Panavision running scared from the 5DII

Barry, here's the thing.

Panavision need not alienate the indie filmmaker through selective rental practices. Why should they give a hoot who they rent to? The exact same end could be reached by setting a minimum rental time. No lenses go out for less than a week, no packages for less than 10 days. And price it accordingly. You want to stop indie rentals, then change prices that only the big boys can pay. If the customer steps up, Panny makes their money. If the customer doesn't step up the gear is still in the rental pool.

I firmly believe that there is adequate market for another smaller player in the anamorphic lens market. If Panavision doesn't want to mold their business to the changing economic reality that's their business, and likely their loss. I wonder what they and Kodak will be doing in 25 years...
 
PerroneFord said:
I firmly believe that there is adequate market for another smaller player in the anamorphic lens market. If Panavision doesn't want to mold their business to the changing economic reality that's their business, and likely their loss. I wonder what they and Kodak will be doing in 25 years...
Click to expand...

This has always been general Panavision policy. You've never been able to use primo's on an arri UNLESS it's a panavised arri. They want their lenses to go out with their cameras. That's why they developed the Panavised F900 and the various PanArris......Panavision aren't stupid. They'll have Panavised EOS cameras too if they see enough demand for them....and they'll make you pay top dollar for it.....

You've never been able to rock up with your own 35mm camera, and expect to get primos. You get primos only in PV mount and only for Panavision / Panavised Cameras. If you were able to then it's because they make a very special exception to their policy.

Primos are essentially hand built lenses and they only have very limited numbers of them, even more so in anamorphic. There are probably only a few hundred sets. A typical large budget film would take at least half a dozen sets. Once you have a few films and TV shows shooting you run out of lenses.....

As mentioned already Panavision's market is the big end of town and seriously, money is no object. If you have a very limited inventory of prestige gear that you can get TOP DOLLAR for why on earth would you rent them out for less. Why would you devalue the brand and make cheaper lenses when the low end market's already crowded.

Have you priced a set of primos ? You do know that panavision don't discount ?

There is no changing economic reality. Hollywood is Panavision's market and it's making just as many films generally as before.

All that's changing is that there's more indie and low budget films being made AS WELL. Your perception of changing economic condiftions is skewed because you're seeing change in a market Panavision don't compete in. Panavision NEVER was in that market so having more at the low end isn't hurting them.

RED would be hurting more than Panavision....

And the actual idea that Panavision have a 'panafurnace' somwhere and would actually be melting lens adaptors is pretty laughable....

melting adaptors ?? It's chicken little hysteria.......


jb
 
I dont quite believe that ,its not like panavision have or had to make their lenses from scratch everytime when someone wanted to use them,lenses were made once and were collecting money for panavision.It was a ripoff and they just got used to it ,now they might be afraid but its just how it is in business world,if something equal but cheaper will appear its only wise to switch.
 
bwwd said:
I dont quite believe that ,its not like panavision have or had to make their lenses from scratch everytime when someone wanted to use them,lenses were made once and were collecting money for panavision.It was a ripoff and they just got used to it ,now they might be afraid but its just how it is in business world,if something equal but cheaper will appear its only wise to switch.
Click to expand...

Lenses cost big big bucks to develop and build as well as Panavision make theirs. They take a long time to repay the outlay not to mention the servicing and overheads that Panavision have on optics.

You did know that they do have a sliding pay scale on their lenses depending on their vintage.... ?

Im not sure you're appreciating how difficult it is to make lenses that perform to their specs....

Someone else does make lenses that some would say are their equal. Zeiss Master primes. Guess what.....they're just as expensive. (or even Cookes)

jb
 
Last edited:
3-5 rentals(500$ day) and you could own one expensive prime non panavision lens ?
Any tests/frame grabs to compare panavision lenses and their superiority in full 4K resolution against very good still photo lens ?
I guess if peoples are telling that lenses are so superb its because they saw some comparisons with other lenses ?
Where we can see the specs and pics which would show how superior panavision lenses are to still photo lenses ?
 
bwwd said:
3-5 rentals(500$ day) and you could own one expensive prime non panavision lens ?
Any tests/frame grabs to compare panavision lenses and their superiority in full 4K resolution against very good still photo lens ?
I guess if peoples are telling that lenses are so superb its because they saw some comparisons with other lenses ?
Where we can see the specs and pics which would show how superior panavision lenses are to still photo lenses ?
Click to expand...

Im not sure what you're asking. I don't think there's an answer to this question.

There are so many ways to compare lenses and measuring resolution is only one of them. Everyone loves to quote mtf charts, line pairs and resolution charts because it's a quantifiable and easy to compare number.

If it has a higher magic number then it must be better right ?

Of course it could have terrible flare and contrast characteristics, breathe, porthole, ramp when you zoom, have a very uneven brightness field and be impossible to accurately focus pull on. But if it resolves more you'd still think it was better ?

Well maybe you would. And that's ok, because lenses are pretty subjective when judging them. I hate saying anything is *the best* because one man's ugly is another mans beauty.

You could do your own tests. Panavision, if approached correctly would probably let you test in their test bays for nix.

jb
 
Anyone knows still photo prime lens with issues you mentioned ? I would avoid this particular model.I have some cheap lenses and they arent THAT bad,they look just decent and when i see blue ray grabs from motion pictures shot on panavision equipment i dont see heaven and earth difference.
Breathing isnt so bad thing its not like its terrible effect and is destroying whole image,ramp when zooming dont count on primes,impossible focusing ? Is it because of different way to pull focus on cinema lenses and different on photo lenses ? Or lazy focus puller.
Which lens have those problems you mentioned i would like to know.
Its just some pople believe that in panavision lenses some serious magic is happening.
It isnt.
I like long focus throw on cinema lenses, i like anamorphics ,besides that i dont see huge differences.
 
bwwd said:
Anyone knows still photo prime lens with issues you mentioned ? I would avoid this particular model.I have some cheap lenses and they arent THAT bad,they look just decent and when i see blue ray grabs from motion pictures shot on panavision equipment i dont see heaven and earth difference.
Breathing isnt so bad thing its not like its terrible effect and is destroying whole image,ramp when zooming dont count on primes,impossible focusing ? Is it because of different way to pull focus on cinema lenses and different on photo lenses ? Or lazy focus puller.
Which lens have those problems you mentioned i would like to know.
Its just some pople believe that in panavision lenses some serious magic is happening.
It isnt.
I like long focus throw on cinema lenses, i like anamorphics ,besides that i dont see huge differences.
Click to expand...

I think that Panavision lenses have proved themselves with images projected 60 feet across in cinemas around the world.

I just have a hard time thinking that they are just going to ignore the rising convergence camera technology. Though I do understand Barry's explanation of there business model. I would bet that in the near future, we will see Panavised versions of some type of convergence camera (maybe not the current crop of them).
 
David G. Smith said:
I think that Panavision lenses have proved themselves with images projected 60 feet across in cinemas around the world.

I just have a hard time thinking that they are just going to ignore the rising convergence camera technology. Though I do understand Barry's explanation of there business model. I would bet that in the near future, we will see Panavised versions of some type of convergence camera (maybe not the current crop of them).
Click to expand...
I'd think they'd wait for the convergence to become a lot more mature before entertaining the idea. I don't see a Hollywood budget bothering with skew/aliasing/moire at all unless its for experiments sake. This thread reminds me of the Claudio Miranda thread on RedUser lol. BTW John its great to find you on here! If anyone wants to see some awesome BTS pics/lighting diagrams/and overall cinematography goodness, check out John's photostream on flickr. (In case you're wandering John it's Greg:)
 
Reminds me very much of the Claudio Miranda thread, yes.

The members of the ASC are Panavision's customers. Panavision will have to keep them happy. Whether other people understand the difference between still-camera lenses versus Panavision lenses, is really rather irrelevant to Panavision. They do not have to justify to us. They do, however, have to justify to their potential customer base (the TV series and feature films being lensed by ASC members and such) what the difference is. For decades they have had no trouble doing so; did I read that 90% of Hollywood films are lensed on Panavision? I thought I read that somewhere...

Anyway, doubtless they will have to adapt to future technology; the high-end is getting stood on its head what with the new Arri line, the F35, the SRW9000, and the new Epic, and who knows what all else is coming soon...
 
Barry_Green said:
Anyway, doubtless they will have to adapt to future technology; the high-end is getting stood on its head what with the new Arri line, the F35, the SRW9000, and the new Epic, and who knows what all else is coming soon...
Click to expand...
Exactly, and those are still quite a few tiers above the 5d's of the world. Barry you got 135,000 euros I can borrow for the new Arri? :)
 
David G. Smith said:
I think that Panavision lenses have proved themselves with images projected 60 feet across in cinemas around the world.
Click to expand...

I think the rule of diminishing returns certainly applies to high-end optics.. When the "wonderfully sharp" reel is projected by an 18-year old with less than desirable projector configuration, then any additional superiority of the Panavision lens is greatly diminished..

Plus, are you watching a 60-feet project from a living-room distance? Viewing distance also greatly affects perceived sharpness/resolution..
 
booggerg2 said:
I think the rule of diminishing returns certainly applies to high-end optics.. When the "wonderfully sharp" reel is projected by an 18-year old with less than desirable projector configuration, then any additional superiority of the Panavision lens is greatly diminished..

Plus, are you watching a 60-feet project from a living-room distance? Viewing distance also greatly affects perceived sharpness/resolution..
Click to expand...

Ok...... and?! The issue is that the Panavision lenses (and Zeiss and Cooke cine lenses) are designed to make great images that are projected 60 feet across (and then some). When choosing a set of lenses for project, one should get the best lenses they can afford, for the anticipated end use delivery of the project.
 
bwwd said:
Its just some pople believe that in panavision lenses some serious magic is happening.
It isnt.
I like long focus throw on cinema lenses, i like anamorphics ,besides that i dont see huge differences.
Click to expand...

Then don't rent them. But saying that Panavision built their lenses once and now they are just cash cows raking in the green for them is just plain ignorant.
 
I dont know... ive seen shi*ty footage definitely not HD, more like SD grainy 35mm adapter like footage on 2k cinema screen and i didnt left the room,it was watchable.Not everyone wants to run along with newest technology when current one is good enough to be accepted by most important audience - people in cinemas ,not pixel peepers and resolution counters.
---
Might sound ignorant and i know that panavision is servicing equipment after every rental.But their prices are really over the top and cheaper still lenses can be close enough.
This is "just glass" , not stones from moon or superb newest laser technology.
 
Last edited:
Wow, the posts on here are hilarious!!! Panavision scared of the 5D? Really guys? Ha Ha Ha!!!! :laugh:

Surprised that no one has mentioned that Panavision owns a CMOS manufacturer and that they are discontinuing their association with the Canon DSLR cameras because of litigation. Put it this way; Canon is using technology that doesn't belong to them.

"In March 6, 2009, Panavision Imaging, LLC, or Panavision, filed a complaint against [OVTI] alleging patent infringement in the District Court for the Central District of California. The case is entitled Panavision Imaging, LLC v. OmniVision Technologies, Inc., Canon U.S.A., Inc., Micron Technology, Inc. and Aptina Imaging Corporation, Case No. CV09-1577. In its complaint, Panavision asserts that we make, have made, use, sell and/or import products that infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 6,818,877 (“Pre-charging a Wide Analog Bus for CMOS Image Sensors”), 6,633,029 (“Video Bus for High Speed Multi-resolution Imagers and Method Thereof”) and 7,057,150 (“Solid State Imager with Reduced Number of Transistors per Pixel”). The complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages, fees and expenses and injunctive relief against us. We expect to vigorously defend ourselves against Panavision’s allegations. The Court has scheduled a claim construction hearing for December 10, 2009."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top