FS7: So what IS the OMB ENG solution..

bengiles said:
Fuji 20-120 currently quite cheap in UK, if you can live without the motor grip - certainly challenges the two new Fuji plastic jobbies:

http://www.topteks.com/shop/lenses-...ers/fujinon-20-120mm-t3-5-lens-without-drive/
Click to expand...

On an official Fuji promotional video linked below, a DP says "For maximum flexibility in film production, PL mount lenses are a must". While I agree with that, Fuji may want to remove that part from the video since it suggests that Fuji's own MK zooms are inadequate for "film production". Fuji probably isn't aiming at "film production" with the MK's, but still. The statement is a strike against Fuji's MK zooms and their decision to produce an e-mount zoom.

I love and respect PL-mount. But I think we are at the point to where saying that only PL is adequate for film production- and thus suggesting the e-mount is inadequate for film production- is an anachronism.




As far as PL mount being a must for maximum flexibility in film production, one could also argue that f/2.8 or faster is also a must for maximum flexibility in film production. And that would disqualify the lens the DP is promoting.
 
JPNola said:
To be a legit zoom for ENG a zoom must be par-focal and, most importantly, be a servo zoom, imo. That puts the Nikkor out of the running. An ENG zoom also needs to be 20mm or wider. That knocks out the Sony 28-125mm. ( no tears shed there. )

stuff.

With the Canon 17-120mm one could conceivably do every type of video production. ENG, Reality TV, documentary, Sports, Live event, Commercials, & Narrative. Even Nature / Wildlife shooting.
Click to expand...

JP

Now it gets personal and interesting or subtle.

OMB? ENG? Stupidly I used both in the thread title. I guess I meant OMB.

Now I would say that the two (OMB/ENG) are different. I think you comments apply to ENG but maybe not OMB.

-ENG one often has a reporter to carry ones sticks, and one needs proper sticks/head for a cine zoom.
-ENG may literally be live to a sat truck making servo zoom and parfocality critical

Personally I would not want to OMB with the CN17-120 and sticks that could carry it.. and the other lenses I would 'need' (10-24) 180 or 50-300 or 300/4 and 50 1.4 and maybe a light!

Im currently looking at swapping out my miller25 for something lighter to OMB with.

One further thing, and a huge advantage for the nikkor is that the thing gets bashed about.. when you have a 2/3 cam the lens lives on, but with OMB you are going to need to whip the lens off to get the 'art' shots (or you will need 10mm to include the whole baloon from the above sequence - (NDA on the design BTW - I cant show the other shot)

And the lens get slung in a pouch or even a pocket or dropped and dies after three years. So if one kills a lens every three years, well $150 a pop is OK $23k less so :)

--

Having concentrated a little on this lens Im both interested in testing the 20-120 (keep the 10-24 for the banging wides) and also the sony 18-110 are both worth a test drive. But actually the 28 is also not bad at all and money might go better on something else like that 75mm bowl head or another LED panel.

--

As for nature or wildlife, my 50-300 with a booster or even 180 prime eat the CN lens alive.
 
The job I shot with the 17-120 we had also a PL 100mm macro ziess and also a zeiss 70-200 and doubler

PL '4k' had been specified by the broadcaster

The doubler was not parfocal, whipping the 17 off to put the macro on was a horror that I eventually got nailed and the 70-200 had way too much focus move for solo opping without an A/C

Even if this glass can be accessed Im not sure I would pick it when OMB.
 
"Im currently looking at swapping out my miller25 for something lighter to OMB with."

Same here. I am thinking about combining a Sachtler DV12 with Miller Solo 100mm sticks. Or possibly a Sachtler Video 15. Although I suspect that the DV12 and the Video 15 may in fact be the same head. Sachtler has a habit of renaming their heads.

I am reluctant to go 75mm head, even in quest for lighter weight.

The spreader on all the Sachtler 75mm legs is a poor design. Seen many of them that have broken with use.

Another lightweight setup I am considering is the Miller Compass 23 with Solo legs. The Compass 23 is Miller's lowest price 100mm head. Same weight as the Compass 25 but minus a few features in order to reduce the price.

I dunno. I've had people tell me that I will hate a spreaderless tripod and curse the day I bought one.
 
morgan_moore said:
I can agree that high torque focus motors used in the production of actual motion pictures (films) make PL a must.
Click to expand...


But have you used high torque focus motors with a locking E-mount and found it inadequate? Or are you just assuming that it is inadequate, based on the inadequacy of non-locking e-mount?

Is there any evidence that PL is a stronger mount than is locking e-mount? Or is that just in our heads as a result of PL always being in the past the strongest mount and any type of e-mount being considered more of a prosumer mount?

Lens support is part of the equation here. Good, solid lens support greatly reduces the potential for rotational movement resulting from zoom motor torque or follow focus torque. I would think that a locking e-mount with rod support at the mount and rod support further out on the body of the lens would be pretty darn solid. And any weak point would more be the front face of the camera body than the e-mount itself.
 
JPNola said:
To be a legit zoom for ENG a zoom must be par-focal and, most importantly, be a servo zoom, imo. That puts the Nikkor out of the running. An ENG zoom also needs to be 20mm or wider. That knocks out the Sony 28-125mm. ( no tears shed there. )


There are the five main contenders for s35 ENG zoom. ( arguably the only contenders ) In order of cost from low to high:

* Sony 18-110mm

* Canon 18-80mm

* Fuji 20-120mm

* Canon 17-120mm

* Fuji Cabrio 19-90mm


___________

The zooms above can be grouped into low budget, medium budget, and high budget. The Canon 18-80mm is lacking for reach at only 80mm, so for me that leaves only the Sony 18-110mm in the budget category. If one requires or merely wants a zoom faster than f/4, both budget lenses are out of the running. But speed is less of a necessity in ENG than in other areas of production such as doc work, narrative, or commercial.

At roughly $13k the Fuji 20-120mm is the lone medium budget ENG zoom. Its only significant shortcoming is that it isn't short enough. That is, 20mm on the short end of the range is a bit narrow for an ENG zoom. One could quibble about the T3.5 top speed, but we are talking ENG work. Cranking the ISO is more tolerable in ENG and "scenes" in ENG are likely to naturally well-lit or lit by the Cam Op. The more shallow DoF of faster glass isn't a priority for ENG.

In the high budget category are the Canon 17-120mm and the Fuji Cab 19-90mm. A long end of only 90mm is a bit lacking but that deficit is offset a bit by the fact that the Fuji is physically shorter than the Canon 17-120mm and thus not as unwieldy.


________

If we put aside cost, the winner for Best ENG Zoom for s35 Cameras is....<drumroll>....the Canon 17-120mm.

Inarguably the winner. Yes, it is comparatively heavy and front heavy at that. Yes, it is big. But ENG camera / lens combos were always heavy-ish and biggish. That's kinda the nature of ENG. It's a big-boy game, ENG.

Any further ruminating is under the umbrella of "what if I can't afford the best zoom that there is for ENG?". And that is where I am at. Stuck between the more affordable Sony 18-110mm that doesn't thrill me in any way and the more desirable Fuji 20-120mm that is also roughly 4x the cost of the Sony 18-110mm. But the Fuji is more of a "real" ENG lens.


fyi- as of yesterday there was a Canon 17-120mm for sale for $19k on RedUser. With time ( and age ) these Canons are coming down in pre-owned price. When the price of a pre-owned Canon 17-120mm moves closer to the cost of a new Fuji 20-120mm, the decision as to which to buy becomes more brain-racking. The price difference is reduced to around a $5k difference. Which is only like half a good tripod cost. :smile:

With the Canon 17-120mm one could conceivably do every type of video production. ENG, Reality TV, documentary, Sports, Live event, Commercials, & Narrative. Even Nature / Wildlife shooting.
Click to expand...

Lots of good stuff there, JP.

If you're playing in the "big boy" leagues of network TV and want to be able to work as closely as you can to how we did in the past, I think the only two real choices on that list are the Canon 17-120 and Fuji 20-120.

The Sony lenses are messes. Hybrid still and video lenses that are lacking the control we want and are used to. The Canon 18-80 is a hybrid, too, that lacks top end and speed. From my stand point, one of the most un-exciting lenses available. The Fuji 19-90 didn't excite me when it was the ONLY lens of its kind and even less so now. Not wide enough, not long enough and EXPENSIVE.

I own the 17-120, so you can say I'm slightly biased, but I bought it for the reasons that make it the most appealing to me, it has the widest back-end, biggest range and is relatively fast for a zoom with its range. Not to mention manual, stepless everything. Yes, it's expensive, but I can get back to worrying about shooting instead of F'ing around with fighting lenses that weren't designed to do and work how I want. And I work in a world where the cost of the lens will soon be forgotten, because I'm paid well to do what I do, even if I can't necessarily bill extra for it on every job.

With that being said, the Fuji 20-120 is probably the bridesmaid, in my mind. It IS lacking on the back-end, but you still get the reach, pretty good range(6x), fully manual everything and servo zoom. And at $14k, 'that ain't bad'. Even less if you could sacrifice the servos for a while and add them later.

And about the 17-120 conceivably being used for everything... it is arguably the best "all-arounder". I have used it on several feature sit-downs with great results, B-roll for features, ENG and multi-cam "studio shows" in the field.

*ADD* I forgot one other thing that the 17-120 has going for it: PL and EF mount options. I just had mine modified so that I can swap mounts in ~1 minute to either.
 
ENG, OMB and DOC have a LOT of overlap and similarities and in lots of situations/scenarios could be used interchangeably.

I don't necessarily consider the term ENG in its purest form anymore: Electronic News Gathering. I look at it as more of a style. Many, and maybe it's a US vs. UK thing, would probably consider a lot of what I could call ENG, now, doc shooting.
 
JPNola said:
"Im currently looking at swapping out my miller25 for something lighter to OMB with."

Same here. I am thinking about combining a Sachtler DV12 with Miller Solo 100mm sticks. Or possibly a Sachtler Video 15. Although I suspect that the DV12 and the Video 15 may in fact be the same head. Sachtler has a habit of renaming their heads.

I am reluctant to go 75mm head, even in quest for lighter weight.
Click to expand...

Exactly the head I was eyeing (I have miller solos.. but 100 and I have sachler oldskol legs too)

I guess for me it would be a trade off between keeping the 100mm solos I own and getting a second 75mm set of solos which would be more ideal and more costly.


--

I've had people tell me that I will hate a spreaderless tripod and curse the day I bought one.

This is a really big consideration and potentially very true!.. I bought the Solo legs and then hated them so much I bought the sachler legs later (floor spreader)

Simply subtle headroom adjustment with the Solos is a total pain - there is something about treading on a floor spreader if you want to lift the camera up 3 inches that will make you want to chuck the solos over a cliff.

Conversely to drop to 18in off the ground for a 'cool' shot is a breeze with Solos.

Ive kind of drifted back to the Solos because they are lighter.

So for me it goes like this..

OMB.. solos
Crew, corporate interview sachler

For the OMB Im compromised on those little adjustments.. but then im compromised on everything to save mass/time
 
Run&Gun said:
ENG, OMB and DOC have a LOT of overlap and similarities and in lots of situations/scenarios could be used interchangeably.

I don't necessarily consider the term ENG in its purest form anymore: Electronic News Gathering. I look at it as more of a style. Many, and maybe it's a US vs. UK thing, would probably consider a lot of what I could call ENG, now, doc shooting.
Click to expand...

Yep and that is where Im saying it gets subtle and personal.

For OMB I will shoot with a 50 1.4 if I get a moment, I will use my 10-24 and I am also likely to go with my 180 2.8, I also wont zoom during a shot. I also wont have a reporter to lug my sticks.

Those three lenses are a given for me and I want to add a better 'mayhem' lens to that party.

DOC to me would sit tighter on the mayhem lens,

ENG could 'go live' requiring parfocal and creep zooms. And often have a second body for sticks lugging.

These are my interpretations.

Its a shame people dont really go in the footage section. Because, well these subtleties come up.
Most of my OMB work has a range well beyond 17-120.
Army is basically 28-85 and 50-300 with HFR crop aka 18-600 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vic7w4OUlRI
Valley relied on lowlight 50-1.4 and 180-2.8 lenses (and also the day 28-85) and uberwide 10mm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyj1mjNu9FI
 
Last edited:
I think you should consider another camera for Doc shooting. There's a 4K shoulder mount which should be ideal, it'll be comfortable and you'll shoot all day with it. NAB may bring some news of other options.

I think the conversation is exhausted with these cheaper cine zooms there's nothing more to say apart from choose one and live with the compromises.

I would go with the Fuji, a 85mm Prime and the 70-200 f4 on an SBU which would do me.
 
Run&Gun said:
ENG, OMB and DOC have a LOT of overlap and similarities and in lots of situations/scenarios could be used interchangeably.

I don't necessarily consider the term ENG in its purest form anymore: Electronic News Gathering. I look at it as more of a style. Many, and maybe it's a US vs. UK thing, would probably consider a lot of what I could call ENG, now, doc shooting.
Click to expand...

I agree, the term ENG sucks for large format shooting. I generally go with 'posh doc', as it suggest considered frames and lit interviews. It's my own phrase but you're welcome to use it:-)
 
Common sense: "A 1/2" or 2/3" camera makes more sense for your production."

mind of the client: "both of those are the old flavor. So yesterday. I want the new flavor. I want the "it" sensor size. I want the "cinematic" look. And that is super 35."


Besides, that 2/3" 4K shoulder-mount camera isn't yet available. And when it is it will easily cost upwards of $35,000 by the time you add a 4K B4 mount lens. It would be difficult for me to spend $40-45k on a 2/3" camera when for roughly the same cost or only slightly more I could buy an Alexa Mini and use it to pursue other types of work. Better work with higher camera rental rates than a 2/3" 4K camera can command. Commercial work and work that I like to call "posh doc". :happy:
 
JPNola said:
Common sense: "A 1/2" or 2/3" camera makes more sense for your production."
Click to expand...

Did you watch those films? Do you think a 2/3 cam could do them? maybe better maybe worse, maybe you think the 'DOF' looks cool, the SloMo looks cool? Maybe you think it all sucks, but hopefully it they have a 'look' that is not 1/3 :)

Obviously the are super compressed on YT.
 
I don't shoot ENG but do a fair amount of "Posh Doc"©. While I've never zoomed in-shot on a Commercial, I do fairly regularly on Docs., but I don't usually use Servos, & prefer the less precise look/feel of a manual zoom. Whenever I rent the Cabrio 19-90 one of the first things I do is have the AC pull off the Servo unit.
 
A lens or a camera will not solve your problem, the OMB is the problem.
Working alone is straining and annoying.



morgan_moore said:
Did you watch those films? Do you think a 2/3 cam could do them? maybe better maybe worse, maybe you think the 'DOF' looks cool, the SloMo looks cool? Maybe you think it all sucks, but hopefully it they have a 'look' that is not 1/3 :)

Obviously the are super compressed on YT.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top