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 :)

Best PL Zoom for hand held / Steadicam

Steve,

I am not going to get into a pissing contest with you. No one ever said you and all the other non union workers do anything wrong. I do tons of non union, non narrative work. You interpret it that way for whatever reasons you do. I quoted two statements in which you implied that some how 600 crews are "railroading out" people, and "peer pressure" is a motivating factor for how we work. This is naive, and I, as well as many people who read your posts, find this offensive and bull headed when it comes to this issue.

Nick
 
arrinick said:
Steve,

I am not going to get into a pissing contest with you. No one ever said you and all the other non union workers do anything wrong. I do tons of non union, non narrative work. You interpret it that way for whatever reasons you do. I quoted two statements in which you implied that some how 600 crews are "railroading out" people, and "peer pressure" is a motivating factor for how we work. This is naive, and I, as well as many people who read your posts, find this offensive and bull headed when it comes to this issue.

Nick
Click to expand...

Naive? I believe it's naive not to acknowledge the peer pressure involved with union work. As quoted in my last post - I've been union - and I felt pressure to conform in attitudes was definitely there. I'm not a conformist - never have been. I'm a freethinker who is always trying to figure out new ways to do something - and new equipment and technology to throw into the mix. As you and I know, that type of approach simply doesn't fit well into a union environment. In my union experience the prevailing attitude was "Hey man, we've always done it that way, so if it ain't broke, don't fix it", and "Don't touch that - its not in your job description".

Some personalities do well in that environment, and others simply do not. I found it stunted my ability to spread out my skill sets - to learn the production business from bottom to top - from being an assistant all the way up to being an executive producer - and you just can't do that in a union environment. Thus I left the unions, went indie, spread my skill sets vertically and horizontally, and I'm way happy I did.

Some may offer the "jack of all trades - master of none" rebuttal, but I'd answer that with "a specialist is someone who learns more and more about less and less - until they know everything about nothing". My goal has always been to be a "jack of all trades - and a master of many of them" - and I felt I just couldn't get there in a union environment, so I bailed out.

Again, professional life is full of choices, and each of us needs to do what we think is right for us. I've been on the union and indie side of the fence, so I understand the mentality, and pluses/minuses of both. When you give something up - you gain something - and vice versa.

Yeah, I have strong opinions, but as you know, anyone who survives in this business has to have strong opinions or they simply don't survive. You do, I do, and every veteran does - it goes with the work. Sometimes those strong opinions clash - but that's natural too.

I have no personal ax to grind with you Nick, or any other guy who chooses to work union. Some of my best friends and closest associates in this business are union guys - and I hire a lot of them for freelance work in the projects I produce - as long as they show respect for the non-union crew members. I spend a ton of time each week in L.A. on business - believe me, I understand the L.A. industry intimately. Everyone needs to choose what's right for themselves. That said, I look forward to the day when there is mutual respect exhibited throughout the motion media industry.

I think this discussion has run its course...it's probably time to get back on the thread topic of zoom ideas for hand held.
 
i think there ought to be a word limit or something on these posts, like word count in MS word. There is elegance in brevity, but never in bloviation...
 
If someone doesn't like long posts, there's no forum rule that requires them to read them. They can just pass on by.

But there is a forum rule, instituted clear back on 11/15/08, that told everyone to start using their real names.

Link: http://205.234.135.241/forum/showthread.php?t=28222

In actuality, there can be either elegance or ignorance in brevity. Some people simply don't have anything constructive to say - so they sign off quickly.
 
Thanks for the comment Steve, very helpful. But you know what might be useful? You should take the time to let us know a little bit about your background. Your spare prose and amish-like modesty leaves us yearning to find out just how you learned so much, how you became so far-seeing and well informed...

Come on, share a little.
James Wong Howe
 
GFIRob said:
Thanks for the comment Steve, very helpful. But you know what might be useful? You should take the time to let us know a little bit about your background. Your spare prose and amish-like modesty leaves us yearning to find out just how you learned so much, how you became so far-seeing and well informed...

Come on, share a little.
James Wong Howe
Click to expand...

