PDA

View Full Version : Canon 17-55 f2.8



Brian@202020
06-07-2012, 09:51 PM
I'm looking for a lens to acompany my Tokina 11-16 on the longer side. What do people think of the Canon 17-55 f2.8 lens? Is there a better option in this focal range?

nickjbedford
06-07-2012, 10:06 PM
I'm looking for a lens to acompany my Tokina 11-16 on the longer side. What to people think of the Canon 17-55 f2.8 lens? Is there a better option in this focal range?

This is one of the best EF-S lenses as it uses the same glass, IS and USM focus as the 24-70mm F/2.8L, except it's not built like an L, with metal and weather sealing. And then, the focal length is more usable on the BMD CC than is a 24-70mm (equivalent to 55mm at the widest). I use this lens on my 60D almost 100% of the time.

This is essentially why I decided to go ahead and get this, since I wouldn't need to buy a new lens in the beginning.

Then again, if I replaced it with anything, and I could also use a PL lens (which you currently can't for the most part), I'd probably got for a RED Pro 17-50mm T2.9 Cine Zoom :D

Brian@202020
06-07-2012, 10:16 PM
How does it compare to the Tokina 16-50 f2.8?

nickjbedford
06-07-2012, 10:28 PM
How does it compare to the Tokina 16-50 f2.8?

Not sure, myself, but here is an extensive review of it. http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/274-tokina-af-16-50mm-f28-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lens-test-report--review?start=1

rommex
06-16-2012, 07:31 AM
From that review CA of Tokina looks scary...

stip
06-16-2012, 07:43 AM
Best thing about 17-55 is it's performance wide open, very sharp, and with BMC I guess you'd want to shoot with a fast aperture as much as possible given the smaller sensor.

rommex
06-16-2012, 08:16 AM
Tamron 17-50 VC looks much better from the site review.

rommex
06-16-2012, 08:18 AM
maybe a lame question, but... I hope BMCC will be compatible with ef-s mount? in tech specs they mention ff EF mount...

Tom
06-16-2012, 09:28 AM
maybe a lame question, but... I hope BMCC will be compatible with ef-s mount? in tech specs they mention ff EF mount...
It should work fine with ef-s lenses. Even John Brawley has used an ef-s lens in his footage.

Valeriu Campan
06-16-2012, 09:45 AM
A good site to objectively compare lenses is here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=400&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=773&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Joe Giambrone
06-16-2012, 07:38 PM
What about the Nikkor AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D

http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/672-nikkorafs173528ff

Is it sharper than the Canon? Compatible?

Jahful
06-16-2012, 11:16 PM
I'm sure to be corrected if I'm wrong, but an EF-s lens might actually be preferable to an EF lens if you're looking for really wide shots. An EF-s lens designed for a smaller sensor will give you a wider FOV than an EF lens with the same focal length. From what I've heard the main strike against EF-s lenses is that the glass isn't as nice since they weren't developed for high-end cameras.

edit- in response to rommex

rick.lang
06-16-2012, 11:57 PM
An EF-s lens designed for a smaller sensor will give you a wider FOV than an EF lens with the same focal length. From what I've heard the main strike against EF-s lenses is that the glass isn't as nice since they weren't developed for high-end cameras.

Well one if us is going to be wrong. I use a Canon camera with an APS-C sensor and a couple of Canon EF-S lenses. It was explained to me that the apparent focal length of the lenses would really be 1.6x the stated focal length on the lens. So a 200mm lens would look like it was 320mm on my camera. As for the concern that the EF-S lenses use inferior glass, that may be true in part (for example maybe no fluorite elements) but the glass is quite decent on some lens. The build quality and weather-sealing is superior on the L series lenses but each lens needs to be evaluated individually rather than just believe all EF-S lenses are inferior.

nickjbedford
06-17-2012, 02:03 AM
I'm sure to be corrected if I'm wrong, but an EF-s lens might actually be preferable to an EF lens if you're looking for really wide shots. An EF-s lens designed for a smaller sensor will give you a wider FOV than an EF lens with the same focal length. From what I've heard the main strike against EF-s lenses is that the glass isn't as nice since they weren't developed for high-end cameras.

edit- in response to rommex

A lens is a lens is a lens, as they say. Focal length is the physical focal length of the lens, not the "cropped" multiplied focal length. 17mm on a full frame is 17mm on a crop body, but the image is cropped 1.6x smaller.

rommex
06-17-2012, 02:01 PM
Sorry, Jahful, but you have some wrong conception )) EF and EF-S differ ONLY in 2 things: 1) they have different mount, so that EF-S lens cannot be attached to the camera with EF mount, and this is done because 2) the size of the image projected to the sensor by EF-S lenses is smaller, designed to cover only APS-C sensor. On the full frame sensor EF-S lenses would look with terrible vignetting in the corners.

And yes, EF and EF-S have the same indication of focal distance.

So my question was about if BMCC actually has EF-S mount, which will allow both EF and EF-S lenses be attached. Obviously and hopefully it has EF-S mount.

rommex
06-17-2012, 02:04 PM
A good site to objectively compare lenses is here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=400&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=773&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Thanks for the link. VERY interesting.

manigandan
08-25-2012, 12:14 PM
I am confused with few calculations regarding my choice of lens for BMC. i own a Tokino 16-28 Asperical lens & Canon 16-35 lens. These 2 lenses are EF FF Lens that i use on my 5d. when i read about Bmc & when i was planning my choice of lenses for widest wide. i planned a Tokino 11-16(like everyone) & canon 17-55 lens.Both are APS-C Lenses i thought i must calculate this 11-16 & 17-55 lens with 1.6x crop as this is a aps-c lens designed for 7d sensor. so i thought 11 x 1.6 will give me a lens equivalent to 17mm. But later i was told by ppl that whatever lens we fit on BMC Camera it will have 2.3x crop. so my 11mm becomes a 25mm equivalent now.
So now my question is very simple
I dont have 17-55 lens. i must purchase it with BMC Only for BMC USE. If all lenses have 2.3 crop on bmc then ill not invest on this 17-55 lens ill use my Tokino 16-28 Asperical lens or Canon 16-35 lens & save cash.
Someone Guide me pls :)

Kevin Marshall
08-25-2012, 12:25 PM
I am confused with few calculations regarding my choice of lens for BMC. i own a Tokino 16-28 Asperical lens & Canon 16-35 lens. These 2 lenses are EF FF Lens that i use on my 5d. when i read about Bmc & when i was planning my choice of lenses for widest wide. i planned a Tokino 11-16(like everyone) & canon 17-55 lens.Both are APS-C Lenses i thought i must calculate this 11-16 & 17-55 lens with 1.6x crop as this is a aps-c lens designed for 7d sensor. so i thought 11 x 1.6 will give me a lens equivalent to 17mm. But later i was told by ppl that whatever lens we fit on BMC Camera it will have 2.3x crop. so my 11mm becomes a 25mm equivalent now.
So now my question is very simple
I dont have 17-55 lens. i must purchase it with BMC Only for BMC USE. If all lenses have 2.3 crop on bmc then ill not invest on this 17-55 lens ill use my Tokino 16-28 Asperical lens or Canon 16-35 lens & save cash.
Someone Guide me pls :)

This is why I hate the use of "crop factors." It all depends on your point of reference. In the simplest terms, the BMC has a "crop factor" of 1.6 when compared to S35/APS-C, and 2.3 when compared to FF35. It doesn't matter if the lens was made for EF-S, EF, 645, 16mm, Super-8, or 8x10 - the focal length is the focal length, and the only way EF-S and EF lenses differ in an optical sense is the image circle. If you were to mount a 24mm EF-S lens onto a Full-Frame body (like a 5D), it would look exactly the same as a 24mm EF lens - but vignetted.

For a more practical answer to your specific situation - if you're happy with your 16-28 and 16-35, no real reason to get the 17-55, unless you want that longer end. The 11-16, though, would probably be helpful on the wide end.

Jason M.
08-25-2012, 12:29 PM
Basically for use with the BMC this should be a helpful guide:

11-16mm on the BMC sensor are wide to moderately wide. Wider than 10mm is going to be ultrawide.

