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 :)

DigiZoom

A

Andrew McCarrick

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
436
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
38
Location
EHT, New Jersey, USSA
Does anybody know the costs of the DigiZoom lenses?

Both the 6-24 and 17-112.

I'm looking at the Scarlet 2/3" as crash cam, for a short 2-3 second shot where a stage light falls on the camera (probably use and apple box or something and shoot through the hole.).
 
Ya know, you could probably do that shot for ~ $6000 cheaper by doing it digitally.
 
I could mount the light and dolly the camera at it (with a green screen behind) or mount the camera and move the light (and both of the options either horiziontaly or vertically) Or just CGI the whole thing....
 
Okay one thing I need help with...

I need to figure out how fast the light should be moving.

gravity = 9.8 m/s2

what's the equation to figure out speed?

Is it Gravity x mass = Acceleration?

The total height of the light would be 25-35 feet if it were really mounted.

Worst case, I guess I'll have to find my physics notes from high school.
 
Position camera level to floor, pointed into a mirror tilted at a 45 degree angle and drop light from above onto mirror. It will look perfect right up until the point of impact.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Position camera level to floor, pointed into a mirror tilted at a 45 degree angle and drop light from above onto mirror. It will look perfect right up until the point of impact.
Click to expand...

Guess that's another option. Thanks.

Still looking for the equation in my previous post though. Just to have multiple options.
 
I believe Newtonian physics states that accelleration is a constant that is not effected by mass. Thus when the astronaut on the moon (no atmosphere for resistance) dropped a hammer and a feather at the same time they landed on the ground at exactly the same time. Your measurement was in meters, but I always new it with the Imperial measurement of 32 feet per second/per second (per second squared). Gravity is your accelleration constant on a dead drop.

All this out of the way, the real answer is to just shoot some variations and see what looks best, as often the technically accurate speed does not appear correct in the shot. If you use a telephoto lens the movement will feel too slow, compressed. If you use a wide angle lens the motion will feel accellerated. And often people like to shoot something like this just a tiny bit overcranked (ie slow motion to lengthen the time) as the technically accurate motion feels a bit too fast even with correct perspective.

How would you portray an accellation curve with a dolly anyway? Try to push the dolly at an ever-increasing speed that matches correct accelleration constant? Good luck with that!
 
Is there a difference in lenses, wether they are designed for a 2/3" CMOS or a 2/3" CCD sensor? The digizoom says it`s built for a CCD sensor.

Regards
 
Andrew McCarrick said:
Does anybody know the costs of the DigiZoom lenses?
Click to expand...

I asked Band Pro Munich and the offer was the following:

Digizoom 6-24mm 35.405,00 €
Digizoom 17-112mm 36.011,25 €

It's a "little" bit more than I expected.
 
snuftr said:
Is there a difference in lenses, wether they are designed for a 2/3" CMOS or a 2/3" CCD sensor? The digizoom says it`s built for a CCD sensor.

Regards
Click to expand...

Zeiss DigiZooms, like their DigiPrimes, are designed for 2/3" 3-CCD cameras. Scarlet uses a single 2/3" CMOS sensor. The 3-CCD cameras use a beam splitter to separate the wavelengths for the multiple sensors, so the lenses designed for them cannot be used on the 2/3" Scarlet without an optical adapter.
Based on that and the price, you'd probably be better off getting a dedicated fixed scarlet for the crash cam- way more cost effective.
 
"Thus when the astronaut on the moon (no atmosphere for resistance) dropped a hammer and a feather at the same time they landed on the ground at exactly the same time."

Well that could go a long way to proving they were actually there. Never seen THAT footage. Don't tell me, they neglected to film it.

Of course vacuum can be achieved on earth, but the acceleration would be a lot greater.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top