vincent laforet says his best lens is 24mm like kubrick but he uses ff

[deleuze3]

Hi,
http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/mygear/recommended-kit/

On this blog, vincent laforet says his favorite focal lenght is the 24mm just like stanley kubrick.

But stanley kubrick uses a sensor similar to 1.6x crop sensor and laforet uses full frame, so it doesnt give the same field of view at all.

If i am on my crop sensor 1.6x, does Laforet means his favorite lens is the 15mm or the 24mm ?

Thanks in advance for any comments,
have a good day,
Deleuze3

[David W. Jones]

The best advice I can give without coming off as a condescending ass would be..... Forget about what somebody else's favorite focal length lens is. If you feel the need to have a favorite, then choose one based on your needs. Not somebody else's.

All the best!

Dave

[DLD]

I believe Lubezki shot the "Revenant" mostly on 24mm (or its equivalents, since there were two primary cameras there - Alexa and Alexa65).

[JackCarter]

On this blog, vincent laforet says his favorite focal lenght is the 24mm just like stanley kubrick.

From my research Kubricks's favourite focal length was 18mm. Most of Eyes Wide Shut was with an 18mm Zeiss Super Speed. From what I've read Terrance Malik shot most of the Tree of Life with an 18mm Ultra Prime also.

[morgan_moore]

His favourite is a the fov of a 15 with the dof character of a 24.

aka a really fast 15

to get the look of a 24/2 fulframe your best affordable option is probably a voigtlander 17 0.95 - if they cover s35 - I can't remember.

[Noel Evans]

1st point - Stanley Kubrick would not give a rats ass what crop factor is. Crop factor is only relevant as compared to what something else is. If he likes 24mm, again, he's not comparing to FF. He likes 24mm.

On S35 a 50mm is a 50mm and that's how we work. I never think oh, what would be the equivalent in ff because I don't care. Im used to S35 and 50mm is 50mm.

2nd Point - I agree with David, what do you like? Thats part of your visual style.

My favourite lens is 35mm. I love using it for medium wide shots, which means you have to have some room to back up, but I love the way it looks.

[alaskacameradude]

1st point - Stanley Kubrick would not give a rats ass what crop factor is. Crop factor is only relevant as compared to what something else is. If he likes 24mm, again, he's not comparing to FF. He likes 24mm.

On S35 a 50mm is a 50mm and that's how we work. I never think oh, what would be the equivalent in ff because I don't care. Im used to S35 and 50mm is 50mm.

I've been saying this forever! Anyone ever worked as an AC? I have.
And trust me, the DP doesn't ask you to "Put the lens on the camera that would
be the equivalent of a 50mm in full frame." He says "put the 35mm on the camera"
if that's what he wants. There is NONE of this 'crop conversion' nonsense on any job
I have ever worked in.

[mail4joeg]

When you start a project you can do tests on the main cast to see what focal length looks best on them. That's what I did with my new web series. One girl looked best at 29mm, the other at 40mm. Cinematographers do this on every project and take test shots of the actors.

[abreu-canedo]

Hi,
http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/mygear/recommended-kit/

On this blog, vincent laforet says his favorite focal lenght is the 24mm just like stanley kubrick.

But stanley kubrick uses a sensor similar to 1.6x crop sensor and laforet uses full frame, so it doesnt give the same field of view at all.

If i am on my crop sensor 1.6x, does Laforet means his favorite lens is the 15mm or the 24mm ?

Thanks in advance for any comments,
have a good day,
Deleuze3

He is asking a genuine question. Lots of folks coming from DSLR will want to know this.

