morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Best zooms are in Munich.
FS7: Fujinon announce MK 18-55 T2.9 and MK 50-135 T2.9
- Thread starter Bern Caughey
- Start date
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
But in 'daily corporate OMB' the sequence in the main does not rely on a smooth zoom.
Who wants to be a millionair used a creeping zoom as a critical and valuable method. A shonky crash zoom is often avioded by the editor (thats what the cam op expects).. or when left in.. they like it because it adds a lively vibe.
I cannot therefore see smooth perfect zooms as a critical part of the armour of the daily OMB shooter.
Who wants to be a millionair used a creeping zoom as a critical and valuable method. A shonky crash zoom is often avioded by the editor (thats what the cam op expects).. or when left in.. they like it because it adds a lively vibe.
I cannot therefore see smooth perfect zooms as a critical part of the armour of the daily OMB shooter.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
I asked who here has zooms in their edits.
Im assuming you did not shoot any of the above films?
Im assuming you did not shoot any of the above films?
JPNola
Veteran
Sam, as you know we were excited to have you be a part of this documentary but we were just going over your footage of the subject's last tournament and noticed that on your footage of the golfer's approach shot you didn't zoom into the ball as it landed on the green and amazingly rolled into the hole, you instead just sat there on the wide shot, frozen. What's up with that?? In the only shot we have of the event the ball is tiny in the frame. Wasn't your instinct to zoom in so as to better show the action?
And in your interview footage with the winning golfer, it would have been lovely had you performed a slow dramatic zoom during the bit where the winner became emotional regarding his father's death. But you just sat on a wide and then, somewhat randomly, crashed into a tight and in the edit we had to cover that with b-roll, which, is a shame because the result is that we missed the moment when a tear rolled down the winner's cheek. It was reported to us that you said you "don't do zooms" because they are "beneath you" and not "cinematic", or something like that, so I am afraid that we are going to have to end our relationship because obviously we are not a good match and we require someone with an open mind who does not arrogantly rule out any tool or method because of some sort of elitism. We do wish you well in your next endeavor. Maybe you should consider going back to shooting stills?
:evil:
Ben Scott
Veteran
Again yes if you were to do it now it would be a throwback to nostalgia.
Galactica used it like documentary warzone crash zooming which I quite liked.
see-mann
Active member
see-mann
Active member
...not really (both) ;-)
I did use zooms in my stuff, but very rarely - in situations like JPNola gave for example. But yes, not very often.
I just wanted to show there are examples in movies history, to use a zoom wisely and not just as a cheap toy.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Dear JP
I fully agree with the shortcomings of the shots that your show acquired. I would have been over the moon to have provided the shots you describe.
Please refer to our e-mails before we undertook this project. I clearly suggested that you rent me the Canon 17-120 zoom and servo like the last production company did on my last big show. I even provided you with links to a local hire company that stocks the lens.
As you felt the need to save some budget and go with my personal lenses I feel that the shortcomings of this shoot were set in preproduction not by the operator on the ground. I was clear in my communications about the limits to the kit that I could provide within your budget.
I am still upset that your director broke the HDMI lead on my personal monitor, while consistently moaning about being 'tethered' to the camera. I would remind you that I had suggested that you rent a teradek and monitor solution for your director as that would give them the viewing experience that they desereved. I find it upsetting that a major broadcaster such as yourself would feel the need to cut such corners and then somehow imply that your operators on the ground were not competent.
I understand that your show had some issues with sound, I note that you employed a trainee/runner not a sound operator for the show, my observation of her is that she tried the best she could with the minimal training she has and was an asset to the show in many ways.
Best SMM
true
Last edited:
The lens is now "in stock" in Japan.
https://info.system5.jp/whatsnew/archives/69900
https://info.system5.jp/whatsnew/archives/69900
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
And I feel this 'affordable' zooms things will make it worse.. as it is highly likely that it will burden owner ops with more kit that is not properly funded. Best stick together and hold out for cabrios and 17-120s
JPNola
Veteran
"In their edits"
Is that assuming that everyone edits their own footage? I've never edited anything in my 30 years of shooting. Not even for personal use. Maybe as a result of that, as a result of not being the editor and not knowing by whom, where, or how my footage will be edited I am reluctant to commit the edit to having to cover a crash-zoom for reframing purposes. I do reframe using crash-zooms, but I try to keep it to a minimum and I make a judgment call as to when is the best time to do it. And of course the frequency at which I crash-zoom to reframe is a function of whether or not I am working single-cam or multi-cam. Avoiding in-shot zooms is possible in the world of narrative, commercial, and to a lesser extent documentary work. But for most shooting that is pie-in-the-sky talk. You end up doing in-shot zooms and doing them regularly. Less so when on a zoom made for still photography that isn't a servo zoom, obviously.
Haha Morgan .. Yes I do really see your point re your correspondence with JP.. but I have the answer.. being in the very same position when buying my F5 3 yrs ago.. to avoid the letter from JP.. ending an otherwise fruitful working relationship.. I did this.. drum roll.. buy my own 17-120mm.. (production doesnt like having to rent stuff)..and CW7 iDX wireless monitor thingy.. and putting my rates up to cover the cost .. no complaints from producers and money in the bank..
If a cheap CN7/Cab could be made.. it would have been.. they will just never be cheap with a wide range high end optics .. end of story.. wont happen..wihtout some major technical break through..
Buy the good gear.. charge more .. and you,ll get the better work.. go the other way.. and you are always be the guy with the stills lenses who misses the shots.. but is cheap.. and you,ll stay here.. its the working for nothing syndrome thing.. you are always the guy who they wont employ for the paying gig.. fact..
If a cheap CN7/Cab could be made.. it would have been.. they will just never be cheap with a wide range high end optics .. end of story.. wont happen..wihtout some major technical break through..
Buy the good gear.. charge more .. and you,ll get the better work.. go the other way.. and you are always be the guy with the stills lenses who misses the shots.. but is cheap.. and you,ll stay here.. its the working for nothing syndrome thing.. you are always the guy who they wont employ for the paying gig.. fact..
Liam Hall
Veteran
This should be a sticky.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
the thing is I guess is I dont actually like the 17-120.
Yes I understand when it is needed.. on a certain type of production.
But my own work usually uses primes that cover a wider range of FOVs, at faster Tstop.
That is why I feel appropriate that that production rents it.
Also if it is not in very regular use it is a drain on cash.
Yes I understand when it is needed.. on a certain type of production.
But my own work usually uses primes that cover a wider range of FOVs, at faster Tstop.
That is why I feel appropriate that that production rents it.
Also if it is not in very regular use it is a drain on cash.