Best lens for my uses?

Hi, I just bought the pocket cinema 4k and am getting overwhelmed with lens choices. I plan on using it for 3 different things at this time. First is recording drums in front of a green screen with a 3 light setup. The second is taking videos of my daughter playing outside. The third is wide-angle cinematic views of nature landscapes.

I eventually want to do more with the camera but these are my main focuses to learn with it.

I would like to stay under 1,000 dollars for my first lens if possible.

Is there a lens that will cover all of my needs?

I've read that the sigma 18-35mm is popular. Would I need to get a metabones speed booster to use this properly? I saw in the manual it says when first attaching your EF or MFT lens...do EF lenses fit natively on this camera? The manual wasn't very clear about that.

I did order the laowa 10mm zero-d lens as well as the 17mm but I'm thinking of returning those if I get any recommendations for a single variable zoom lens that will handle the jobs I mentioned better. What are your thoughts on budget lenses like laowa, Meike, 7artisans, etc. vs lenses like panasonic Leica, Canon, and sigma, etc?

I would like a lens with quality image stabilization on it. Having an optional autofocus is a plus but I would like to learn manual focus techniques so it's not a requirement.

Hopefully I've given a clear picture of my needs/wants for the camera's uses. If not, feel free to ask for more info.

Thanks in adavance!

The Olympus Pro 12-100mm f/4 is currently on sale new for $1,200 and used for less than $1k. That may be the only lens you need period.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1281427-REG

If you want a faster lens Olympus Pro 12-40mm f/2.8 is currently on sale for $800 new.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1688419-REG

The best IS lens I’ve ever used is the, by all other accounts unexceptional, Tamron 17-50mm. It’s soft at 24 mpx but it’s always taken beautiful photos, of my family especially. How well the IS performance translates vis Speedbooster I can’t say.

Good Luck

I agree with Rick. I have the Olympus 12-100 and it's a great lens with image stabilization and the manual focus clutch common to most Olympus/OM System Pro lenses, which is a very nice feature. It's widely recognized as having exceptional image quality across the full zoom range, is weather-sealed, and great build quality.

Image stabilization is very handy. You may not always need it but if you end up doing a lot of handheld shooting, you'll be glad you have it. The Panasonic Leica 12-35 f2.8 is on its mark II version and well under $1000, with IS. I think it's also well-regarded. The companion 35-100 f2.8 with IS is also under $1000 but may not be wide enough for your needs.

Steve

EDIT: Sorry, I see you are already sold on IS.

If you want IS in a zoom it’s hard to go past the Olympus.

The range is great. Optics are great. IS is great. Manual focus for a native m4/3 lens is also great. A lot of these lenses aren’t great in MF but the Oly has a nice mechanical clutch feature.

The only downside is that it’s maybe a bit slow at F4 but that’s not as much of a problem as you might think.

I think it’s perfect for your use.

JB

18mm may not be wide enough, and while the Sigma 18-35mm has great image quality, it's also big and heavy, covering S-35 with very high speed for a zoom.
A SpeedBooster makes that even worse.
If you want something universal, I'd second the Olympus. Definitely get MFT glass, it's faster and lighter generally, with a large zoom range if you need that.
MFT, being very a very short mount, can be adapted to hundreds of lenses. But as a beginner I wouldn't go down that route.

Thanks for the recommendations! Sounds like the Olympus 12-100mm is the way to go and has everything I’m looking for.

I’m tempted to wait till Amazon prime day in a couple weeks to see if it goes on sale.

One question that I’m still wondering about is why they even sell single range lenses. Is there any benefit to buying a single range Olympus lens like the 20mm other than the lower price and the fact that it’s f1.4 instead of f4.0?

The main factor is speed. That's 3 stops faster, after all. To explain the expression "speed" here: in photography a wider aperture means you can shoot with shorter exposure times under the same lighting. Since you'll usually want to use an exposure of 180 degrees for video, for you it rather means you can shoot in darker conditions.
As I wrote, a fast zoom is heavy and big, plus it has less range.

Thank you for the info. It definitely has given me confidence that the Olympus is the right choice for my first lens.

