Is cine glass about to be rendered obsolete?

[David Mullen ASC]

I think the new up and coming generation will be bringing still lenses with them into larger productions..
The kids in film school/making their own films now.. use still lenses.
They will become comfortable with these lenses.

I see a shift in the next 3-6 years..

more and more privately funded indie flicks will be showing up.. and i bet you, they would rather spend 100.00 a day (or just buy) a set of zeiss ZF primes.. than rent master primes for 650 a day.

my 2 cents.

experience based on me being one of these indie flick kids

And once those kids get a shot at using cine glass for their features, most of them won't go back to using still camera lenses. It doesn't matter how "comfortable" they previously were with their still camera lenses, they'll fall in love with how much easier it will be to pull focus on the cine lens.

You can spend money unwisely on a movie shoot, and using lenses that may impact efficiency just to save money is not always the wisest use of your budget.

There are many places I'll cut corners to save money, but generally you pick things that won't have a visible impact on quality on the screen, nor things that may compromise your speed of working, nor your ability to get the shot right within a few takes. Lenses are the wrong place to cut corners on a feature shoot. That doesn't mean you need to always use the newest, most expensive lenses on the market, but it also means that going bottom-line is not always the smartest way of spending your money. I'll give up on some lights before I'd choose cheap lenses that I felt would slow me down or cause more soft shots to occur.

Unless you feel that young people today have some sort of X-Men-type mutation going on... that makes using a tiny focus scale and short barrel rotation where it only takes a 1/8th twist of a lens to go from 6' to infinity as having no impact on their ability to follow focus during a scene.

It's not a question of comfort -- still camera lenses have been around longer than cine lenses, and people have been using them for over a century, even on movie cameras... it's a matter of mechanics. Cine lenses are designed for cine-style shooting and still lenses are not, and comfort is not really the issue. Something actually designed for the work you plan on doing will always be easier to use than something NOT designed for the work you are planning on doing with it.

It's not a matter of age or old-fashioned thinking, it's the age-old problem of human eyes and hands, things that haven't really changed. And it's a matter of the lens mechanics happening in real time on screen. If you are following focus on an actor in a scene as they move closer and farther, you want a longer barrel rotation (with larger focus marks) for a smoother effect as you pull focus, not a short snappy focus effect because you barely have to wiggle the barrel to cause the focus to shift by a foot.

 

[Mark Crabtree]

Still Lenses

Still Lenses

David,

I agree with every reason you mentioned that makes Cine lenses superior to Still lenses. However, still lenses will soon be using their own internal focus motors controlled by sophisticated remotes which allow for totally repeatable, even recordable focus action. These remotes will give us the familiar knob but will be able to expand or contract the mapping on the knob for slower or faster action. Plus these lenses will supply on screen MM, Focus and Iris info including meta data. All this with very reduced weight. The Birger and Impero combo should go a long way toward this goal.

And once those kids get a shot at using cine glass for their features, most of them won't go back to using still camera lenses. It doesn't matter how "comfortable" they previously were with their still camera lenses, they'll fall in love with how much easier it will be to pull focus on the cine lens.

You can spend money unwisely on a movie shoot, and using lenses that may impact efficiency just to save money is not always the wisest use of your budget.

There are many places I'll cut corners to save money, but generally you pick things that won't have a visible impact on quality on the screen, nor things that may compromise your speed of working, nor your ability to get the shot right within a few takes. Lenses are the wrong place to cut corners on a feature shoot. That doesn't mean you need to always use the newest, most expensive lenses on the market, but it also means that going bottom-line is not always the smartest way of spending your money. I'll give up on some lights before I'd choose cheap lenses that I felt would slow me down or cause more soft shots to occur.

Unless you feel that young people today have some sort of X-Men-type mutation going on... that makes using a tiny focus scale and short barrel rotation where it only takes a 1/8th twist of a lens to go from 6' to infinity as having no impact on their ability to follow focus during a scene.

