C300: Client Lens Complaints!

[puredrifting]

Reading a lot of your other posts, it sounds like you've been really contemplating the 18-80 and a lot of what you do shoot is still "event style". BTS on movies and shows is still pretty much like shooting an event(sports, concerts, corporate conventions, etc.). It's all the same. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I think you've at least alluded to that even one of the T4.4 zooms would really benefit you in a lot of your shooting. It's not JUST about the client. You have to shoot it. I bought my zoom more for me than anyone.

Good observations but one difference is, when I shoot BTS, we rarely use camera zoom moves, it's almost alway very filmic editing with pans, tilts, wide, medium, CU, reverse, reaction. That's why trying to get smooth zooms is not that typical for me, my work is almost always pretty cutty with lots of different angles, not usually long shots with slow zooms. I will probably get the 18-80,, not sure if I will get the 70-200 CNe Servo zoom though, I already have the 70-200 2.8 IS II which is such a good lens other than the lack of servo. Same idea, I can see zooming quite a bit more in the 18-80 range when walking or shooting shoulder mounted. But 70-200 is typically out at the 130-200mm range shooting b-roll of people and things, doesn't feel like as much need to power zoom out at those lengths for me.

 

[puredrifting]

If I were your producer, I would ask you to use a 35mm prime.

I could dig it, I did some night shoots in Morocco on Prison Break S5 with only my 28mm 1.8, got some great shots. All of my other lenses I brought were slower, I purposely brought this lens for the super low light night shoots.

 

[puredrifting]

I agree with R&G's post #5 in this thread... right tool for right job. But perhaps my only add to it - is you should educate your client as well.
I wear a producer's hat at times and I want the equivalent light output of a 1600hmi (of course very soft though) for a indoor shot I have envisioned in my head - with details viewable outside the window with full daylight - but my budget doesn't allow for the light or even a 1 ton grip truck. If you take that theoretical gig and shoot with small light pkg or avail light, chances are I'm not going to be happy with the outcome and I'm going to blame you, not my small budget unless you explain the difference to me ahead of time...

Often a camera gets spec'd or requested based on nothing more than "we used it last time" or so and so shot that video using that camera. Can you please this client by shooting smaller sensor / fixed lens combo?.... maybe. Are all clients worth educating?....well, that's a whole other topic...

To make it even more confusing, not actually my client, I shoot for these guys for a friend, friend is in NYC on a shoot and this client needed to shoot in California while he was gone so he asked me to pinch hit. So my chances to educate are kind of touchy, I don't want to delve too deeply into it since it isn't my client.

 

[puredrifting]

Since you do this type of shoot only twice a year, it might be worth renting the Canon 17-120 servo zoom:

http://www.adoramarentals.com/p-~ca17120ef/canon-17-120-t295-ef-servo-zoom-lens

Hmm...would have to double my insurance, it only covers $20k worth of rentals.

 

[puredrifting]

Going to suggest it might be outside their budget for an event, however Varicam LT with Cabrio 19-90 would eat it up.

That would make me drool but seriously doubt this client would spend anything near that when they mostly shoot on EX3s.

 

[DLD]

A budget friendly version - a Sony A7RII with a Fujinon 17-55 and 50-150 manual zooms. You get a decent low light due to the BSI sensor, 15 MPX 4K center crop (albeit 8-bit), good colors too. As rentals, these can be had very reasonably.

 

[bill totolo]

Just sub-rent the Sigmas if you want a fast zoom lens, or a Cabrio 19-90 if you want more range in a single lens.

Back in the day when I shot E3 I used either a Varicam 2700 with a fast Fuji servo zoom attached or an EX1/EX3.
And we always had a PA with a Kino and a battery belt

 

[Spartacus]

How about a disclaimer for the future saying in a nice/corporate way, you're generally shooting "film style" with a large sensor camera (in laymans terms).
If a clients has the need for "TV style" zooms, he needs to book the "Servo Zoom" package (which will cover costs for renting and insurance for such zoom).
For once or twice a year, I wouldn`t buy a high priced item (and the T4.4 as a budget alternative doesn't seem to deliver in low light events...).
(Side note: One of my reasons for switching to 4K acquisition soon, is the ability to do precise zoom ins/outs if I feel like in post. Not helping for those "company signs to
wide shot" reveal shots, but I'm not doing those anyway.)

 

[NMSK]

This won't really help you in low light, but it's a shame you don't have the Nano USM version of the 18-135 as the powerzoom controller from Canon could be the perfect solution without spending a lot.

https://store.canon.com.au/power-zoom-adapter-pz-e1.html

$220 and it attaches to the lens in seconds. Aside from the obvious 18-80 solution, it could serve you well if you were open to exchanging your 18-135mm to the power zoom variant.

Don't think this ever made it to market unfortunately

 

[Burners]

Have you used the Sigma 18-35 1.8? The range is limited but the zoom ring is so silky its easy to pull off smooth zooms by hand.

