Ryan Patrick O'Hara
Veteran
As someone said already, some could view this as not desirable as you cannot use different lenses.
But you are correct about lens design. I agree with you that the biggest obstacle standing in the way of a manufacturer making a fixed zoom lens on a s35mm sized sensor, is the sensor size. A big sensor makes designing an 'all purpose' lens (one with a fast speed, good quality, and large focal range) incredibly difficult, especially when cost and size is to remain low. A 2/3" chip would optically require a lens that could be smaller and lighter in design and thus be much more practical for the advantages of a built in lens.
Yes. Having a slow zoom would mean your DoF could not get any more shallow than the maximum aperture of the lens you have, without changing your compositions. Also an image tends to get more contrasty when you stop down, flare qualities can differ, etc. There are optical effects, and further so than simply bokeh. For me, it would be the lesser of evils, as I tend to want to be at a T/4 to begin with. But I can see where people would be afraid to loose the option. I mean, heck, many people today freak out about using T/2.8 lenses because they want that super shallow DoF. So despite seeing myself content, I will bet there will be some protests at an idea of a T/5.6 zoom wide open, even if cameras are at 4000 iso by then.
In my world the need to change lenses arises every day. It may not be the need to change lenses on set, but the ability to choose your weapon for the project. I will get into the aesthetic reasons in a minute, but first look at practicality.
First, if you plan on renting the camera out, cinematographers and videographers all have personal preference on lenses while more importantly, they also have differing budgets. If the lens is fixed the lens will always be of a certain quality and range. It will not change. Thus if it is made like an Angie Optimo, it will attract the cinema crowd, but likely scare away the indie crowd, low-budget or videography crowd because of size and price. Compromise the zoom lens a little and you will gain the low budget crowd, but the cinema boys will pass on the camera.
So the camera package, as a rental, could be viewed as more attractive as you can rent it to everybody (if it's a good camera) and custom fit a lens that best suits each production.
You are also correct with your two scenarios. An all purpose zoom, is never an all purpose zoom. It is a great lens to have to cover the typical range, but there will always be shots that need that special focal length or two outside of the range. Whether it be a 10mm lens like used in Fear and Loathing or an 800mm lens, like the one Conrad Hall, ASC used to shoot the race sequences in Without Limits. There will be times where you will want a lens outside of the range you have, and instead of renting a whole new camera, you can just change the lens.
Tilt shift is another good example. It cannot be accurately recreated in post, but perhaps can be 'ballpark' close. I would assume on a normal production where post production costs money, it would be less expensive to simply shoot the shot with a tilt shift lens rather than tagging it as a plate and having a VFX company hammer it out down the line.
Regarding other reasons:
1) To use a different brand of lenses: Modern Cooke, Zeiss, Leica, Red brand, and other lenses give different looks. Not just color, but texture, contrast, bokeh, etc.
2) Use vintage lenses. Sometimes you want modern lens coatings for crisp, clear, and sharp images. Sometimes you want to play in the mud. Vintage lenses have been used on huge productions to great advantage, and if you have ever played with an old, broken, and dirty lens, you will see the absolute beauty of it.
3) Anamorphic. So you want anamorphic flares? Oval Bokeh? You want the resolution benefit of them? I doubt the fixed zoom in the camera will be anamorphic.
4) Special effects shots that require tilt-shift, probe, snorkel, or any other specialty lens that distorts perspective. Similar to the shot from Close Encounters by Vilmos Zsigmond
5) You cannot use a macro lens, unless the built in zoom provides. You cannot use a bellows system to get super macro nor a lens baby, as in Assassination of Jesse James or The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, by Roger Deakins and Janusz Kaminski, respectively.
6) The ability to free lens. Every shoot a beautiful 'free-lensing shot'? It's absolutely wonderful for playful love scenes, memories or dreams. Flare-tastic!
7) The ability to fix a lens without needing to send the camera in. My HVX200 backfocus went out from me leaving it in macro for two years (thanks RedRock adapter). Had to send the whole camera to get fixed. My cooke 25mm lens had a slight shim issue after two years of use and I just had to send the lens out, not my camera.
8) The ability to switch to a smaller lens for space or weight reasons. I will assume an 'all purpose' zoom range lens for a s35mm camera will not be small. If on a steadi-cam, going handheld, in small spaces, suction cup mount, or similar situation, we typically ditch our zoom for a lighter prime.
Those are the advantages I came up with after 2min of thought. I'm sure there are more.
Now there are advantages to fixed lenses, but as I've said in a previous post, the OP was discussing fixed lenses for cinema purposes. If anything, that is the one area of cinematography/videography that needs it the most. We don't shoot talking heads, weddings or corporate videos all day. We shoot car chases, alien invasions, acid trips, love scenes, murders, mysteries, and comedy. Our needs change as the story does.
-ryan
Last edited:
