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 :)

Onfilm July 2007 Crossing the Line Exclusive

That is one frankensteined camera. Looks like the used everything but the kitchen sink to make the prototypes workable.

Before people jump all over me for saying that I am actually saying a possitive thing. If PJ and his crew can do as much as they did with such rough prototype work around equipment imagine what we will be able to do with the elegant refined red accessories.
 
All we took were "Boris" and "Natasha" and a couple of drives. They rigged everything else. Peter's team is VERY resourceful.

Jim
 
and don't forget this shot

153_1184913103.jpg
 
donatello said:
and don't forget this shot

153_1184913103.jpg
Click to expand...

Ahhhh! That Red is too close to the ground for my comfort level.

Clearly, I have no idea... Are those rigs always set up, what....... six inches from the ground?

It's looks like a small pilot error on take off or landing and ouch.

Jim, tell the truth... were you holding your breath?
 
Rocketeer said:
18-70mm Optimo Zoom
24-290mm Optimo Zoom
Click to expand...

i have a soft spot for the angenieux zooms as well, we have the 5.3-53, 7.8-208 and the 25-250 in use since years and are -really- happy with them.

however, if you want some really extreme, how about this little angenieux:
15-1200mm, 15x40
 
Interesting to see Peter Jacksons crew use Sachtler, can anyone tell which head that is? Maybe one of the older Studios?
 
laguun said:
i have a soft spot for the angenieux zooms as well, we have the 5.3-53, 7.8-208 and the 25-250 in use since years and are -really- happy with them.

however, if you want some really extreme, how about this little angenieux:
15-1200mm, 15x40
Click to expand...

That 40X15 is a 2/3" lens. When we were purchasing long lenses a little less than a year ago we tested the Angenieux 40x11 and 40x15, the Canon 40x10 and 40x14, and the Fujinon 42x9.7 and 42x13.5. We found the Fujinon 's to have the best resolution and least CA. The Angenieux was a close second and it is an excellent lens, but not quite the resolution of the Fujinon, especially when stopped down to f8.

We purchased both the Fujinon 42x9.7 (my favorite) and the 42x13.5. We have been getting stunning images from the Fujinon's. Of course some folks prefer Canon glass or Angenieux, but based on direct head-to-head testing and then shooting over 400 HDCAM SR tapes to date with the Fujinon's I would not use anything else.

Remember that 1200mm in a 2/3" lens is equivalent to roughly 3000mm for a 35mm lens. That would be a big lens in 35mm format. And believe me at those focal lengths you want the greatest depth of field possible. Tracking focus on a moving target (wildlife in our case) from a moving platform (helicopter or boat with Cineflex gimbal) at those extreme focal lengths in natural lighting (or lack thereof) is interesting.
 
Thanks man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top