Where did the lens turret go?

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

Just want to take a poll on what others feel of this idea.

I recently was playing around with some old 8mm and 16mm cameras which I have laying around my desk/shelves. I realized that many of them possessed a lens turret and I realized that the design has been long gone... but why?

Of course there are obvious pro's and con's... but I am a huge prime lens guy, and I would love the convenience of having a choice of three or four lenses at my finger tips... at a flip of the turret.

What are your feelings on this?

 

[Davdo]

Wow. I totally never thought about that. Why did they ever go away?

I think I, too, wouldn't mind having them back. The quality of primes with the speed of zoom (to a degree). Regarding whatever problems they had, these days we're shooting movies with still cameras and lighting with fixtures that can instantly change color temperature with the flip of a switch. Someone ought to be able to fix everything that was ever wrong with the turret.

Bring back the lens turrets!

~~Dave

 

[Steve Laramie]

My theory is were better without them. Especially in the modern day gorilla style of shooting. I would hate to fly a lens turret camera on a steadicam.

 

[Mattykins]

Eh.

I hated them when on the old 16mm cameras I was using. Personal taste for me anyways. I didn't mind switching manually.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

We are probably better off without, but I kinda miss it.

I can't imagine how front heavy a camera would be with three Ziess Master Primes on the front.

 

[DadinWestchester]

Yeah, way too heavy these days. My first turret use was a TK-11 back in the 60's. More video cameras were fitted with a pistol grip to rack the lenses...

 

[pmark23]

Zoom lenses were expensive, so the run-and-gun news and documentary shooter needed a quick way to change primes. Now primes are more expensive than zooms!

 

[emretufekci]

I would hate to fly a lens turret camera on a steadicam.

Well you might not have to fly turret on a steadicam but this isn't too far off that.:happy:

"can't imagine how front heavy a camera would be with three Ziess Master Primes on the front."

How about just 2? No thank you keep those turrets away.

 

[Steve Laramie]

And how happy does that guy look? Haha

 

[DC EX1]

If the turret itself was interchangeable that would be great, or have the option of a turret, but a mandatory turret with your nice expensive set of glass up front is a liability for theft, damage and really inconvenient if you use those same primes on other cameras. It looks cool, but to me it's not worth it.

 

[rsmith]

I think lenses outgrew the practicality of turrets in terms of physical volume and weight. Pretty straightforward.

 

[emretufekci]

:laugh:I think there this thread is meant to be tongue and cheek,right????

I can just imagine asking my DIT:

"Hey can you prep the 3700 and whiteshade the camera for these turret lenses. Oh yes dont forget to compensate for the MTF on all of them, I dont care how: just do it!!!"

I think he would just turn and say::furious3::furious3::furious3::furious3:

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

:laugh:I think there this thread is meant to be tongue and cheek,right????

Yes. I think it's understood that a lens turret is a bit ridiculous, but the thread is gauging who still thinks it would be badass. I do.

Practical... no. But tell me you wouldn't want to see a RED or D-21 with four master primes on it.

 

[dadoboy]

One of the design problems of turrets was that eventually with wear and age or abuse, they would affect the physical distance of the focal plane and err from the lens focal flange distance.
If you think about the tolerances we need to keep lenses in collimation, you can see how this can be a problem for narrative filmmaking.
Another being the weight - as mentioned. While I think the older Schneider and Arri primes that work on my Arri SB, BL and SR are sharper than my zooms, the practical use of their very small barrels for focus pulling is pretty bad, and I prefer using the large zooms with their nicer focus throws and barrels even though they are a bit softer and slower. Putting three Zeiss Mk III primes on a turret wouldn't be that practical.

p.s. amazingly my Arri SB's turret doesn't suffer that much from the effects of wear. My distance marks of my Zeiss 10-100mm are hardly off! Man, got to hand to ARRI and the Arri SB.

 

[emretufekci]

But tell me you wouldn't want to see a RED or D-21 with four master primes on it.

Ok, I dont want to see a red or d-21 with 4 master primes on it.:happy:

My insurance agent would have stroke and die. My premiums could buy a small country.rogar-Kriz(DBG):

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Just want to take a poll on what others feel of this idea.

I recently was playing around with some old 8mm and 16mm cameras which I have laying around my desk/shelves. I realized that many of them possessed a lens turret and I realized that the design has been long gone... but why?

Of course there are obvious pro's and con's... but I am a huge prime lens guy, and I would love the convenience of having a choice of three or four lenses at my finger tips... at a flip of the turret.

What are your feelings on this?

With the improved zoom lens and maintenance of focus through the zoom range, why would you need the several fixed lenses of the turret, other than fixed lenses have usually better optics relative to the equivalent zoom lens.

Me... I just want a HD low cost camera with interchangeable lens capability in the first place... It seems to me, of all the 'cheapneing' things one could do to a camera, putting on a lens mount and letting the customer put on lenses at will would be... well... cheaper... either that... or one could now guess how really 'cheap' those lenses are on those prosumer cameras...