22-25mm is normal

35mm is slight tele/portrait.

Above 35mm will be tele. So if you want more telephoto on only one zoom, and you don't have a longer zoom for your Canon, then you might want to get the 17-55. But 16-35 is an incredibly useful range for this camera. Lenses designed both for APS-C sensors and 135/FF sensors will work just fine with the BMC, though, assuming they're EF/EF-S or can be adapted to EF (Leica-R, Nikon, M42, etc).

TL;DR. Unless you want more telephoto, and don't have other lenses like a 50mm or 85mm that can help you out when you need the extra focal length, the 16-35 should work great.

EDIT: What Kevin said, too.

Gwangjuboy
08-25-2012, 01:06 PM
I'm looking for a lens to acompany my Tokina 11-16 on the longer side. What do people think of the Canon 17-55 f2.8 lens? Is there a better option in this focal range?


The Sigma 17-50mm has received good reviews and is seen by some as being on a par with the Canon But cheaper. I personally like the fact it's more compact than the Canon.

manigandan
08-25-2012, 01:13 PM
Thank you both for sharing your thought.
But, to ask my question even clearly.
I am running a rental house. i am planning to rent Bmc cameras. i have 1.Tokino 11-16 (Aps-c).2.Tokino 16-28(FF), 3.Canon 16-35(FF) lenses so far.
I have 50,85,100,70-200 etc to satisfy the need for a Tele Lens Coverage for this BMC SENSOR.
I need to Find Widest Wide which will be 11-16 offcourse. I need the next best lens for my BMC. A 17-55 on bmc if it has 1.6x calculation of crop factor it must give me a magnification & Area covered in Frame after 11-16 should be a 27-88 Euivalent. Then ill say A tokino 11-16 & 17-55 will satisfy the need for wide frame (ie)Long shot,Mid long shot.
But if this 17-55 must also be calculate with 2.3x (ff) crop factor for dis bmc camera. Then no point in purchasing 17-55. i can use 16-35 itself cos both will give same area coverage for me.
AREA COVERAGE I MEAN SATISFYING MY NEED TO GET NEXT BEST WIDE ANGLE FRAME COVERAGE AFTER 11-16. am not using any technical term wrong here i guess.
If the 17-55 is better choice on Bmc for my purpose than 16-35(ff) then ill consider buying 17-55

mhood
08-25-2012, 01:24 PM
The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-IS is pretty well thought of too. I'm going to use mine until reviews point to a better solution.

manigandan
08-25-2012, 01:37 PM
Tokino 11-16,Sigma 17-50,Tamron 17-50 or Canon 17-55 All these 3 are APS-C Made lenses.
My Direct question is Should i calculate these APS-C Made Lenses with 1.6x calculation
or
what ever format the lens was made For,Any lens on BMC will have 2.3x Calculation ???

Jason M.
08-25-2012, 01:49 PM
Thank you both for sharing your thought.
But, to ask my question even clearly.
I am running a rental house. i am planning to rent Bmc cameras. i have 1.Tokino 11-16 (Aps-c).2.Tokino 16-28(FF), 3.Canon 16-35(FF) lenses so far.
I have 50,85,100,70-200 etc to satisfy the need for a Tele Lens Coverage for this BMC SENSOR.
I need to Find Widest Wide which will be 11-16 offcourse. I need the next best lens for my BMC. A 17-55 on bmc if it has 1.6x calculation of crop factor it must give me a magnification & Area covered in Frame after 11-16 should be a 27-88 Euivalent. Then ill say A tokino 11-16 & 17-55 will satisfy the need for wide frame (ie)Long shot,Mid long shot.
But if this 17-55 must also be calculate with 2.3x (ff) crop factor for dis bmc camera. Then no point in purchasing 17-55. i can use 16-35 itself cos both will give same area coverage for me.
AREA COVERAGE I MEAN SATISFYING MY NEED TO GET NEXT BEST WIDE ANGLE FRAME COVERAGE AFTER 11-16. am not using any technical term wrong here i guess.
If the 17-55 is better choice on Bmc for my purpose than 16-35(ff) then ill consider buying 17-55