 

[Bern Caughey]

The only Sigma 18-35mm that's shimable is the Cine version with PL mount, so that lens may not exhibit parfocal performance on your EF-mount bodies.

 

[drummondb]

'...you not being able to shoot the entire sequence with zooms meant that the editor had to edit this film style with cut, cut, cut, cut, which was killing me on time...'

That had to be so rough on the editor--having to assemble a sequence out of individual shots.

 

[markfpv]

:happy:

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

That had to be so rough on the editor--having to assemble a sequence out of individual shots.

+1 the horror!

 

[puredrifting]

That had to be so rough on the editor--having to assemble a sequence out of individual shots.

Yeah, I know. But to play Devil's advocate, they were on an insane timeline, the uploads to NY were taking forever and they needed everything yesterday, so I get it, when every second counts. Kind of like cutting news that is going to air in 20 minutes.

 

[JPNola]

Good observations but one difference is, when I shoot BTS, we rarely use camera zoom moves, it's almost alway very filmic editing with pans, tilts, wide, medium, CU, reverse, reaction.

PureD- I think you are limiting yourself creatively with your aversion to in-shot zooms. Or, to be more blunt, with your snobbery in regard to zooms. ( we're friends, so I can say that to you. :happy: ) My EPK clients generally love zooms because the zooms can make the production seem more active, fast paced, and dynamic. And they like that the BTS doesn't look like the film that the BTS is documenting. They want the BTS to look like BTS, to have a distinct style and look that is unlike the film, one that distinguishes itself from the film. Most often the EPK clients want the film to look filmic and the BTS to look like BTS.

Were I to be of the mind that I don't do zooms in BTS and only do "filmic" shooting, some of my EPK Producers would likely return volley with something like "dude, you ain't shooting a film. You are shooting BTS. You ain't Emmanuel Lubezki or even the next Emmanuel Lubezki. You ain't even listed on the call sheet. So get over yourself already. "

Again, I think you limit yourself creatively by having an anti-zoom mindset. There are so many types of in-shot zooms that can be creative statements. The snap-zoom, the stutter-zoom, the reveal-zoom, swoop-zoom, "urgency zoom" that starts out medium paced and rapidly increases in speed, etc.

While infrequent, there are feature films that use in-shot zooms. Films such as The Big Short. Is The Big Short not cinematic because it uses in-shot zooms?

While addressed to you, this isn't directed solely at you, PureD. I've seen others on this forum pooh-pooh zooms and treat zooms as if they are beneath them. And my response to that is "dudes, get over yourselves already."

 

[Eric Coughlin]

Just watched King Arthur: Legend of the Sword and it had some cool zooms in it. Avatar, The Graduate, etc. Plenty of big films with zooms in them. I agree that DPs who diss zooms as a general statement are inept in that regard. You can say it doesn't fit your style all you want, but to call it bad as a general statement is just wrong.


That said, Dan, I have the 18-80 and it's not that special. Clearly the solution is the 17-120.

I just bought the Canon 30-105 T/2.8 as well in addition to the 15.5-47 I have, so the 17-120 is next on my list. I like zooms.


The thing I actually like most about the 18-80 so far is the focal range, which is generally more useful than the 24-105. I thought parfocal would be a big deal but given the autofocus of the C300 Mark II which sort of makes the 24-105 parfocal, parfocal isn't quite as big of a deal as I had thought. I've used the servo zoom some; it's nice to have when you need it but I don't need it most of the time.

I've only used the 18-80 on three shoots so far so haven't gotten a ton of experience with it yet. The first was a narrative film shoot, which it wasn't that well suited for (no hard stops, 17-120 would have been better), the second was a wedding with a C100 Mark II (which I didn't realize I'd need to update the firmware for it to work properly, so the lack of functions working (such as autofocus) made that a less pleasant experience), and the third was a wedding with the C300 Mark II which actually worked pretty well, but gosh, that was a pretty big camera setup for a wedding.

Due to the larger size and weight compared to the still lenses, that's one reason the 18-80 hasn't been going out with me on every shoot. Another reason is I feel like at that price level I should be up-charging for it, so if a client doesn't want or need it, then it's kind of a lot of money to bring on the shoot in terms of liability if it's not being paid for. Like the C300 Mark II, the extra size and weight can slow me down, while the feature set can speed me up, so it depends on the shoot as to whether the lens will be helpful or not.

Before buying the lens I'd thought you could take the servo piece off (not the grip, the actual servo). I unscrewed various screws to take it off, but found it was still connected by electrical wiring which didn't seem wise to try to figure out how to disconnect that, so I figured that the servo grip is supposed to stay on, which adds to the size and weight.

An interesting thing I found with the zooming is if you put the switch on manual, the manual zooms are less smooth due to a lack of dampening, while if the zoom is set to servo, but you zoom manually, you can get a smoother manual zoom. I hope zooming manually while it's set to servo doesn't damage it.

