6d or lens?

>>2697608
The 6D definitely. The 18-55 looks awesome on it.

L E N S
E
N
S

>>2697609
the 18-55 doesn't work on the 6D

>>2697608
well both ideally... though the lenses should come first. no point in getting a good cam if you only have shit lenses to use with it.

just make sure you actually get lenses intended for full frames (EF, not EF-S). 600d isn't too bad of a film camera honestly and if the intention is solely video then full frame isn't going to make a HUGE difference (better DR definitely, but that's the major benefit).

the new tamron 24-70 would be a great investment. ive heard its quite sharp.

>>2697618
GEAR THREAD
E
A
R

T
H
R
E
A
D

why not buying a real motion cam if you "shoot films"?

Glidecam

60D, 6D doesn't autofocus in video

>>2697855
>autofocus
>during filming
Ask me how I know your shit SUCKS

>>2697608
a7r ii

>>2697608
600d with magic lantern. Feel free to get a cheapo nifty 50 for dat sharpness and bokeh. This combo worked great for my short vids

File: 1405535078798.gif (270KB, 229x220px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 229x220px

>>2697855
>using the 60d live view af for video

>>2697608
Since you're doing cinematography, spend on the body, and get some old manual lenses off Craigslist or thrift stores. Virtually nobody who'll ever see your films will know the difference between that old glass and ones that cost more than your camera.

>>2697608
Lens.
6D is bad for video
http://petapixel.com/2013/01/04/test-shows-the-canon-6d-suffers-from-way-more-moire-than-the-5d-mark-iii/