It's not a question of comfort -- still camera lenses have been around longer than cine lenses, and people have been using them for over a century, even on movie cameras... it's a matter of mechanics. Cine lenses are designed for cine-style shooting and still lenses are not, and comfort is not really the issue. Something actually designed for the work you plan on doing will always be easier to use than something NOT designed for the work you are planning on doing with it.

It's not a matter of age or old-fashioned thinking, it's the age-old problem of human eyes and hands, things that haven't really changed. And it's a matter of the lens mechanics happening in real time on screen. If you are following focus on an actor in a scene as they move closer and farther, you want a longer barrel rotation (with larger focus marks) for a smoother effect as you pull focus, not a short snappy focus effect because you barely have to wiggle the barrel to cause the focus to shift by a foot.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

When that new technology arrives, I'll be happy to check it out. But I'd still prefer using a lens where the barrel rotation and internal gearing was actually designed in the first place for cine-style focus-pulling rather than some high-tech workaround. Being overly clever in one's solutions is not always the best way to work. A simpler mechanical solution tends to be more reliable.

 

[SteveLucas]

Still lenses will never trump cine glass; they will always be choice.
Even mechanics aside (witch I think cine glass is the obvious choice), the visual texture of 35mm glass is a different ball park.

I've shot with both. From my experience I have vowed, like David mentioned, to never compromise optics for budget. Glass is vital, and worth the expenditure.

I can't imagine cine glass EVER being obsolete.

 

[Poi Boy]

David,

However, still lenses will soon be using their own internal focus motors controlled by sophisticated remotes which allow for totally repeatable, even recordable focus action. These remotes will give us the familiar knob but will be able to expand or contract the mapping on the knob for slower or faster action. Plus these lenses will supply on screen MM, Focus and Iris info including meta data. All this with very reduced weight.

I think this is right on the money, looking forward to the new lenses.
Aloha
-A

 

[Mark K.]

David,

I agree with every reason you mentioned that makes Cine lenses superior to Still lenses. However, still lenses will soon be using their own internal focus motors controlled by sophisticated remotes which allow for totally repeatable, even recordable focus action. These remotes will give us the familiar knob but will be able to expand or contract the mapping on the knob for slower or faster action. Plus these lenses will supply on screen MM, Focus and Iris info including meta data. All this with very reduced weight. The Birger and Impero combo should go a long way toward this goal.

Mark, could you point me in the direction of some information on these remote-controlled lenses please? Sounds like very interesting stuff.

 

[JoshBertrand]

Here is one of the upcoming systems for doing that Grug. This is a very short demo of a Viewfactor Impereo controlling a Birger mount with a Canon EF zoom lens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceNbZxFnVTw

 

[PaulClements]

If Red's DSMC and Canon and Nikon's ventures into video take off we might even see still glass housings beginning to reflect the nature of their cine counterparts, but cine lenses will be the choice of professionals always, it's what they're made for. Hopefully they'll become cheaper though without a huge drop in quality for those who want to own them and the mass of Red camera owners and hobbyist photographers will have an impact on that.

Paul

 

[Michael Hastings]

If Red's DSMC and Canon and Nikon's ventures into video take off we might even see still glass housings beginning to reflect the nature of their cine counterparts, but cine lenses will be the choice of professionals always, it's what they're made for. Hopefully they'll become cheaper though without a huge drop in quality for those who want to own them and the mass of Red camera owners and hobbyist photographers will have an impact on that.

Paul

Paul: The Zeiss ZF (Nikon mount and the new EF mount versions) are basically already there. We were very successfully using Contax/Yashica mount Zeiss lenses on our early Birger mount (which needed a computer to control). The C/Y lenses are what basically became the ZF series. Besides being excellent optically they have very smooth, long focus throws (ironically one of the complaints you get from some still photographers.)

 

[Mark K.]

