Looking for opinion on F-4 vs F 2.8 vs cost

JohnM · July 29, 2013

I shoot DSLR right now. I'm currently looking at either a Canon L-series 70-200mm lens. This lens is image stabalized and available in both an f4 and f2.8 variant. However there is a $1000.00 cost difference between the two. In your opinon, would you consider that extra stop worth that kind of money?

Thanks

Heikki Repo · July 29, 2013

It depends quite a lot on what kind of situations you are about use it and whether the noise introduced by using a higher iso value is a problem for you. f4 is quite slow and while it might be enough for still photography due to image stabilization, for cinematography you'll want to have as fast lens as possible because you really cannot get more light by using slower shutter speeds.

Is there a specific reason why you want to buy a zoom? There are many excellent, fast and cheap manual focus primes available for EF through the use of adapters. That way you'd not be paying for such features that aren't that useful for cinematography (i.e. autofocus).

JohnM · July 29, 2013

I have an L-series 2.8 that's a 24-70. We are more or less starting out with a few projects lined up and I figured those two lenses for the time being would have quite the range covered seeing as primes are quite pricey. I'd like to be able to move into those once the ball is rolling.

Adrian Sierkowski · July 29, 2013

You'll be hating yourself stuck at an F4 when you get a director who throws you in the back of a tahoe to get night driving shots of a city. I just did this on a 5dMKIII and it only worked because we happened to have a 24mm F1.4 L series lens, and even then I was around 1600 (about the highest I'd push) and shooting around a 2 and 1/2.

Zooms are nice and all; especially for run and gun, and some directors really like them for the quickness of shot changes, but I'd say in truth primes really are the way to go for cinematography as they're generally faster since, as mentioned, your limited in your shutter speed choices to 1/48th ish (sometimes 1/30th, sometimes faster, like 1/90th, 1/100th.)

JohnM · July 29, 2013

Do you have any preference as to what used primes you'd go for? Since this post I've been looking around the market and have seen a few 85mm and 105mm older Nikkor lenses in the 1.8 to 2.5 area.

Edited July 29, 2013 by JohnM

Adrian Sierkowski · July 29, 2013

i love my Nikon E Series lenses which I use on my GH2. However, as they're Nikons, i'd not throw them onto a canon camera. The L series lenses from Canon are pretty fantastic, and that's normally what still glass i'd use on a canon camera, however i hate their focus system.

For good cheap lenses, look into the Rokinons. They're ok, the cine versions, and very affordable. I like that they're de-clicked for aperture and geared already, though the marks leave a bit to be desired, it's no worse or better than any other stills glass honestly.

You'd still need to find a 50mm lens to round out that set, but 50mms are pretty much so everywhere.

Normally I'd go with a 14mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm for a good rounded set which'll get you where you need to be. Maybe drop the 14mm, depending on how wide you like to shoot.

Also note this is for an ASP-C sensor, as I don't think the rokinons cover FF, but I tend to workw ith APS-C as it's about the same as S35mm motion picture film (well close enough) so I'm used to the DoF and the focal lengths from my time on film cameras/ d cinema cameras.

JohnM · July 29, 2013

Thanks for the help. As it stands right now, I have a Canon 1.8 50mm, a Tamron fixed 2.8 17-50mm, an L-series fixed 2.8 24-70. I figured the L-series 70-200 f4 was a good way to round it all out, but now maybe not so much. I also am on an APS-C with a T2i and 7D. Obviously the faster the better, however a lot of what's in my range are 2.8's. Aside from that big f4

Adrian Sierkowski · July 29, 2013

You're really already got a full set there. Maybe grab a 85mm L series to fill out your long end, and I may also grab a 24mm L series prime, just to keep it all matched, then rely on your 24/50/85 for primes and fast shooting, and use 17~50 for a short zoom when you need speed.

Adrian Sierkowski · July 29, 2013

14 mm ish or 18mm would also be nice; but I am a fan of very wide angle lenses.

JohnM · July 29, 2013

Just curious. what do you guys use for zooms anyway? especially if you have a shot that calls for a zoom in or out. I had a look at the Cine Rokinon 85mm. definitely affordable. Wondering how sharp it is wide open compared to a significantly more L-series. Thanks again for the advice.

Adrian Sierkowski · July 29, 2013

I don't normally use Zooms, personally; but when I do I normally go for cine zooms. There are quite a few options for rental now in EF Mount. I like the Zeiss LWZ a bit, though it's rather cold and clinical for my tastes so I normally throw a WBPM on it.

JohnM · July 29, 2013

I think you've got me sold on that Rokinon 85mm. Have you hands on time with it? Curious as to what it's like wide open. I know the 24mm at 1.5 is pretty much unusable from what I've researched. Starts to get sharp at 2. I do documentary style work so that was one reason I wanted the F4 long lens.

Alan Rencher · July 31, 2013

Rokinons are great for what they are. I would recommend them to anyone who is looking for glass in that budget range. Matthew Duclos has some comparisons of the Rokinon primes vs the Zeiss ZF Primes on his blog (http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/). I've used Rokinon lenses in the past, and I prefer them over L glass.