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 :)

Only One Prime?

kidrobot said:
So, yeah 40mm is pretty close to one part of our vision.
Click to expand...


40mm on Super 35 has 34.8 degrees horizontal field of view...

If you want 60 degrees, that would be something like a 22mm.
 
Wasn't Stranger Than Paradise shot largely with one lens? Or Down By Law? Can't remember...
USlatin, The "35" sticker looks like a Brother P-Touch label. It's very common on movies and TV shows to conspicuously mark lenses this way during the camera prep; often the manufacturer's engraving is too small to read at great distances. The ACs can spot the lens that's on the finder sitting on the cart, the 2nd AC may have been off set during a quick lens change and can spot what's on the camera. Even a savvy script supervisor can look over at the camera and jot down the focal length and that's one less thing that has to be discussed with ACs.
Stealth and quiet are crucial camera department traits, as you likely already know...
Cheers,
Harry
 
Kid, THANKS... that is by far the most comprehensive explanation I've been given so far!

An other question would be, which is the focal lenght that would best mimic the lens in our eyes? Match that with a sensor that would best mimic the retina's "60mm area" and double it up for stereo... then this should be the closest we could get to the real deal... well... I digress from the topic.

Harry, yes, I understand now. Big schedules, quiet sets, long days. I never knew why that was done. I guess that's why some lenses like digi primes seem to have neon signs engraved, visible from miles and miles. (not very pretty, but same goes for gaffer tape)
 
USlatin said:
Kid, THANKS... that is by far the most comprehensive explanation I've been given so far!

An other question would be, which is the focal lenght that would best mimic the lens in our eyes? Match that with a sensor that would best mimic the retina's "60mm area" and double it up for stereo... then this should be the closest we could get to the real deal... well... I digress from the topic.
Click to expand...

The problem about comparing camera lenses with our eyes has more to do with the size of the screen than anything else.

I believe the closest lens to the human eye would probably be 6mm or 8mm, however you'd have to project that image onto a screen that encompassed your entire vision for it to work, otherwise it would be too distorted. As the screen gets smaller, you start using longer lenses, because it's taking up less of your vision.

My point being that I personally think the comparison is moot, however if you're going for theatrical with a larger screen, i think something like 28mm-35mm spherical is probably what your looking for.
 
Yes, I realized that it was the case. And expected something much wider to match the lens in the eye. Do you know for sure it would be about 6-8mm? (just curious)

Brandon said:
My point being that I personally think the comparison is moot, however if you're going for theatrical with a larger screen, i think something like 28mm-35mm spherical is probably what your looking for.
Click to expand...

It seems that would be the range everyone seems to use for that effect, but you now made me realize that it was with theatrical in mind... but I don't think I understand how much of the equation is attributed to the wrap around effect or lack thereof...

My main concern would be creating the same effect on an "average" large HDTV? Say something like 42"... what would be best there?
 
4K 2:1 R28 with 50mm arri-zeiss f2.1 prime

4K 2:1 R28 with 50mm arri-zeiss f2.1 prime

Filipo said:
Correct.
Click to expand...

22 of March this year will show a 52 documentary i shot with the RED ONE using only a 50mm Arri-zeiss f2.1 on the Dutch Broadcast Television by the AVRO. 95% handheld and 95% with avaliable light. Its about a great Dutch still fotographer. For the Dutch/Belgian viewers its on Sinday 22 at 18.15u on your tv screen. Beautiful still pictures in black and white! Filmed in colour and because this photographer is 75 years old and shot in his begin of his career only with 1 or 2 lenses i, give me the reasen and the challenge to use only 1 lens and pulling focus my self in 4K.

It was heavy, but came out very beautiful!

Robert
 
i think the wrestler was also just shot with one prime.but im not exactly sure wich focal lenght.
 
USlatin said:
My main concern would be creating the same effect on an "average" large HDTV? Say something like 42"... what would be best there?
Click to expand...

ok, here's the test: Set up your camera in front of a 42" tv, about the distance your head would be if you were sitting there watching it and then find the right lens where the TV screen just fills to the edge of the frame in your camera.

There you go. Again, I've personally never understood this discussion and the theory that certain lenses more closely match the human eye. Like we've said, to match the field of view of your eye you'd have to use something ridiculously wide and would look completely inappropriate on the screen.

But that's just my own personal gripe. If you want to shoot a whole flick with one lens, anything from 18-70 is will look fine, they'll each look different, but none of them is the "wrong" choice, just go with what works for you.

EDIT: I just took my nikon d50 (sensor size very similar to the RED ONE's) and sat down in front of my tv, 58" panny from I think about 8 feet away, and the right focal length cam out to be about 55mm. So there ya go.
 
I recall reading sometime ago that "The Last Picture Show" was almost all shot on a
28mm lens.
 
thank you very much for all your input!

best wishes,
martin
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top