Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The weight would tear the mount out of the camera.
The weight would tear the mount out of the camera.
Am I the only one that thinks this is just crazy talk?
How could this ever be usable / practical / doable / worth it?
Considering how, on a set, they're often festooned with monitors, rails, hoods, external recording units, mics, etc... definitely easier to just swap a lens in that situation.Ever thought about simply buying or renting a second AF100 placing it on standby with another prime lens on it? These things rent for $200 a day now. Pass the cost on to the client. More money but IMHO more practical as it'll cut down shooting time to some extent or no?
Good point, good point. Except on a two-camera shoot where both cameras are already festooned and prepped for different shot sizes. If you then needed to change a lens, it could be done while one camera was shooting with very little down time. But generally, I have to agree, especially if one cannot afford a second camera man and second focus puller. I think we'd have to see this lens turret and test its practicality. For instance, the last shoot I was on, we had a tracking shot and then moved into a close shot. Same lighting set up, and if one had had a second camera positioned for the close shot we needn't have stopped to swap lens, nor would we need a lens turret. We'd just shoot the close up and prep the tracking camera for the next shot. But I guess if you need a turret, you need a turret. If it works, I'm all for it.Considering how, on a set, they're often festooned with monitors, rails, hoods, external recording units, mics, etc... definitely easier to just swap a lens in that situation.
In a fluid shoot, it would be just one more thing to carry around.
Some of you fellas have Turret Syndrome.
There you have it. A pun worse than "primetive".![]()