I'm now even more confused as to what you're asking. Are you looking for lenses to rent out on DSLR's as well as the BMC? Because whether a lens is designed for APS-C or 135/FF, it makes no difference whatsoever if all you're doing is using the Blackmagic Camera. As for something to cover the range between 16mm and 50mm, if you are OK with not having something between a 35mm and a 50mm, the Canon 16-35 is fine. As is the 17-55 EF-S, unless you also need to use these lenses on a 5D or a 1D. The Tamron 17-50, as someone suggested, is well thought of. Mechanics are lousy for doing cine work (which is pretty true of all the lenses mentioned so far), but optically, it's pretty good.

Basically, there's no one standout consensus on what the best zoom lens is from moderate wide to moderate tele on the BMC. Almost all still zoom lenses are going to have pretty major drawbacks in terms of holding focus through a zoom, breathing, mechanics, etc. If that doesn't bother you, most of the lenses mentioned are going to work just fine.

Jason M.
08-25-2012, 01:55 PM
Tokino 11-16,Sigma 17-50,Tamron 17-50 or Canon 17-55 All these 3 are APS-C Made lenses.
My Direct question is Should i calculate these APS-C Made Lenses with 1.6x calculation
or
what ever format the lens was made For,Any lens on BMC will have 2.3x Calculation ???

This is where the whole crop factor thing gets totally ludicrous. It depends on what you want to compare them to, in order to calculate an equivalent FoV. BMC is smaller than APS-C and 135/FF. If you're comparing BMC to 135/FF, there's a 2.3x crop factor. If you're comparing to APS-C, there's a 1.5x crop factor. Doesn't matter what format the lens is made for, only the focal length of the lens matters.

EDIT: Frankly, it's best to stop thinking in terms of crop factor entirely, and simply learn which focal lengths have which characteristics on each medium you're shooting. It's not much more work, and it's a whole hell of a lot less confusing, particularly with the proliferation of different-sized sensors for motion work.

Brad Ferrell
08-25-2012, 02:05 PM
I have both the Tokina 11mm-16mm f2.8 and the Tamron 17mm-50mm f2.8 non-VC. Over at DVX-User I bought the Tamron as it had the best reviews from other users. Look in the APS-C forum and search for Tamron non-VC in the lens section. I've found it is fast enough to get away with 100W on the set with a 7D @ ISO 1250. It's hair-sharp. Minor CA.

The Tokina is also sharp, but not as sharp as the Tamron. I'm interested to see it as my wide lens on the BMCC. I can work with 25mm (equivalent FF35) on the wide end. I always used it at 16mm anyways, 11mm was too wide on 7D most of the time.

manigandan
08-25-2012, 02:08 PM
I'm now even more confused as to what you're asking. Are you looking for lenses to rent out on DSLR's as well as the BMC?

I am already Renting DSLR'S. I am planning on Bmc camera for rental. My simple need is to Find the best set of lenses to get Wide shots (ie) A Lens that can give me scope to cover larger area on my frame. we all know 11-16 is the best option for widest wide angle shots. I need the next best lens to do the same job. i am not confusing crop factor,magnification or anything.
After 11-16 on a bmc camera which lens will give me scope to cover wide area on my frame. Canon 17-55mm lens[Made for APS-C Bodies] or Canon 16-35mm lens[Made for FF Bodies].
This is what i want an answer for. i guess am very clear now if i was not clear on previous posts :)

Jason M.
08-25-2012, 02:18 PM
I am already Renting DSLR'S. I am planning on Bmc camera for rental. My simple need is to Find the best set of lenses to get Wide shots (ie) A Lens that can give me scope to cover larger area on my frame. we all know 11-16 is the best option for widest wide angle shots. I need the next best lens to do the same job. i am not confusing crop factor,magnification or anything.
After 11-16 on a bmc camera which lens will give me scope to cover wide area on my frame. Canon 17-55mm lens[Made for APS-C Bodies] or Canon 16-35mm lens[Made for FF Bodies].
This is what i want an answer for. i guess am very clear now if i was not clear on previous posts :)

