1/3" chip focal length vs. super35 film focal length

[Rich Lee]

i have read allot of post from people in regards to the most wide angle focal lengths of video lenses, like the DVX/HVX, being too long, and thought i would share some experiences i have had working in the film biz.

most of the movies i have worked on could have been shot with only 2 lenses...a 27mm and a 50mm. i have been involved from the beginning on many high end films and i would say i have framed up 70% of the shots i do for a film on a 27mm lens and another 20% on a 50 (close ups). its so common that all my cameras in my 3D package are by default a 27mm lens. sure, there are the occasional long lens stuff, like a 75 or 100...and then some times there are 21's..or maybe a 17.5...but most directors i have worked with try to stay away from 21's or 17's...too distorted.

anyway, i was messing around with the panavision tools on their site...

http://www.panavision.com/tools.php

and compared the focal lengths for a 1/3 inch chip and super35 (which most films are shot on today) and the focal lengths that came up were interesting.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't shoot with anything wider then a 27...I'm just sharing my experiences...i know so many people are trying to figure out what makes a movie look like a movie...well...focal length has allot to do with it.

anyway, just sharing some info. one director was telling me he could shoot an entire film with a 27.

personally, with stuff i shoot on video/stills i try to base it off stuff we are doing in films. like always trying to frame wide shots with video equivalents of a 21mm or 27mm super35 lens....or close ups with anything from a 50-100.

i think when video camera and still camera companies compare their focal lengths to film focal lengths it is misleading. because they are referring to still photographic cameras...not motion picture cameras, which have different sized image planes.

I'm sure the 16x9 chips will yield different results...but it should be in favor of wider focal lengths, right?

 

[Policar]

That's a great chart, and a totally valid point. Kaminski claims that Speilberg works almost entirely between 21mm and 27mm (or around there) although he uses a ton of wide angle lenses with just slightly different focal lengths. Apparently, he used a 210mm lens for one shot, though. Must have been a weird shot. With camera movement so important in big budget films, though, it seems most directors are shooting super wide....

One thing to keep in mind is that the sensor size for super 35 is a lot smaller than for an SLR and most people are talking SLR lenses. (I've used PL-mount lenses and they definitely do seem to be much less wide than SLR lenses.)

The AOV for a 35mm SLR lens is 54º. The AOV for a 24mm lens is 83º. So....if you're shooting PL-mount at 27mm and 50mm, that's more like shooting with SLR lenses at 35mm and 85mm. And 85mm is the standard "portrait" lens so it makes sense it's what's used for close ups.

So I'd say the best focal lengths (and all you really need) if you're using SLR lenses are 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm. In PL-mount equivalents, you'd go way wider, though.

 

[Rich Lee]

yeah, you always have special cases where you need a really long lens or a really wide one...like a 200...we have a few of those in the movie im working on now...and a few shots with a 800mm with a doubler...making it 1600mm (its a shot with something really big in frame with a big fat sun taking up the frame..lawrence of arabia type shot)

but those are special cases.

Kaminski claims that Speilberg works almost entirely between 21mm and 27mm (or around there) although he uses a ton of wide angle lenses with just slightly different focal lengths.

yup. DVX has a 4.5mm lens...and based on that chart its equal to a 22.5 super 35 lens. which is pretty darn close to a 21.

also, the dif between a 21 and a 27 is pretty noticable. i have tried sneaking 21mm lenses into previs shots and almost always the director will go "hmm...is that a 27?"...funny...