afford more than one lens at the moment (I will have more money in like 2 - 3 months). I use dslrs mainly for video, esp. sport events and short films. Im looking mostly for image quality and silent AF. I was thinking of getting one of the kit lenses - 18-55 mm IS STM (only 200$) and later on getting this one: Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. My current budget for the lens is 500$ at most. Thanks.
Help me with picking lens
- Thread starter Pavelcz
- Start date
Sports typically require a long zoom lens.
Narratives do great with wider ranges and you have lots of time, so primes give you better quality usually for less money.
Kit lenses, while versatile and cheap, are usually slow and the image quality isn't great.
Finally, you're on a crop sensor, which is important to consider.
All that said, with what you want to do and your budget, you'll have to compromise somewhere...
Lens quality compromise:
Pick up a Canon 18-135mm kit lens for $300ish. It's VERY versatile: can get wide on your crop sensor and relatively tight at 135mm. However, it's slow. You'll want some stadium lights on at night for sure, but daylight will function great. This was my first lens (came in the kit) and I still hang on to it today for those weird situations where you need an "everything" lens. Alternatively, you can shop for third party zooms like Sigma or Tamron. I'm not a fan of either, autofocus is slow and image is worse than the canons, but man, they're cheap. (Don't get a 24-105 for a crop sensor everything lens. 24 is too tight. You'd be happier with a 17-40 for the same price).
Versatility Compromise:
You can pick up a really high quality Rokinon prime lens in your price range. MAYBE two if you shop around a lot. Their facebook page posts deals every now and then where some retailers sell them for over half off. They're fast (work great in low light) and beautiful. Perfect for narrative film. You're going to have a horrible time shooting sports though, as you'll have to swap lenses to change focal lengths.
Also, if you want a quality lens for sports but not so versatile for film, you can pick up a Canon 70-200 f/4 used in that price range. Another beautiful lens, but you'll have no wide end. Again, that's fine for sports and talking head stuff, but yeah... I don't recommend this as a first lens for anything else.
Budget Compromise:
If you can stretch your budget, you can pick up the longer lens (70-200) and wider prime (fixed but good for low light) or zoom (17-40, still versatile but needs more light) or all three.
Auto-focus compromise:
You mentioned autofocus, you typically don't use that in pro video. If you can get around not having it, buy vintage lenses. You can pick up an M42 mount 200mm for $40, a 135mm for $80ish, 50 for $50-100, 28 for $20-50 and even a zoom for a couple of hundred, plus your $20 adapter. Vintage lenses have a look all their own, but it's a pleasant look. They're less expensive and hold quality.
Narratives do great with wider ranges and you have lots of time, so primes give you better quality usually for less money.
Kit lenses, while versatile and cheap, are usually slow and the image quality isn't great.
Finally, you're on a crop sensor, which is important to consider.
All that said, with what you want to do and your budget, you'll have to compromise somewhere...
Lens quality compromise:
Pick up a Canon 18-135mm kit lens for $300ish. It's VERY versatile: can get wide on your crop sensor and relatively tight at 135mm. However, it's slow. You'll want some stadium lights on at night for sure, but daylight will function great. This was my first lens (came in the kit) and I still hang on to it today for those weird situations where you need an "everything" lens. Alternatively, you can shop for third party zooms like Sigma or Tamron. I'm not a fan of either, autofocus is slow and image is worse than the canons, but man, they're cheap. (Don't get a 24-105 for a crop sensor everything lens. 24 is too tight. You'd be happier with a 17-40 for the same price).
Versatility Compromise:
You can pick up a really high quality Rokinon prime lens in your price range. MAYBE two if you shop around a lot. Their facebook page posts deals every now and then where some retailers sell them for over half off. They're fast (work great in low light) and beautiful. Perfect for narrative film. You're going to have a horrible time shooting sports though, as you'll have to swap lenses to change focal lengths.
Also, if you want a quality lens for sports but not so versatile for film, you can pick up a Canon 70-200 f/4 used in that price range. Another beautiful lens, but you'll have no wide end. Again, that's fine for sports and talking head stuff, but yeah... I don't recommend this as a first lens for anything else.
Budget Compromise:
If you can stretch your budget, you can pick up the longer lens (70-200) and wider prime (fixed but good for low light) or zoom (17-40, still versatile but needs more light) or all three.
Auto-focus compromise:
You mentioned autofocus, you typically don't use that in pro video. If you can get around not having it, buy vintage lenses. You can pick up an M42 mount 200mm for $40, a 135mm for $80ish, 50 for $50-100, 28 for $20-50 and even a zoom for a couple of hundred, plus your $20 adapter. Vintage lenses have a look all their own, but it's a pleasant look. They're less expensive and hold quality.
Hello, thanks for your answer. There are two options for the kit lets. One being the 18-55mm and the second one being the 18-135mm you have mentioned above. However the, 18-135mm is 250$ more expensive though, do you think its worth the money considering i will be upgrading in like 3 months? Versatility is exactly what im looking for right now. Those rokinons look fairly cheap, on the other hand i cant really go with those deals considering im from czech republic and i dont have time for shipping. When i said autofocus i meant things like leaving the camera on a tree stump and recording guy going down the hill on a bike - short shot. I hope its gonna work well, everyone is saying the 70d does well with autofocus. I used to have few vintage lenses but im not a big fan.
I was basing off of US market used prices, sorry. That 18-135 goes for $300 or so USD here. The extra range vs an 18-55 is pretty crucial for sports though because you can't be close to the action.
Personally, I've had bad experiences with Tamrons and Sigmas. If you're looking for something you can keep a while you should look eleswhere, but if you're looking for bottom dollar to get you going they're a good option.
Personally, I've had bad experiences with Tamrons and Sigmas. If you're looking for something you can keep a while you should look eleswhere, but if you're looking for bottom dollar to get you going they're a good option.
I feel your pain man .
I think people just don't give a fuck about Europe.
If I want to get BMCC with a good lens here I must spend around 5000 dollars , where in USA I can get it for 2500 .
People who live in poor countries must pay twice the price , I just don't get it .
I think people just don't give a fuck about Europe.
If I want to get BMCC with a good lens here I must spend around 5000 dollars , where in USA I can get it for 2500 .
People who live in poor countries must pay twice the price , I just don't get it .
When the price difference is that much I don't get it, but when it's only a few hundred more (for equipment this big) it Usually has something to do with the fact that Americans don't include tax in their advertised price.mige actually recently discovered that when the tax price is added (in the places that tax..) the costs are significantly closer