# Best beginner lens/lenses for mostly video but also photo



## purry (Sep 20, 2013)

Using a 60D


----------



## duydaniel (Sep 20, 2013)

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC
THERE IS NO LENS BETTER THAN THAT
but make sure you get a good copy

Tamron vs Canon

Tamron pros:
+ sharper (dxo)
+ lighter
+ 6 years warranty vs 1 year warranty

Tamron cons:
+ 5mm shorter which could be compensated by leaning forward a bit.
+ resell value maybe?

review:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Database/Tamron/Tamron-SP-17-50mm-F28-Di-II-XR-VC-LD-Aspherical-IF-Canon

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Camera-Lens-Database/Canon/EF-S-17-55-f-2.8-IS-USM


----------



## AmbientLight (Sep 20, 2013)

Be very careful with this.

Click the below link to get to trustworthy reviews (to put it mildly DXO lens reviews are as suspicious as a fish rotting at store for 6 months) and you will find this lens tested with rather not so stellar results:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Tamron-17-50mm-f-2.8-XR-Di-II-VC-Lens-Review.aspx

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/482-tamron_1750_28vc_canon?start=2

I rest my case.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Sep 20, 2013)

I have the Sigma 18-50 constant f2.8 non OS. Can't vouch for Tammy but looks a good lens on paper.

You really want fast primes or fast constant aperture lenses:

This avoids f-drop (where your aperture changes over a zoom, darkening or brightening a shot unintentionally)

Gives you more exposure control (your shutter should be fixed, and your ISO kept low, a brigter lens really helps in low light)

An f2.8 zoom gives you lots of flexibility without changing lenses all the time.

I'm not a huge fan of OS, I would recommend a monopod, shoulder brace (such as the SM-1) or tripod for video work.

Good luck.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 20, 2013)

AmbientLight said:


> and you will find this lens tested with rather not so stellar results:



So what? If big review sites suck up to the big manufacturers and bash 3rd party gear it isn't better than small sites doing favorable reviews for smaller companies ... 

... imho the best way still is to ask around in non-trollish/fanboyish forums, read cricial customer reviews in online shops & look at the sharpness in tdp - and last not lest try the feel of the lens for yourself in a shop.


----------



## AmbientLight (Sep 20, 2013)

@Marsu: I am with you on your second paragraph, but after DuyDaniel in my humble opinion went a bit overboard with praise for the Tamron lens, I felt it was appropriate to tone that down with information from more reliable review sites.

The only big corporate review site ever sucking up to one of the big manufacturers is neither the digital picture nor is it photozone, so I think we need not confuse the (reasonably) good guys and the (really) bad guys here.

All in all it boils down to what Paul wrote, which is good advice, irrespective of the OP going for a Sigma or Tamron or Canon or whatever lens.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 20, 2013)

In fact the most versatile lens for video is a zoom 17-50 F2.8 constant. The Tamrom is good for video. Strangely the Tamron VC version has less sharpness, but nothing is visible on video. The Sigma 17-50 F2.8 OS, seems the best option to take pictures too, because the sharpness is better. If you get more serious video, prime lenses are great a option. For example, a set of Samyang 14mm F2.8 + 35mm F1.4 + 85mm F1.4 caters well various situations, but the focus is manual only, as the Cinema traditional.


----------



## Skywise (Sep 20, 2013)

I've had the Tamron and it's a good lens - Better than the kit but not as good as the $1000 Canon EFS 17-55 f2.8 which I eventually moved up to.

My problem with the Tamron was that the pictures always had a tinted appearance to them (as if I had a light polarizer filter on the lens... which I didn't).

I currently own a T4i and carry the Canon 17-55 and the 10-22 with me everywhere I go (on trips). Both do great for video.

(I'd also recommend getting a Rode Stereo Videomic pro for video).


----------



## sanj (Sep 20, 2013)

I do not understand the term 'beginner lens'. I understand bad vs good lens. Cheap vs expensive lens. Since lenses do not have a learning curve, what does 'beginner lens' imply?

If you are starting out then pick the BEST lens you can afford. It will be with you for a long time. Buying cheap just because you are starting off is a bad idea. 

Of course buy value for money...


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 20, 2013)

sanj said:


> I do not understand the term 'beginner lens'. I understand bad vs good lens. Cheap vs expensive lens. Since lenses do not have a learning curve, what does 'beginner lens' imply?
> 
> If you are starting out then pick the BEST lens you can afford. It will be with you for a long time. Buying cheap just because you are starting off is a bad idea.
> 
> Of course buy value for money...


At the moment, the zoom lens under $ 500 which produces better image quality, accurate focus and quiet, and has image stabilizer is the Canon 18-55mm STM. It is not perfect, but no one lens is. However, as it has variable maximum aperture, causes some problems changing light, when changing the zoom position. Above this, are Sigma 17-50 OS and Canon 17-55 IS, which outweigh the modest 18-55 STM in all respects, with the exception of quiet focus.


----------



## Bruce 101 (Sep 20, 2013)

The one lens that has been quickly gaining in popularity for both video and stills and also as an excellent walk around lens is the 18-135 IS STM. Yes, it's variable aperture (so is the 15-85), but other than that it may be the only video lens you will ever want. It's $549 but you can get it for less used.


----------

