Posted 23 September 2005 - 10:39 PM
Mario C. Jackson
Posted 24 September 2005 - 12:19 AM
For the upcoming film I am shooting I have a few questions about lenses. I am really trying to work on my craft to be a dp. We are shooting on 500t. I was wondering if I am making the right decision by not exposing any lower than a 2.8 Also I want to shoot all close ups and medium/bust shots with a 50mm lense. Well any help woul be appreciative.
Mario C. Jackson
Mario it depends of what kind of lenses u are using, there are some high-speed primes that they don't have any problem using them wide open, or at least any visible to the human eye problems that aren't acceptable.
Going with 2.8 or above it's not a bad decision, usually most lenses having the best resolution when at 4.0 to 8.0 Tstop.But that's a general rule and nothing that can dictate your shooting.
Is it a 16mm film? 50mm is more tele for 16mm.
Consider 25mm as your normal lens for 16mm and 50 mm normal for 35.(A general rule, I know that sometimes 45mm is considered normal for 35mm it depens of what is the screen's aspect ratio).
Posted 04 October 2005 - 03:21 PM
You are wise to avoid shooting on the wide end of the aperature 2.8 of wider on anything but the best of lenses especially in as 16mm tolerances are critical. When you are shooting closeups look at the actors ears and nose. Long lenses make the ears look big and the nose look small. Wide lenses make the ears small and the nose big. Something around 50 for 16mm and 75 to 85 for 35mm seems to be least distorting. For a comic effect you can't beat shoving a wide lens close to an actor, however that effect could destroy a more serious shot.
Posted 04 October 2005 - 04:09 PM
So if you want to emulate the 35mm look, then you'd have to open up to at least T2. Of course that depends on what lenses you use, since sharpness is always an issue at such low stops. But the new 16mm Ultra Primes (6, 8, 9.5, 12, 14) are a very fast T1.3 and are matched to Ultra Primes, so you can fill out your set with 35mm lenses (for 16mm and up)
Posted 28 October 2005 - 12:03 PM
reading this thread makes me wonder if i have found the problem to some of the stuff i have shot recently. I tend to shoot on the slowest film i think my light will let me, but this also means that i am opening up to usually around 2.0, sometimes even 1.3. I can't tell you off the top of my head what lenses i used, but it was for a Super16 SR2. The final image was a bit soft, and i wonder, could me shooting so open be the cause? in all of your opions, for 16mm is there a noticalbe difference in sharpness between shooting at 1.3/2 and 2.8/4? Thanks for your input.
Posted 28 October 2005 - 02:49 PM
in all of your opions, for 16mm is there a noticalbe difference in sharpness between shooting at 1.3/2 and 2.8/4? Thanks for your input.
Basically Yes, I have not shot with the new Master Primes but I think every lens ever made will be sharper at 2.8/4 than at 1.3/2. I have tested many lensed and most are clearly better when stopped down a couple of stops.
Posted 29 October 2005 - 12:40 PM
Posted 31 October 2005 - 04:15 PM
Shooting on a 50mm lense with 16 film is like shooting on a 75mm on 35. This is what I would normally use when doing headshots as it seems the most flattering.
Virginia Beach, VA
Posted 01 November 2005 - 11:48 AM
does anyone know the "why" of why that is? the lamens termsn light properties and physics involved? im just curious now, come from a scientist family:)