With decent lighting, yes.
But one thing to consider is the space you have. If you can't get enough distance between the scene and the green screen, a faster lens will give you better background blur.

And to help compensate for the slower aperture, you have the option of shooting with the BMPCC4K’s dual ISO sensor using the faster ISO 3200 range compared to the standard ISO 400 range.

I often shoot either ISO 1250 or ISO 1600 for results with less noise than using ISO 3200. Selecting ISO 1250 or higher puts you into the ISO 3200 range; selecting up to ISO 1000 keeps you in the ISO 400 range. Careful though as ISO 1000 generates more noise than shooting in the upper range with ISO 1250 or ISO 1600.

Your last choice in a low light scenario (which can be applied to some of your use cases with minimal camera movement or movement of your subject in frame) is to gain a stop of exposure by selecting a shutter angle of 360 degrees. Without significant motion or camera movement, this can be a reasonable option although you normally will shoot with shutter angle 180 degrees.

But probably not for drumming;-)

The reason I prefer using a single zoom lens such as the 12-100mm is simple. When you’re not shooting a narrative (that gives you the time to change lenses and even have the luxury of retakes) but live action such as following your child’s unpredictable action, there are moments you’ll lose while changing a lens that you can quickly capture continuously with a good range on a single zoom.

To me there is no such thing as "best first lens". My first lens was a kit lens and I got rid of it fast. I find general purpose lens that tries to do it all are "Jack of all trades but master of nothing". Find out what you most likely to shoot and use that as a guide.

I’m tempted to wait till Amazon prime day in a couple weeks to see if it goes on sale.

If you want something a little cheaper, there's the Panasonic LUMIX G Series 12-35mm F2.8. It's one stop faster, and substantially lighter, and does tend to go on sale regularly. It's a very good lens for the price. The Olympus, however, has better IS and manual focus. You really can't wrong with either one -- assuming they serve your needs with respect to focal range and speed.

Typically single range lenses, better known as primes, are optically a bit nicer, a lot smaller physically and lighter weight, and tend to be useable with much less light. A 1.4 prime can be used with 1/8th of the light that you need for that Olympus F4 zoom. That can be the difference between being able to shoot or not.

Another side effect of the fast lens with a lower maximum aperture is that it means focus is more selective. A common technique for cinematography is to use selective focus to direct the audience gaze where you want by choosing what part of the frame is in focus.

JB

So much amazing information here. Thanks everyone. I'll definitely check out that panasonic lens as well.

Also looking at some vintage lens as well for adding a certain "look" to my videos. I saw Uli Plank mention a Minolta 50mm f1.4 in another post and saw they're less than 100 dollars preowned. I would love to get your thoughts and experiences with different vintage brands that you have tried. While I'm most likely going to get the olympus as my work horse lens, I would like to build a small collection of lenses that have their own unique character.

Well, if you want to get into that direction, I'd get the 12-35mm Panasonic for everyday use and get vintage lenses for longer focal lengths. While the Olympus is a great lens, it'll eat your budget and 120mm are not really very useful on MFT without a very sturdy tripod. OTOH, there are no really wide, good vintage lenses for MFT.
For a beginner, I'd suggest not to get into the fastest vintage primes, they are overpriced by collectors. For example, the Minolta 50mm PG f1.4 will cost you much more than the 55mm f1.7. While the 1.4 is clinically sharp for vintage glass, the 1.7mm has the nicer look. It's great for portrait with a beautiful background blur. The Pentax Takumar 55mm f1.8 is quite similar. With some patience, you should still find either one for less than 50 bucks. If you need something longer, look around for the faster 85mm ones.
Nearly all big brands had nice glass in that range, like Canon FD, Nikon (but focusing the other way around), Minolta, and Olympus (quite small ones). Finally, there are the old Soviet lenses and those from Zeiss and Meyer Optics from East Germany. They are (in)famous for their nervous bokeh, but that's a matter of taste.

There's a helpful site here: https://www.vintagelensesforvideo.com

And if you want to know all about Minolta Rokkors, here's my guide:
https://reduser.net/threads/minolta-rok ... ide.94546/
BTW, you'll find these only pre-owned, they don't make lenses any more. But Sony bought all their intellectual property and some unique constructions live on in Sony lenses.

Thanks Uli, exactly the info I was looking for!

That was fast. I'll be around for about 20 minutes more, so ask right away.

I found the 1.4 on ebay pre owned for 76 dollars. It's the MC version. I read that there's an MD version as well and on another site I read that MD is the upgrade to the MC. Which version of the 50mm 1.4 and 55mm 1.7 were you mentioning?

I'm very interested in the 55mm since from what you mentioned and from what I've read, it seems to give a nicer, softer look which I would love to use for when I video my daughter at the park.

I found the 1.4 on ebay pre owned for 76 dollars. It's the MC version. I read that there's an MD version as well and on another site I read that MD is the upgrade to the MC. Which version of the 50mm 1.4 and 55mm 1.7 were you mentioning?

I'm very interested in the 55mm since from what you mentioned and from what I've read, it seems to give a nicer, softer look which I would love to use for when I video my daughter at the park.

I have two versions of the MD 50/1.4 (one with 55mm threads and the later one with 49mm threads) as well as the MC 55/1.7; I prefer the 55/1.7 by far. It's one of my favorite lenses (though I've never actually used it for video, just photography). It has many of the qualities of the far more expensive and far heavier MC 58/1.2.

You will need an adapter for these lenses from SR mount to Micro Four Thirds, and keep in mind the so-called crop factor as these will be like telephoto lenses on the BMPCC 4K.

Just made an offer for the 55mm 1.7 so here's to hoping. I ordered the adapter already as well but thank you for the heads up.

Correct. The 55 would look like a 110 on full frame (photographic), and you’ll need stabilisation when your daughter is running around. If you tell the camera the focal length, the gyro in DR will work, but focus will still be difficult.
The main difference between the older MC lenses and the later MDs is somewhat better coating and mechanical transfer of aperture, which doesn’t matter on digital cameras.
The problem with vintage is speed of the wides. You’ll find 35mm 1.4 or 1.8 ones, but they are expensive and heavy. A slower and cheaper Takumar 35mm will give you nicer bokeh than a modern zoom, though.

Thanks, ya I plan to use Resolve to stabilize. So glad that the camera came with resolve studio. I also am looking at my options right now for independent stabilization for those moments where I don't have a lens with IS or a monopod.

They weren't kidding when they said that the pocket 4k price is misleading. You have to rig this thing like crazy unless you just want to have it sitting on a tripod. No worries though, it's a fun experience.

Be creative. There a clamps and tiny tripods like the Gorilla Pod, they don’t cost much.
Even a bean bag helps.

Just wanted to update that I got the MC 55mm 1.7 for only 30 dollars before shipping….I’m looking forward to trying it out.

And also the latest version of the Panasonic 12-35mm released in 2022 just went on sale at sweetwater.com so I’ll be ordering that one as well. Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe the one mentioned earlier in this thread was either version 1 or 2 of the lens. After some research I decided to get the latest version as it has more sharpness in the corners and better IS among other things.

Definitely want to try out that Olympus 12-100mm someday. Maybe I’ll see if it’s available to rent once I’m more experienced and know what to look for.

Thanks again everyone for the help!

Yes, the second generation of that Penny 12-35mm is better, but it has been around for years.
I think you'll enjoy that Minolta Rokkor, if it's in reasonable condition. Check for scratches and fungus, the mechanics are usually smooth even after all those years.

Good you’re on your way with a starting lens set. Let us know about your user experience with these lenses after you’ve used them for awhile.

Is there a lens that will cover all of my needs?

I think I would choose the 12-35 from Panasonic. It's under $1,000, has really good OIS, and is native to the camera.

Will do.

Thanks again for the help everyone.

Vintage lenses have a speciality look but you need to remember they were still lenses and not optimise for videos so you might get severe focus breathing.
I use Speed booster on my BMPCC4K which turns it to APS-C crop and the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 does great as a go to walk around lens like having 3 primes.

But that's considerably over his budget and as I see he has already ordered.

