-
What Is Today’s Workhorse Camera?
-
Well I’m feeling a bit better about my lenses now, and not too worried about future-proofing. The time will come, when it comes.
For the moment, I have no problems with shooting the glass I have, and figure it will be QUITE a while before I have to worry about the resolution of jumbo-imagers, if ever. I direct television commercials, and that’s a whole different ball of wax.
I will echo the earlier suggestion about buying used lenses. I’ve bought a few new video lenses through the years, but I think I’ve only ever bought one new cine lens before. All the rest of my 35mm lenses had previous owners. My present set of primes were previously owned by Bojan Bazelli (“Mr. and Mrs. Smith,” “The Ring,” “Hairspray,” etc.) and while they weren’t always his primary glass they were used on feature films on occasion. I think they’ll serve me well for still quite a while longer.
Also, when you can it’s often smart to rent the lenses you need. I only ponied up fairly big dough to buy the lenses we have because we don’t have a rental house in my city. The closest one is two hours away in Nashville. We used them quite a while, but it got to be a drag to schlep to the bus station to pick up the lenses, shoot, and quickly ship them back… and maintain the third-party insurance and all that. Plus that required advance planning that is sometimes an unavailable luxury here.
I’ve seen sooo many people put off projects or buying equipment because something newer was “just about to come out.” Well, something new, different, and better will always be coming out next. If you do this for a living, you just have to make decisions, do it, and move on.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
-
Todd, when you buy a used lens, do you have it checked out by someone? If so, who do you use?
Bob C
-
Thank you so much for your replies. And yes, Bob, great advice, I’ve been very lucky with finding excellent used gear. John, you kept that lens in immaculate condition! I absolutely love it and jaws drop whenever I pull it out. It looks almost brand new still — it’s hard for me to trust ACs to keep it ding free, haha.
I thought the resolution and MTF on these lenses were more than adequate for cinema. Especially if a still photographer’s highest end glass at a fraction the cost resolves fine with 20+MP sensors. Is my misunderstanding because I have no experience with projection? — I do understand contrast, resolution, MTF, image circle coverage/crop factors. You mention RAW being a contributing factor…? It seems I’m missing something.
(Also, is there a true definition for legacy lenses as I hear the word used incorrectly at times, haha)
-
I have my used lenses (and cameras) checked out at AbelCine in NYC where I live. Todd, I’m shooting this week in Memphis–writing from the Peabody hotel right now!
-
Hi Bob…
Frankly, I usually don’t have them checked out in advance… although if I were buying some now I probably would.
And if so, I’d use Paul Duclos, at Duclos Lenses in L.A. Paul is just great (I think he’s a former Panavision lens tech, or something)… and he does incredible work, fast, and fairly inexpensively.
He saved my butt once when some total nimrod let my 50mm Leitz-Panavision prime fall onto a concrete floor on location once (ok… it was me). Paul let me FedEx the lens to him and he worked on it the day it arrived, and overnighted it back the same day he got it. And he charged me something like only 500 bucks or so (the lens is probably worth 20 times that, or more). Great guy, and totally saved me. I know lots of people that use him for repairs, collimation, testing, etc.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
-
Seth,
I’d refer to legacy lenses as those designed for film (in this case Super 35mm). Just as the difference in SD vs HD Video lenses is attributable to a smaller “circle of confusion” required for the smaller pixels (more pixels packed into the same area), the same phenomenon controls the softness in the edges issue with larger high density sensors like those in the Epic and F65.
In the F65 for example there are 20 Million (Mega) Pixels.
With digital cinema cameras the first fault revealed by older PL mount lenses is that the light is not parallel as it exits the rear of the lens. As a result the pixels at the edges of the sensor do not receive the same amount of light as those in the center. The result is vignetting. More “modern” lenses designed for single large sensors make the light that emerges from the rear of the lens more parallel and are called “telecentric”. UniQptics, Leica Summicron and Fujinon Aluras (I believe) and Premiers are definitely more telecentric, and also somewhat more contrasty than film lenses to increase “apparent” sharpness.
The issue with the high density large CMOS imagers is that unless the lens’ “image circle” is large enough to essentially “overscan” the sensor then the edges of the sensor are perilously close to the edge of the circle and is not the same resolution as the center or nearer the center. If the lens has a large enough image circle to overscan the sensor, then the edge of the picture falls into more of a sweet spot of the lens for resolution.
For example the 12X Optimo has an image circle of 28mm, whereas the UniQoptics primes have 34mm image circle. I cite these two because the specs are available on them. The actual “image circle” is not often advertised other than to say that such-and-such a lens will cover a Super 35mm area, but will become increasingly more important to know as these larger and more populated sensors become commonplace.
JS
-
I second Todd’s recommendation of Paul Duclos. He is a real gentleman and probably the best Cine Lens tech in the business (although for Canon or Fujinon video lenses I’d probably use factory service).
Paul was for many years the tech at the Angenieux factory service center in Los Angeles and when they closed up that operation, when video became more ubiquitous and Angenieux had not yet entered that market, he opened his own shop, which has just moved into a new facility in the SF valley area of LA.
In addition to fixing lenses, he remanufactures Nikons, Tokina and Zeiss still photo lenses into Cine versions.
His website is very good and features a terrific lens blog “circle of Confusion” hosted by Mathew Duclos.
JS
-
Ahhh, that’s it… Paul was an Angenieux guy, I was remembering it wrong. But I knew he had some kind of highbrow lens pedigree.
It’s almost always best just to pick up the phone and call Paul. He does respond to emails, but phone is prompter. A real gentleman and super helpful, too. Once I left him an urgent message, and he called me right back even though he was on vacation. Not many people will do that. Me included…ha.
T2
__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com
-
Thank you for that detailed explanation. I understand MTF, vignetting, chromatic aberrations, and the other issues at the edges of the image circle. I don’t remember hearing about telecentric design for 35mm but I thought m4/3s was created with this in mind (I also own an AF100).
But as far as quality — Why then in the 35mm still photography world professionals consider Canon L’s to be more than adequate (if not top of the line) for full-frame and APS-C? Totally different lens and use, I know, but regarding IQ and MTF still photo pro’s don’t really require anything better (aside from larger formats of course). And they have pretty high standards.
And why don’t Cine lens manufactures make the obvious choice to make use of a sweet spot by designing full frame style lenses with larger image circles?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up