Either will work just fine. Obviously, you have more range on the 17-55mm, but 16-35mm is still a tremendously useful range, and if you already have that lens and are happy with it, I don't see why you'd need to shell out for another lens. The 16-35 can be used on full frame bodies, so if you rent them already, it'll be more versatile in that sense, too.

manigandan
08-25-2012, 02:21 PM
A canon 17-55mm lens will be considered has ________ equivalent lens on Bmc Body.
I guess a 16-35 canon(FF)Lens will be considered has 37mm-80mm equivalent lens on Bmc Body with 2.3x Calculation.

stip
08-25-2012, 02:44 PM
You have a 11-16mm f2.8. Add the 17-55 f2.8 and you'll have a range from 11-55mm seemlessly covered at max aperture of f2.8.

That's an equivalent range of 17-86mm on Super-35 film.

Forget comparing to 35mm Full Frame sensors (x2.3 crop), that's photography 35mm and not what you see in cinema. Too many people calculate with that though it makes no sense when looking for the 'movie reference'.

EDIT: Just like Jason said, forget thinking in crop factors.

manigandan
08-25-2012, 03:02 PM
SO with reference to my previous posts.
SHOULD I BUY A 17-55 LENS FOR BMC CAMERA FOR THE NEED I MENTIONED ABOVE OR NOT ????

Jason M.
08-25-2012, 04:47 PM
Speaking in 135/FF equivalent, a 17-55mm will act like a 39-127mm lens on the BMC. It doesn't matter what format the lens is made for at all; if you're only using it on BMC, a lens designed for 35mm stills and a lens designed for APS-C are going to act exactly the same. In this case, it's a moderate wide to telephoto. Buy it if you need the extra telephoto; if you don't, stick with the Canon, which will be fine.

Personally, I'm not a fan of using still zooms for cine work. They can be a pain in the ass to work with. But it *is* frequently more versatile than dragging a ton of primes around. Simply depends on how you (or maybe your clients in this case) prefer to shoot.

Brad Ferrell
08-25-2012, 06:05 PM
Just buy the Canon. It will be fine.

Kevin Marshall
08-25-2012, 06:56 PM
SO with reference to my previous posts.
SHOULD I BUY A 17-55 LENS FOR BMC CAMERA FOR THE NEED I MENTIONED ABOVE OR NOT ????

Well, if you're trying to minimize your number of lenses, and maximize your focal length range, then sure - then you'l have 11-55mm between two lenses, rather than 11-28 or 11-35, and making up the longer end with another zoom or some primes. The 11-16 and 17-55 combo covers a pretty standard range for cinema use - which would compare to having something like 18-55mm on an S35 format, or to something like 28-135 on a 5D.

nickjbedford
08-25-2012, 07:02 PM
As a starting lens, a 17-55mm will be great. If you're shooting narrative, that covers a lot of ground with focal length, and the 11-16 will cover wide angle. An 85mm F/1.8 or something should give you a decent 125mm telephoto lens (as per 35mm film).

zwarte_kat
08-25-2012, 09:07 PM
This thread goes into the crop factor subject and EFS lenses as well:
http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?732-What-is-the-field-of-view-of-my-10mm-20mm

I will say it again: There are so many different sizes of sensors now that only one should be picked as a reference (Many traditional photographers usually use photo 35mm "full frame").
Once you start comparing cropped lenses on one format with another, things get confusing. Now even camera makers are putting the the equivalent focal lengths as their lens names (Ricoh comes to mind).

Best would be to simply speak about angle of view. It is a universal scientific value. Most people however, don't know what different angles of view look like, me included.

I wonder that when/if IS becomes supported on the BMC, there will be any difference between canon brand and non canon brand lenses. I guess non EF(s) mount lenses probably wouldn't have IS supported. That might be one thing to consider when buying a standard zoom.

