DSLR filmmaking, when do you shoot with a prime/zoom lens?
- Thread starter HeyAndy
- Start date
Prime lenses have less elements in them, makes them sharper, and faster. Prime lenses with wide apertures can create fantastic images, but in return will maintain a shallow area of focus. Zoom lenses are a bit more finicky in what to consider when buying them. I would say there's a bigger difference between cine zooms and still zooms than there is a cine prime and a still prime. Still a very considerable difference, but it is easier for me to use a prime as a 'cine' lens than i am to pass a reg'lar zoom for a cine zoom.
Having said that, I started with buying primes, and all my shots were shallow, and I used no light. This went on for a while, and the more I got into the films, the less I wanted to fiddle with the camera. So I got a zoom. But then I learned more about exposure, and having to keep it as consistent as possible, so I began using a zoom with a constant fast aperture. Then I realized that things look better in light, sometimes stopped down even, so my ideal choice for lensing now would be a standard zoom with a constant aperture of f4, and a set of primes (24,35,50,85) that max out at f2.
Forces me to light.
Having said that, I started with buying primes, and all my shots were shallow, and I used no light. This went on for a while, and the more I got into the films, the less I wanted to fiddle with the camera. So I got a zoom. But then I learned more about exposure, and having to keep it as consistent as possible, so I began using a zoom with a constant fast aperture. Then I realized that things look better in light, sometimes stopped down even, so my ideal choice for lensing now would be a standard zoom with a constant aperture of f4, and a set of primes (24,35,50,85) that max out at f2.
Forces me to light.
Jordan Scott Price
Veteran
If you need to move fast and don't have time for a lens change, you can use a zoom instead.
As mentioned, there tend to be compromises from using a zoom over a prime in the same class (i.e., entry-level photo zoom and entry-level photo prime to Arri/Fujinon Alura 18-80mm and Arri Master Primes).
As mentioned, there tend to be compromises from using a zoom over a prime in the same class (i.e., entry-level photo zoom and entry-level photo prime to Arri/Fujinon Alura 18-80mm and Arri Master Primes).
It's nice with these cameras (because they're small) to use zooms. I wouldn't like to rig them out and treat them like these huge cams. The reason I use one is so it gets out of the way. So a zoom came after as a more mature decision in my book (still an immature book). Also constant aperture is necessary for me, but the speed not so much anymore. f4 is good. I'd rather spend the finicky rig tim with lights. This will come. There is nothing wrong with having lenses. If you buy a bunch of primes and switch, you'll still keep and use the primes. I say get what you can now and do everything with it till you want to do something you can't do with the glass you have. That way you'll go after features instead of brands and specs.
Zooms are parfocal in the cine world. They hold focus through the zoom range. On a small lens (if it exists I've never used a parfocal non-cine lens before) that would also add to getting the camera out of the way.
Breathing (pompage) is another issue, cine lenses do that less if not at all. Although I could swear once we had a 25-250 angenieux on a RED and it would breathe during focus. Breathing is when you change focus from a distant object to a nearer one or vice versa, and the focal length slightly changes in correspondence. This is also a no-no aesthetically for some time.
That said, the price difference can make one not be as picky as one likes. Cine lenses cost tenfold still lenses.
Zooms are parfocal in the cine world. They hold focus through the zoom range. On a small lens (if it exists I've never used a parfocal non-cine lens before) that would also add to getting the camera out of the way.
Breathing (pompage) is another issue, cine lenses do that less if not at all. Although I could swear once we had a 25-250 angenieux on a RED and it would breathe during focus. Breathing is when you change focus from a distant object to a nearer one or vice versa, and the focal length slightly changes in correspondence. This is also a no-no aesthetically for some time.
That said, the price difference can make one not be as picky as one likes. Cine lenses cost tenfold still lenses.
vision_filmz
Carbonite Member
Basically photo zoom lenses vs photo prime lenses is the question here , forget cine zooms/primes as those are very very expensive. In my opinion it's always good to have some zoom lenses, but certain kind of shots with nice bokeh can only be achieved with primes. Primes are generally faster lenses than zooms have provide a nicer quality image as the lens has less elements in them.
I would say use a canon 50mm prime and then use a zoom lens at 50mm and you can see the difference. No lens is perfect, just remember that.
I would say use a canon 50mm prime and then use a zoom lens at 50mm and you can see the difference. No lens is perfect, just remember that.
Primes can definitely be faster, depending. True, you won't find an APS-C or Full Frame zoom in the range of 1.4~2.0, but you can find a MFT zoom of 2.0. So it depends on camera/format as well.
