Boards > Discussions
Start a Discussion
You're going to be using the camera for music videos and short films.
I'd probably start with some basic Rokinon cinema lenses. Assuming you have no other lenses, I would grab a 12mm, 16mm and 35mm (assuming you have a traditional 2x crop mft camera). However if you have something like a JVC LS300 that has a super35 sensor with mft mount, I'd buy 16mm, 35mm, and 50mm.
August 11, 2018 at 11:41AM, Edited August 11, 11:41AM
So you would go with primes vs zooms?
August 11, 2018 at 12:34PM
Most people do. Primes tend to be sharper, faster and lighter than zooms.
August 11, 2018 at 6:23PM
Unless you buy just one zoom lens with this budget, you're likely to get a variable aperture zoom and find it to be soft at it's lowest apertures.
I have the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for canon (which I got because I thought it would be good enough). It has a constant aperture, however if you use anything less than f/4 between 40-75mm, you're in for a rude awakening. Totally soft and unusable. At 5.6 is where this lens really shines, but I cant always boost my ISO that high. So I'm stuck with a 28-75 f/2.8 that really acts more like an f/4 constant aperture. Bottom line, you can't go cheap on your zoom lenses. You'll find that the loss in quality isn't worth it.
With that rant over, I just want to say that rokinon lenses, at least in my experience with the 35, 50, and 85 are tack sharp at t1.5 ~f/1.6 (at least when it comes to HD video.) That being said they also are pretty consistent across the line with color and contrast. The smooth aperture ring is incredibly helpful when transitioning from inside to outside (when I shoot weddings) and the build quality is well worth the price tag.
I'm a huge fan of primes and use them almost exclusively. I would use them exclusively if I hadn't already wasted money on some zooms.
August 11, 2018 at 11:25PM
It may be more than you want / can afford to spend, but in my experience the 'best; M43 lenses are the Voigtlanders. By 'best' I mean giving the image I like best, by far - I often get comments from clients that the images 'just look great' with footage shot with them. I use the 25mm, 42.5 and 17.5mm (all the F0.95 versions - get the 25mm MkII). They are good at 4K (except when completely wide open at F0.95) and I love the shallow DOF. I use them almost all the time on my GH4s (weddings, TV shows - docs). Trouble is, one of them will cost you maybe $1,000 ..
August 12, 2018 at 1:39PM
You'll get a lot more mileage out of a single nice lens than you will an assortment of lower quality lenses. My most used native mft lens is the Panasonic Leica Summilux 12mm f1.4 (which is around $1300). I shoot 90% of the stuff I shoot on that lens and the Nocticron 42.5 f1.2, but the 42.5 isn't the best lens to get first, simply because it's a bit less versatile. The other lens I use a lot is the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 with a Metabones adapter, but if I could only bring one lens it'd be the Summilux. The Voigtlanders seem great too, though I've never shot with them. I shoot mostly docs, so the relative softness of the Voigtlanders wide open is a bit of an issue for me.
August 13, 2018 at 3:33PM
I will start off by saying that I only have experience with EF lenses, but I think this drastically depends on what you are shooting. Can you get away with shooting entirely on one lens? Sure. I shot an entire wedding on a Canon 50mm f/1.2L once but if I were shooting something like a music video where my client wanted a wide shot in a small bedroom, I'm not going to be able to even do it if all I have is a 50mm f/1.2L. I understand the desire to have quality lenses, and I shoot with a variety of lenses are "good enough" for 90% of jobs out there in the music video/short film world (which is what the op says they are shooting). Purchasing one lens when starting out sure can help when it comes to learning, but it becomes limiting quickly.
That being said, I'm not sure what crop factor you are shooting at, but even with a 2x crop, I would never shoot a close up of a face with a 12mm lens. But that's just my style I guess. It definitely has it's uses, but damn if that isn't really wide.
August 14, 2018 at 2:07PM
This is a fair point. Most of my projects are not client-focused, so I determine what shots I'll get through planning and I bring the lenses I'll . need to get those shots. If all I have is a wide lens, I choose frames that will look nice with that lens.
My comment was motivated by the fact that I really just didn't like the look of my footage until I got nicer lenses. I felt like there was something missing or like I was doing something wrong. Granted, I've seen plenty of great work shot on crap lenses, but my personal experience was that when I upgraded the quality of my glass, it was like the puzzle finally fit together. A similar perceptual shift happened when moving from a Sony Camera to a Panasonic camera. In both cases, the people that I show my work to said it looked way better than stuff I had been shooting previously. Liking the way your own work looks matters from a motivational perspective.
All this said, I realize I'm saying this from the point of view of not being limited to one lens/focal length. I happen to like the unusual qualities of a wide lens, but you might be right that it's maybe off-base to recommend a lens that wide to someone unless they like that look.
August 14, 2018 at 2:41PM
I favor prime lenses and do most of my shooting with vintage Canon FD lenses hooked to the camera with a Fotodiox adapter. These lenses were not designed for HD or UHD and the resulting image is somewhat muted giving a cinematic feel with very little grading.
August 14, 2018 at 5:20AM, Edited August 14, 5:20AM
Thanks for the suggestions I’m about to switch to MFT from canon gear and was wavering between selling my canon glass for Native MFT zooms or merely adapting the glass I have, and selling my 7D body
For a lense that would fill a hole in my collection.
I have a 85mm, 35mm, and 14mm Rokinon set, and a cheap nifty fifty canon 1.8.
August 15, 2018 at 7:02PM
I think that comments should not be sent on approval. Either you should totally close the comments like what https://nz-casinos.com/ is doing or you should directly approve the comments.
August 16, 2018 at 4:59AM
If I only had $1300 to spend on lenses for a MFT camera that would be used for music videos and short fillms I would purchase a Metabones Speedbooster Ultra (Trending @ $350 on ebay.com), Sigma 18-35 f1.8 (Trending @ $650 on ebay.com) and a regular EF to MFT adapter (Trending @ $100 on ebay.com).
Using the Speedbooster, the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 becomes a 12.8-25mm f/1.2 (S35) effective lens, which is faster than most primes (expect the Voigtlanders and maybe Veydras) available for MFT, with the convenience of a zoom lens.
I'd be looking to use the crop factor of the MFT camera to my advantage to get "two lenses for one". Once you swap out the adapter the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 becomes a 36mm-70mm f/3.6 (S35) effective lens. Although the Sigma is "f/1.8" it will have the equivalent depth of field to an "f/3.6" lens. This means the amount of light the Sigma 18-35 lets in will not change, only the depth of field or the "blurry part" of the image.
This setup gives you a decent range from a S35 equivalent of 12.8mm - 70mm with about $200 left over. I'd use that $200 get a cheap Variable ND filter ($50), Circular Polarizer ($50), and a Black Pro Mist filter ($100) off ebay.
August 23, 2018 at 8:50AM, Edited August 23, 8:56AM
Thanks for sharing the informative information through the article.http://super-fighters.games
August 29, 2018 at 11:37PM