As for 17-55, it will be a bit tight on the wide end when indoors. In smaller spaces you won't be able to shoot head to toe often. Of course you can just move the camera to get everything in :)
When you are outside you should be fine, unless you shoot from far away, for example a preformance on a podium, or a sports match on a field, and you want a half body shot or closer.

I would get the 11-16mm Tokina, because in those FOVs, there isn't much else that competes, not even primes.
If then you then want to complement it with another zoom, I would skip 17-55 and go for something more tele, like the 24mm-105mm L. For the difference in price with a faster zoom you can get a prime to get real shallow DOF.

It is also worth noting that Canon lenses, especially L glass, generally keep their values better than Sigma or Tamron ones, in case you want to sell.

Gwangjuboy
08-25-2012, 11:42 PM
This thread goes into the crop factor subject and EFS lenses as well:
http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?732-What-is-the-field-of-view-of-my-10mm-20mm

I will say it again: There are so many different sizes of sensors now that only one should be picked as a reference (Many traditional photographers usually use photo 35mm "full frame").
Once you start comparing cropped lenses on one format with another, things get confusing. Now even camera makers are putting the the equivalent focal lengths as their lens names (Ricoh comes to mind).

Best would be to simply speak about angle of view. It is a universal scientific value. Most people however, don't know what different angles of view look like, me included.

I wonder that when/if IS becomes supported on the BMC, there will be any difference between canon brand and non canon brand lenses. I guess non EF(s) mount lenses probably wouldn't have IS supported. That might be one thing to consider when buying a standard zoom.

As for 17-55, it will be a bit tight on the wide end when indoors. In smaller spaces you won't be able to shoot head to toe often. Of course you can just move the camera to get everything in :)
When you are outside you should be fine, unless you shoot from far away, for example a preformance on a podium, or a sports match on a field, and you want a half body shot or closer.

I would get the 11-16mm Tokina, because in those FOVs, there isn't much else that competes, not even primes.
If then you then want to complement it with another zoom, I would skip 17-55 and go for something more tele, like the 24mm-105mm L. For the difference in price with a faster zoom you can get a prime to get real shallow DOF.

It is also worth noting that Canon lenses, especially L glass, generally keep their values better than Sigma or Tamron ones, in case you want to sell.


Everyone seems to constantly forget the Sigma 8-16mm for a Wide. I bet it gets used a lot by by people.

RyGuy
08-26-2012, 12:13 AM
Everyone seems to constantly forget the Sigma 8-16mm for a Wide. I bet it gets used a lot by by people.

Could be a joy for steadicam shots.

manigandan
08-26-2012, 08:04 AM
Simply depends on how you (or maybe your clients in this case) prefer to shoot.

Clients Expect a variety range of lenses to shoot with. There is lot of independent film making happening in india now. So, my job is to provide them variety of lenses to play with. right from a lens to shoot a long shot to a lens to shoot Choker shots.
I have 16-35,24-70 etc. But, i will buy 17-55 if it will be considered has a 27-88 lens coverage on BMC Body otherwise i wont invest on it. Rather ill Buy 8mm circular fisheye. I hear ppl say 8mm fisheye will be a 10mm wide lens on BMC.

maccane
08-26-2012, 08:17 AM
Notice when you using zoom lenses it can give you problems when attach a mattebox the front of the lens get larger with zooming and will stockt in mattebox !!!

nickjbedford
08-26-2012, 08:37 AM
A fish eye is not rectilinear. A 10mm fish eye will still have distortion despite the crop. If that's what you want, then go for it, but for normal wide angle you still need a rectilinear lens.

manigandan
08-26-2012, 08:48 AM
Notice when you using zoom lenses it can give you problems when attach a mattebox the front of the lens get larger with zooming and will stockt in mattebox !!!

I have a 70-200 which wont grow big while zooming :). Yes,other lenses will grow big when zooming. But we cant solve every single problem Then The clients must afford Prime lens set :)

manigandan
08-26-2012, 08:51 AM
A fish eye is not rectilinear. A 10mm fish eye will still have distortion despite the crop. If that's what you want, then go for it, but for normal wide angle you still need a rectilinear lens.

