Ultimate DVX Rig
- Thread starter kai
- Start date
Z
Zoomforce
Guest
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
magic crane would be nice ;D
magic crane would be nice ;D
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
Definitely the mini35 with a set of SuperSpeeds or better. I've used it, and from personal experience I can testify that adding the additional lens causes no problem, but the imagery is stunningly awesome!
(actually you do lose some light sensitivity, depending on how fast your prime lenses are. With an f/1.8 to f/2.4 lens, we were calculating about 3.5 to 4 stops light difference! That's a problem, of course...)
Definitely the mini35 with a set of SuperSpeeds or better. I've used it, and from personal experience I can testify that adding the additional lens causes no problem, but the imagery is stunningly awesome!
(actually you do lose some light sensitivity, depending on how fast your prime lenses are. With an f/1.8 to f/2.4 lens, we were calculating about 3.5 to 4 stops light difference! That's a problem, of course...)
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
No doubt the SDX is a much better camera, but a complete SDX kit with lens & power runs around $40,000.
A DVX, with mini35, and a set of Zeiss Jena prime lenses like I used, will set you back about $14,000.
Not comparable cameras at all, really, but certainly not the same price either. And the SDX with its video lens is going to have a much deeper depth of field than the DVX/mini35 combo. If you want to match the DOF with the SDX you'd need the Pro35, and that's $27,000 by itself!
The sweet price-performance ratio, I think, will be when someone produces a true professional version of their "homemade mini35", for about $1000 (I guess Agus has announced he'll sell pro versions for $800 or so). Then you'd be talking about a DVX/A, an Agus Pro35, and a set of still-camera lenses, for a total bill of $7000 or so. In the right hands, you could shoot footage FOR THE TV SCREEN that would look very much like 35mm film. For the big screen, the SDX900 would still be a much better choice (but at a combined rate of around $60,000 it had better be!)
No doubt the SDX is a much better camera, but a complete SDX kit with lens & power runs around $40,000.
A DVX, with mini35, and a set of Zeiss Jena prime lenses like I used, will set you back about $14,000.
Not comparable cameras at all, really, but certainly not the same price either. And the SDX with its video lens is going to have a much deeper depth of field than the DVX/mini35 combo. If you want to match the DOF with the SDX you'd need the Pro35, and that's $27,000 by itself!
The sweet price-performance ratio, I think, will be when someone produces a true professional version of their "homemade mini35", for about $1000 (I guess Agus has announced he'll sell pro versions for $800 or so). Then you'd be talking about a DVX/A, an Agus Pro35, and a set of still-camera lenses, for a total bill of $7000 or so. In the right hands, you could shoot footage FOR THE TV SCREEN that would look very much like 35mm film. For the big screen, the SDX900 would still be a much better choice (but at a combined rate of around $60,000 it had better be!)
kai
After FX Guru
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
I can't agree more... once a realisticly priced version of the mini35 comes to market, that combo will be one serious force to be reconed with... How did you like the lenses you used with the mini35? I'm still considering it, but can think of alot more I could get for that amount of coin...
I can't agree more... once a realisticly priced version of the mini35 comes to market, that combo will be one serious force to be reconed with... How did you like the lenses you used with the mini35? I'm still considering it, but can think of alot more I could get for that amount of coin...
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
I used two different lens sets: a $20,000 set of Zeiss SuperSpeeds, and a Zeiss Jena collection of still-camera lenses that I cobbled together off ebay over the course of the last five years, total investment probably around $2000.
The SuperSpeeds were much, much nicer of course: they're true cine lenses, with accurate and wide focus scales, and they're so much faster: f/1.2 and f/1.3, vs. the f/1.8 to f/2.8 of the still lenses.
However, the still lenses were 1/10th the price, and I had a much wider variety of focal lengths. On the SuperSpeeds we only had 25, 35, 50 and 85mm. On my primes, I had (if I remember correctly) 8mm, 16mm, 17mm, 20mm, 25mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 80mm, 105mm, 135mm, 150mm, 200mm, 300mm and 500mm.
As far as optical quality, at a given focal length and similar f-stop, the surprising thing was: THERE WASN'T MUCH DIFFERENCE! I'm sure if you were shooting 35mm film with its 4000 x 3000 resolution, the SuperSpeeds would trounce my still-camera lenses, but considering that we were recording down onto 720 x 480 video, there really wasn't a discernable difference! They provided lush, exquisite cinematic video, just at a lower light level is all.
If someone was going to use the Agus35, I'd say forget renting expensive cine lenses, go for a Zeiss Pancolar 50mm/f1.8, a Pancolar 80mm f/1.8, a Distagon 35mm f/2.4, a Distagon 20mm f/2.8, and a Sonnar 135mm f/3.5. That'll give you a very wide range to choose from, glass that should intercut well, and the total bill off ebay should be maybe (I'm guessing at today's prices) $500-$600. Add a Peleng 8mm for the rap-video fisheye effect and your total lens package will be maybe $700-$800, with no rental fees!
Truth be told, you don't really need the long lenses anyway: my 135mm was relatively inexpensive, but the 200mm, 300mm, and 500mm were buck$ -- yet I rarely ever use them. A set of 20mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm is reasonably well-rounded and shouldn't set you back over $500.
I used two different lens sets: a $20,000 set of Zeiss SuperSpeeds, and a Zeiss Jena collection of still-camera lenses that I cobbled together off ebay over the course of the last five years, total investment probably around $2000.
The SuperSpeeds were much, much nicer of course: they're true cine lenses, with accurate and wide focus scales, and they're so much faster: f/1.2 and f/1.3, vs. the f/1.8 to f/2.8 of the still lenses.
However, the still lenses were 1/10th the price, and I had a much wider variety of focal lengths. On the SuperSpeeds we only had 25, 35, 50 and 85mm. On my primes, I had (if I remember correctly) 8mm, 16mm, 17mm, 20mm, 25mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 80mm, 105mm, 135mm, 150mm, 200mm, 300mm and 500mm.
As far as optical quality, at a given focal length and similar f-stop, the surprising thing was: THERE WASN'T MUCH DIFFERENCE! I'm sure if you were shooting 35mm film with its 4000 x 3000 resolution, the SuperSpeeds would trounce my still-camera lenses, but considering that we were recording down onto 720 x 480 video, there really wasn't a discernable difference! They provided lush, exquisite cinematic video, just at a lower light level is all.
If someone was going to use the Agus35, I'd say forget renting expensive cine lenses, go for a Zeiss Pancolar 50mm/f1.8, a Pancolar 80mm f/1.8, a Distagon 35mm f/2.4, a Distagon 20mm f/2.8, and a Sonnar 135mm f/3.5. That'll give you a very wide range to choose from, glass that should intercut well, and the total bill off ebay should be maybe (I'm guessing at today's prices) $500-$600. Add a Peleng 8mm for the rap-video fisheye effect and your total lens package will be maybe $700-$800, with no rental fees!
Truth be told, you don't really need the long lenses anyway: my 135mm was relatively inexpensive, but the 200mm, 300mm, and 500mm were buck$ -- yet I rarely ever use them. A set of 20mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm is reasonably well-rounded and shouldn't set you back over $500.
Theodore_Lederman
Well-known member
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
Barry thats interesting to know...3 1/2 to 4 stops...I had the XL1 with the pl mount figured out a 3 stops lost...People don't realize how much time and money that will cost...4 stops turns a 12k into a 1k in theory...That's why when I was offered one with a full set of cooke s4's for a Free rental, we turned them down...Plus the fact that the P+S Technik mount on the last show...36 weeks...Was a maintainence nightmare...I'm getting great results with just the century optics 1.6 adapter and an open iris...While lighting big interiors with nothing bigger than a 2k...But I agree the unit on the DVX looks great...
Barry thats interesting to know...3 1/2 to 4 stops...I had the XL1 with the pl mount figured out a 3 stops lost...People don't realize how much time and money that will cost...4 stops turns a 12k into a 1k in theory...That's why when I was offered one with a full set of cooke s4's for a Free rental, we turned them down...Plus the fact that the P+S Technik mount on the last show...36 weeks...Was a maintainence nightmare...I'm getting great results with just the century optics 1.6 adapter and an open iris...While lighting big interiors with nothing bigger than a 2k...But I agree the unit on the DVX looks great...
Barry_Green
Moderator
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
Yeah, four stops certainly hurts. I wonder if they used a stronger magnifying diopter if that'd let them stick to the wider end of the lens. That might buy back 1.5 stops. A lot of the rest of the loss could be attributed to my "slow" lenses, because a Zeiss SuperSpeed at f/1.2 is nearly two full stops faster than my f/1.8 lens! I think in a "perfect" world, the mini35 would only cost about 1 stop, associated with the ground glass.
Yeah, four stops certainly hurts. I wonder if they used a stronger magnifying diopter if that'd let them stick to the wider end of the lens. That might buy back 1.5 stops. A lot of the rest of the loss could be attributed to my "slow" lenses, because a Zeiss SuperSpeed at f/1.2 is nearly two full stops faster than my f/1.8 lens! I think in a "perfect" world, the mini35 would only cost about 1 stop, associated with the ground glass.
Theodore_Lederman
Well-known member
Re: Ultimate DVX Rig
Right now for me the cons outweigh the pros of the rig in real world use...I guess your lens situation is a perfect example of t stops vs. f stops...
Right now for me the cons outweigh the pros of the rig in real world use...I guess your lens situation is a perfect example of t stops vs. f stops...