Red One + one lens = feature film

[sam siddig]

Hello there ,

I need your advices guys , i will shoot next July comedy film , i want use one lens for all the movie , the camera is REDONE MX ,


Most of the scenes(Ex) .

Thanks



Sam

 

[Nick Morrison]

32mm Cooke.

Thats ths only lens Michael Haneke has EVER used on most of his movies.

 

[Chuck Greenwood]

big fan of this technique shot two films on a 35 and one 40 pager on a 50 - take the above advice and go for it - no question

 

[sam siddig]

Thank you Nick and Chuck . what about Ziess CP.2 Lenses ? the final quality in theatrical screen .

Peace up

 

[David W. Jones]

From a viewers standpoint I could give a rats ass which lens or camera was used to shoot a film.

Bottom line.... Either I was entertained, or I was not.

 

[Nick Morrison]

CP2s are fine...

(To emphasize what David said) What and how you film...is far more important than the lens you use...

 

[Demetri Zuev]

I'd go with a 40mm

 

[M.Halsell]

The general rule of thumb is a normalized lens matches the natural FOV of human eyesight depending on viewing application. So in a cinematography application a focal length of roughly a quarter of the film sensor diagonal would be normal. The math, either still or moving image, is based on viewing distance of the medium. Also, note that 2 lenses with the same focal length may exhibit slightly different focus positions (manufactures and vintages).

From there work backwards on the technical (flair :smiley characteristics of the lens i.e. light and flare management, color transmission properties, resolution. So test well prior to production.

 

[Chuck Greenwood]

"The 40 is a man's lens", Rick at Radar. +1 for the 40mm

(it's) just the ultra contemporary choice right now but if we go back to Rosemary's Baby, one of my favorites, as kind of a benchmark control group for the thread which goes back to Dave's comment that it's really about the story.
I read on Mr. Deakins blog about locking down f2.8 for interiors and f4.0 for exteriors just wrapping the softest light with the most beautiful silks and engaging the story is the juice.

 

[Akin A]

How about one zoom lens?
Close-ups can look nasty if you have to get too close to the actor's face. You might not notice, but the actor will, lol.

 

[M.Halsell]

Clearly lens discussion falls into two camps, serious cinema lenses or stock/modded photography lenses. The top end optical products will reconcile most of the general needs of narrative production. So even you made a blind decision to select Zeiss, Leica or Cooke, neither will hurt your production. Small character differences, but qualified choices.

Scaling down to photographic lens adaptations. Most in this group will provide the needed resolution IQ but at the cost of consciously knowing and managing the optical weaknesses of the lenses. The Zeiss CP 2 falls in this basket.

 

[sam siddig]

Thank you all Guys for your feedbacks , i have got so many ideas :smiley::smiley:


Sam

 

[Peter Strietmann]

Get an Angenieux 25-250mm zoom. Should be plenty around your neck of the woods.

 

[Aaron michaels]

One lens used on a film camera could be a 32mm but i don't think you will get that same look on digital only because the sensors bring the picture closer than a film camera. I think you would have to find the lens that will bring you close to the look of the 32mm they used. I could be wrong but in my eyes even ana film and ana digital are day and night both look great but different effects.

 

[Mark K.]

One lens for the whole thing? Unless there's some very specific need to shoot at a single focal length I'd go with a compact zoom. A Zeiss 15.5-45mm, an Angie 16-42mm, an Arri 15.5-45mm, or better yet, the Cooke 15-40mm, which gives you a T/2 (a stop faster than the rest).

 

[David Battistella]

35mm would be my choice at the moment.

David

 

[Nick Gardner]

Depends on the story, but the 32-35 range for some reason has the most ugly distortion out of a set. I would make sure to shoot a test of close ups and decide whether or not you hate it. Shoot anamorphic and rock a 50 ;-)

Nick

 

[Aaron michaels]

I never shot with one lens using a prime, using the Zoom lens stopped me from buying a lot of primes because it covers so much. I'm film school my teacher shot down zoom lenses all day, it's to easy, lack of art etc. until he saw a short I did shot with a zoom lens but instead of him giving me credit i was a liar and i used primes. Ego's stop you from admitting to a student that you were wrong about people that use a zoom lens. I always open to learn something new, shoot a test and let us see the great works. i think zooms and primes go hand in hand when you are broke and if i was rich i would still use primes and zooms to paint my pictures.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

32mm Cooke.

Thats ths only lens Michael Haneke has EVER used on most of his movies.

I would also recommend this. I usually only use the 35mm and the 85mm in my set and occasionally the 24mm when I need a wide shot in a small area or for stabilization.
But a 32mm Cooke would be gold if only using one lens.

Depends on the story, but the 32-35 range for some reason has the most ugly distortion out of a set.

Depends on the lens :tongue_smilie:

 

[Björn Benckert]

I would put on a flare factory 58 and then use the wide adapter for wide shots.