FS7: Fujinon announce MK 18-55 T2.9 and MK 50-135 T2.9

Liam Hall said:
There's no doubt exploitation is getting worse. And there's no doubt freelancers get abused more than in-house teams. I'm so used to being abused by production companies I've forgotten what normal is. Shoot, fly, repeat is the mantra in the world I inhabit. Take the rough with the smooth... Don't complain... Crack on... And most people think I'm on a jaunt... What absolute bollocks.
Click to expand...

Yes its not a 9-5 type job.. and a camera person in demand with gear can make pretty good money working half the year.. and go to the occasional exotic place.. so all our mates think we live the life.. and yes for sure there are some long hours.. or times when we dont have lunch.. Im all fine with that..if we then have a half day the next day at full rate.. there is alot of give and take .. no problem with that.. but to go 20 hrs without sleep Ive never done or go without a break for 10 hrs.. there is never any reason for that..its only TV we are not surgeons saving lives.. there should be another team.. its all about money.. and people are literally dying because of it.. I dont have any answer and for sure its going to get worse..
 
morgan_moore said:
Its a trade off. We wanna be macho, but don't want to be exploited.

The cop show, a siege.. we wanna pile along sit in a ditch for 14 hours, get the bang bang , but only because it was televisual gold and the producer will give you a day off in lieu. We do not want such days to be an acceptable norm due to cost cutting.

--

Donny you getting me on my use of a zoom? basically shooting at three prime lengths, but not having time to change between primes because it is all happening too fast.

S
Click to expand...


Yes I think so.. its pretty much the same for most dp,s I guess.. very few are using 5 minute zooms to be used in picture.. very occasionally a slow pull out to reveal something really amazing can be justified I think personally.. I saw a shot in a refugee hospital once.. one ill kid on a bed.. the camera zoomed out to show ever increasing numbers of beds in neat rows.. till there were hundreds filling the frame.. could have been done with a cut.. or cuts.. tight mid wide or straight tight to wide better I guess.. but the reveal worked.. you just couldn't believe how many beds.. so its wasn't a boring shot.. it was interesting the whole way..
I use a zoom as a set of primes too.. at the fastest stop I could buy at the time,, with widest range.. and I,ll zoom to change frame size snap in /out. but sometimes I,ll over cook it and its nice to be able to just feather it in or out a bit.. try to disguise it with a tiny move hand held.. also for interviews alot of directors dont want to break the feel or re actions they're getting just to change a lens.. in fact most that I have worked with would hate it.. 4K can help here for cropping in in HD anyway..
Thats why everyone wants the $5,000 16-150mm 1kg multi mount 4K spec zoom.. but it aint going to happen :).. without some amazing technical break through..
 
Indeed Don

Moving up the production value train you want to be able to creep/pull out in shot, but that is 'beyond' my offer or my expectations for a $5g lens.

Moving further up the production value train you would pull out with a techno crane! Again not part of the ENG/OMB offer.

Thats why I asked 'how many actually zoom in shot'

And that is where I think this mystical lens could find compromise and become possible.. like 18-55 2.9, bump stop, extends to 80 at t4.5

Or the flip in 1.4 converter, gives 18-55 2.9 or 28-80 4 with no digging in the bag. Television zooms have had a flip in converter for ever.. not an amazing technical breakthrough. I suggest 1.4 as I think its a better compromise of speed/quality than a dubler

I do not disrespect any shooting style.. except giving 15 hours for the price of 7 which fooks stuff up for every one. Also being a packhorse I dont respect as it just puts us in hospital.
 
Last edited:
A $5,000 zoom lens you could feather in or out.. it just needs a decent servo..no ?.. but yes thats my point that lens will never exist as it stands today..
I have learnt to work with 17-120.. 240 for HD.. I had the lovely Fujinon 4.5mm ENG zoom.. and i wish I had 14 or 15 on the CN7..but I dont.. or I need two cabs to do it.. way too expensive and I still have to carry,look after and change a lens at least once.. its not the change that really worries me.. but who is carrying this lens and looking after it.. as a camera assistant becomes another expense that prod co,s dont want to pay.. as there is no magazine to load ... the thing weights a ton and I bought an easy rig.. hated it to begin with now love it.. and it has totally saved my back .. such is life.. make your choices and spend or dont the big bucks.. if your work is in nice clean studios with alot of time shooting commercials .. even without an assistant ..I would have bought a set of primes for the same price instead..
 
