24-105 not good for video?

[frowni]

I just bought a new mark iii for video purposes only. Since i bought the body, now its time for the lens. I was planning to get 24-105 since my budget is enough for that but a friend of mine says that 24-105 is useless and i cant get quality shots with it. He says i should get 24-70...its bit more expensive..is he right? I know im not a pro and bought a very expensive equipment but i had the money...you know

 

[JohnTrav]

24-105 is fine for video. Plus it has IS so it would be better if you are hand holding or video also. I used a 55-250 on my 7D and its no where near as nice as a 24-105 and the video still came out very good. I would just get the 24-105 and save the money. Plus the extra zoom is nice to have. A lot of people use that lens for video and have great reviews about it.

If you bought the mark iii new why did t you buy it with the kit lens. It comes with a 24-105. It would have been a little cheaper that way

 

[Buckster]

Ask your friend WHY he thinks it's "useless" and get back to us with the answer.

 

[EIngerson]

^^^^^I'm curious to hear that also.

 

[Overread]

Your friend is likely missinformed and probably biased because the 24-105mm is "only" f4 and not f2.8 like the 24-70mm.

Actually the 24-105mm is one of the best zooms in the canon line for video work because its one of the few that keeps its focusing point fixed as you change the focal length. This means that you can zoom during video recording and your focus won't move. Both versions of the 24-70mm don't do this (the point of focus will shift) - even expensive ones like the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII shift the focus a little. For stills its not a problem as the AF can recalculate - for video it is a problem - esp on DSLR setups where you don't have quite the same focusing setup as on a dedicated video camera (though you can get close with accessories).

 

[cptkid]

As above, also a 2.8 is an irrelevant aperture for video.

You cannot shoot that wide open, and you really shouldn't.

F4 is plenty wide enough for shooting video and still having good depth of field.

In all honesty, if you want to take video seriously, you should be shooting with primes, and never ever zooming during filming.

I guess buying a zoom gives you the ability to shot at a number of focal lengths. However, never zoom during filming.

 

[Buckster]

In all honesty, if you want to take video seriously, you should be shooting with primes, and never ever zooming during filming.

That's ridiculous.

 

[Overread]

I can't count the number of times I've seen video zoom - it might be one of those things like HDR or selective colouring where its "WRONG" to do it until you know "HOW" to do it; but is often a cool thing lots of newbies do

 

[Buckster]

I can't count the number of times I've seen video zoom - it might be one of those things like HDR or selective colouring where its "WRONG" to do it until you know "HOW" to do it; but is often a cool thing lots of newbies do

I see it all the time in professional motion pictures, sometimes done VERY creatively.

 

[cptkid]

In all honesty, if you want to take video seriously, you should be shooting with primes, and never ever zooming during filming.

That's ridiculous.

I can't count the number of times I've seen video zoom - it might be one of those things like HDR or selective colouring where its "WRONG" to do it until you know "HOW" to do it; but is often a cool thing lots of newbies do

I see it all the time in professional motion pictures, sometimes done VERY creatively.

Why is that ridiculous ?

Zooming during filming is so offputting and very disorientating for the viewer.

There is normally no place for it. Yes, it is used in movies, but is the OP seriously going to making feature films with his DSLR. No.

 

[jaomul]

In all honesty, if you want to take video seriously, you should be shooting with primes, and never ever zooming during filming.

That's ridiculous.

I can't count the number of times I've seen video zoom - it might be one of those things like HDR or selective colouring where its "WRONG" to do it until you know "HOW" to do it; but is often a cool thing lots of newbies do

I see it all the time in professional motion pictures, sometimes done VERY creatively.

Why is that ridiculous ?

Zooming during filming is so offputting and very disorientating for the viewer.

There is normally no place for it. Yes, it is used in movies, but is the OP seriously going to making feature films with his DSLR. No.

I am not getting into the arguement but I recently watched a documentary on whiskey making shot with a 5d Mark II. Zooming was a feature here and regular lenses were used (I know this because the guy who made it explained how he made it). I would ask though how you know the OP is not going to make feature films or use this style in their film making. Maybe primes is the norm for this but that is why zooms may be more creative, because they are not the norm

 

[HughGuessWho]

Pan and zoom at the same time is quite common. In fact, I would guess that you could not find a single professional video where it is not used at some point in the film.

 

[Buckster]

In all honesty, if you want to take video seriously, you should be shooting with primes, and never ever zooming during filming.

That's ridiculous.

I can't count the number of times I've seen video zoom - it might be one of those things like HDR or selective colouring where its "WRONG" to do it until you know "HOW" to do it; but is often a cool thing lots of newbies do

I see it all the time in professional motion pictures, sometimes done VERY creatively.

Why is that ridiculous ?

Because it's a statement that's so untrue, it's elevated to the point of, "silly or unreasonable and deserving to be laughed at."

Zooming during filming is so offputting and very disorientating for the viewer.

Thank you for your opinion, Siskel. That opinion hasn't stopped every "serious" filmmaker from using it in every "seriously" produced, directed and filmed professional video made or seen in quite a while.

There is normally no place for it.

Except for...

Yes, it is used in movies

:er:

but is the OP seriously going to making feature films with his DSLR. No.

Don't know, and neither do you. Don't care either. It can be used in ANY kind of film, even "serious" films made by people who want to take video "seriously", like, oh, I dunno - PROFESSIONAL FILMMAKERS who quite obviously take video "seriously".

By the way, what makes you the expert on this, especially in the face of it being used in pretty much every actual film made by people who take video "seriously" that any of us have ever seen? How in the world do you justify your statement in light of that blatantly observable indisputable fact?

 

[Juga]

That's ridiculous.

Why is that ridiculous ?

Because it's a statement that's so untrue, it's elevated to the point of, "silly or unreasonable and deserving to be laughed at."

Thank you for your opinion, Siskel. That opinion hasn't stopped every "serious" filmmaker from using it in every "seriously" produced, directed and filmed professional video made or seen in quite a while.

Except for...

Yes, it is used in movies

:er:

but is the OP seriously going to making feature films with his DSLR. No.

Don't know, and neither do you. Don't care either. It can be used in ANY kind of film, even "serious" films made by people who want to take video "seriously", like, oh, I dunno - PROFESSIONAL FILMMAKERS who quite obviously take video "seriously".

By the way, what makes you the expert on this, especially in the face of it being used in pretty much every actual film made by people who take video "seriously" that any of us have ever seen? How in the world do you justify your statement in light of that blatantly observable indisputable fact?

I have professional film friends and I think he should have said zooming isn't widely used for film unless it is artistic and used very rarely. At least my film friends share this sentiment.

 

[HughGuessWho]

I have professional film friends and I think he should have said zooming isn't widely used for film unless it is artistic and used very rarely. At least my film friends share this sentiment.

Don't watch very many movies these days, huh?