Need a lens for video

[das affe]

SO. I want a lens for shooting some video and of course taking pictures with my sony slt-a65.
I already have these: sony 18-55 3.5-5.6 
sigma 28-200 3.8-5.6
sony 35mm 1.8

If you know a good lens thats not much more than 3-400€ let me know. Even if it's not for sony (i will find the sony modell )
These are lenses I would consider:
Sigma 50mm f2.8 EX DG
Walimex Pro 85mm 1.4 IF

 

[MrSuperb]

what are you missing with your current lens setup?

[das affe]

what are you missing with your current lens setup?

I know the lenses I told you i'd consider are 50 and 85mm but i'd like a decent wideangle-lens. the kit-lens is cool for testing and stuff but I imagine there could be better glass..

 

[Chibi]

I also have a a65 and always use a sony 50mm 2.8 macro for videos.
I aslo have a sony 20mm 2.8 I have not tested for video yet.

I can upload sample videos of those two lenses if you want?

[das affe]

I also have a a65 and always use a sony 50mm 2.8 macro for videos.

I aslo have a sony 20mm 2.8 I have not tested for video yet.

I can upload sample videos of those two lenses if you want?

Oh that would be wonderful can you try film some trees and and landscape too? thank you in advance

[Chibi]

Oh that would be wonderful can you try film some trees and and landscape too? thank you in advance

I'll try my best. It's already dark out when I get home from work.

[Chibi]

It's way to dark outside to get a good video.
I can upload them on saturday if you don't mind waiting a couple of days

[CaptainSi]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the SAl1680z. At e24-120mm f3.5-4.5, with optical quality and price on par with Sony's bloody excellent 16-50 f2.8, it offers a really good range and speed for most video needs. If you need lower light performance perhaps you might consider the 16-50 (e24-75) instead. 

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal1680z

 

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal1650

 

Obviously if you don't need the extra range, the 16-50 is a much better choice for video for a number of reasons. Obviously constant aperture is a big one, as well as simply a wider aperture. The 16-50 uses a silent AF motor, which might be important if you're running about filming on AF.  Also weather sealing (which isn't immediately helpful seeing as you're on an a65, however if you upgrade to an a77/99 or any new A mount bodies in the future it will come in handy). There's a lot of discussion about which of these lenses is sharper, and I think the general consensus is the Zeiss is marginally sharper, however you need to remember you're filming at 1080p which is just about 2 megapixels. Such a minor difference in sharpness really doesn't matter for content at that scale.

One thing I should briefly mention is the filter di is 62mm on the Zeiss lens, and 72mm on the Sony, so if you're thinking of buying, for example, a vario ND filter for your videos then it might be an idea to think about that for costing, as the smaller diameter filters are significantly cheaper.

[das affe]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the SAl1680z. At e24-120mm f3.5-4.5, with optical quality and price on par with Sony's bloody excellent 16-50 f2.8, it offers a really good range and speed for most video needs. If you need lower light performance perhaps you might consider the 16-50 (e24-75) instead. 

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal1680z

 

http://www.sony.com.au/product/sal1650

 

Obviously if you don't need the extra range, the 16-50 is a much better choice for video for a number of reasons. Obviously constant aperture is a big one, as well as simply a wider aperture. The 16-50 uses a silent AF motor, which might be important if you're running about filming on AF.  Also weather sealing (which isn't immediately helpful seeing as you're on an a65, however if you upgrade to an a77/99 or any new A mount bodies in the future it will come in handy). There's a lot of discussion about which of these lenses is sharper, and I think the general consensus is the Zeiss is marginally sharper, however you need to remember you're filming at 1080p which is just about 2 megapixels. Such a minor difference in sharpness really doesn't matter for content at that scale.

One thing I should briefly mention is the filter di is 62mm on the Zeiss lens, and 72mm on the Sony, so if you're thinking of buying, for example, a vario ND filter for your videos then it might be an idea to think about that for costing, as the smaller diameter filters are significantly cheaper.

Thank you very very much for this comment. I will digest the info and look at those lenses

[das affe]

It's way to dark outside to get a good video.

I can upload them on saturday if you don't mind waiting a couple of days

I will happily wait those few days I just took a video of the sunset... at 4pm...

[Timmyfox]

I've got the a77 with the 16-50 f/2.8 and this is hands down one of the best lenses Sony has made in a long time. AF is near instant and the optical quality is solid, heck the entire body and construction of it screams quality (not joking).
 
Here's some photos taken with this lens:
 

 

 

[Chibi]

http://youtu.be/ikKIccwjTEA

 

Everything was shoot with a tripod, ISO 100 and Aperture at f/4.

When taking stills the 50mm is much sharper than the 20mm.
But when shooting video the quality are pretty much the same.

Guess it's the bitrate bottlenecking.

Both lenses use the cameras internal motor to focus making them quite loud if you use autofocus.
So if you use the internal mic on the camera you will hear them quite well.

 

Since the a65 is cropping in video mode you sometimes need to stay quite far away to get everything in the frame on the 50mm.

 

The lenses handles flares quite differently as you can see in the video.

[VictorB]

I have a 12 35 F2.8 for my Panasonic GH3 and it is a good range for video. 24mm is nice wide and 70mm is good to have some zoom if you cant stand closer or you want to make a closed up shot. And it is F2.8 over the whole range of the lens. That is something to look for with video. It throw the background nice out of focus when I film close.