Yep I know that no-one is going to make a $20k lens for $5k

Then as a designer (some thing I do on occasion, and care about a lot) you sit down and think 'what compromises am I going to make?'

I think (to me) Fuji made the wrong compromises through a misunderstanding of the OMB method of covering a scene.

If this lens was available for $2g more with a flip in 1.4 Id buy it.

If there was a zoom motor for another $2g Id be very happy that it was available.. but personally I would not buy it. If it was FIZ id consider it.

BTW - how do you do a quick digital punch in on the FS7.. it is a menu dig is it not?
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
I think (to me) Fuji made the wrong compromises through a misunderstanding of the OMB method of covering a scene.
Click to expand...


All the while Fuji be like


Agy6Tzw.gif
 
It's a profession that foresees phases of extreme stress and pressure and you have to be able to perform. I have covered events like the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, Fukushima, hurricane Kathrina and various crisis zones around the globe and there you roll with the punches and operate under adverse conditions and that's just fine. I just don't except these conditions when they are caused by producers due to bad planning or lack of budget. I shoot 15-20 days in a month every one of those days is just another day in my life and wants to be well spent.
As
Donny 123 said:
Yes its not a 9-5 type job.. and a camera person in demand with gear can make pretty good money working half the year.. and go to the occasional exotic place.. so all our mates think we live the life.. and yes for sure there are some long hours.. or times when we dont have lunch.. Im all fine with that..if we then have a half day the next day at full rate.. there is alot of give and take .. no problem with that.. but to go 20 hrs without sleep Ive never done or go without a break for 10 hrs.. there is never any reason for that..its only TV we are not surgeons saving lives.. there should be another team.. its all about money.. and people are literally dying because of it.. I dont have any answer and for sure its going to get worse..
Click to expand...
 
This is the same company that rehoused its ZE as Milvus and launched them like it was a brand new line when only 2-3 were new designs :)

The LW2 was a 15-45mm constant T2.6 beautiful lens that was twice the weight of the LW3 and twice the cost. It wasn't really the same market. The fact I've seen them recently going for £7k makes them seriously good value in my opinion and I'd actually favour it over the LWZ3 at that price.
 
.. so someone made a loss.

Actually 15-45 is absolutely perfect for the wide of a camera pair - it is a lens I can understand!

S
 
If I recall correctly the LW2 came out before the vistavision/full frame 35mm Compact Zoom series of Cinema Zoom so if anything the 'LW3' is just bringing that 'Lightweight Zoom' name back to life like Nokia and their new 3310. I couldn't possibly speculate on whether the lens was a success or not. I do know if you see one for cheap you should snap it up immediately.
 
icarusfilm said:
It's a profession that foresees phases of extreme stress and pressure and you have to be able to perform. I have covered events like the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, Fukushima, hurricane Kathrina and various crisis zones around the globe and there you roll with the punches and operate under adverse conditions and that's just fine. I just don't except these conditions when they are caused by producers due to bad planning or lack of budget. I shoot 15-20 days in a month every one of those days is just another day in my life and wants to be well spent.
As
Click to expand...

Exactly sir.. you put it much better than me.. slightly annoying thing is I was an assistant lugging Ronford 150mm bowl tripods around when camera people had a very good life.. and the pay was the same as now.. only 30 yrs ago.. they all had big houses and nice cars.. I have shot for about 20 years .. and the first 10-15 it was still ok.. but really Ive seen a big and fast decline .. esp in broadcast doc,s.. in conditions and the hourly rate and gear that was once extra is not expected for "free".. Im really not sure I would advise a young person to work in TV now..
 
I do TV very very sparingly now. Too much bullshit and I can make better quality product elsewhere. Occasionally still do a little thing here and there but life is too short to be taken for a c-word all your life.
 
Ben Scott said:
I do TV very very sparingly now. Too much bullshit and I can make better quality product elsewhere. Occasionally still do a little thing here and there but life is too short to be taken for a c-word all your life.
Click to expand...

That's a luxury.

And then there is that feeling which results from having turned down a job where you would have made $1600 only to sit at home on that day making nothing at all. And you start thinking about what you new gear you could have purchased with that $1600 you didn't make as a result of being picky. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top