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 :)

Canon Lens Set

Yeah, but those slow speeds! I can't imagine shooting at 2.8 all the time. We probably shot half of this new film (and it is, as noted above, a two-camera shoot that is still on-going) at night. We're at f1.2 or f1.4 on almost every shot. In our case, it's either buy fast lenses or buy an enormous amount of new lights. (Rentals aren't an option in our case, as we shoot over such a huge an enormous amount of time.)

But, we certainly do give up the ability to change iris settings during a shot. I wish we could, but we can't.

Wish we had more money!

Stephen
 
The other route is to get the set you listed and rent fast primes as needed. Probably the best investment as you'll get even faster speeds and lenses that perform as if they weren't wide open.
 
Rentals just don't work for us at all, Roberto. Our entire budget for our films is in the quarter-million range, and that includes everything. . . cast. . . crew. . . meals. . . insurance. . . etc. And since we shoot over about six months at a time, you can only imagine how quickly rentals like that would consume our budget.

On the other hand, we sure are getting a great look. One national film critic said our first film, "Works in Progress," as "a jewel," and "a marvel," and "may be be one of the best-looking [low-budget] first films ever." And that was before we knew what we were doing. Frankly, the critics won't believe their eyes this time around.

:-)

Would I like a great set of PL-mount lenses? Absolutely? Will I EVER be able to afford one? Nope. Ain't gonna happen. Riches are just not in our future. Not making the kinds of films we're making, anyway.

Stephen
 
re: hard stops.

The Birger/Impero does NOT have hard stops. I hope the RED solution(s) DO!
 
Tom:

Re: ease of changing the RED Canon and PL mounts -- I'm pretty sure Jarred has stated this is a very easy swap -- a few allen screws is all it looks like. I'm under the impression it should be no problem to make that swap in the field.
 
Stephen Pruitt said:
Rentals just don't work for us at all, Roberto. Our entire budget for our films is in the quarter-million range, and that includes everything. . . cast. . . crew. . . meals. . . insurance. . . etc. And since we shoot over about six months at a time, you can only imagine how quickly rentals like that would consume our budget.

On the other hand, we sure are getting a great look. One national film critic said our first film, "Works in Progress," as "a jewel," and "a marvel," and "may be be one of the best-looking [low-budget] first films ever." And that was before we knew what we were doing. Frankly, the critics won't believe their eyes this time around.

:-)

Would I like a great set of PL-mount lenses? Absolutely? Will I EVER be able to afford one? Nope. Ain't gonna happen. Riches are just not in our future. Not making the kinds of films we're making, anyway.

Stephen
Click to expand...

Of course. I totally get it Stephen. I was only hitting the little rental reminder gong cause it doesn't hurt to hear the ring every so often. : )

Now consider this: Say there is one scene you envisioned that completes the film in an important way. Say to make it happen you will need wider and faster. Say you work on this production hurdle for a long time, and arrive to this decision after meticulous consideration of all possible sets, the way these could be lit to achieve that visual, AND after considering various re-writes... Then say that after considering the rental route you also realized that all you would really only need one MP, for one day (in addition to your great package). Then, say you pull some favors and get someone to let you rent one prime, for one day, at the normal rate. In this scenario you would spend $300 to make the climax magic possible...

...and I would still call it a "rental". ;)
 
Stephen Pruitt said:
Rentals just don't work for us at all, Roberto. Our entire budget for our films is in the quarter-million range, and that includes everything. . . cast. . . crew. . . meals. . . insurance. . . etc. And since we shoot over about six months at a time, you can only imagine how quickly rentals like that would consume our budget.

On the other hand, we sure are getting a great look...
Click to expand...

Stephen..wow..great that you're taking advantage of the opportunity
these cameras allow for lower budgeted types of production. Actually
Kubrick did some long scheduled/small crew films as well...
hard work..but very rewarding the times when it finally comes together..

But how do you find it pulling focus with your Canon lenses..?
do the primes perform better w/this than the zooms..?
..also do you have to avoid certain kinds of blocking with your actors
to compensate at all..?
 
16-35/2.8 II is great lens. I would buy it and forget all other lenses from that range. 2.8 is fast enough for that range anyways IMO. Plus you don't have to swap lenses that much.

50/1.2 is overkill IMO. Sure, it has a bit better focusing ring than 1.4, but I would suggest the 1.4. It is sharp and it has great bokeh too. In 1.2 bokeh is a bit better, but not that much as the difference between 1.4 and 1.8. These comments apply to 85/1.2 too.

