Author Topic: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?  (Read 7894 times)

Odin

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« on: January 02, 2016, 10:48:57 AM »
Hey guys.
Currently I own kit lenses ISII 18-55mm, but I want to upgrade to Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 as it perfectly fits my needs for video. Although, I'm not sure I will find it here, in Ukraine plus it has a high price tag.
In case I will not find this lenses, I will go for Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 or Tamron 18-50mm f/2.8. But I'm not sure which one is better. I've watched a couple of video and from that Sigma seems to have more detailed picture though it has not as good video stabilisation as Tamron has. Although some people recommend to get Tamron without IS as it has better video quality. Plus, I'm not sure that video quality would be much better than on my kit lenses.....
Guys with decent lenses, what can you recommend on this?

And, YES, I don't need autofocus. So if there are old-fashioned lenses which are very cool with low price tag I would gladly hear their names...

ansius

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #1 on: January 02, 2016, 11:43:04 AM »
I have worked with Tamron 18-50 f/2.8 without stabilization, and it is nice lens. con is that it has short focus throw, so it is hard no nail focus in manual mode, but it is with most photo lenses anyway. I own Canon 18-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM and it has grate stabilization, works well for hand held. but is is dark. the canon 24-105 f/4 i think is out of you budget, but it is a worthy investment, it will work on FF, and it is a good lens, good stabilization also.

Sigma art series lenses are very good, I would not look for stabilization below 35mm as it is not that necessary, when you master holding camera right. but if you go with Sigma, go only with ART series.

So I have two approaches either good stabilized lens (dark) or a fast prime. And here you can have many choises, because you also are from post soviet world - so there are plenty of grate old manual lenses to choose from, because with a simple adapter you can mount any m42 (Zenit, Practica), K (Pentax) lenses. if you digg around you can find superb ones (some that I use - http://ansius.lv/old-m42-lenses/)

Canon EOS 7D & 40D, EF-S 17-85mm IS USM, EF 28-300mm IS USM, Mir-20, Mir-1, Helios 44-5, Zenitar ME1, Industar 50-2, Industar 61L/Z-MC, Jupiter 37A, TAIR-3
http://www.ansius.lv http://ansius.500px.com

ansius

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #2 on: January 02, 2016, 02:13:19 PM »
I got asked to write more detailed about old lenses you can adapt, but I'll write here because someone else would benefit as well, I think.

First - you can adapt following mounts to EF:

Second - You can find very god and very bad lenses on those mounts, so you should do research before purchase and always check the lens for problems (lose focus thread, stuck aperture, fungus on glass, damaged etc)

Third - Especially with soviet lenses the quality varies, so you can have two lenses with same designation and one is stellar, other is bad.

Fourth - Lens worth getting:
  • Helios 44[Y]-[X] 58mm f/2.0 – [Y] means mount – where M stands for m42, K for Pentax K, the [X] at the end is sharpness, 1 trough 7, higher the number – sharper the lens. It based on Carl Zeiss Biotar 2/58. One of, if not the most popular soviet old m42 lenses because sold as kit lenses for Zenit cameras.
  • Jupiter 37A 135mm f/3.5 – there is also multi-coted version, based on Carl Zeiss Sonnar design, it is believed to be successor of Jupiter-11 witch is a lens with similar parameters and characteristics, but with m39 mount. Razor sharp lens, when stepped down, one of my favorites.
  • Industar 50-2 50mm f/3.5 – one of the most common old m42 lenses, is also common in rangefinder cameras and older m39 mount, grate for macro photography.
  • Mir-20 20mm f/3.5 – wide angle lens, based upon Carl Zeiss Flektogon 2,8/20, no the sharpest lens in corners, flares quite easily. Outperforms most of the kit lenses for DSLR’s tough. Rear filters – so rather hard to obtain, was supplied with 3 filters – uv, yellow, orange. There is more modern version M and also multi-coated
  • Mir -1  37mm f/2.8 – Highly praised but not really m42 lens, it is m39 mount, that you can adapt with simple ring, might not focus to infinity without adjustment, because m39 is 44.2mm not 44.5mm to film plane. This lens received “Grand prix Brussels 1958”. It is bit wider than normal lens, based on Carl Zeiss Flektagron, It has new sibling Mir-1b witch are true old m42 lenses. Flares really easily, but does that really beautifully.
  • Industar 61L/Z – 50mm f/2.8 – a nice normal lens, design based upon Carl Zeiss Tessar, with rather exotic Lanthanum glass witch is thought to be a little radiative, but also with good optical characteristics. Other is rather peculiar iris design, witch halfway mes nice star sharped bokeh. One of my favorites for HD DSLR filming.

