Jump to content


Photo

Angie Lens, Need INfo


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 10 July 2007 - 01:52 PM

what do you guys think about this lens ?
I know it covers S16 and all that what I'm trying to find out is what mount is it ?


Thanks
  • 0

#2 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 10 July 2007 - 01:54 PM

Sorry forgot about the link
:lol:
http://cgi.ebay.com/...I...p;rd=1&rd=1
Thanks again, I just want to know what you guys think


Best
  • 0

#3 Thanasis Diamantopoulos

Thanasis Diamantopoulos
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • greece

Posted 10 July 2007 - 05:19 PM

Hi

I thing that the adaptor for this lense is for video cameras screw mount and looks very worn. BTW i have an angenieux 15 150 2.8 with my super 16 camera and the lense covers the super 16 . I am not a fan of ang lenses but tis one is quiet sharp. I used some times a Cannon 25 100 for video cameras in my c mount eclair npr.
  • 0

#4 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 10 July 2007 - 06:58 PM

Thanks for the advice my man!


Best
  • 0

#5 Mike Rizos

Mike Rizos
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 July 2007 - 09:19 PM

Martin, let me make a suggestion if I may, with all due respect, but after you spend a bunch to buy and convert your camera, why go with a cheap old lens? I would save up and look for a converted Cooke, Zeiss or the Canon 8-64.
I don't know what mount that is, probably video.

Edited by Mike Rizos, 10 July 2007 - 09:21 PM.

  • 0

#6 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 10 July 2007 - 09:45 PM

Mike, Thanks for the advice, trust that's what I want to, but for the mean time I will like to use the camera and shoot a bunch of projects, rather say, experiment with diferent looks, Yes will I want a set Optar Illumina's , off course, a Canon 8-64, you bet, this cheap lens is for the mean time.
I would love to know what are your all time favorite lenses that you will like to have both primes and zooms.


Best
  • 0

#7 Ian Marks

Ian Marks
  • Guests

Posted 10 July 2007 - 09:56 PM

Hi Martin -

I'd agree that it doesn't make sense to buy an older Angenieux like this when you've spent the money for a PL conversion. Also the mount is a bit of a mystery. Since you might end up spending more money to change out the mount, why bother?
  • 0

#8 Mike Rizos

Mike Rizos
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 330 posts
  • Other

Posted 10 July 2007 - 11:02 PM

Hi Martin
My experience is limited to low cost lenses. I've used the Switar primes and zooms, the Angenieux primes and zooms, a few stills lenses. Most of these are acceptable quality, I thought. A few months ago I got a Cooke 9-50, and it's quite spectacular in my judgement. That's my favorite lens. I'm saving to convert it.
  • 0

#9 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 11 July 2007 - 12:35 AM

Guys , I have to stop and say, Thanks even do I keep doing my own stuff is always really nice to count with you fellas,

Mike I used the Cooke and I was really close of buying it, but a bunch of illnesses stop it, I want so many lenses you guys have no idea, but I also want weird lenses, with great distinctive looks and shapes.
You see I'm a director, first and for most and I always looking for different things to work with I love to mix old and new glass create more visual stimulations, shapes contrats and so forth again I thank you guys for the advice, it's well taken I will included on my research


Keep it coming!
  • 0

#10 Sean M Murphy

Sean M Murphy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 01 August 2007 - 02:34 AM

Guys , I have to stop and say, Thanks even do I keep doing my own stuff is always really nice to count with you fellas,

Mike I used the Cooke and I was really close of buying it, but a bunch of illnesses stop it, I want so many lenses you guys have no idea, but I also want weird lenses, with great distinctive looks and shapes.
You see I'm a director, first and for most and I always looking for different things to work with I love to mix old and new glass create more visual stimulations, shapes contrats and so forth again I thank you guys for the advice, it's well taken I will included on my research
Keep it coming!



I would have bought it just on price... can't hurt to pick up on an oldie like that... never know when you may decide you like it... or need something to use for target practice :P
  • 0

#11 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 01 August 2007 - 04:13 AM

he-he well I'm actually saving for either a great lens ( CANON, Cooke, Zeiss, yeap in that order) or get a really nice set of primes ( like the OPtars)
  • 0

#12 Craig Knowles

Craig Knowles
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 182 posts
  • Director
  • Cleveland

Posted 29 August 2007 - 11:27 AM

he-he well I'm actually saving for either a great lens ( CANON, Cooke, Zeiss, yeap in that order) or get a really nice set of primes ( like the OPtars)


Don't be so quick to assume the 15-150 is a second-class lens. I picked this one up last year (15-150, 1.9):
http://www.cinematog...amp;mode=linear

I had some work done on it at Visual Products and they put it on their focus chart. To my great surprise, it was NOTICABLY SHARPER than the equivalent Zeiss and Cooke zooms there that cost well over $5000.

Now, I can't say that all the 15-150's are this sharp -- mine is larger and faster than the one you pointed out on eBay -- but now that I have this lens I have no need or desire to upgrade to anything else. At $500 purchase price + a $500 overhaul, this lens will get me through all my S16 projects.
  • 0

#13 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 29 August 2007 - 03:20 PM

Craig, thanks for the info

I will love to see some clips with it, , there is 2 kinds of 15-150, and yours is the faster one, and bigger one he!
but it seems to be great glass, I'm getting my kit together to shoot a film in Argentina and I'm looking for great glass

I will love to see some of the great clips that you might have


Best
  • 0

#14 Craig Knowles

Craig Knowles
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 182 posts
  • Director
  • Cleveland

Posted 29 August 2007 - 11:37 PM

I will love to see some of the great clips that you might have


Martin, here are few examples from the first project I used the lens on. They're not perfect -- after getting the telecine back, I discovered the back-focus was off because some shots came out soft/blurry, but I think they give a good representation of the lens.

Regular 16, Fuji 400/500T, Best light telecine to DV at Cinelab, no color correction, Eclair ACL:

Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
  • 0

#15 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 30 August 2007 - 06:04 AM

Dude, those are some cool images!!! they look pretty sharp, even with the back focus issue
  • 0

#16 Craig Knowles

Craig Knowles
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 182 posts
  • Director
  • Cleveland

Posted 30 August 2007 - 09:30 AM

Dude, those are some cool images!!! they look pretty sharp, even with the back focus issue


Thanks, Martin. They're from a short I'm working on about violence. Everything was shot wide-open (1.9) with very shallow DOF.

As for the lens, dollar for dollar, it'd be tough to beat. I'm sure it's nowhere near as sharp as modern glass, may not be as sharp as the Canon lens you mention, etc., but for the $500 I paid (plus a $500), it's a great buy that gets you in the same class as the equivalent Zeiss and Cooke zooms of that era, but at a fraction of the price.
  • 0

#17 Martin Yernazian

Martin Yernazian
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts
  • Director
  • San Francisco/Los Angeles CA USA

Posted 31 August 2007 - 01:30 PM

True, That's my point, why I can just try and see what happens? I feel people Are afraid of trying , and even worse they are afraid of failing,
Well in this Bussiness is what it's all about!
I don't care if Any Big DP tells me , oh don't try that I know is wrong.... welll I will listen, But I'm still going to try, because I want to experience the same things that he went throught, or maybe I will go in a different new direction, who knows? That's the magic of it!


Best


ps: I will love to see the short, even if you put a white letter mark in teh middle of it ( to protect your ass) I will love to see it
I'm really obsess with color, contrast and definition= texture, I planing this feature in the next year and I'm planning some really unique looks


Thanks Again
  • 0


FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Opal

Visual Products

Tai Audio

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Abel Cine

CineTape

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Opal

Metropolis Post

CineTape

The Slider

CineLab

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Visual Products