 

[rob norton]

PureD- I think you are limiting yourself creatively with your aversion to in-shot zooms. Or, to be more blunt, with your snobbery in regard to zooms. ( we're friends, so I can say that to you. :happy: ) My EPK clients generally love zooms because the zooms can make the production seem more active, fast paced, and dynamic. And they like that the BTS doesn't look like the film that the BTS is documenting. They want the BTS to look like BTS, to have a distinct style and look that is unlike the film, one that distinguishes itself from the film. Most often the EPK clients want the film to look filmic and the BTS to look like BTS.

Were I to be of the mind that I don't do zooms in BTS and only do "filmic" shooting, some of my EPK Producers would likely return volley with something like "dude, you ain't shooting a film. You are shooting BTS. You ain't Emmanuel Lubezki or even the next Emmanuel Lubezki. You ain't even listed on the call sheet. So get over yourself already. "

Again, I think you limit yourself creatively by having an anti-zoom mindset. There are so many types of in-shot zooms that can be creative statements. The snap-zoom, the stutter-zoom, the reveal-zoom, swoop-zoom, "urgency zoom" that starts out medium paced and rapidly increases in speed, etc.

While infrequent, there are feature films that use in-shot zooms. Films such as The Big Short. Is The Big Short not cinematic because it uses in-shot zooms?

While addressed to you, this isn't directed solely at you, PureD. I've seen others on this forum pooh-pooh zooms and treat zooms as if they are beneath them. And my response to that is "dudes, get over yourselves already."

I don't think this is a fair comparison because not all zoom moves are created equal. Your film reference, along with martial arts movies, Django etc. use zooms as a stylistic choice. Similarly, in non-narrative television we see fantastic reveals during reporter stand ups and sports broadcasts - I love seeing a slow pull out from a blimp or something from the stadium that eventually shows the entire surrounding area. Although those shots of full moons at baseball games have been done to death! They're all stylistic choices that supposedly add value to the production.

In contrast and as I'm sure you're aware, particularly with documentary style - news, television and ENG/EFP type shooting, zooms are more than anything, getting you out of trouble. The stand up reveal outside a court house attempting to distract from a boring story, or a slow zoom to clearly extend the life of a shot due to inadequate coverage. Like you say, the zooms can make the production seem like something it isn't. A cover up versus a creative choice. Regarding the BTS, I think that speaks more to producers who either play it safe and continue to follow a formulaic style, or aren't capable of thinking of alternative ways to show something. I hate the "documentary style" office/modern family type shooting - frenetic handheld, micro zooms, deliberately slow/missed focus - how do all these incompetent shooters keep landing these gigs !? It's insulting and makes non-narrative camera operators seem like they're clueless.

Of course in-camera zooms should be part of any camera operator's skillset. If anything, pleasing a producer who decides whether you get hired again and again is reason enough. But I think limiting yourself creatively and not being able to get out of trouble are two different things.

 

[indiawilds]

I love zooming in camera. There are many situations where a very slow zoom would be nice. I struggle to do that with my still lenses despite DPAF. Not sure whether clients will be willing to up the rate for the 18-80.

 

[Liam Hall]

PureD- I think you are limiting yourself creatively with your aversion to in-shot zooms. Or, to be more blunt, with your snobbery in regard to zooms. ( we're friends, so I can say that to you. :happy: ) My EPK clients generally love zooms because the zooms can make the production seem more active, fast paced, and dynamic. And they like that the BTS doesn't look like the film that the BTS is documenting. They want the BTS to look like BTS, to have a distinct style and look that is unlike the film, one that distinguishes itself from the film. Most often the EPK clients want the film to look filmic and the BTS to look like BTS.

Were I to be of the mind that I don't do zooms in BTS and only do "filmic" shooting, some of my EPK Producers would likely return volley with something like "dude, you ain't shooting a film. You are shooting BTS. You ain't Emmanuel Lubezki or even the next Emmanuel Lubezki. You ain't even listed on the call sheet. So get over yourself already. "

Again, I think you limit yourself creatively by having an anti-zoom mindset. There are so many types of in-shot zooms that can be creative statements. The snap-zoom, the stutter-zoom, the reveal-zoom, swoop-zoom, "urgency zoom" that starts out medium paced and rapidly increases in speed, etc.

While infrequent, there are feature films that use in-shot zooms. Films such as The Big Short. Is The Big Short not cinematic because it uses in-shot zooms?

While addressed to you, this isn't directed solely at you, PureD. I've seen others on this forum pooh-pooh zooms and treat zooms as if they are beneath them. And my response to that is "dudes, get over yourselves already."

Funny, last year I shot a BTS on an art house feature doc (think Koyaanisqatsi) and had the direct opposite request from the Producers; they wanted the BTS to punch above its weight and have a cinematic look of its own. I sent the first cut in and the EP said he couldn't tell which shots were the movie and which were BTS - they were all BTS... ...shot mostly on zooms too. Go figure!

On most jobs I carry a set of primes along with my zooms that cover 16mm-600mm. Sometimes I favour the primes, sometimes I favour the zooms, though I can't remember the last time I used a mid range zoom or indeed, the last time I did an in-camera zoom. It's a creative choice, nothing to do with snobbery.