Best canon lens for both video and stills?

[ph0toe]

so, i am aware dslr aren't meant to do videos, but I have seen great films and even movie taken with a dslr. I want that cinematic look. what lens can give me the best video look as well as also being very versatile and can take great photos as well?

Like for video/film i'll love to be able to take great crispy b-roll shot, etc

What would you suggest and WHY?

 

[Dacaur]

Half the reason I bought my current DSLR is to make HD videos....

Without a budget it's tough to help.... But here is what I use...

Right now my go to video lense is my canon Efs 18-135 nano usm. It's made only for Canon crop sensor bodies, so if that's not what you use it's not much help...

It's great for video because it focuses ridiculously fast, and silently, so you will never hear it focusing on your video. It has great image stabilization as well, and it can use canons pz-e1 power zoom adapter, which not only gives you super smooth zooming via a button, but you can zoom it remotely from a smart phone (it's also quiet enough not to be heard in a video)... So far it's the only lense the zoom adapter works with.

 

[ph0toe]

I use a full frame body sensor camera, so what would you recommend and why?

 

[Original katomi]

If you can go to your local camera dealer and try some different lenses, I have an understanding that the STM stepping motor range are quiet. You do know that you will only get 29 min 59 sec of vid on your DSLR at one go.
Just tried my canon 70 200 f4 non IS l series and you can hear that as it zooms..so maybe not so god for video

 

[petrochemist]

so, i am aware dslr aren't meant to do videos, but I have seen great films and even movie taken with a dslr. I want that cinematic look. what lens can give me the best video look as well as also being very versatile and can take great photos as well?

Like for video/film i'll love to be able to take great crispy b-roll shot, etc

What would you suggest and WHY?

I would suggest you consider what you want to shoot first.
You haven't indicated the field of view/focal length or subject type, there can be no best for either stills or video until that's answered.
In reality the available budget also becomes very important, then there are a series of more nebulous factors, things like bokeh, color rendering & the feel in use. The ideal lens for one person will be too clinical for someone else...

 

[ph0toe]

So I'm looking to shoot mostly close sit ups video (sitting in front of my camera and talking to it) perhaps add some props to show what i am talking about etc (like a presentation but more casual).

I'm not sure if a prime lens 35mm will do the job since i do like that it doesn't show a full body and only crops my top body, but on the other hand I don't think its good to show props where I need to show a full body clip.

would it be good to invest in a zoom lens 70-200 for crispy b-roll and a 35mm for the needs I just discussed above? thoughts?

 

[Dacaur]

Depends on how far you plan to have the camera. 70mm is pretty zoomed in, you would likely need to back the camera far enough away that you would need an off camera microphone even when just doing an upper body shot.

 

[Derrel]

Be specific camera that you are using plays a big part. What kind of a crop will be applied to the video?

Some cameras shoot 4K video with a horrible crop, which would necessitate using a much wider angle or shorter lens than otherwise.

I would think that a good quality zoom lens would be preferable to a single focal length lens, just for the flexibility in framing your shots.

 

[Derrel]

You say that you want that cinematic look, but I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that. I assume you mean that long telephoto look, with a very blurred out background, in which case the 70-200 zoom lens would probably be a good choice.

 

[ph0toe]

yes, the bokeh affect so a f 2.8 would be preferable to a f 1.2 prime lens?

the thing is a 70-200 would be good for b-rolls of say clothing laying on my bed and close up of say buttons, tags, etc. However would i need a separate lens for a close up video of my face talking to a camera with the background blurred is the question.

I am currently working with a mark 3 5d canon and the 24-105mm lens. it has f 4.0 so not giving me the blurry background effect.

 

[Dacaur]

No lense will give you a blurry background without the right setup. Put someone 3 feet in front of a wall or hedge, and you aren't going to get good bokeh no matter the lense. On the other hand, your 24-105 f4 can create great bokeh with the right setup. Move the camera back just far enough that you can zoom in all the way to 105, then move the person so there is more space between them and the background.
Basically;
Zoom in all the way, but keep the camera as close to the subject as possible.
Get the subject as far from the background as possible.

 

[petrochemist]

yes, the bokeh affect so a f 2.8 would be preferable to a f 1.2 prime lens?

the thing is a 70-200 would be good for b-rolls of say clothing laying on my bed and close up of say buttons, tags, etc. However would i need a separate lens for a close up video of my face talking to a camera with the background blurred is the question.

I am currently working with a mark 3 5d canon and the 24-105mm lens. it has f 4.0 so not giving me the blurry background effect.

NO.
You want shallow depth of field (DOF) - 'bokeh affect' is something that shows a misunderstanding of the work bokeh which refers to the quality of out of focus portions rather than how out of focus they are. Bokeh can be smooth, harsh, doughnut, soap bubble, shaped... but not big or small.

If you want to make the background out of focus a wider aperture is preferable, but there are other factors to consider too @Dacaur has summed them up. A long focal length at f/2.8 will have shallower depth of field than a wide angle at f/1.2, but if both lenses have the same focal length & the camera/subject/background positions are the same, a f/1.2 lens will have less than 1/4 the DOF of a f/2.8. Indeed at f/1.2 it's not uncommon for the ears of a portrait to be badly out of focus, because the DOF is not enough to cover them when focused on the eyes.