Wide angle reality check

grimepoch said:
I use my 11-16mm all the time, but the problem I see with it in tight spaces is that if you don't have the camera locked down, the perspective distortion (not sure what to call it) that you get looks so unnatural and can subtract from the shot if you don't want that to be the focus. Look at the South video by Bloom, when he pans the camera on top of the building, you get that push pull effect as things come in and out of the center of the FoV. At 11mm I definitely get this, and for visual effects work it is a NIGHTMARE. I have to lock almost every shot down as the perspective changes make certain compositions a nightmare.

I've often felt that this is why you don't see super wide often on cinema shots, or if you do, the subject matter is very far from the camera UNLESS you are going for that distorted look (ie Gilliam's Fear and Loathing).

Granted, not all use is for narrative, and with that, I think there is a distinct difference in need that people need to consider. For people shooting documentaries or other sorts of projects, where there is no set, or ability to change the environment (like a cave or something), then these desires have real considerable application. A lot of advice or example tends to focus on one aspect of 'filming' when in reality, there are many applications.
Click to expand...

Do you use the 11-16mm with a GH1 or Canon DSLR?
 
I've owned and used a nikon mount 11-16 on a gh1. Also have owned and used 11-16 on canon as well. What do you want to know?
 
J Davis said:
I've owned and used a nikon mount 11-16 on a gh1. Also have owned and used 11-16 on canon as well. What do you want to know?
Click to expand...

I assume the 11-16 had worse barrel distortion on the Canon than the GH1 due to the extra crop factor with m4/3s.
 
Yes, the barrel distortion would be less, but that is not what I am referring to. That push pull effect I mentioned is called Perspective Distortion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_distortion_(photography)) and that is what I was referring to that really detracts from a scene with a moving camera or objects close to the lens that you don't normally see in professional narrative work unless that effect is desired. This is why I try and use a 30mm for most of my shots on my 7D, and will be using 25mm on my AF100. I only use the Tokina (or the Canon 10-22) when I have no other choice or I am doing the shot for artistic reasons, or as I said, things are far enough away that the perspective distortion isn't a problem.
 
TheReverend said:
I assume the 11-16 had worse barrel distortion on the Canon than the GH1 due to the extra crop factor with m4/3s.
Click to expand...

If you look at pictures that show the crop difference between both sensors, it's not cropping out very much, so how much reduction you get with the lost FoV is pretty small.
 
Huh... Learn something new everyday. I assumed that the weirdness in the South pan was barrel distortion from the 7mm.
 
Any barrel distortion or perspective distortion from the tokina 11-16 will not change when comparing the two cameras. The image circle projected out
the back of the lens will not change either. How can it? Its a lens. The physics of the glass and aperture hasn't changed so the image won't.

The only difference is the sensors. One sensor is slightly larger than the other so it will capture more of the image circle than the other.
Hence one will have a slightly different field of view than the other.
 
love this thread! The extreme wide angle request seems to stem from the crop factor and I understand its reason. I am also sure there will be many more native 4/3 lenses in the future. I am really curious to see the difference of primes vs nikon or canon glass for example. I bet some of the 50mm and above lenses for photography are not going to be so much worse then the primes.
 
dop16mm said:
I think it is rather humorous that over the last while everyone has been clamoring for telephoto shallow focus solutions for video cameras, and as soon as someone builds one, everyone starts complaining about lack of wide angle. Compared to what? Yes there are super wide lenses for full frame stills for shooting big group interiors, but guess what we are movie shooters and can move the frame to take in the shot.
Click to expand...
dop16mm said:
I think the real bennefits of wide angle lens are the near far relationships they create and the resulting visual dynamics. Moving your camera back to see more reduces those bennefits. There certainly are times when you simply need to get a wider view, but I generally am using a wide angle lens because of how it allows me to compose an image, not simply because it allows me to see more.
Click to expand...
 
Julienmassie said:
That would solve the problem
Click to expand...
Great, then hurry up and buy this lens.



It's f/2.8 at the wide end (12 mm).

Want to trade 2 mm of width for F/2 aperture ? Go for it


1334_header.png


Problem solved?
 
Do you think George Lucas was saying. "what's the crop factor" when he used the CineAlta camera to shoot Star Wars? The F900 is 2/3" sensor!
 
Probably not
He paid some people to think about that.

And im not going to shoot star wars, i just need '' these dam ultra wide shot that dont fit and that are not used in featured film '' for my gangsta rap videoclip and a couple of specific job.


If Georges Lucas was about to film the next lil wayne videoclip on a AF100 he would pay some people to think about it ... again ...

So in this case i really need to think about the crop factor since i need a lens to do this type of job in my bag.


Svecher they say that ...

'' autofocusing system and covers a zoom range equivalent to 24 to 120 mm on a 35 mm camera lens ''
 
Last edited:
grimepoch said:
At 11mm I definitely get this, and for visual effects work it is a NIGHTMARE.
Click to expand...

Why is it a nightmare? I have done plenty of 3D tracking and FX shots including comping 3D model stuff on my 10mm sigma plus 7D no problem. Maybe your probelm is you didn't remove lens distortion first? Or you're only doing 2D tracking/FX?
 
Last edited:
Julienmassie said:
So in this case i really need to think about the crop factor.
Click to expand...
But how wide do you think you'll need to go? 7mm (from the 7-14) on an AF100 is as wide as 13mm on a "full frame" camera. Neither Canon, nor Nikon, nor Zeiss, nor Leica, make a wider-than-13mm lens on a full frame camera (that isn't a fisheye). Are you saying you need to go wider than the widest of the widest wide lenses that there are in existence? If you want the widest field of view, you want an AF100 with the 7-14.
 
Barry_Green said:
Are you saying you need to go wider than the widest of the widest wide lenses that there are in existence? If you want the widest field of view, you want an AF100 with the 7-14
Click to expand...

Rap star like it wide YO!
Yes im looking for something like this but this is a f4 lens, im just waiting for a better option. I already have all the others lens that i need, i just dont have my wider than the widest of the widest wide lenses at the moment because there is this crop factor, but im full equip and good from 40 to 200mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top