Need suggestion for a basic set of lenses...

nouou

nouou

Well-known member
I'm getting ready to shoot my first feature film with a DVX100A and I am unsure as to what lens I should get. It is a very low budget film and our estimate is almost up to our breaking point although I refuse to skimp on the lenses. I heard from someone that a basic beginners set would comprise of a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm. Can someone confirm/debunk this?
 
this may be a stupid question, but your using a 35mm adapter right? If so then yeah those lens will do you right for your set up.
 
assuming its Nikon lenses. I would get a 17-35 zoom. to knock out the wide angles. Then I'd get a 50mm 1.4 and an 85 1.8. (assuming the budget is about 2200.
 
lairhair said:
assuming its Nikon lenses. I would get a 17-35 zoom. to knock out the wide angles. Then I'd get a 50mm 1.4 and an 85 1.8. (assuming the budget is about 2200.
Click to expand...

That 17-35 zoom is expensive, those others are affordable though. Is there a cheaper alternative for a zoom similar to the 17-35, or is it worth it to get that one?
 
I have that lens got it for free though lol. It is deffinetly worth the price as it is THE best nikon wide angle. Look for a used one.
 
The 17-35mm is very handy like the others say. It's also useful because you have to zoom in a bit on some 35mm adapters to get edge to edge sharpness and avoid vignetting so the extra wide lenses are needed to get what would normally be covered by a regular wide.

Whenever I'm stuck with a set of cine primes that ends at 85mm I end up really needing that 100 or 135mm. 85mm is good for head and shoulders plus, but for ECU's 100/135mm's with close focus are very handy. So I would consider a longer lens a necessity.

If you are in LA you can rent fast geared Nikon sets for pretty cheap. Msg me and I'll send you the vendor links.
 
might not be relevant to the op, but can someone shine in a light bulb for me,

how does these nikons mentioned compare to equivalent canon lens?(if you can be very specific about the differences),

and would you get some kind of vignetting or add softness or get less wide fl if mounted nikons on 5dmkii.
 
I would recommend Nikon mounted Zeiss ZF primes. They are really sharp and the focus throw is really smooth and long. After testing Nikons and Canons you will see what I mean. Great for any time you have to use a follow focus on a moving subject.
We have the Nikon 17-35 and its a kick ass lens. I think right now its one of the best wides.
 
As Beat said Zeiss ZF are pretty amazing pieces of glass. However they are over priced in my opinion. I have only shot 1 film with using nothing but Zeiss and I have shot numerous ones with Nikon. I think the Zeiss lenses are a little warmer and have better color then the Nikons. However Zeiss lenses are nothing that cant be replicated with color correction and sharp Nikon lenses.
 
Beat Takeshi said:
I would recommend Nikon mounted Zeiss ZF primes. They are really sharp and the focus throw is really smooth and long. After testing Nikons and Canons you will see what I mean. Great for any time you have to use a follow focus on a moving subject.
We have the Nikon 17-35 and its a kick ass lens. I think right now its one of the best wides.
Click to expand...

From my experience the lenses were just amazing! They were very sharp, had matched color (obviously), very fast lenses, nice long manual throw, and the very wide lenses (25mm) had considerably less distortion versus my Nikon 24mm f/2.8. This was a big reason why I rented the ZF lenses. I was shooting in a very small set of which the walls were not removable. I had to strap on a very wide lens and had lots of camera movement. Camera movement will highlight the barrel distortion of lenses.

The ONLY thing i didn't like about the lenses was some of them breathed more then expected. Perhaps they were optimally designed for photography, where breathing is not as important.

The cost is high because of performance and perhaps slightly because they look badass, and have black felt inside the lip of the lens.... fancy shmancy.
 
I will let you in on some of my super secret screen grabs from my new film hah. The first one is a Nikon 180mm f2.8. Second is an 85mm Zess lens. Both have very similar lighting.
b4aulc.png

2yuha1g.png

The next one is another Zeiss lens shot its the 50mm if I recall.
1568nsy.png

And the last one here in my own opinion is the best wide angle solution if you have an A and B camera unit. (stock HVX)
4qmpa9.png
 
Also note that the 180mm shot is soft because apparently the Redrock doesnt like to work in 10 degree weather. Which we didnt find out till we hiked the gear out through the woods to that location.
 
apparently the grease in the redrock got hardened slightly and also made the batterie less powerful and the motor couldnt take it.
 
I could see how that would make grain appear. Not nit picking, as I'm the king of out of focus shots - just thinking aloud :)
 
Yeah, that doesn't change the focal plane... just saying. That would simply start a semi-circular effect of the grain rushing by. I think the cold weather froze them little pull focus fingers a little.

Here is my passive aggressive smiley face to cover up my picking on you: :grin:
 
Yeah I thought that excuse would fly for a soft image haha. The redrock did freeze up though but it is not a fun job pulling focus with a 180mm lens and now follow focus. I just took a soft grab there.
 
D'oh! No follow focus makes sense. The focus ring on my Nikon 135mm is sticky enough - I hear they are worse on the 180?

Nice grabs, by the way. Especially the last one.
 
I havnt noticed the 180 focus ring being any stickier then my other lenses. However its almost impossible to tilt/pan and reach almost 3ft ahead to get a hand on the focus ring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top