Wide Angle Lens for Self-Shooting

[EposVox]

Hey all,

 

(tl;dr I'm looking for good, cheap 14-18mm lens recommendations for a T3i)

 

So for my YouTube videos for the past few years, I've been shooting with my Canon EOS Rebel T3i/600D. I've mainly just used the kit lens, though I've bought a Canon 50mm and some old manual film SLR lenses to use, as well.

 

For the A-Roll of my videos (shooting myself, 1-man crew, need to be close to focus on self while in position), I still use the kit lens at the 18mm distance. This has gotten me my best results. However, I'd like to step up my game, and can't afford a new body right now. (A7s ii or GH4 WAAANT!)

 

Since I shoot with the 18mm length on the kit lens (I know on cropped sensors the measurements change, etc.) I've been looking at Prime lenses around that same wide-angle fashion so I don't have to change my set. On another tech YouTuber's gear list, they recommended the Tokina 11-16mm.

 

I was looking for a prime lens around this price range and found the Rokinon 16mm, which I've since been given pretty strong recommendation for.

 

They're both around the same price. My ideal "budget" would be closer to $300, but ~$425 being my max, since that includes these.

 

Any other recommendations for a lens like this over these options?

 

Thanks guys!

[ALwin]

snip

 

Get the Tokina, it is better rated and you won't be stuck with a manual only lens.  The Tokina lens is among the top lens in terms of sharpness, minimal distortion and image quality for an ultra wide angle lens for a cropped sensor.

 

However, I don't recommend using an ultra wide lens for video.  For various reasons

• With an ultra wide focal length of 10-18mm (15-24mm equiv on full frame) if the subject of the video is standing anywhere beyond a distance of 1 meter or so away from the camera the lens is already in infinity focus.
• If your subject is close to the lens, wide angle lenses will always distort the image.  For example, try doing a head shot with an ultra wide and the subject's nose will be bulbous.
• But step a distance away from the camera and with an ultra wide angle lens you become small.

I hate to say this but Ken Rockwell makes a good point about ultra wide lenses.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm

 

So if you're going to use the ultra wide angle lens to video yourself, unless you're very close to the camera it will see most of your room.  Do you really want people to see what stuff you have inside your room?

[EposVox]

So if you're going to use the ultra wide angle lens to video yourself, unless you're very close to the camera it will see most of your room.  Do you really want people to see what stuff you have inside your room?

 

I'm shooting myself practically right on top of the lens, against a wall/backdrop specifically composed to be behind me in video.

 

Would the 16mm really be that big of a difference from the 18mm I've been shooting with? There's no distortion/issues with that.

Or does it have a wider field of view because it's not part of a massive zoom lens? (Kit goes 18-55.)

 

I don't have much space to shoot in, so I can't use the 24mm, 36mm, or 50mm lenses I have, plus I wouldn't be able to manually focus myself from that distance anyway. So closer has always been better in terms of shooting convenience and having the room to still have a soft background behind me.

 

Not to mention literally everything I've read/watched/heard about this kind of shooting has said that a wide-angle lens with presenter up close is the preferred style. (And thus what most people I follow use.)

 

And when I have shot a person-subject with a further away lens, everything makes me feel super claustrophobic. Too cramped.

[ALwin]

This is what happens if you stand close to a camera with an ultra wide lens

 

And here is an example of when you are standing away from an ultra wide lens, the people in the photo are just a couple of meters away from the camera, but they appear less important than the room itself.  They become small.

[EposVox]

This is what happens if you stand close to a camera with an ultra wide lens

 

And here is an example of when you are standing away from an ultra wide lens, the people in the photo are just a couple of meters away from the camera, but they appear less important than the room itself.  They become small.

 

Yes, I know how the lenses work, but that's more of an extreme, closer to "fish eye" level example.

So if that Tokina lens will be that much more "ultra wide" then I need to go for an 18mm instead of 16mm.

 

But at 18mm, even with an "ultrawide converter" lens attachment, I've never had quite that extreme of results.

 

But of course I'm not seeing an affordable 18mm lens like this o_O

[ALwin]

snip

 

There are wide angles and ultra wide angles.  I'll speak in terms of 35mm equivalent field of view.

 

Anything below 20mm focal length (on a full frame camera) can be considered ultra wide.

Anything above 20mm (with perhaps a few millimeters of overlap) and below 35mm can be called a wide angle lens.

 

If you want a flat image with minimal distortion and correct proportions, I recommend using focal lengths between 24-50mm for a wider field of view, with 35mm being a sweet spot.  Of course, to see more in the frame you need to move the camera farther back.  While focal lengths above 50mm are great for tight framing of the scene.

 

Between 16mm and 18mm focal lengths is just a few degrees difference in field of view.  On your camera the 18mm focal length is already giving you equivalent to a 29mm lens' field of view on a full frame camera.

 

Additionally it's all about what you want to keep in the composition.

[ALwin]

snip

 

You already have a decent 18mm lens, on your 18-55 zoom kit.  What ultra wide converter?

 

For focusing issues, as your camera is going be in a fixed spot, place an object where you plan to be standing and prefocus on that object.  Additionally work with hyperfocal techniques.  Stop down your lens to about f/5.6 which will give you a decent DOF to work with.