The Olympus 14-35/2 and 35-100/2 cover every range you could ever want on M4/3 cams, and yeah they're expensive, but tally up the focal lengths and then the premium for utility and it balances out.
Also, there are a lot of zooms that out perform their Prime counter parts and equal focal lengths wide open. Compare the 14-24 Nikon G to anything Nikon in that range at the same aperture (2.8).
And to forget cine primes and zooms is kind of off-base: there are a number of SLR designed zooms that have been rehoused for PL use. I've used the Nikon 200/2.8 on Epic right along side RPP's and it's a great match.
The Olympus 14-35/2 and 35-100/2 cover every range you could ever want on M4/3 cams, and yeah they're expensive, but tally up the focal lengths and then the premium for utility and it balances out.
Also, there are a lot of zooms that out perform their Prime counter parts and equal focal lengths wide open. Compare the 14-24 Nikon G to anything Nikon in that range at the same aperture (2.8).
And to forget cine primes and zooms is kind of off-base: there are a number of SLR designed zooms that have been rehoused for PL use. I've used the Nikon 200/2.8 on Epic right along side RPP's and it's a great match.
gonzo_entertainment
Veteran
It's an opinion and shooting style thing. I don't bring a single zoom lens to a narrative shoot, ever. Nothing inherently wrong with zooms though if you like using them.
The old Angenieux 25-250 does breath, a lot.
Will Turner
Well-known member
I shoot with primes on my dslr.
I would need a zoom if was to run and gun with it but that's just sheer madness if you ask me.
I would need a zoom if was to run and gun with it but that's just sheer madness if you ask me.
ectobuilder
Veteran
For me, I base it on predictability of the scene or event.
If there is a shade of predictability in the shot and I want my shot to be as creative as possible then I will go prime.
On the other hand if there is ZERO predictability in the scene (i.e. I have no idea what I will be shooting or what will unfold) then zoom is the way to go. Doing news coverage would be a good example.
Logistics is another good reason. Say you've decided on focal lengths to be 24mm, 50mm and 85mm. But know that there is no way that you can carry around 3 lenses and have any place safe to do a quick lens change, then in that case a 24-70mm zoom would be a good compromise.
And one more thing, shooting style matters too. If you are not a fan of dollying the camera into the subject or scene, then zooming would be the other alternative. Lots of people doing ENG style shooting really love zooming in and out to either bring something into the scene or to exit the scene. Whereas many film people love dollying.
I personally like primes as they really force you to think ahead and to imagine yourself in the environment, forces you to plan instead of being lazy. Plus they give excellent creative looking shots too.
Over the last few days I've been deciding between the EF 24mm F1.4L II or the EF 24-70mm F2.8L. After doing some tests I really liked the out of focus bokeh (very selective depth of field) of the EF 24mm F1.4L II and the closer focusing distance of the prime as well. The reason why these aspects were appealing to me is because it matches the way I was visualizing the scene, thus it was better suited to meet my artistic requirements.
StillMotion on Vimeo has a great tutorial on how to think about primes:
http://vimeo.com/27627363
If there is a shade of predictability in the shot and I want my shot to be as creative as possible then I will go prime.
On the other hand if there is ZERO predictability in the scene (i.e. I have no idea what I will be shooting or what will unfold) then zoom is the way to go. Doing news coverage would be a good example.
Logistics is another good reason. Say you've decided on focal lengths to be 24mm, 50mm and 85mm. But know that there is no way that you can carry around 3 lenses and have any place safe to do a quick lens change, then in that case a 24-70mm zoom would be a good compromise.
And one more thing, shooting style matters too. If you are not a fan of dollying the camera into the subject or scene, then zooming would be the other alternative. Lots of people doing ENG style shooting really love zooming in and out to either bring something into the scene or to exit the scene. Whereas many film people love dollying.
I personally like primes as they really force you to think ahead and to imagine yourself in the environment, forces you to plan instead of being lazy. Plus they give excellent creative looking shots too.
Over the last few days I've been deciding between the EF 24mm F1.4L II or the EF 24-70mm F2.8L. After doing some tests I really liked the out of focus bokeh (very selective depth of field) of the EF 24mm F1.4L II and the closer focusing distance of the prime as well. The reason why these aspects were appealing to me is because it matches the way I was visualizing the scene, thus it was better suited to meet my artistic requirements.
StillMotion on Vimeo has a great tutorial on how to think about primes:
http://vimeo.com/27627363
Last edited: