if u were to shoot at one focal length on s35 but not 17-50, which one?

J Davis

J Davis

Veteran
I seen a few threads on reduser and here asking which are the three best focal lengths etc etc
or if you were stuck on a desert island with only one lens etc etc ...

This thread is the polar opposite. I'm not fishing for info, just a thread for the hell of it.

So you are gonna do a short or a feature or some drama art house film, sensor is s35 or aps-c
and you are limited to one focal length but not 17-50, which would it be and why?

"The absence of limitations is the enemy of art."
— Orson Welles

(Shawn I know u just finished a short using only 300mm ... you rock!!!)
 
Last edited:
28mm. I've been in that situation before where i had to pick either a 28 or a 50. on an aps-c i can work with that easier than a 50, i need less space. i can get by on wides and mediums, rather have those than straight closes.
 
I like these threads, they are just fun. Obviously I'd never work on a film with just one focal length, unless it was pre-planned as an asthetic, in-which case depending on what the idea was, could be any lens.

But if I were to shoot the first fictional narrative film on the moon, and during our lunar orbit approaching landing, NASA told me I had to jettison off all non-essential film gear in order to conserve fuel to land on the moon and return home, I'd send all the lenses into space, but keep the 40mm. I don't own one (yet!), but Cooke makes one in the S4 series and 5/i series, Zeiss has them in the Master Prime and Ultra Prime series. It's a very pretty length. It's a 'wide-portrait', as I call it. :) I think I could back the camera up and get some decent wides, and it makes gorgeous close-ups, imo.

I love it so much, I'm thinking about buying a 40mm Cooke S4/i. It would match my lens set perfectly and would be one stop faster, which is good for me, because if I ever needed that extra stop of light, the 40mm lens is a great 'all solution' lens, where I could probably make most shots work with in. So it would be a great lens to use if I was ever slammed for light... which so far, I've never been, because these cameras are so sensitive now. You never know, I've yet to shoot a 'No-Country' night exterior desert shot, yet.

Not sure I'll be able to get all those 18k's. :)

ps: I'm not sure what 50 years of moon-dust does to lenses, but a dozen of the original Zeiss lenses from the first lunar landing are still on the moon. To reduce weight on the craft, they left the cameras and lenses on the moon surface and only brought the film back to Earth. So I guess bring some lens adapters to the moon, and try those zeiss lenses out. hahaha :) I believe they were on hasselblads.
 
Last edited:
....er. ... but NOT 17 to 50

ie less than 17 or greater than 50 ... spicing things up.

(editing my poorly written original post to stop the confusion)
 
Last edited:
lol. i must admit my first reaction would be to go conservative and use a 60 prime.
if I were to go with 16 it would be a real challenge. Maybe do something like a stage play
 
I guess with your restrictions, it would really depend on what I was shooting. That's not easy.

I'd either go with a Cooke S4 16mm OR the Cooke 65SF (Soft Focus) lens... Never used it, but I'm really interested in it.

If I had to choose blindly, I'd pick the 16mm. You can always get close, or cheat by sampling a smaller part of the imager or using doublers.
 
Last edited:
Stephen Mick said:
35mm.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I second that. I have a 35mm F2.8 AI Nikkor prime that I use on a Canon ASP-C HD-DSLR and I am becoming a real big fan of it as MY "Normal" lens. I think that it renders an image that really works as an objective view. There is little of the optical distortion that is inherent in wider or longer lenses. I see Ryan's point also. I have read a lot of big time cinematographers swear by the 40mm. However, I even find that when I set up a shot with a zoom (the 17-5mm kit lens on the Canon) I find that I usually settle to around 35mm, when shooting people. This may be my personal aesthetic and the way I see the world. Off course, I would hate to not have the option of other lenses, but in the spirit of the thread, I go with 35mm.
 
Haha, I was going to respond 30mm as well, as that is what I use now more than anything else. However, having read the OP's intention, 51mm. Given I own the Tokina 11-16mm, I almost NEVER film with 16mm. Also, given I do a lot of action filming (fighting) the compression of the image is important to me so 51mm would be more helpful that 16mm in that regard, on selling the action. :)
 
800mm @ various subject distances would be interesting to watch....would probably need a segway or golf cart to set up a wide shot.
 
I have recently fell in love with my Tokina 35mm FD lens. I would without a doubt go with that lens. Next would be my 28mm 2.0 ssc. Im poor at the moment, I dont have any proper cinema lenses.
 
After working on a 3 camera TV show and seeing the crazy focal lengths they end up using, it seems like just having an 85 would be a cake walk. Just hopefully we'd be outside and it'd actually be appropriate for the story!
 
J Davis said:
I keep thinking ... how the hell would I do a film with everything at 16mm? I think it would be an awesome challenge
Click to expand...

One of the films that got me to really appreciate wide angles was actually Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, which was shot with only 14-24 lenses.
 
RyanT said:
After working on a 3 camera TV show and seeing the crazy focal lengths they end up using, it seems like just having an 85 would be a cake walk. Just hopefully we'd be outside and it'd actually be appropriate for the story!
Click to expand...

When I got my AF100, my only fully manual lens was a 85mm Bower F1.4. I shot with it exclusively. Making yourself use one lens is a VERY interesting exercise. I really learned where 85mm works and where it doesn't. Maybe they need to do a focal length film festival! :) f^4. A focal length is chosen at random for the project and everyone has to shoot with just that lens. And, no 17-50mm in the hat just to make it really interesting :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top