Hmmm...I'll have to do that sometime :-)

If you review my posts on this thread, they are full of ideas for solutions, real world experience with lenses, and suggestions for the needs of in the field workers. They may be long, but they're packed with constructive information and suggestions.

If you'd like to discuss or disagree with the tech solutions I've suggested, how about taking the time to post such. If you simply want to post sarcastic one-liners and personal criticisms of me, like your last two posts, then I have a problem with that. Disagreeing with someone's posts is one thing, but personal defamation of an individual is prohibited by the Rules of Conduct posted by Jared.

If you want to discuss the technology covered by this thread, have at it. But any personal attacks on me need to cease right now, or I'll take the issue to the powers that be.
 
So how about that Optimo 15-40.....
 
Targeting

Targeting

My original reason for starting this thread was to delineate a target for a zoom lens with S35 coverage, minimum 8X zoom ratio, at least 20mm on the wide end, under 9 lbs for hand held ergonomics and as fast as the above parameters allow.

There have been several illuminating posts about the physics of creating such a lens. While I am not an engineer or lens designer I do accept that a lens like the 24-290 Angie Optimo is 26 lbs for a reason. On the other end of the scale is a lens like the Nikon 18-200 DX which is less than 5lbs, but ramps more than a stop and does not have smooth action on the zoom ring. I am looking to meet in the middle.

Mechanicals/barrel: Reasonably smooth action, willing to sacrifice a little precision to save weight and cost

Zoom ratio: has to be at least 8X for real world run and gun

Widest focal length: 15mm is the dream, 18mm would rock, 22mm at least

Weight: under 7 lbs would be so nice, over 10 lbs and its hard to call it a handheld lens.

Speed: Anything over T3.5 is going to be tough in available light situations.

Ramping: In my opinion up to a half stop of ramping, especially if most of it happens near the end of the bottle is acceptable if it results in dramatically lowering the weight. Others have cited ramping as a deal killer and anything more than a full stop would be problematic to say the least.

Cheers - Blair
 
It's not 8x but...on R1 crop factor about 1.7x equivalent to 16.5-61mm f/2.8

m28_105.gif


Tamron 28-105mm f/2.8 LD Aspherical IF
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi,

On RED it will be 28-105, focal length of a lens never changes when you put it on a camera with a different size sensor. I thought we cleared that up a few months ago!:)

Stephen
Click to expand...

Stephen

yes we did it,

but the lensmakers like a Nikon, Canon, Tokina, Tamrom, etc...

using another approach that involves "angles of view" when they talking about "different focal lengths" with crop sized sensor(s)... (equivalent to... FF35mm)

have a look at the picture below:

AnglesOfView.jpg
 
Blair, for a pistol grip with zoom control (a bit like the Arri pistol grip) try the C-Motion lens control with a C-Zoom mk1. It comes in beautiful hard wood and fits the hand great. My focus puller Charlie England has one and its great on RED or film cameras. Try and mount it to a "rose" rather than bars to stop it spinning.

I shot hand-held all day (long day) on a RED with the Optimo 17-80 (my favorite for H/H) which I could normally do easy enough on a 435 or Arricam BUT wow that really killed my wrists! Felt like the balance was all wrong. Very front heavy. Any suggestions? I'm prepping a TV series in Egypt on the RED at the mo so would love some suggestions. I think it will be the first here! They don't seem to know nowt so hoping to get Jeff Brown out from London to set us up and train a DIT.
 
Stephen, the mount on that Tamron lens does not look too good to me. Looks like the thing is about to snap off!

PL all the way...........
 
Blair,

On your summary post of what you're looking for (Post #89), you didn't limit your mount options to PL, so:

One of the new RED Electronic Lenses is a 25-100 f2.8 (4:1 ratio). If RED can also add on, using their 35mm stills lens technology, an 18-144 zoom f2.8 (8:1 ratio), that will satisfy a lot of what you listed. I don't expect the RED 25-100 to be big, I expect it to be optically excellent, to hold focus while zooming, to have smooth zoom action, and to breathe very little. If they made an 18-144 zoom, I would expect that same quality - plus I wouldn't expect it to exceed the weight limit you listed. Beyond all that, the RED Electronic Lenses have been mentioned as being able to fully "talk with" the new RED mount. I expect the new RED mount to be solid.