Also worth to mention:
  • Jupiter 9 85mm f/2.8
  • Helios 40-2 50mm f/1.5

Also you can find many Zeiss m42 lenes and most of them are grate tiough I would say they are overpriced. There also are Praktica lenses that are mostly really good especially their 50mm one, that is sharper than Canon's 50mm f/1.8

there are many good Nikon lenses, but they might feel odd because they turn the other way for focus, and I'm not so familiar with them. I've mentioned lenses that I personally can vouch for, so if someone has something to add - please do!
Canon EOS 7D & 40D, EF-S 17-85mm IS USM, EF 28-300mm IS USM, Mir-20, Mir-1, Helios 44-5, Zenitar ME1, Industar 50-2, Industar 61L/Z-MC, Jupiter 37A, TAIR-3
http://www.ansius.lv http://ansius.500px.com

Odin

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #3 on: January 02, 2016, 04:58:49 PM »
Thanks alot! Already looking for old used lenses!
And what can you say about Pentacon 50mm f/1.8? Upd: its seems to be Praktica lenses, right? That's good, cat get it for 20-30 USD.

And....are there any possible issues with installing old lenses on Canon 600D?

Btw, watched several videos,Helios 44-4M make sharper video compared to Pentacon 50mm 1.8...

Levas

  • Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1741
  • 6d - Nightly build user
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #4 on: January 02, 2016, 08:24:00 PM »
For video I most of the times use the Canon 35mm f2.0 with IS.
Very new lens from Canon and very sharp. Non L lens, so not that expensive ;)
I use it on a full frame Canon, on crop it would become more like a 50mm lens.

Last summer I bought a used Helios 44-2 58mm f2.0 and use it with a m42 adapter.
I like this lens a lot for video, it's sharp in the middle, but not supersharp like the canon 35mm f2.0 with IS.
I have one of those old preset diafragma versions (so diafragma has no steps, good for video)
For video I have a 6 stops ND filter on it most of the times, so I can use f2.8 or f4.0 during daytime.
Wide open the lens is very soft outside of the middle, so don't try to place people to the side of the frames with this lens :P
And did I mention it has the cool swirly bokeh!


ansius

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #5 on: January 02, 2016, 08:35:11 PM »
pentacon 50mm is practica lens, but as I said it is matter of individual lens as quality varies a lot. Helios 44M-4 is average sharp, bet best I have seen is 44M-6, have never seen with index 7, tough non are sharp wide open, you have to compare them head top head with same settings to be sure. I have compared the Jupiter 37A (135mm f/3.5), and at f/5.6 it blew out Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 @ 135mm f/5.6 but wide open it looses.

All Pentacon 50mm lenses I have seen have been nice sharp. Helios has a specific bokeh when wide open, and you can't mistake if for any other lens (maybe the same design Zeiss Biotar).

Get a decent adapter tough, and make sure you can focus to infinity, I have had lenses that had to be adjusted. For video I rarely use ones with AF confirm chip as I have found that they tend to misbehave and can have error on some cameras, so I found it more cumbersome. But do not go to fancy either, no pint of paying large amounts for simple adapter. Even tough you camera is not a weather sealed, adapted lens rarely is so be aware of that. I have to because my 7D is and with L lenses I can use them is quite harsh weather, but with manual lenses I have to be careful.

super sharpness is not always the best thing, because it will emphasize moire more, so I tend to use lenses and according apertures that are sharp enough for video, unless you film with 5Dmk3, 7Dmk2 or RAW in crop mode then you need all sharpness you can get. So I have had problems with my Jupiter 37A, I have to be careful.
Canon EOS 7D & 40D, EF-S 17-85mm IS USM, EF 28-300mm IS USM, Mir-20, Mir-1, Helios 44-5, Zenitar ME1, Industar 50-2, Industar 61L/Z-MC, Jupiter 37A, TAIR-3
http://www.ansius.lv http://ansius.500px.com

PaulHarwood856

  • Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #6 on: January 02, 2016, 10:18:36 PM »
     I have the Canon 50mm f1.8 EF, Canon 24mm f2.8 EF-S, Canon 100mm f2.8 macro, and Tamron 17-50 f2.8 VC. I absolutely love these lenses, but the one I use most is the Tamron. I really don't think you would regret purchasing this. I looked into the Sigma, and I agree what you said about detailed photos and not as good stabilization (from my research). The VC (Image Stabilization) on the Tamron is amazing. This focal range is perfect, and the lense I have is sharp. With unsharp mask in post production, it is even sharper!Definitely try it out.