Here is one of the upcoming systems for doing that Grug. This is a very short demo of a Viewfactor Impereo controlling a Birger mount with a Canon EF zoom lens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceNbZxFnVTw

Thanks for that Josh. Does anyone know where I could find some information on how remote mounts like that one will overcome the particular difficulties of a still-lens focus throw that only requires a turn of a few millimeters to go from 5'-10' and from 10'-Infinity?

The possibilities of these sorts of things are very exciting.

 

[Jorge Díaz-Amador]

David,

However, still lenses will soon be using their own internal focus motors controlled by sophisticated remotes which allow for totally repeatable, even recordable focus action. These remotes will give us the familiar knob but will be able to expand or contract the mapping on the knob for slower or faster action.

I heard this so many times. But I won't believe it until I see it (and I'm not holding my breath).

The focus motors in those AF still primes were designed to focus BEFORE the image is captured not DURING capture. Are they strong enough to handle the weight of a clip-on matte box? How quiet are they in movement?

Optical quality aside, most cine lenses are too big heavy and costly for a still camera. Most still lenses are designed to be relatively light, compact, and priced reasonably in relation to the cost of the camera itself.

Wide angle SLR primes are compromised optically in order to provide enough back focus (real element clearance) for the flip-up SLR mirror. A cine camera mirror rotates allowing shorter back focus. The RED ONE allows even shorter back focus, limited only by the protection window.

All things being equal, shorter back focus = less distortion in wide primes. This is why Leica M (and Contax G) lenses are so highly regarded.

 

[Michael Panfeld]

I think this is right on the money, looking forward to the new lenses.
Aloha
-A

Yes, it will be interesting to see if the Impero will lend the touch of a cine lens to a still lens. That aside, I've read that still lenes are geared for high contrast, while cine lenses are gear for high resolution (and lower contrast). Can anybody comment on the quality of the images produced rather than the mechanical operation.

I expect to have my Impero unit in the next few weeks. Come on viewfactor.

 

[Joel Kaye]

I expect to have my Impero unit in the next few weeks. Come on viewfactor.

God I wish I didn't post this.

I got a chance to speak to Curt directly and saw some of the initial Impero and Inclinos about a week ago. He told me the Birger mount was very high resolution and capable of very refined focus pulls with the Impero. I still want to experience myself of course.

The Impero will be scriptable. I need to learn more still, but you theoretically could set up a dolly push in and have the lens focus itself during the move. If the dolly timing is close and hits the end mark then you've got it.

I did just get done shooting my first feature using all PL mount lenses. We shot a very complete set of Ultra Primes along with an Optimo 24-290 and an Angenieux 17-80mm both with micro force controllers.

I pulled my own focus for 98% of the shoot.

So am I in love with PL mount stuff and will never go back to SLR lenses? Well... that's a long discussion but I was pretty stunned to find the UltraPrime 40,50 and 85 appeared to breath more than any 50 or 85 slr lens I've used after all these PL guys have been harping on the breathing point. These lenses had some very nice things I liked... like most lenses took the Arri clip on matte box, the FF Gears are the same distance from the mount, the mechanics were universally terrific etc.

I'll also grant that the Optimo zoom is really impressive... but at the expense of size and intimacy.

I could go on forever - but the truth is good SLR lenses are for real if YOU want them to work for YOU. If not, go rent Master Primes (but be careful because for the $1700 repair fee you could have had half a kit of SLR glass that you OWN and you don't have to be extra careful with).

I'm not going to stop using SLR lenses now that I've shot a movie and put a hundred+ hours on some nice PL glass. I've had about 40+ different lenses on my RED by now. I can make any of 'em work. I found some focus pulls to be MORE difficult with a couple of the PL lenses because too many revolutions of the FF were required. The PL lens required 2 people whereas I could have pulled it on my own with an SLR lens.

