mercer

Since I started shooting Raw with the 5D3, I've been slowly selling off some lenses and replacing them with better ones, but now I have a hodgepodge of lenses and no real set of lenses anymore. So, I was wondering what is the consensus of mixing different brands of lenses in a film? I am kinda lazy, so I rarely change lenses anyway, and I have a couple zooms that work fine for most scenarios... but I do love my primes. Unfortunately, as you know, building a matching set of fast, quality prime lenses is a time consuming, expensive endeavor. My goal for the next year is to make a handful of 3-5 minute short films. For these projects, I will most likely either use zoom lenses, or a single prime for each project, but when my budget allows, I may start building a couple sets of lenses. However, if I can get away with having really good lenses, of different brands, for different focal lengths, I am okay with that as well. Thoughts? Also, if I do mix brands, are there certain lens characteristics to consider when doing so... e.g. number of blades, shape of blades, aperture consistency... etc?

Unsure, I've never used the SL1. Since he didn't mention it, then maybe it wasn't an issue?

Andrew did an entire write up of ML Raw on the SL1. I believe he goes over his workflow in it... or in the comments... http://www.eoshd.com/2017/06/enabling-10bit-raw-video-mini-canon-100d/

True but I've always felt shallow depth hides a lot of the inherent flaws in consumer video, plus it conceals the limitations of no budget, run and gun, guerilla filmmaking. The Voigts clean up pretty nicely by 1.4, so if the Veydra lenses are good wide open, that's still + a stop with the Voigtlanders. Either way, the Veydra is the better choice for Jon's needs.

The only problem I see with the Veydra lenses, on Micro 4/3s, are that they're still fairly big and heavy for Micro 4/3 lenses. And they're all a T2.2... which is about an f/2 in photographic terms... correct? With the Voigtlanders at f/0.95... about a T1.2?... you're gaining a +1.5 stop for lowlight use... which is a bonus in Micro 4/3 world. If I had to choose one or the other, I'd go with the Voigtlanders, but for @jonpais 's desire to have a good cine lens(set) for multiple cameras, the Veydra lenses make sense.

Grab a Veydra in your favorite focal length and write a 1-3 minute short, or adapt a public domain short story, with 1 or 2 actors. I would use your street shooting skills as part of the production. If you want to go lightweight and handheld, I saw a cheap, rail-free, follow focus that could help with the Veydra's focus throw to keep a simple set up.

Are you considering narrative work?

Yeah, we're pretty lazy across the pond. Without screw on filters, a lot of us probably wouldn't use any. Sadly, I am probably going to invest in that magnetic filter holder because screwing on a filter is quickly becoming a chore...

B&H carries screw on Tiffen Black Satin filters. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/search?N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search&Ntt=Black Satin filter

I believe that frame that enny posted from the BMCC, the cinematographer used a Black Magic filter. I've never tried one, but I think with my next consumer camera purchase I will give the Pro Mist or some sort of diffusion filter a go.

True but you're pretty damn close to a complete set anyway, so if you take the plunge you can finish it off. If you sell your 28mm, that will get you 25% of the way to the Hollywood or the 35mm 1.4. Then you could probably sell off two other complete sets of lenses because why would you need them when you have a complete Zeiss set? Then the proceeds from those lens sales will pay for multiple Fuji lenses. Plus, Fuji deals will pop up more regularly than a Zeiss 85mm 1.4 deal will.

Man, that's a tough call. As you said, the Fuji may make more sense... but that Zeiss is some legendary glass. But at that point, if you get that 85mm... then you NEED either the Hollywood or the 35mm 1.4. Supposedly, I don't know if it's true or not, they used the same glass in those Contax Zeiss as they did in the Master Primes or Super Speeds... of course it's probably just Zeisslore. All I know is that I briefly owned the 50mm 1.7 a couple years ago and it was one of the absolute nicest lenses I've ever used but I didn't use 50mm lenses that much back then and I couldn't afford the other Zeiss lens I really wanted... the 28mm f2... so I sold the Planar for a profit. Since then I occasionally search for Contax Zeiss lenses and hit some deals yesterday. So now I'm rethinking everything. Lol. At least this keeps me from buying a camera.

By page 5 it starts getting really interesting. Hmm. When I woke up yesterday, I had no intention of buying any Zeiss lenses, but then I saw those deals. I'm looking to build 3-5 small sets of lenses. For me a small set could consist of a zoom and a Prime or two primes... a wide and portrait. So as I sell off a bunch of tester lenses, I want to rebuild with more quality. I have my Canon set up and I have my Tokina zooms. I also have a half ass Nikkor set which consists of my 28mm f/2, a 35mm f/1.4, a few Series E lenses, a couple old non-ai 50s and a Nikkor ai-s 35-70mm f/3.3-4.5... every review hates that lens but I find it has some interesting character and I bought it new for $50, so I may just keep it and the series e 50mm and sell off the better Nikkors. I don't know. my 28mm f/2 will be a difficult one to list. Another 2 lens setup that interests me is the Leica (Minolta) design 35-70mm f/3.5 and the 50mm Summicron. I have the Minolta 35-70mm, and I love it, but I no longer have a camera to use it on. Sorry, just thinking out loud here, in print...