Just thinking: one other run n' gun option for 8x zoom will be the fixed lens Scarlet, which will sport an 8x. RED has said from the beginning, that for the fixed lens Scarlet they also plan to make a 2x tele extender and wide converter - both what they say will be optically matched to the 8x. That 2x extender would give you 16x for certain long focal length needs, where 3k RAW will suit the bill. A complete rig like that will be small and light - thus real mobile. I can think of a lot of productions a rig like that could be useful for - couldn't you?

Just some thoughts...
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
yes we did it,
but the lensmakers like a Nikon, Canon, Tokina, Tamrom, etc...
using another approach that involves "angles of view" when they talking about "different focal lengths" with crop sized sensor(s)... (equivalent to... FF35mm)
Click to expand...

Yes.

I guess people coming form the 35mm adapter world often talk in still marketing language.

I've gotten "yelled at" countless times due to this... : )
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
Yes.

I guess people coming form the 35mm adapter world often talk in still marketing language.

I've gotten "yelled at" countless times due to this... : )
Click to expand...

Roberto,

you are right.

It's all about that just in case Nikon (18-200mm) or Tokina (11-16mm) sell me those zooms

I must be ready to "convert" them in terms of FF35mm or vice versa.

Also don't forget that the RED's Field of Viev (FoV) crop factor related to FF35mm is about 1.7x.

Then you should start to count...

Depth of Field for all focal lengths remain the same as Stephen likes to warn you sometimes.
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
It's all about that just in case Nikon (18-200mm) or Tokina (11-16mm) sell me those zooms

I must be ready to "convet" them in terms of FF35mm or vice versa.

Also don't forget that the RED's Field of Viev (FoV) crop factor related to FF35mm is about 1.7x.

Then you should start to count...
Click to expand...

Looks like you're counting the wrong way though. A 28-105mm lens on 1.7x crop will have equivalent FoV to 47-178mm on FF35. Not 16.5-61mm like you fabulated.
 
Nils J. Nesse said:
Looks like you're counting the wrong way though. A 28-105mm lens on 1.7x crop will have equivalent FoV to 47-178mm on FF35. Not 16.5-61mm like you fabulated.
Click to expand...

Nils,

I was thinking in a way "If they would..."...

Also I'm not sure that you've got a trick about how crop factors sized still lenses are marketed?!

Tamron's catalog at the picture above tells a story about "Different Angles of View with Different Focal Lengths".

Following that marketing "logic" I said that "IF" 28-105mm lens would be designed for a crop factor sized sensor.

They always try to sell you a product (in this case a lens) as it would sound more attractive or more like a zoom lens that is about 16-60mm

and you would be "fascinated" how wide that lens would be (you dream about 16mm wide...).

That would be about a trick I'm trying to talk about here.

Actually it is 28mm-105mm lens in FF35mm.

Again "IF" it would be designed for cropped sensor then they would say it is 16-60mm...

But maybe this is a wrong example that made all this confusion now.

It could be better to take example from zooms like a 18-200 from Nikon and 11-16 from Tokina.

Those zooms were designed for a crop factor sized sensors (DX, APS-C, etc... abbreviations...)

Then somebody would say, whooooo! They are pretty wide zoom lenses!

The trick is blinking on you!!!!!!!:cute:

But if you would "convert" their sizes to FF35 you would get something about (for Nikon crop factor that is 1.5x)

Nikon 18-200mm x 1.5 = 27-300mm at FF35

and Tokina 11-16mm x 1.5 = 16.5-24mm at FF35.

So the trick is that they would like to sell as much attractive "Focal Lengths size" "packed" as "Angles of view size" and sometimes vice versa.
 
Tamron tweak?

Tamron tweak?

Perhaps the Tamron 28-105mm zoom would be a good candidate for Dr. Lens to do a PL mount conversion on. To really make it a better hybrid lens for the uses I have in mind, some of the other tweaks that are planed for the Tokina 11-16 might make sense for the Tamron as well.

Can anyone comment on the optical properties of the Tamron - is it worth the effort to re-mount and re-house for motion work? On top of that the zoom ratio is still a limiting factor for the "utility" envisioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top