 

You can also get an old Nikon lens like this and mount it on your Canon camera using an adapter.  This lens, while it is old and cheap, has a few advantages over your Canon 18-55 kit lens.  The markings and numbers on the lens that this one has is not available on the Canon kit lens.  These markings will help you get precise focusing and hyperfocal measurements.

 

There is also this lens on ebay, a Sigma 18mm lens for Nikon and mount it on the camera with an adapter.  Didn't see a Canon mount version for it.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Nikon-AF-Mount-Sigma-18mm-3-5-Lens-/221943742622?hash=item33ace0c09e:g:k9cAAOSweuxWS5rB

[EposVox]

You already have a decent 18mm lens, on your 18-55 zoom kit.  What ultra wide converter?

Yes, but it's not very sharp.

 

Also, I just looked at sample customer images with the Tokina lens (didn't see them before and I'm not seeing any on Amazon specifically for the Rokinon lens, though I may dig around), and the distortion is nowhere near that level, because it's not quite that "ultra wide." And it looks quite good, potentially selling me on the lens, despite being more expensive ><

 

The converter came with a bunch of used gear I bought at some point and happened to fit on my kit lens. Definitely widens things up a bit, only adds a tiny amount of distortion, which I can compensate for. I don't use it regularly, currently, but I did for a little while. Was happier with how kit lens looked without it.

 

[EposVox]

 

For focusing issues, as your camera is going be in a fixed spot, place an object where you plan to be standing and prefocus on that object.  

 

I assure you that has not once worked out remotely in my favor.

 

And - at least with my other lenses - even with 2 umbrella lights with 4 studio bulbs each and a center soft box light with 4 bulbs, lamp, few clamp lights, etc. I still don't have enough lighting to make 5.6 aperture look even close to decently lit o_O

 

All of these reasons hence why going for a close-up lens that I can focus where I'm at and has a wide aperture. Not sure why I'm being fought on this choice. 

This isn't photography, this isn't multi-people shooting, outdoors shooting, etc. All stuff I've heard before and flat-out doesn't really work in this situation.

[EposVox]

There are wide angles and ultra wide angles.  I'll speak in terms of 35mm equivalent field of view.

 

Anything below 20mm focal length (on a full frame camera) can be considered ultra wide.

Anything above 20mm (with perhaps a few millimeters of overlap) and below 35mm can be called a wide angle lens.

 

If you want a flat image with minimal distortion and correct proportions, I recommend using focal lengths between 24-50mm for a wider field of view, with 35mm being a sweet spot.  Of course, to see more in the frame you need to move the camera farther back.  While focal lengths above 50mm are great for tight framing of the scene.

 

Between 16mm and 18mm focal lengths is just a few degrees difference in field of view.  On your camera the 18mm focal length is already giving you equivalent to a 29mm lens' field of view on a full frame camera.

 

Additionally it's all about what you want to keep in the composition.

 

This got buried, but this is good, clarifying information. Thank you.

 

So, then, would the Tokina/Rokinon not provide the same results, or is my kit lens marked in compensation for the cropped sensor (18mm equivalent on my cam) whereas the other lenses are not?

[ALwin]

snip

 

Ahh those kind of converters, I avoid using them.

 

Stop down your lens to a smaller aperture and you will find a sweet spot for improved sharpness.  Usually it's somewhere between f/4 and f/11.  Also, you're shooting video which has motion.  It's never going be as sharp as a still photo.  If you need more lights, get some.

 

I'm not telling you not to get one, I'm advising you to find a better solution than resorting to using a wide angle lens because you want to keep the camera close at hand.  Which will likely introduce distortions.  I never said don't get the Tokina, if you buy it use the 16mm end.  The Tokina has a better IQ than the Rokinon.  The advantage of the Rokinon is that it is a cine lens, so the focusing wheel on the lens has a wider turn arc than stills photo lenses.  This will give you more precise control over manual focus.

 

Both lenses will produce similar IQ for video, the Tokina will however produce better IQ for stills photos.

 

Here's a video shot with a D800, which has a better image quality than many DSLR's for video and one of the best IQ for a stills camera. Yet it still doesn't look as sharp as a still photo.

[EposVox]

snip

 

Alright, I'll probably go with the Tokina at some point. I won't be using follow focus with these lenses anytime soon, so I don't need the notches or anything.

 

Thanks for your help.

[ALwin]

Alright, I'll probably go with the Tokina at some point. I won't be using follow focus with these lenses anytime soon, so I don't need the notches or anything.

 

Thanks for your help.

 

If you need an accessory to help improve your focusing I recommend getting an on-camera field monitor. Or install Magic Lantern on your T3i and use the focus peaking function.

 

A larger screen than the back LCD on the T3i is very useful.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Image+Controls_Focus+Peaking&ci=1984&Ns=p_PRICE_2|0&N=4028759510+3887600114

[EposVox]

If you need an accessory to help improve your focusing I recommend getting an on-camera field monitor. Or install Magic Lantern on your T3i and use the focus peaking function.

 

A larger screen than the back LCD on the T3i is very useful.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Image+Controls_Focus+Peaking&ci=1984&Ns=p_PRICE_2|0&N=4028759510+3887600114

Yeah, I've looked into them; they're just expensive and still quite small.

 

At some point I'll just hook a big computer monitor to it on a stand, when I have an extra one.

 

Been trying to use DSLR Controller on tablets, but it's not much better than the screen.