Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Advice please a lense for Epic for 7-8K!

A

Alexey Datsenko

Banned
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
714
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Advice please Lense which can be get for Epic for arround 7-8K USD!
I know it is hard desition and hard to advice but something have to be chosen!
Lense is planning to shoot cinema, music video. Ultra Prime, Master Prime, Cooke, Optimo are excellent but too expensive 13-15K for one!
Of course some of them will be rent but I think it is need to have even one working uneversal lense for most scenes!

My variants of posibility taking:

1. Red Pro Promes 18-85 as universal
2. Red Pro 17-50
(Actually this is the most posibility choice and I don't know what will be the best for me!)
3. Take two CP2 lenses for example 25 and 50 mm or 25 and 85 mm for most scenes. (2 lenses is not well but budget is budget)
4. Take one lense for example Cooke 85 mm for around 8000 USD.
5. Maybe your variant!

Just tell me please what would be your desition with budget in 7-8K!

Tnanks


P.S. If somebody have seen footage for Red Pro Prime 18-85 or 17-50 give please a link!
 
I would suggest you look to get a Red 18-85mm Zoom. Plenty fast enough on an Epic (I presume it will cover?), and a good piece of glass for the price. If you can get one "Battle Tested" or otherwise used, it should be well within your price range.

Happy shooting,
Dom.
 
go for the 17-50 (and maybe a compact prime 85). The 17-50 is awesome, you have a 18,25,35, and 50 in on lens :) The 18-85 is on the big side for mobile and handheld work, the 17-50 is lovely for that, without a doubt

or buy for 2000 dollar the canon mount and spend the other 6000 on canon lenses...
 
Or buy the OptiTek Prolock and get the 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 Nikkors and you'll still be on budget.
but that depends on the kind of shooting that you are doing....
 
Or wait for Optitek's Canon FD mount and buy some excellent 70s/80's vintage Canon FD aspherical (later relabeled 'L Series") lenses for cheap. Or buy a set of Lomo lenses. You may even be able to find a set of Lomo superspeeds for around $8K.
 
On that budget, I'd really look at the Canon mount or the Optitek ProLock and some SLR lenses. I might be very tempted by the ProLock option, because you can get piles and piles of used Nikon glass with your budget.

Sticking with PL though:

I'm a fan of the 17-50 red lens, but I'd aim you at a Red Pro 85mm instead of the compact prime.

If you are a lens speed freak, then I might aim you at the Illumina 85mm instead of the RPP.

Regardless, choosing the 17-50 with any other prime lens in combination will put you outside your budget.

I also like the battle tested 18-85 if you can handle the weight as your only lens. That is actually under your budget, but the weight is a huge issue if you are not on a stable camera support platform. I like to mount the camera on a dolly and roll like that all day, but that's a luxury to most productions.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
Thank you guys!
I think it would be good if I can reach such kind of cinema-look picture (I think there is no post-production)
I am shooting shot cinema and music video with story like in cinema.

http://vimeo.com/19284151

http://vimeo.com/15091172

Red 18-85 is good but too heavy so if 17-50 is not less good then 18-85 and I can manage without 85 mm I think it would be better because often compactness is important but if 18-85 give me much more oportunitiess I will buy it of course even it is more heavy.

Now reading about Optitek's Canon FD and OptiTek Prolock and Lomo lenses
 
I think its pretty important to have a lens 75-85 in your arsenal.

These are classic portrait focal lengths, and the generally do nice things to faces, so I use them on CU and XCU quite a lot.

I myself prefer the 85 ... but I have been very pleased with the 65 and 75 used for this as well.

The 50 ... its just a bit too wide for my taste for these shots. The problem in using such a lens is that as you get the lens closer to the subject you distort their features a bit more, adding perspective. That's great for many objects ... but its often not flattering to people.

That said ... there are plenty of directors, like Aronofsky and Spielberg, who like to use very wide lenses. So, it is very much a matter of taste.

If you think you'd like shooting wide like that, I recommend adding a Tokina 11-16 to your kit instead of the 85mm prime.
 
Here is a set of LOMOs that sold today. http://www.ebay.com/itm/300608645964?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649

Its nearly complete set of standard speeds (missing only the 28mm, 250mm, and 300mm), and includes an Ekran and a Photon Zoom. Both are lightweight zooms and are worth about $2K. It also includes a Peleng fisheye. All in PL mount. It works out to about $300/lens for the primes. This is a hard to beat bargain for cinema lenses.

Lomos have their proponents and their opponents. Most agree that the images are sharp and comparable to 80s era Zeiss. Most of the negatives comments relate to their mechanics, rather than their image quality.

Cheers
 
Thank you!
Sorry but I a few times have heard about LOMO but I just can't understand how lense for about 500- even 1500 USD can be so good as Prime for 12000 USD (or even comparable).
Just tell me it is quite well to shoot cinema (even with some small problems) with Epic and such LOMO lenses (and comparable with Zeiss Prime or RED 17-50), because if YES of course I will be looking for these lenses because it is good budget for me. And I think many people have to want to get these lenses.

For example LOMO lenses on ebay

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LOMO-SuperW...18153699?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a65ed4ce3

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lomo-S35-PL...080?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f07b209d0

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Lomo-anamor...86089823?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item1e6789995f

http://www.ebay.com/itm/SET-5-LOMO-...84568174?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item20bb7e456e

http://www.ebay.com/itm/LOMO-150mm-...01237979?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item53e99677db
 
Get the red 17-50, it'll cover most of your needs. Great lens for the price.
framegrabs with no color correction just redcolor 2 and redgamma 2 :
red 17-50 at 50
attachment.php

full rez here:
https://files.me.com/skellycinematography/6q9pv8
red 17-50 at 17mm
attachment.php


full rez here:
https://files.me.com/skellycinematography/6az9ga
 
If you want something decent that you can use for handheld shooting as well I would get the RED 17-50 and save up for a RED or CP.2 85mm. The good thing about the RED 17-50 is that any focus puller will be comfortable with it. It has clear readings on both side of the lens and they are accurate and decently spaced. The new hood will reduce the vignetting and if you are shooting 16:9 or 1:2.40 you are fine.

Nikon and Canon lenses are not cinema lenses so while they are sharp enough they have their disadvantages like difficult to pull focus, markings that are off, irises that close in steps.

I love my LOMOs for the look of them but the mechanics are a real PITA. Apart from being made in the USSR they are also from the 70's and 80's and didn't come with a PL mount originally. I wouldn't want these as my primary set of lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top