Whats your best lens for 4 to 14 ways?

[Jacked 0]

I'm shooting a canon t2i with a cx110 on tandems, .45 on video and a 10 x 22 canon set on 22... I'm going to get a lens for RW and am just wondering what would be recommended?

The end result is directly connected to the effort applied

[dragon2 0]

Quote

I'm shooting a canon t2i with a cx110 on tandems, .45 on video and a 10 x 22 canon set on 22... I'm going to get a lens for RW and am just wondering what would be recommended?

That combo will work for FS4 (and bigger), provided you do not really hug them. Since you are apperantly not hugging the tandems (I'm presuming you are not cutting off hands etc in the shots here) I doubt you'll be flying that close to FS yet, so just use that combo untill and unless you need/want something wider.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[Jacked 0]

I shot a Minolta 18 to 28 wide angle on a Sony A100 for the better part of a year, I'm not sure what the actual crop factor is being that lens was for a 35mm... I shot it at close to 28, I was using a .5 on the cx110. The setup was good for RW.. The canon lens is real wide compared to what I was use to. Flying at the edge of the burble was OK with the Sony setup but I would have to drop to close using my new rig... I am thankful for the 18 mp... I need to find a combination like I had with the Sony...

The end result is directly connected to the effort applied

[PhreeZone 15]

The Canon 18-55 Kit is a good fit here ,it lets you dial in around 25-28 mm to get a tad of distance for big ways and keep everything clear.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Icon134 0]

I shoot with a Century 0.55x and the 10-22 set around 17mm and the Still is generally just a bit wider.

Honestly, you can shoot FS (or other stuff) with just about any lens combination depending on how close or far you are flying to the formation. I can see an arguement for flying with a narrower lens 24-35mm for larger formations as the burble would be much more extensive and thus staying out of the burble would be more benificial.

I know of at least one camera flyer that swears by shooting competitive 4-way with 0.3 as it allows them to be closer to the formations (in particular on exit when a narrower lens might miss the action...)

I have actually jumped my 50mm f/1.4 to shoot canopy formation stuff... and the nice thing about it was that it provided much better color and background "focus" then any wide angle would have provided...

The key to successful camera flying is not to lock yourself into one particular setup but to develop an understanding of each of the factors that come into play to generate an image and take the tools that are needed for the job at hand...

Livin' on the Edge... sleeping with my rigger's wife...

[billvon 2,444]

The 10-22 set on about 15 works pretty well, but the rectilinear compensation sometimes causes odd artifacts. The kit lens at 18 is a good option and gives you reasonably good results for very little weight and cost. The Canon 15mm prime is a great lens but a little more pricey.

[Jacked 0]

***The key to successful camera flying is not to lock yourself into one particular setup but to develop an understanding of each of the factors that come into play to generate an image and take the tools that are needed for the job at hand... /***

That is a very good piece of advice...
I bought the camera body and the 10 x 22 at the same time. I'm currently looking to expand my "tool box". I have every lens under the sun for a sony. They are all film lens though. I have been coaxing that old camera every skydive for good shots.. I'm tired of using my hand to clear era codes by cycling the on and off switch during free-fall.. It's days are done...
I think I'm going to go with the small EF-S 17-85mm
That should cover everything.. Thank you all for your input...

*** I shoot with a Century 0.55x and the 10-22 set around 17mm and the Still is generally just a bit wider. /***

That would be my lens of choice if I could find one for the cx110... I found one cheap one that was not HD...

The end result is directly connected to the effort applied

[Jacked 0]

I just bought the century .55x lens for my sony cx110 and the camera is out of focus at the infinity setting.. Is that due to the step down ring?

The end result is directly connected to the effort applied

[realpet 0]

Quote

I just bought the century .55x lens for my sony cx110 and the camera is out of focus at the infinity setting.. Is that due to the step down ring?

Nope. It is due to the lens itself. I have the same .55 and it is not through-zoomable (well maybe there is a more correct english term for it). You need to set up the focus manually from the settings to something like 3-4 feet (or 1 meter) and you should be a-ok.

- Petri

[Zlew 0]

Use the spot focus feature on your CX. If you need help, send me a note.

[DrizZ 0]

This is only half answerin the OP, half tangent, but:

I love my Canon 15mm 2.8. I bought it back before I ever shot digital for my Canon EOS film cameras. It's a great peice of glass that works really well for exits and small formations.

Also, keep in mind that 15mm (or any of these other zoom levels people have talked about) are generally 1.6 times that, unless they're jumping a 5d2 or another full frame. The 15mm on my 5d2, for example, is a bit ridiculous for anything other than really close stuff (like inside stills)

The kit lens is a great all around lens if you're just trying to capture stuff. The 15mm will get you a little wider (for close stuff) and way better depth of field and colors. It's also usually a bit faster to focus.

I really want to try the 10-22. I've heard great things. I'm also going to give my 35mm 1.8 a try soon, as that may be good for stills where you want to keep your distance (like from a large formation)

[Zlew 0]

I've never used the 10-22 for jumping, but I have used it on the ground. I like the the lens quite a bit, one thing to consider :
The build quality seems light for how expensive the lens is. You can't even compare it to something like the 17-40 L (about the same price). It feels more like a slight build upgrade from the kit lens. Which makes it lighter too...but still something to consider.

Image quality was fantastic and there is a real difference in those 7MM between it and something like the 17-40.and it is nice to have something that wide for a 1.6 sensor.