Other posts are correct in that the language of cinema is Super 35mm and so on pro sets you will not hear this "crop factor" lingo. And calling something "full frame" is also never talked about. That is Canon marketing speech to suggest that anything smaller is "lesser than"...or not as good. So pro tip, call your full frame sized sensor "Vista Vision". ;)

A 24mm will always be a 24mm, not matter what the sensor size. That number relates to the distance between the "nodal point" of the lens and the focal plane/sensor. So the distance of 24mm will not be changed, nor will the perspective and depth characteristics of the focal length. What will change is the "Field of View". So a 24mm on S35 will show you a similar amount of the world in front of it as a 35mm lens on a "Vista Vision" sized sensor...this is what we call a stills photography sized sensor in the cinema world. Kubrick was undoubtedly referring to S35mm sized film. So if you want the same depth and perspective qualities of the 24mm lens, just use a 24mm lens...no matter what. If you want to see as much of the world on your DSLR as Kubrick saw with a 24mm on his S35mm film camera, then use a 35mm lens. However, if you want to see as much of the world on a S35mm sensor as you do with a 24mm lens on your DSLR, then use a 15mm lens on the S35mm camera.

Just multiply or divide by the ratio of 1.6 or 1.7...this varies marginally.

I too love a good 24mm lens. But I've also been starting to discover the wonderful world of the 21mm lens. As it stands for me, I want to build a new lens set of 21mm, 40mm, 85/90mm, 135mm. That sounds ridiculous, I know. But the way I've been wanting to shoot lately lends itself to those focal lengths. I'm starting to prefer the 40mm to the 50mm. I'm also trying to learn more about 60mm focal length. I hear the Cooke Speed Panchros have a 60mm lens, but I hardly ever see it for rent.

[dp90068]

When you start a project you can do tests on the main cast to see what focal length looks best on them. That's what I did with my new web series. One girl looked best at 29mm, the other at 40mm. Cinematographers do this on every project and take test shots of the actors.

This is the best response I've read on DVXUser in quite some time and it makes absolute sense. Didn't Shane Hulbut do a comparison of focal lengths using a model to demonstrate this. Back in the studio days didn't contracts specify things like focal lengths and lighting?

This is subtle - similar focal lengths would see long thin faces and short wide faces differently.

Haven't thought about this in a while, Thanks joeg!

[combatentropy]

Until the '90s there was no such thing as "Super 35." The common crop factor was 1.7x. The format was called Flat 35 (21.95 x 11.86 mm).

---

Unless you're talking about the only* other format that films were shot in, which is Anamorphic, or as the pros called it Scope, which has an optical diagonal (45.5 mm) slightly above FULL FRAME 35mm (43.27).

(* by only, I am of course rounding.. Let it be said therefore that 99% of all films between 1952 and 2000-ish where shot in either Flat 35 (crop factor 1.73) or Anamorphic (crop factor 0.95). Or, as the pros would say, you were either shooting in "flat" or "scope.")

---

For Flat 35, the normal lens (a lens that looks neither wide angle nor telephoto or maybe looks both) is 30mm (as opposed to the newer Super-35 format, for which the Normal focal length is 35mm). Therefore, on Flat 35, a lens whose focal length is 24mm would appear to be almost normal, slightly wide angle --- almost exactly how a 40mm lens would like like on full frame.

Therefore I don't think Kubrick's favorite lens was a 24mm (40mm equivalent). His films seems much more wide angle. It's hard for me to tell, since I hate Stanley Kubrick. However, given the glimpses I've seen of his films from various depraved film critics who think he's the greatest filmmaker in the world, I would say the guy favors wide angle, in general. But not so much as Terry Gilliam (14mm*). So I would Stanley Kubrick's favorite focal length is somewhere around 18mm*.

(* The real focal length. The number that is stamped in white paint on the barrel of the lens. In other words, no, I'm not translating through crop factor.)

[Jim Feeley]

IIRC, Kubrick worked as a photojournalist or magazine photographer before he dove into film. So the story goes he had a pretty good grip on glass issues. Anyway, if you have 12 minutes to spare, check out what Joe Dunton has to say:

[JackCarter]

18mm all the way for me. Great video and I wish Kubrick was still around so I could see what he could do with all this technology we have now.

[JackCarter]

A cool video looking at master directors and preferd focal lenghts.

[geffyb]

My personal favorite is 40mm Anamorphic. Something about that combination just draws me in.