16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS

Started Mar 30, 2011 | Discussions
eco_bach
Forum MemberPosts: 51
Like?
16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS
Mar 30, 2011

Hi
i shoot mostly video am am perplexed by which lens to invest in next.
I have a Tamron 28-70

A Tamron 17-50 NON VC which I am considering selling because I want image stabilisation.

And also a 50 year old Pentax Super takumar 50mm1.4

Lenses I am considering

1--Canon 17-55 IS to replace my tamron 17-50

2-Canon 16-35L

3_Canon 35 1.4L OR Sigma 30 1.4

Please, help me spend my money!
Which ONE of the above would you get?

Lemming51
Forum ProPosts: 12,795Gear list
Like?
only 1 of your choices has IS
In reply to eco_bach, Mar 30, 2011

eco_bach wrote:

Hi
i shoot mostly video am am perplexed by which lens to invest in next.

I have a Tamron 28-70, a Tamron 17-50 NON VC which I am considering selling because I want image stabilisation. And also a 50 year old Pentax Super takumar 50mm1.4
Lenses I am considering:
1--Canon 17-55 IS to replace my tamron 17-50

That's the lens. Get it. Unless you want to spend less, in which case you should consider Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM, or Tamron SP 17-50 f/2.8 XR Di II VC

2--Canon 16-35L

No. No IS, too short a zoom range, too expensive compared to better alternatives.

3--Canon 35 1.4L OR Sigma 30 1.4

No IS, or no IS.

-- hide signature --

Unapologetic Canon Apologist

 Lemming51's gear list:Lemming51's gear list
Canon EOS 40D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
irm
irm
Senior MemberPosts: 2,531Gear list
Like?
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS
In reply to Lemming51, Mar 31, 2011

I suspect IS will not be much use to you while shooting video on a Canon DSLR because the IS does not run continuously. Also you will hear the IS as a whine or buzz in the sound.

I have 2 of the lenses you are interested in, the 16-35 and the 17-55. I haven't tried viedeo with the 16-35, but have to agree with the previous poster the zoom range is too small. I am not sure that the zoom range on the 17-55 is that great either, the 18-200 or 55-250 would probably better for video work on a DSLR.

I bought my wife the Lumix G10 with only the 14-42mm lens, way too short for video, not enough zoom, so when she comes home from her overseas trip the 45-200 is waiting.
--
my 2 exposed flashcubes worth.

Ian the pbase supporter.
http://pbase.com/ianm_au

Please check my profile for equipment list.
An amateur with dreams of being a good to excellent photographer.

 irm's gear list:irm's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Panasonic Lumix DMC-G10 Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
James Madara
Forum MemberPosts: 98
Like?
Re: 16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS
In reply to eco_bach, Mar 31, 2011

I have the Canon 17-55 IS and love it, however I agree with the other poster IS isn't meant for video. The best IS for video is a tripod. This lens in fantastic for photos.

I would think your 50mm would be great for video. You can always use look at getting a 35mm or 85mm if needed.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tejas Ramakrishnan
Forum MemberPosts: 73
Like?
Re: 16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS
In reply to James Madara, Mar 31, 2011

You seem to be ready to make an investment in any of the said lenses. I think you should consider the 17-85mm also...

See.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens as shown below costs near to $1000 or more if you are looking to get a new one...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000EW8074/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=dp-rev-forum-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B000EW8074

The Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS USM lens comes for about $500

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0002Y5WXO/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=dp-rev-forum-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0002Y5WXO

Or the Canon EF 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD Wide Angle lens for around $800 (some rebate now at amazon i think. It was listed for $1200 or so a while back)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002NEGTTM/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=dp-rev-forum-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B002NEGTTM

Hope you find a good option among the three. In case you are looking for low light shots more then, you could stick with the EF-S 17-55 which has a larger aperture and is the faster of the set, but the added zoom of the 17-85 and or the wide angle feature of the 15-85 might interest you. Check them out too. Good luck and all the best.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jday83
New MemberPosts: 5
Like?
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS
In reply to irm, Apr 6, 2011

Totally agree with not choosing IS for your video shooting. To take it even further, the IQ between the Tamron 28-75 and 70-200 2.8 is incredibly close to the canon equivalents, given their cost. The only reason I went with Canon L for all my glass is the AF isn't as accurate or fast enough with Tamron, from my experience. The IS was also a major demand of my still shooting. I tested all these lenses side by side and researched them obsessively before not choosing Tamron. But if I were in your shoes, I'd stick with T.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pultzar
Senior MemberPosts: 1,424
Like?
No, you really want IS for video
In reply to irm, Apr 6, 2011

The 15-85 runs the IS continuously during video and it is dead silent. It is remarkable and makes hand holding the camera very very usable.

I have also used the 17-55 and it worked brilliantly as well with IS. The only lens so far that I have had a noise problem with is the 70-200 f/4

If you are hand holding and want shaky video, forgo IS. Otherwise make sure that you have IS or another stabilization system.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Pultzar
Senior MemberPosts: 1,424
Like?
Re: 16-35 f2.8 L vs 17-55 IS
In reply to Tejas Ramakrishnan, Apr 6, 2011

The 15-85 works great with IS during video. It isn't so great for zooming while taking video, but none of the mentioned lenses are.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Faintandfuzzy
Senior MemberPosts: 3,328Gear list
Like?
Only one option
In reply to eco_bach, Apr 6, 2011

The 17-55 is the only lens you list with IS. And it is a superb lens! Get it!

 Faintandfuzzy's gear list:Faintandfuzzy's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Nikon Coolpix 950 Olympus E-10 Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
papabear2
Senior MemberPosts: 1,139
Like?
Re: Only one option
In reply to Faintandfuzzy, Apr 7, 2011

The IS is necessary for video, the only drawback is that your arms may get tired. AND there is no noise with my 18-135.

You can develop a style of zooming and refocusing while shooting if you choose a time where you can sneak in a cross dissolve transition 1 or 3 sec. in post. But certain situations may demand manual refocus

the micro shake is removed in IS

The Pentax takumar 50 1.4 for the 60 D is the the current rage at some of the video forums because of it's unique color treatment.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
skanter
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,586Gear list
Like?
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS
In reply to irm, Apr 7, 2011

irm wrote:

I suspect IS will not be much use to you while shooting video on a Canon DSLR because the IS does not run continuously. Also you will hear the IS as a whine or buzz in the sound.

You suspect wrong. IS is essential for hand-held video, it runs continuously, and makes no noise.

Please check your facts before answering questions.
--
Sam K., NYC

 skanter's gear list:skanter's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Sigma 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dave_bass5
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,907Gear list
Like?
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS
In reply to skanter, Apr 10, 2011

I definitely get IS noise from my 17-55 in my 60D videos if im recording in a quiet environment.

This is a fact and ill upload videos to prove it if needed. There have been loads of posts about IS noise and video.

I do agree IS is very essential.

 dave_bass5's gear list:dave_bass5's gear list
Canon PowerShot S110 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 650D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
akiskev
Junior MemberPosts: 44
Like?
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS
In reply to skanter, Apr 10, 2011

So true!

skanter wrote:

irm wrote:

I suspect IS will not be much use to you while shooting video on a Canon DSLR because the IS does not run continuously. Also you will hear the IS as a whine or buzz in the sound.

You suspect wrong. IS is essential for hand-held video, it runs continuously, and makes no noise.

Please check your facts before answering questions.
--
Sam K., NYC

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
turokker
New MemberPosts: 13
Like?
Re: only 1 of your choices has IS
In reply to dave_bass5, Apr 10, 2011

dave_bass5 wrote:

I definitely get IS noise from my 17-55 in my 60D videos if im recording in a quiet environment.

"me too." I used to own a 15-85 which I don't recall getting any noise with. maybe improvements made in the 3-stop -> 4-stop IS iteration...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
katman68
Regular MemberPosts: 480
Like?
Not true
In reply to irm, Apr 10, 2011

"IS doesn't run continuous"?! That is false.

My 70-200/f4(only IS lens i have) did so zoomed in tight the entire time shooting video of silky sifakas in Madagascar back in Nov. Thankfully! Can't recall if i set it up that way w/Custom Functions by pressing a specific button, but don't think so.

My 28-70/2.8 i mostly shot the video with on that trip did NOT have IS, and it shows. As a result, i now consider IS an invaluable feature for DSLR video due to the inherent stability issues. Yes when using the built-in mike it may pick up the IS noise(at least noisier models like my 70-200), but generally just quiet shooting. On occasion i simply turned it off at the lens(if i was able to prop against a tree etc). But an external mike or recorder should be used anyways & will minimize this. Compared to video without IS, video WITH is well worth any drawback. That is unless you by a stability mount, which can easily run well over $1000.

Which lens is best for you is a personal decision. It depends on what focal length you prefer for one. I prefer to avoid EF-S lenses because of future full-frame body compatiblilty issues, but the 17-55/2.8 IS is a great choice. Particularly for video with the IS. When the $ is there, that is the lens i plan to get to replace my 28-70 when shooting video. You hear great things about its optical Q too. Had i known HOW bad DSLR video stability was prior to my trip, i seriously would've looked into renting the 17-55.

The 24-105/f4 IS is another versatile choice, thought unsure if the optical performance is on par w/the 17-55 due to the wider range(despite being an L-series).
Good luck w/your decision...

Mark

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads