Jump to content


Photo

Super 16 zooms revisited


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 William Mckay

William Mckay
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Denver, CO

Posted 19 February 2013 - 11:06 PM

Hello all,

 

I've read as much as I can about super 16 zooms here and elsewhere for a few months. Prior

to a purchase, I wonder if any film shooters familiar with the following zooms could chime in about shooting a whole feature on one.

 

 

I just watched Leaving Las Vegas again, which was apparently the Canon 8-64. It looked fantastic. Walking Dead uses a 10.6-180, also great. That lens is hard to find.

 

I've been looking at the Angenieux 7-81, which seems bulky and requires support. It's 5 lbs versus

the Canon 8-64/7-63's, which are 4.5lbs. There's not much out there on the Angie.

 

Does the Angenieux breathe too much too use as a main lens? Is it much sharper than the canons - ie, worth dealing with the extra weight and support? A little scared to brace a lens, or deal with diverting pressure from the PL mount.

 

The Canon 7-63 seems like an improvement over the 8-64. Half of the 8-64's have numbers but don't have witness marks on the barrel, some do. 

 

Of the 7-81, 7-63, 8-64 which would you recommend for a feature?

 

Thanks so very much in advance

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


  • 0

#2 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1604 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:34 AM

They're all good really, not much between them optically. The 7-81 is actually about the same size and weight as the 7-63, maybe even a little thinner.

 

The main drawback to the Angenieux is that it loses light at the long end, it's T2.4 until 50mm then T3.5 to 81mm. Focus marks are also a little haphazard on the feet scale ( ie 3'6" then 5'6" then 8' etc). It breathes more than the Canons, but not badly, nothing like the Zeiss 11-110 for example. 

 

If you're considering buying one, get whichever one has been the best maintained. With older zooms, condition is more important than anything. For that reason renting can often be a safer option, particularly if a whole feature depends on the one lens. 


  • 0

#3 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:18 AM

If you are getting a steal on any of those lenses  ie: $5k, then buy it. If you are approaching or over 10k and the lens is really just for this feature, then rent a better one, like Dom suggested. Canon 6.6 x 66 perhaps. I have used a 8-64 many times and love the contrast that it produces, but have never used the Angenieux.


  • 0

#4 William Mckay

William Mckay
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Denver, CO

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:06 PM

Dom / anyone,

Does the 7-63 require support?

 

 

I see it is a little bulkier than the 8-64, which I gather seems to be okay for many without a support.


  • 0

#5 Dom Jaeger

Dom Jaeger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1604 posts
  • Other
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:59 PM

It's probably OK without a support on a PL mount camera, as long as the camera doesn't get jolted. You'd definitely want to remove the zoom from the camera during transport (which was always the professional procedure in the past, but lately I've noticed people transporting cameras with lenses attached - yikes!)

 

Add a clamp-on matte box and filters and you'd be pushing it. Personally I'd recommend a support, but I tend to err on the safe side.


  • 0

#6 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 21 February 2013 - 04:27 AM

I don't recall TV people normally removing 16mm zoom lenses when transporting their camera in the crew car on normal roads during a production, although they may do so on dramas. There was a range of ready to shoot camera cases that allowed this. However, you'd want to remove the lens when transporting by air or by courier companies.


  • 0

#7 William Mckay

William Mckay
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Denver, CO

Posted 25 February 2013 - 09:33 PM

I should have mentioned in my original post. We do have the choice between a zoom and Zeiss mk3 primes, but probably not both. We wanted the speed of a zoom. However..

 

Our focus puller is experienced but not a veteran. Would we be safer with primes and to stay away from zooms due to the fewer marks? Or they similar in terms of marks/rotation?

 

Stuck in the south with no place to view/test these lenses.  : )

 

Thanks so much for the guidance.


  • 0

#8 Robert Horwell

Robert Horwell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • UK

Posted 23 March 2013 - 04:33 PM

william, i have a Canon 11.5 - 138 i am probably selling if your interested drop me a line indiefilmltd@mac.com


  • 0


Ritter Battery

Visual Products

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Opal

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Tai Audio