Whew... as I scrolled down and didn't see the GH5 under best mirrorless category, I was awaiting the shitstorm that was gonna follow... but then I saw the best hybrid category. Of course the NX1 isn't on there, so it's still not safe.

You may also want to check some early EF 3rd party lenses... like the Kendy Sigma 30mm. Or one of the earlier Tokina zooms. The Tokina Angenieux lens may be perfect for what you're looking for. Tokina also made a 19-35mm that has a little bit of a cult following and is often referred to as The Plastic Fantastic. The build quality is kinda cheap and it's a variable aperture zoom but man it's a pretty sharp lens and a decent wide to normal zoom range when speed boosted.

Since I started shooting FF, my lenses aren't making as much sense as they do with super-35mm. For instance I rarely shot with a 50mm and used a 35mm or even stayed on the wider side with a 28mm. I found a cine modded Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 with the Leitax adapter for pretty cheap, so I was hoping to fill it in with a 35-70mm. Of course an hour later I got the 25mm for $200... so I may just roll with that for now and then maybe get an 85mm down the line. But to be honest, I usually shoot with one lens and rarely change them. Do you know how the 35-70mm f/3.4 is?

I just watched it. Yeah that looks great. Nice highlights. I love the early shot of the sun's reflection in the puddle. That guy is really talented. He shot one of my favorite a7s videos as well. But I still think that Martin Wallgren may have some of the best GH5 footage. But his footage always looks great... no matter the camera... And I really like ntblowz screengrab from his Last Airbender film.

Well, since the EVA1 isn't getting the 400mbps at release, I fear the GH5 may not get it for awhile. But we'll see. I am really looking forward to that update. The footage should look insanely good.

Are there any two ring Contax Zeiss zooms that are any good?

I'm no expert, but I would think a Fuji or maybe an Olympus. Of course if you're looking for mirrorless size but DSLR stills... the Nikon D5500/5600 is pretty tiny. Or the new SL2 is pretty small as well with DPAF.

I guess the Fuji is way above that price range... but damn is that a nice image...

Hey Dave, you know I just wrote a lengthy reply going over the pros and cons of both cameras, but then I realized you're probably more aware of them than I am, so I decided to watch some of your videos again instead. And to be honest, I was floored by your earlier work, especially Picnic and Porcelainia. You did such an excellent job with that documentary, and to think it was made on a 7D with CineStyle. Really remarkable. I actually have to thank you because your Picnic video helped to lead me down the ML Raw path... first with the 50D and now with a 5D3. Now I understand that your work requires a level of tech to sell yourself. So in today's age, it seems 4K is probably a necessity but I must say I would love to see some of your 80D work. I think I am one of the few people that believe the 80D has some untapped mojo and in a lot of instances more than enough for most online work. With that being said, the 1DXii probably makes the most sense for your style. But I would think a rental of both cameras may be in order to make a final decision.

Great poster! Is that the film you showed a trailer for a few months back?

@jonpais I agree with some of that. I think you would be hard pressed to get NX1 footage to have the same depth, texture and highlight roll off as shown in that screen grab, though but maybe. As I said earlier, I think people should use whatever camera they feel comfortable with. If they like 4K, then they should shoot 4K. If they like 1080p or can only afford 1080p, then shoot with 1080p. In the 2+ years I've been around here, I have learned a ton, but I've also learned that I am not a particularly talented or skilled operator, but I love filmmaking. I was ready to quit it all as it was becoming way too expensive of a hobby without getting results I felt comfortable with. And then I made a Hail Mary pass and bought the 5D3 and it all came together for me. I'm still not nearly as talented or skilled as I'd like to be, but at least I can look at my shots and not feel angst. But even with that gratification I missed small cameras and small file sizes. So I convinced myself that I needed a small mirrorless 4K camera for casual video, or at least a camera that has IBIS. I bought and sold, or returned, a few more and have never been happy with the results. To this day, I have only liked the images I was able to shoot with either my D5500 or my 5D3. I made a couple 4K videos from my NX500 days that were okay, but I had plenty more failures than successes with that camera. So when I speak of 4K vs 1080p, my opinion is based solely on my very specific history with various cameras and my skill set with using them. And my only interest in video is for narrative work. I could not care less about any other form of videography and what is deemed acceptable or even beautiful for those disciplines. With that being said, I wish you could get your hands on a 5D3 or a BMCC for a week to give them a test ride. I think you would have a different opinion of them and 1080p when seen in Raw. You already have seen how beautiful 1080p ProRes is. Or get, or borrow, a BMPCC and put one of those fancy 12mm lenses you have on it, I think you'd be blown away by it.

I'm not really "over" IBIS, I've just realized I don't "need" it. But I would love an LS300. Maybe after I sell a screenplay. I think the multi sized sensor and prime zoom of the LS300 are some of the best advancements in the past 5 years. If Panasonic thought of it, it would be the most praised tech on this site. Lol.