I need Ultra wide on BMC Camera. Not in reference with Sensor Diagonal. But i mean a Extreme Long Shot Like "Good bad ugly" movie types :).
I have a 16-28 Tokino Rectiliniar lens. it is a FF Lens,will this lens solve my problem ? But i dont think so as 11-16 will be front runner than this. M asking below 11-16 llike a sigma 4.5 mm it shouldn look bad also like distorted to the core

maccane
08-26-2012, 12:41 PM
We talking about lenses without aperture control what about the control on the camera I mean I never notice someone how can we change the aperture on the camera with EF lenses electronic aperture ?????

Jason M.
08-26-2012, 01:11 PM
We talking about lenses without aperture control what about the control on the camera I mean I never notice someone how can we change the aperture on the camera with EF lenses electronic aperture ?????

You can control aperture on EF lenses with the camera. Shouldn't be a problem. Adapters are available that allow Nikons without an aperture ring to be manually controlled. But it's so much more useful to have a manual aperture ring on the lens itself, and for motion work, having it de-clicked.

maccane
08-26-2012, 02:15 PM
You can control aperture on EF lenses with the camera. Shouldn't be a problem. Adapters are available that allow Nikons without an aperture ring to be manually controlled. But it's so much more useful to have a manual aperture ring on the lens itself, and for motion work, having it de-clicked.

Yes I know but traveling through the menu to adjust the aperture is never comfortable
I heard from JB also the adjust goes not step by step...you only have less choice then the lens deliver..Is this true ????

manigandan
08-26-2012, 02:30 PM
We talking about lenses without aperture control what about the control on the camera I mean I never notice someone how can we change the aperture on the camera with EF lenses electronic aperture ?????

This is a million Dollar question that i wanted to ask :)
Seriously, with out a special manual nob for this feature like on Dslr's what are we going to do ? every time go inside menu is completely uncomfortable & as someone said wont have all increments on f no that my lens can deliver
And, is there only Shutter Angle option ? No shutter speed option ?

maccane
08-26-2012, 05:30 PM
So conclusion don't choice lenses without aperture ring !!!!!
Canon 17-55 is a lens that I will not prefer to use with BMC ...
I got the tokina 11-16 with same problem....

Jason M.
08-26-2012, 07:15 PM
This is a million Dollar question that i wanted to ask :)
Seriously, with out a special manual nob for this feature like on Dslr's what are we going to do ? every time go inside menu is completely uncomfortable & as someone said wont have all increments on f no that my lens can deliver
And, is there only Shutter Angle option ? No shutter speed option ?

Shutter Angle and shutter speed both essentially affect the same thing. The shutter speed is easily calculated from shutter angle like so:

(1/'Frames per second') x (Shutter Angle/360) = Shutter speed

So, for 24 FPS, with a 180 shutter, the shutter speed is (1/24) x (180/360) or 1/48 of a second. Pretty standard shutter speed for motion work. If you're shooting in a country with power that runs at 50Hz (like India, I believe), you may want to shoot with a 172.8 shutter (which comes out to 1/50 of a second at 24 FPS) in order to avoid flickering with some fluorescent lights or HMIs. It's pretty easy to learn once you get the hang of it.

Lenses with manual apertures are obviously almost always preferable to ones without for cine use, but in the case where there are no other options (ie, no manual aperture on the Tokina 11-16), using the camera's aperture control will be just fine. Slightly annoying, yes. Don't know how fine a control there is, and obviously you can't rack aperture if needed. But it should work fine for any native EF mount lens, so not entirely a deal-breaker there.

ade towell
08-26-2012, 07:38 PM
if you want some kind of manual control of aperture, an alternative would be the nikon 17-55 2.8 with relevant adaptor - you wont know the exact f stop but you can change it manually without having to access the camera screen and you will get smooth stepless aperture change. From my experience the Nikon is a better lens too, sharper with slightly better manual focus feel and it extends less when using the zoom. Unless IS eventually becomes workable on this camera this seems a better bet to me

Philip Lipetz
08-27-2012, 10:27 PM
Mangigandan

The canon 17-55mm has a angle of view equivalent to 39-125mm on a 135 format camera.