What lens should I use for filming people within 10 feet of the camera?

[bart55]

I use an R50, and I am going to be making a film with people in it, so they won't be too far from me. I was experimenting with my 18-45 kit lens, and the 18 is a fine focal length for how we will be filming, but I have been thinking of buying a prime lens because I have heard the quality is better than on a kit lens or zoom lens.

So now I am trying to figure out one to buy. It isn't easy because of the R50's crop sensor to find a lens that is wide enough, because there aren't many crop lenses out there, and I can't buy like a regular ~20mm lens because that would be equivalent to 30mm, which I worry will be too zoomed.

Any advice is appreciated. Maybe I don't need the lens to be as wide as I think for my shots, maybe I should just stick with the kit lens, tell me what you think. Thanks!

[Waddizzle]

Welcome to the forum!

We would need [you] to provide specific details for a specific suggestion.  “..filming people within 10 feet of the camera” is pretty vague, and allows wide room for interpretation.  You need to figure out what focal length you need or want to use.  

What type of composition and framing are you looking for?  Do you want a head or bust shot?  From the waist up?  Full body shot?

What ever you select, I recommend a lens with an aperture ring and a distance scale.  I have used this “cinema” lens for years.  It has a “de-clicked” aperture ring, which can be essential for filming video..  Unlike its photography oriented cousins, this lens is razor sharp.  The only real trick to using it is to level the camera/lens to the horizon.

[ebiggs1]

Yes more info would be helpful however I would avoid buying any prime lens. They are far more difficult to use than a zoom. Far more limiting especially if space is limited.

Yes a prime can have better IQ but how much and how much will you see or notice is the question. Generally in real world conditions the difference or better IQ in primes and current zoom lenses is very small most will not benefit form it.

[Waddizzle]

Just because a lens is good for photography does not mean it is good for videography.  The kit lens is focus by wire and it retracts when you power the camera off.  Depending on camera settings, the lens may retract when the body goes to sleep.  Neither of those behaviors are desirable for shooting video.

Having a distance scale on the lens is invaluable for shooting video, something which the kit lens lacks.  The prime also offers a much wider aperture, too.

The OP also mentioned a very specific shooting scenario, capturing subjects at specific distance from the camera, which to me sounds like a variety of focal lengths are probably not needed.

Again, just because a lens is good for photography does not mean it is also a good lens for videography.

[rs-eos]

Here are a couple images showing the framing of three people ten feet away from an APS-C sensor camera.  One at 18mm and one at 45mm.  The mannequin figures here are 170cm tall (approx 5'11").

When at 18mm, I had the camera at a height of around 86 cm which reveals you can get full body.  When at 45mm, I had the camera higher to capture heads.

APS-C Simulation 18mm

APS-C Simulation 45mm

[normadel]

How about one of the Canon EF-S wide zooms: 10-22 f/3.5-4.5 IS USM (focuses down to 9.6"), or the  10-18 f/4.5-5.6 IS STM (focuses down to 8.6")?

With an EF-to-RF adapter you maintain full auto control, which you don't have with the Rokinon 14mm manual lens mentioned.

[Waddizzle]

I had the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM.  It was initially released in 2004, which is prior to the introduction of Dual Pixel AF in 2009.  It most likely will not be fully compatible with all the Movie Servo AF features available on the newest Dual Pixel AF sensors.

It is a really good lens.  It is built like a tank.  It is the only EF-S lens that I am aware of with a metal body that I am aware of.  It can be argued that it is built like like L series lens, except it has an EF-S mount.  It is fully internal focusing and zooming.

When used with lens correction it is an excellent lens for photography.  It is also another example of a lens that can be great for photography, but not for videography.  

As I recall, the aperture noise was easily picked up the built-in mic. Aperture noise is normally masked by the mirror slap.  The aperture did not move smoothly and continuously from on setting to the next.  

Like most lenses from the era, the aperture would “jump” from one setting to the next, just like a “clicked” aperture ring would.  This behavior is probably what made the aperture so loud.  When capturing video, the exposure “jumps” in brightness, instead of making a smooth transition.

However on the plus side, the lens is great for “talking head” videos that you see all over YouTube.  The camera does not move, so not stabilization is needed.  The subjects do not move so Movie Servo AF is needed, but do switch the lens to MF.  The lighting is fixed, so no aperture control is needed.

[ebiggs1]

"... to me sounds like a variety of focal lengths are probably not needed.|

Commonly called a zoom lens! Doesn't matter if you are shooting stills or videos a zoom will be far more practical and far easier to use making it the better choice. Now if you argue that a certain zoom had build characteristics that are not beneficial to video I am all in.

"Just because a lens is good for photography does not mean it is good for videography. "

But on the other hand, yes, it does. Goes both ways. However, I don't think I mentioned the OP use a Rebel kit lens.

"The prime also offers a much wider aperture, too."

Once again comparing what to what? If it is a f2.8 zoom compared to a f2 prime I doubt the difference would be earth shaking.