Yes, I already ordered the panasonic. I have a few more things I would like to save for before getting any more lenses.

Would it be worth it or kind of pointless to get the olympus 12-100mm and sigma 18-35mm in the future?
I know the sigma would end up giving me close to a full frame fov with a speed booster and better low light and the Olympus will give me better telephoto.

Are those the only real differences or do each of the lenses have a drastically different look and feel from the panny?

Each manufacturer's lenses have a different look, but these days the differences are subtle between Olympus, Panny, and Sigma. Modern lenses don't show as much 'personality' as vintage glass.
The Sigma with a Speed Booster will be quite front-heavy, though, nearly twice as much weight over the Olympus.

If you are getting a speed booster get the Metabones, pickup a second hand one. I have used other boosters including Viltrox and they have in impact on IQ.
With a speed booster you can still adapt it to M42 vintage lenses and better still get more of the characteristic of those lenses at APS-C crop over the native Micro 43.

Hi, I just bought the pocket cinema 4k and am getting overwhelmed with lens choices. I plan on using it for 3 different things at this time. First is recording drums in front of a green screen with a 3 light setup. The second is taking videos of my daughter playing outside. The third is wide-angle cinematic views of nature landscapes.

I eventually want to do more with the camera but these are my main focuses to learn with it.

I would like to stay under 1,000 dollars for my first lens if possible.

Is there a lens that will cover all of my needs?

I've read that the sigma 18-35mm is popular. Would I need to get a metabones speed booster to use this properly? I saw in the manual it says when first attaching your EF or MFT lens...do EF lenses fit natively on this camera? The manual wasn't very clear about that.

I did order the laowa 10mm zero-d lens as well as the 17mm but I'm thinking of returning those if I get any recommendations for a single variable zoom lens that will handle the jobs I mentioned better. What are your thoughts on budget lenses like laowa, Meike, 7artisans, etc. vs lenses like panasonic Leica, Canon, and sigma, etc?

I would like a lens with quality image stabilization on it. Having an optional autofocus is a plus but I would like to learn manual focus techniques so it's not a requirement.

Hopefully I've given a clear picture of my needs/wants for the camera's uses. If not, feel free to ask for more info.

Thanks in adavance!

For your Pocket Cinema 4K, the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 is a versatile choice. Yes, you'll need a Metabones Speed Booster to use EF lenses properly on your camera, as it has a Micro Four Thirds (MFT) mount. The Sigma lens covers your needs for recording drums, outdoor videos, and wide-angle nature shots. Budget lenses like Laowa, Meike, and 7artisans offer good value, but lenses from Panasonic, Leica, Canon, and Sigma generally provide better quality and features like image stabilization and optional autofocus.

Yes, I already ordered the panasonic. I have a few more things I would like to save for before getting any more lenses.

One thing you might consider adding to your list is some neutral density (ND) filters. You can start with a variable ND filter (which is made from two circular polarizers), which will be the cheapest option but can negatively affect your image due to color casts (at really high strengths it can also cause an x-shaped vignette in your image, but most good VNDs have hard stops that prevent you from reaching those strengths). Later on you can buy individual ND filters at different strengths, but that's more of an investment.

You'll want these filters because they give you more control over your aperture settings: if you want a shallow depth of field on a sunny day, ND filters will allow you to do that. And some lenses get soft at higher aperture numbers (e.g., f16 or f22) due to diffraction, so an ND filter can prevent you from getting into the danger zone.

If you have experience as a photographer, you might think you could just change the ISO instead of using an ND filter, and to some extent that's true, but if you're shooting BRAW the ISO doesn't actually change the amount of light hitting the sensor, it just affects your exposure decisions. At lower ISO settings you risk clipping the highlights but you'll have more detail and less noise in shadows; at higher ISO settings you'll have more noise in the shadows and more detail in your highlights. Dynamic range decreases as you shift from the camera's native ISO (in this case the BMPCC 4K has two native ISOs), and some people like to always keep the ISO at the native setting and use ND filters to allow them to use their desired aperture.

Ok, I’ll definitely look into those and do some research. Thank you.