Focal lenght above 85mm ! HOW OFTEN ?

[Cristian Mihai]

Hello guys

How often do you guys use focal lenght above 85 mm except sport, nature etc. Having a hard time to decide if i should add the primes above 85mm to my set.

Thanks!

 

[ericyoung]

It totally depends on your style of shooting, what kind of subject matter, personal preference etc.

For narrative film or well controlled shoots, you could shoot your entire career on just focal lengths up to and including 85mm. But for run & gun, low budget, tiny crew types of shoots, longer focal lengths, especially in the form of zooms, can get you out of trouble, or just because you prefer the look of longer focal lengths.

Or another way of looking at it - how often have you thought you REQUIRED a longer focal length on your own shoots, and were frustrated you didn't have it?

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Eric's answer is very good.. all I can add is the question 'what are your lenses for?' ....if it is for 'your use' then the answer is in Eric's question.

If your lenses are for others to use I do feel that a 135 is very useful if you already have 5+ lenses between 16/18 and 85.

one of the great things about the Red Epic MX or Dragon is that at 3k you can produce a great 1080p image. This function has worked for me - especially when underpressure for a longer lens than I was carryng that day.

 

[Cristian Mihai]

Thanks

I lean towards o having primes including 85mm and from up a nice zoom. I just bought the ZF.2 Zeiss : 15/2.8 , 21/2.8 , 28/2 , 35/1.4 , 50/1.4 , 85/1.4. Was thinking to get the 100 but it's a macro extending lens. Maybe 135/2. Was thinking about rehousing aka Lock Circle but unless it gets cheaper i am not gonna do it. Also bought Zeiss 10-100mm 1.8 and Abakus S16 converter and Zeiss 11-110mm/2.2. Also a nice set of Contax Zeiss, Zeiss Jena set and some fun russian lenses. As a photographer after a while 85mm was my longest lens. Sold the longer ones and bought more lights. Thanks for your inputs.

 

[Bob Gundu]

On Dragon I've been using the 100mm more than ever.

 

[Phil Holland]

Most of my shooting happens in the 18-200mm range. A little wider here and there. Also, the occasional 300-600mm work. I'm a fan of long glass.

In S35 18-85 and 18-100 are pretty much "standard".

With larger sensors, like Bob is describing, I'm seeing more shoot at 100-135. Which seems like a natural extension to the S35 standard focal lengths in relationship to the larger formats and FOV.

 

[Chris McKechnie]

I use 100+ all the time. Just remember to have some sort of rig, monopod, etc so your footage is usable.

 

[PatrickFaith]

From my low budget perspective, I went with very high quality pl lenses at 50 and below, with 2x and 1.4x pl extenders above 50. I use Nikon lenses for above 100.

I did some research on this question and there are a lot of films shot 90% the time at 50 or below.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

It's all subjective as an art form. Focal length choices are often determined by budget, availability, the look you want, when, where and how you shoot, etc..

I use my 300mm all the time and it's not just for sports and nature. It's wonderful for shooting cars or certain types of portrait shots, among other things... There are films out there shot on long focal lengths for the look. IIRC, "The Exploding Girl" was shot primarily with a 300mm lens.

I use the 100mm a lot more with Dragon than I did with the RED One, partially because we gain the bit larger sensor and AOV. So a shot I would have normally composed on a 4K RED One with an 85mm might have me reaching first for the 100mm prime if I'm going to shoot it in 6K on Dragon. Or maybe I'll stick with the 85mm on Dragon, knowing that it will be a bit wider and I can use those extra pixels to my advantage for re-framing. It's all about options.

But what it really comes down to is the look I'm trying to achieve along with requirements of the subject and shooting environment. I find that I like shooting with long focal lengths and also with very wide focal lengths because they both offer a certain level of visual character that is different than the common 25mm thru 85mm or so... Also remember that focal length is the predominant factor in depth of field. DOF becomes increasingly shallower as focal length increases. This can be a creative asset, or an obstacle. Maximum apertures also diminish as focal length increases and it's not so common to come across a 300mm that can deliver an aperture larger than F2, it just makes the lens a lot bigger with more glass and therefore more expensive. Longer focal lengths in relation to shallow DOF can also be another thing to worry about in addition to keeping things stable when shot through a long lens.

 

[Nick Morrison]

I think it's worth quoting the wonderful David Mullen:

I remember Owen Roizman, ASC once talking about lenses - he said something about preferring the "normal" unexaggerated lenses for narrative work but the extreme ends for commercial work. It strikes me as true, that it is more "stylish" to use the extreme ends, and therefore you see it done more often in genre movies that are mostly about style. Michael Bay is a good example, he shoots a scene on both the widest-angle lens he can find and the most telephoto. It has a very slick, commercial look -- because it looks like a commercial!

But for drama, and a subtle directorial touch, working in the middle focal lengths helps to not call attention to the mechanics of filmmaking.

Like I said, there is no right or wrong answer. Just the application of personal taste. Polanski, Welles, Kubrick, Gilliam, etc. tend to prefer the wide-angle lenses but Kurosawa, Ridley & Tony Scott, many others prefer telephoto lenses. Hitchcock, Ozu liked the 50mm...​

Ie there is no one answer!! Depends so much on what you're shooting, and the style you're after!

On a recent project, we shot interviews on a 50mm and a 100mm. We also used a 200mm f2 for lots of b-roll: across the campaign, long lenses proved IDEAL as we were going for an intimate, portrait driven look.

However the project immediately after was shot entirely on a 21mm! Here a wide, more expressive FOV was well suited to the fun, whimsical subject matter!

Goes to show..."Horses for courses"!

I would personally like to shoot on a 135mm more...it's a focal length I like a lot, and am trying to be more mindful of..

 

[Larry McKee]

I have done a lot of narratives in the 18mm - 85mm range. I shot one last year, though, where the director tended to like longer glass. We used a 135mm a lot as well as a 180mm and 200mm. We did a couple of shots with a 300mm. It just depends on the story and the director's preference.

 

[Cristian Mihai]

Thanks guys. Really