Leaderboard

1) Hire an experienced producer. 2) Hire an accountant. 3) Get a Production budget. 4) Talk to camera rental/ sales house. 5) Listen to their recommendations. 6) Get a package deal.

Last night I watched American Hustle and it was mostly shot on a 24mm, all steadicam, where the operator moved in from wides to two-shots or tighter framing. Lots of long takes. Not only was the lens not overly distorting for the wides (like the annoying steadicam work in The Conjuring) but I didn't, in this instance, miss the giant, creamy bokeh of a CU/portrait lens for every close-up. Detail and skin rendition was not diminished any more than the magnitude of the performance and drama.

Note to others: the above bickering is fallout from another thread. Apologies, please ignore it.

all of Mark's threads get out of hand as he just likes to argue -with anyone about anything ! this forum is about digital cinematography its becoming a teenage tit for tat forum rapidly which is very sad to see happen.

Yashica 24mm f2.8 stunning sharp Carl Zeiss Distagon equivilant lens made in same factory in Japan just alot cheaper - use this as your standard every day lens its very good !! Carl Zeiss Vario Sonnar 28-70mm - unreal lens very very sharp - aspheric element Canon FD 24-35mm f3.5 L SERIES - amazing go to all purpose lens , very very sharp has aspheric elements Canon FD 35-105mm f3.5 very very sharp constant aperture zoom - great for Paul Greengrass /Barry Ackroyd Bourme Ultimatum type zooms - (the zooms on the black background on the vid above are this lens) Canon fd 50mm f1.7 - sharp cheap canon fd 28mm f2.8 - bloody sharp cheap !! Sigma FD fit 24mm f2.8 - has nice colours and is cheap very sharp too! I do really like the Panasonic kit lens 14-42mm - its very very sharp has aspheric elements I do use it alot for outside shots with ND 4 or ND 8 on it a killer insanly sharp lens is the Carl Zeiss N Mount 24-85mm - its is one of my favourite lenses and is rediculously sharp - Im talking PL mount cinema lens sharp - makes the G6 look like RED EPIC with the fine detail it renders - we use this lens alot Carl Zeiss Biometar 80mm f2.8 in pentacon 6 mount- mine is 50 years old !! 1963 model - but it is a superb portrait lens I use for head shots amd close ups - Razor Sharp!!!! (head shots on vid above are this lens) Panasonic 14mm f2.4 very sharp and cheap too - nice wide lens - great on street scenes in cities. my latest new toy Fujinon c mount 25mm f1.4 - very sharp wide open superb for night street scenes where you have neon etc I very rarely shoot past f2.8 on the G6 as the dof gets too narrow for me , at night I like the f1.4 Fujinon but as a whole I shoot alot of f2.8 - 3.5 on set ,as DOF is usable but looks cinematic. Im not into 5mm dof its unusable for me , so dont be afraid of buying f2.8 and f3.5 lens for the G6 - remember if you are outside you will be using NDs and down at f5.6 if cloudy and f8 - f11 with ND4 in the sun , so your fast lens is working slower anyhow due to the light. On set you just light the set for f2.8 or f3.5 and you can hit marks Ok with Actors its usable for me.....

This assumption comes up too often, but as Sean was saying, it's completely wrong. Wide angles have been used with great results on probably all genres, it's a matter of choice. You say wide lenses are rarely used in serious films when actually comedy might be the genre where they are used the least! The Harry Potter films got more serious towards the end and most shots were 21mm or even 18mm, and there's tons of other examples out there, it's a stylistic choice, not something imposed by the genre. Not all horror films look the same, not all action films look the same, not all comedies or dramas look the same... the genre has very little to do with which lenses you should use, the same way the lenses you use will not define a style alone. And please... don't feed Mark.

markm's recent forum topic about Philip Bloom's Digital Bolex review seems very skewed in favour of bigotry when compared to more objective and rational responses. I'm beginning to wonder if his topics are neutral. What do others think? ;)

Take that preset as a start but up it to at least 25Mbits. Professionals upload 50-70 or even 100Mbit files (and they are officially encouraged to do so, no matter what their BS upload guidelines are for average users) and that's a big reason why when you look at an official trailer, music video, etc., even if you're looking at a 5Mbit stream, it will look lightyears better than any 5Mbit stream Joe Sixpack uploads (if they're using 5Mbit presets intended for and included for novices whom Adobe knows likely can't tell the difference and aren't creating content where it matters anyway). Here's a good read on the subject, and a quote right from a YouTube infrastructure insider: ...the exact principle applies to VIMEO.