Best all around lens for filming on 7D???

I wouldnt buy a seperate camcorder for making films, when i have a perfectly good sensor on my 7D lol... that just seems a bit daft personally!

I disagree with the statement that primes aren't good for shooting. A prime will always have a wider aperture and be clearer than a zoom. Zooming smoothly with video on a DSLR is almost impossible anyway... so the only times you're gonna be using that zoom is in between shots. I've done some nice video with my 50mm f/1.4 and 30mm f/1.4.

A prime means you may have to swap lenses often, but they are far from unusable and have many benefits over a zoom, like IQ and aperture capabilities.

You can't zoom and focus at the same time. I think just about everyone is shooting video with primes.

Yea, agree... think im gonna be aquiring a sigma 30mm 1.4, maybe even the 85mm 1.4 when it hits the market

forthewinwin wrote in post #9760519
Just a thought, why not purchase a separate camcorder?

Because the sensor on a DSLR is bigger than that on a a camcorder. You can use lens with wide apertures and get close to cinematic quality video. Some people claim that the quality is better than that of a RED camera.

rogazilla wrote in post #9761509
I would get myself a fast prime with usm and IS.

I would too if Canon made such an animal.

I used my Sigma 10-20mm lens last week for some vids which came out quite nicely.

Maybe the 17-55mm would be a niec lens too, i didnt really wanna get rid of my 15-85mm, but if i bought the 17-55 id probably pick the 24-105 as it gives a bit more range for a walkabout.

If your using this lens for filming only, don't bother getting the sharpest... you won't tell the difference. Remember you're working with a 2mp image.

I don't think you'll want anything any faster than F2.8, for one... depth of filed will be too shallow for most things and will just look OTT. Plus... have you tried keeping in focus 1.4/1.8? It's not easy!

By accident I've found the 28-135mm IS to be really good for filming.

It's big enough to get a good hand on it, has a pretty smooth/quiet focus ring and the IS does actually help out quite a lot.

So, something with a smooth focus ring, isn't too small, and image-stabilization is very helpful

benesotor wrote in post #9781477
If your using this lens for filming only, don't bother getting the sharpest... you won't tell the difference. Remember you're working with a 2mp image.

I don't think you'll want anything any faster than F2.8, for one... depth of filed will be too shallow for most things and will just look OTT. Plus... have you tried keeping in focus 1.4/1.8? It's not easy!

By accident I've found the 28-135mm IS to be really good for filming.

It's big enough to get a good hand on it, has a pretty smooth/quiet focus ring and the IS does actually help out quite a lot.

So, something with a smooth focus ring, isn't too small, and image-stabilization is very helpful

Eh, f/1.8, f/1.4 are both fine for shooting. The DOF has a lot to do with how close you are to the subject, not just the f/stop being used. I had little trouble using f/1.4 and keeping things in forcus.

24-105 L is great for filming when you have light

Keep in mind that you need Singh-Ray Vari-ND filter to utilize shallow Dof field with f/2.8 in bright conditions.

Shooting at 24p requires a shutter 1/50 to make it look like film.

snoop99 wrote in post #9782107
Keep in mind that you need Singh-Ray Vari-ND filter to utilize shallow Dof field with f/2.8 in bright conditions.

Or the much cheaper Light Craft Workshop alternative on eBay:

http://stores.ebay.com …Q2ec0Q2em14?_so​p=15&_sc=1

Morlow wrote in post #9739032
I dunno about you but I usually use my 1200mm for portraits. It really gives the model some room to move around and feel relaxed.

haha yes, about a half mile, they won't even know when you are shooting!

thats the MFD right?