But if you have money you don't know where to spend otherwise, buy everything L.
 
Hi there, Steve. . .

We don't have even the tiniest issue with pulling focus with or Canon glass, and we do HUGE pulls all the time. . . I mean, really massive pulls in some cases (say from 20 feet to 1 foot at f1.2), and whereas we miss these pulls a lot of time (due to insufficient marks or just plain old operator error), we NEVER have had an issue with not being able to pull perfect focus when we've got accurate marks and are actually paying attention. This thing just never drifts.

I know they aren't for everyone, but the Canon glass has served us so well and faithfully it's amazing. We used Nikon glass before that, but that glass didn't allow a remote focus puller. With the Birger, that's no issue at all.

I agree, Roberto. . . I like your style. . . I just haven't found the need, to this point, to even covet that great PL glass. Sure my pups breathe a little more than some PL glass, but I actually like breathing under certain circumstances.

I WOULD love to be able to do a smooth iris change, but that doesn't happen very often in our shooting.

Thanks.

Stephen
 
PL vs. Canon Compiled Options

PL vs. Canon Compiled Options

Hey guys. So I went ahead and compiled the potential lens sets that can be used on the Epic. I left off the low end still glass and stuck to RED PL glass since that's the most affordable option. I also took the $250/lens Duclos Cine Mod off of the Canons since they don't have an iris wheel to de-click. Here's what I got:

CANON PRIME SET
Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 600
Canon 24mm f1.4L II 1800
Canon 35mm f1.4L 1400
Canon 50mm f1.2L 1600
Canon 85mm f1.2L II 1800
Canon 135mm f2 1000
TOTAL 1
$8,200

CANON ZOOM SET
Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 600
Canon 16-35mm f2.8 1400
Canon 24-70mm f2.8 1300
Canon 70-200mm f2.8L II 2250
TOTAL 2
$5,550

PL PRIME SET
Duclos 11-16mm f2.8 PL Mount 3,500
RED Prime 18mm f1.9 3,800
RED Prime Set (25-100mm) f1.9 19,000
TOTAL 3
$26,300

PL ZOOM SET
Duclos 11-16mm f2.8 PL Mount 3,500
RED Pro 17-50mm f2.9 6000
RED 50-150mm f3 8500
TOTAL 4
$18,000

As expected, zooms are significantly cheaper in both cases, and in the PL category, also significantly lighter in weight. And of course, the primes are faster than the zooms in both cases, although in PL lenses it is only 1 stop, whereas with the Canons the primes buy you an extra two stops over the zooms.
 
Hey there, Julio. . . there are a lot of us around here who feel that the whole breathing debate is really overblown. As for me, in cases where I'm moving the emphasis from far to near and the near object increases slightly in size as we pull, I think it really adds to the feel of the shot. It's definitely less effective when you pull to something and the thing pulled to decreases slightly in size, but it honestly has to be a pretty wicked and fast pull to be visible to anyone other than ACs and DPs.

Your table of Canon primes at $9000 (I'm including the 200mm, as well, as that's a great lens, too) versus $26,000 for the RED primes really tells the tale for me. The expense differential is just too great for us at the present time, and that doesn't include the purchase of a remote lens controller, which would cost several thousand dollars more. Unfortunately, there's just no way to control a lens on a big dolly move or up on a jib without a remote controller. And we do those sorts of moves quite often.

Once the RED EF lenses come out, with any luck they'll be at a price point that actually makes sense for this indie filmmaker.

Stephen
 
Stephen Pruitt said:
Your table of Canon primes at $9000 (I'm including the 200mm, as well, as that's a great lens, too) versus $26,000 for the RED primes really tells the tale for me...and that doesn't include the purchase of a remote lens controller, which would cost several thousand dollars more. Unfortunately, there's just no way to control a lens on a big dolly move or up on a jib without a remote controller. And we do those sorts of moves quite often.
Click to expand...

This is a really good point, and something to definitely take into account. I have yet to ever see a working (or even non-CG) RedMote Pro. Could Jarred chime in as to the progress with this item? And if you guys have a working one, how reliable is it as an electronic follow focus with a Canon mount?
 
My electronic ff has been pretty reliable.

I would expect RED's to be even more so because they're ff and camera firmware will be from the same vendor (themselves).
 
It occurs to me that relevant questions for me are:

1. Which PL lenses to the Canon lenses we've been discussing cut best with?
2. Which PL lenses to the following Nikon lenses cut best with: 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top