Let me be very, very clear. I'm not telling anyone not to use an AC to pull their focus. I'm just asking you to concede that there are other people out there that may feel the type of content they shoot is better served by pulling their own focus. (Improv movies with no marks anyone?). Frankly, I just feel like focus and simple tilt/pan moves are so married that...

Oh no... I feel a rant coming on
[rant on]
Guitars and Pianos could be played by two people too. You could have left hand specialists teaming up with right hand specialists. And they could each have their own union. Why should camera be different than a musical instrument? Playing music in rhythm with a band is way tougher than pulling focus. I know no one wants to say this stuff out loud for fear of being ridiculed here.
[rant off]

So are PL lenses going out of style? No. Will the generation of kids who are really good with SLR lenses going to switch up for PL if a director or producer doesn't make them? I'll believe it when I see it. I say they'll be more like me and be happy to shoot anything someone puts on their camera. And that might give them an edge in a changing marketplace.

God I wish I didn't post this.

 

[conrad gaunt]

i love the Red PL glass, and I don't like swapping mounts, but I definately intend to buy some fast slr glass for low light work, if it can be converted to a PL mount by a camera engineer.

 

[Jason Sinclair]

God I wish I didn't post this.

I got a chance to speak to Curt directly and saw some of the initial Impero and Inclinos about a week ago. He told me the Birger mount was very high resolution and capable of very refined focus pulls with the Impero. I still want to experience myself of course.

The Impero will be scriptable. I need to learn more still, but you theoretically could set up a dolly push in and have the lens focus itself during the move. If the dolly timing is close and hits the end mark then you've got it.

I did just get done shooting my first feature using all PL mount lenses. We shot a very complete set of Ultra Primes along with an Optimo 24-290 and an Angenieux 17-80mm both with micro force controllers.

I pulled my own focus for 98% of the shoot.

So am I in love with PL mount stuff and will never go back to SLR lenses? Well... that's a long discussion but I was pretty stunned to find the UltraPrime 40,50 and 85 appeared to breath more than any 50 or 85 slr lens I've used after all these PL guys have been harping on the breathing point. These lenses had some very nice things I liked... like most lenses took the Arri clip on matte box, the FF Gears are the same distance from the mount, the mechanics were universally terrific etc.

I'll also grant that the Optimo zoom is really impressive... but at the expense of size and intimacy.

I could go on forever - but the truth is good SLR lenses are for real if YOU want them to work for YOU. If not, go rent Master Primes (but be careful because for the $1700 repair fee you could have had half a kit of SLR glass that you OWN and you don't have to be extra careful with).

I'm not going to stop using SLR lenses now that I've shot a movie and put a hundred+ hours on some nice PL glass. I've had about 40+ different lenses on my RED by now. I can make any of 'em work. I found some focus pulls to be MORE difficult with a couple of the PL lenses because too many revolutions of the FF were required. The PL lens required 2 people whereas I could have pulled it on my own with an SLR lens.

Let me be very, very clear. I'm not telling anyone not to use an AC to pull their focus. I'm just asking you to concede that there are other people out there that may feel the type of content they shoot is better served by pulling their own focus. (Improv movies with no marks anyone?). Frankly, I just feel like focus and simple tilt/pan moves are so married that...

Oh no... I feel a rant coming on
[rant on]
Guitars and Pianos could be played by two people too. You could have left hand specialists teaming up with right hand specialists. And they could each have their own union. Why should camera be different than a musical instrument? Playing music in rhythm with a band is way tougher than pulling focus. I know no one wants to say this stuff out loud for fear of being ridiculed here.
[rant off]

So are PL lenses going out of style? No. Will the generation of kids who are really good with SLR lenses going to switch up for PL if a director or producer doesn't make them? I'll believe it when I see it. I say they'll be more like me and be happy to shoot anything someone puts on their camera. And that might give them an edge in a changing marketplace.

God I wish I didn't post this.

Full of common sense...