Which 24-70 for video with 5D3 (considering binning!)

[adrjork]

Hi, my question is which 24-70 for video with 5D3 (Magic Lantern).
First of all, I don't use stabilization so much (almost always on tripod or gimbal), so I'm interested into image-quality comparison.
And the comparison is between Canon (2.8L II) and Tamron (old 2.8 G1 VC). (Not new G2 because it's too heavy for my gimbal.)
From many tests I've seen on the web, it seems that Canon 24-70 2.8L II is sharp on all the frame (borders included) while old Tam.G1 is sharp only in central region, while smoother towards the corners of the frame.
This is obviously an "theoretical" photographic comparison, but in video mode (full-frame) we should also consider the "binning effect".
My quesiton is: considering the binning, the difference between sharpnesses (in the center vs on the borders of the frame) is still noticeable? Or the difference is reduced? (In this case, the Tamron would be the best choice for the buck!)
So the question is translated into: which 24-70 do you recommend, as ML users?

Thanks SO much.

[50mm1200s]

Canon is better on all MTF measures. I don't know about chromatic aberration, vignette and distortion, but the "L" series from Canon usually has very little of that. But, there's a difference of $400 between the two, so...

I would recommend, though, you look into old primes. Canon lenses have this "digital-look" and I personally don't find it suitable for video. With $1200 you could buy a neat Takumar 50mm f/1.4 for about $300, a Rokinon Cine DS DS24M-C 24mm T1.5 for $700, and a Black ProMist 1/8 filter to suppress a bit the "digital-look" of the Rokinon (for $83)...
Much better choices, in my opinion.

[adrjork]

Thank you for your reply.
Very interesting the using of vintage lenses for digital video, thanks for the advice.
Unfortunately I can't go for vintage lenses right now, because I started a feature project months ago with modern lenses, and I can't change style now (I used Canon 50 1.8, Sigma Art 35 1.4, Sigma EX 85 and old Tamron 24-70 now damaged... that's the reason of my question: remaining on Tamron or changing for Canon 24-70).
Anyway, for future projects, I'm surely interested into testing vintage lenses.
Takumar 55mm could be one, but also Helios 58mm 44-2, and Jupiter 9 85mm.
For 24mm and 35mm, any vintage advice?

[50mm1200s]

Unfortunately I can't go for vintage lenses right now, because I started a feature project months ago with modern lenses

Well, if you want to use manual lens in the future, then I suggest you buy a cheap 24-70 for now. Don't waste money in some fancy canon lens.

Anyway, for future projects, I'm surely interested into testing vintage lenses.
Takumar 55mm could be one, but also Helios 58mm 44-2, and Jupiter 9 85mm.
For 24mm and 35mm, any vintage advice?

Back in the day, Zuiko (OM series) did some good wide-angle lenses.
Of course, if you want great quality you'll have to spend more money on old Zeiss or Leica lenses...

[adrjork]

...old Zeiss or Leica lenses...

Might you be more specific? Any specific model, for example?
(Thanks)

[50mm1200s]

Might you be more specific? Any specific model, for example?
(Thanks)

I'm not a specialist on this subject, but I heard the old Distagon from Zeiss (the 25mm f/2.8) and the Elmarit-R from Leitz (24mm f/2.8) are the good ones.
These two companies produced and still producing the best optics in the world. Anything produced by then for professional photography/cinematography in the last 50 years is top quality. Zeiss has a contract with Arri (arguably the best comercial cinema camera producers today). The Leica division that produces the optics, Leitz, designed the Primo series for Panavision. Summicron lenses from Leica is known to have the best sharpness and contrast ever (for spherical, in the anamorphic area it's the G-series from Panavision).

[adrjork]

Thanks a lot for these infos!

[adrjork]

I think it would be very useful (also for many newbies like me) if you would be so kind to help me defining a sort of shopping bag for vintage "video oriented" lenses for full-frame camera.
Let say we consider 5 primes for FF: 20-to-28, 35, 50-to-60, 70, 85-to-90.
An let say we consider 2 different set of 5 lenses: the first with 5 cheap vintage lenses (like Takumar etc.), and the second with 5 a bit more "ideal/quality" (for the buck) lenses (like - as you wrote - Zeiss etc.)

Thanks in advance.