     Another option is the Canon FD lenses. You can actually buy an active adapter for these on Ebay, and they will then work electronically with your camera. So if you find one great FD lense for the price, you could go this route. The active adaptation is around $100, and although I haven't tried it or the FD lenses, I still think this is a great route for getting good video quality at a decent price.

     I hope this helps you on your journey to buying a new lens for your DSLR.

- Paul Harwood

Odin

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #7 on: January 02, 2016, 11:34:04 PM »
Today got myself to the shop (despite the New Year celebration some shops are working, wow) and tried Tamrom 17-50 and Canon 50mm. Well....Definitely, Canon 50mm is a great option for close-ups but without any rig or a steadycam it's worthless.

Tamron looks pretty good, but at the same time I didn't find any difference between it and Kit lenses on Aperture 3.5, 4.0 and so on. May be, image looks sharper a bit, but it's just 2-5% of difference. During post-processing I also didn't find too much of a difference. Sure f2.8 is better than 3.5 in low light, but I'm not sure that $300 worth this slight difference. If it was 1.8 at least....

I think I'd rather go with the old-fashioned lenses like 44-4M 58mm or Pentacon 50mm which are really cheap and will help me out in low light conditions. And will wait till I find any supplier who can deliver Sigma 18-35mm 1.8.

mothaibaphoto

  • Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 393
  • pesky kid
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #8 on: January 03, 2016, 04:36:43 AM »
You make me curious - does really nobody ship this to Ukraine, it's almost Europe...
What's wrong with this ebay seller -
US $679.00, free exp. ship. to Ukraine, worldwide warranty?

ansius

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #9 on: January 03, 2016, 08:17:38 AM »
he doesn't ship to Latvia :D

I would not advise FD lenses on EOS body because you need adapter with optical element, and then you need a real good one, a long the level of metabones, because flange distance of FD is smaller than on EF. Tough on m4/3 and Sony E this is one of the best options price / performance wise. Just for video maybe, but as I do timelapses, I still need it to work decent in photo mode as well.

as for the 50mm ones, for video definitely go with old manual lens, easier to work with and they can easily be de-clicked. Auto focus on any 50mm canon lens is awful. Even on the expensive 1.4 and 1.2 ones, it is not precise, you can try focusing the same spot like 10 times and maybe one will be in focus.

only problem with old lenses - there are so few options on the wide angle ok Mir-20, zenitar-16, peneleg 8, but they fall back to modern counterparts by miles. Tokina has some good options there 11-16 and the new 11-20 that you do not need to rob a bank for.
Canon EOS 7D & 40D, EF-S 17-85mm IS USM, EF 28-300mm IS USM, Mir-20, Mir-1, Helios 44-5, Zenitar ME1, Industar 50-2, Industar 61L/Z-MC, Jupiter 37A, TAIR-3
http://www.ansius.lv http://ansius.500px.com

rsmith02

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2016, 01:56:58 PM »
I had the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non-stabilized and then switched to a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 with OS for video. The Sigma is sharper and the stabilization works well enough to handhold video and photos within reason. Note that Japan prices are quite cheap if you can find a seller to ship to you for Sigma lenses (17-50 is $200 something, 30mm 1.4 art is $300 plus shipping and tax.)

Both zooms have very short focus throws which is not good for video but you can deal with it. Just don't expect to be able to artfully rack focus.

I also have a Pentax Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 lens adapted from m42. It works great for video but I can't focus it accurately for photography with the viewfinder and a focus confirm chip.

Odin

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Re: Canon 600D Lenses: what's better?
« Reply #11 on: January 03, 2016, 07:50:22 PM »
Just got the Helios 44-2 lenses. I'm amazed with the video quality, actually. It's soooo good for 30 bucks lenses!))
Here is a raw footage, may be someone will find it helpful: