Usefulness of 85mm

A

Arch Stanton

Member
I know this is somewhat of a subjective question, but how useful do you find 85mm (170mm effective) to be for filmmaking? I've been thinking about purchasing an 85mm 1.8 and was wondering if people find this focal length useful and in what situations. Thanks.
 
Last night I shot an 85mm about 10 feet infront of a car, capturing the driver's / passenger's MCUs. We had about 4 lights backlighting the scene/car so flare was persistent. I realized something quite beneficial then and there after closing the sidebrows of the mattebox. Because m4/3 crops so heavily of the image circle you have more room to cut out flares without getting the brows in shot which would not be possible if the camera were to see the whole image circle. You have less leeway with the eyebrow however.

I find 50mm less useful on m4/3 than 85mm because it gives you the FoV of a 100mm whilst lacking the background compression the 85mm provides for isolation and intimacy. The 50mm seems to me an awkward lens to use on m4/3. I usually use it for the speed and bokeh when it calls for it or an exterior wide when I want to get less AoV than a 35mm.
 
I've found an 85mm to be invaluable for nice tight closeups when you're unable to get within 6-7 feet of the subject.
Always noticed myself coming up short in the focal length department until I picked up the Samyang 85mm.
 
An 85mm lens is a great addition to a lens kit.

But... An 85mm is an 85mm, not a 170mm effective.
The only time a crop comparison is relivent is when you are trying to emulate the look of another format camera with a different size sensor than is in your camera.
 
I want a 60-70mm focal length, but there aren't that many lenses in that range that are good, cheap, and readily available with all the manual qualities I want in a lens to be used for filmmaking. The closest I've found is the Minolta 58mm 1.2, but that one is expensive unless you get one with fungus.
 
I purchased a Canon FD 85mm f/1.8 on eBay for $100 in good condition. Normally these go for a lot more and the cheaper ones are in crap condition. I even got 6 months to pay it off, which should give me enough time to evaluate it. If I decide to sell it, I'm fairly confident I can make back what I paid, if not more.
 
Been pondering this myself as well. It seems like 20, 24, 28, 35, 50 are enough on the GH2. I don't use an 85 enough. But just in case, I've got one anyway.
 
Probably repeating here but I like how the 85's are some of the fastest tele/med lenses you can get. For example I have a Zeiss 85mm f1.4. Great lens - on any camera system. My other legendary fav is the Helios 85mm f1.5, dubbed the "Bokeh Monster"
 
This is the sort of question that always puzzles me a LITTLE bit on these forums. Not because I don't like to do plenty of research before spending moolah myself, but the first place I'd look, certainly, is not really to the folks around here like myself or the other FAR more accomplished filmmakers, but to the entire history of movies! As in, look up some movies you really like the look of, search for old American Cinematographer articles, interviews with dps and directors, these guys would rather talk about their preferred focal lengths to shoot in than the metaphorical content of their pictures, I assure you. You don't need film school to pick up this stuff. Ask Kubrick, Spielberg, Scorsese. Granted they HAVE the whole kit and kiboodle (how do you spell that, um, correctly?), the question is when and why would they use the different pieces (from time to time maybe even they went to longer focal lengths to hide weak production design. Maybe). You can even just LOOK at the movies and get a pretty good idea. When are they jumping into close-ups, and is the background compression getting really extreme or not, etc... this is also WAY more fun than just asking on the internet. Not suggesting the original poster ISN'T doing this, just a general thought I've had. That said, I like having an 85, but like Kholi and Heartfelt I rarely grab it. It's really nice for the glamour/fashion photography vibe of dvdbrother's lovely video above, for my blab-fests maybe not so much. (also, like David Jones said don't fret so darn much over the crop factors, that'll really throw you off. Not very many filmmakers have EVER shot movies on a 5D full frame... except the ones you find on the internet last number of years...)
 
Right now I'm missing an 85, but tele lenses are VERY useful on the GH2. Don't think of the sensor as a full frame equivalent. The GH2 is like regular academy film, which was the standard for all spherical movies up until the late 90s. I'm a long lens kind of guy and don't get why people don't use them enough! Sure they are different to work with, requiring different types of planning and thinking, but once you know how to work with them, it's just lovely.
And while not always the most used lenses, tele lenses are VERY useful to have at times. Right now I've really felt that.
While I'm missing the 75 from my Lomo kit, I use an even longer lens... The 150! On a GH2 that is too. It's an amazing lens for close-ups or for filming people at a distance. The compression is awesome and it's just such a beautiful lens. Here's some stills from a feature we're shooting in China right now where we're using it almost as our main lens:



1_s.jpg

4_s.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top