There’s a lot of factors to take into account before choosing a camera body, its brand, its size, its features, its performance. But I think that at least as much in the lenses choice ! Zoom, prime, aperture, weight, quantity… Possibilities are illimited. And it has to get into a budget, whatever its size. And the possibility to adapt or set the mount for most of main brands allows to think wider, independently on your camera body. Let’s have a look on our outdoor case:

Size VS Versatility

Is it possible to recall it zoom VS prime ? Almost, yes !
Since 2015, it’s forbibben to zoom during a rush (that’s a joke !) so are the zooms always useful ? Considering I’m using zooms during maybe 70% of shots, my answer is yes. The main purpose is more to be able to update the focal lenght very quickly between 2 shots than to really use the zoom. And this is versatility: in some conditions, changing the lens is not possible or can lead to a missed key shot, and the possibility to have a wide and a closer shot of the same scene in some seconds apart is a real asset. Obviously, no quality or light can be lost in the zoom, only fixed zooms have to be taken into account ! Thanks the EF 24-70 F/2.8L II for this.

Weight VS Aperture

Let’s take an example, with a fast 50mm, always useful on set. There’s such a huge choice of 50s in third party brands, I’ll focus on the 50 F/1.8 II, 50 F/1.4 USM and 50 F/1.2 L series. The price difference is huge, but the weight is just as ! 580 grams for the F/1.2, 290 for the 1.4 and only 130 for the 1.8 II. A concrete comparative would be useful to check the exact difference in term of quality, but my experience on the F/1.4 is quite concluding: a very good quality/weight (and price!) ratio. Nevertheless, in order to gain the L series guarantee of quality, more than the fraction of stop, I’ll take the 1.2 with pleasure.

In the other side, when aperture is really not a priority and the lightness is critial, the pancake can be a good option. We use the 24mm F/2.8 STM a lot on the Raven on the Ronin, not as versatile as the 16-35L 2.8 II but really lighter for the same aperture. Also, the GDU 40mm is in the cart, I hope I’ll be able to add its test here soon.

Quality VS Usefulness

In the end, this is the real challenge: record the best quality possible and be able to move it in any conditions. For sure the “perfect lens”, neither a “perfect set” don’t exists, but the idea is to ask the good questions while packaging your backpack.
When we talk about quality in video, we obviously think about Cine lenses. Really heavy, expensive, fragile, manual focus… Not really adapted to outdoor in my opinion.

Going back to the fast 50 example, the Canon CN-E50mm T1.3 is a beast of precision and sharpness, and I’ll accept it with pleasure in my set. But honestly I won’t be able to mount it often: on the Ronin, its 1100 grams will take down the batteries. In hurry conditions: no autofocus, so video AI-Servo on Canon DSLRs is useless. And for sure, given its price, taking it in a ski downhill or on close-up shots is not recommended ! So, about cine lens usefulness, I’ll answer: if the set and the budget allows it: yes ! But my experiences shows that L series do the job.

Superzooms

That’s a particular case, where the weight and size can’t be separated from the quality, the aperture or the versatility. In superzooms I mean lenses superior to around 400mm. And as I use this very very rarely, I’ll let this theme for the experts !

Solution

And so… concretely, what do I have to put in my backpack ? It’s obviously depending on the shooting purpose and the quality needed, but I’ll advice to prioritize the fact to be able to reach several kind of angles, without using a slow 18-300 (that can be an idea too !) and without having to change lens all minutes. Take zooms advantages, take primes advantages, and don’t forget pancakes !