35mm lens for 16mm camera

[Mitch Gross]

if one were to do critical focusing for everything, even pulls, the old school way by placing one strip of tape around the barrel for a reference mark and another around the focusing ring? Say, for example, a couple of pulls were required for the shot; could one critically focus each mark and then feel confident that the lens would be correctly focused once the focus ring is returned to that mark?

 

Yes, this will work just fine, but it can be very hard to accurately judge eye focus for wider lenses, say below 35mm. You might think it is okay in the eyepiece and then be very dissapointed watching dailies. If you are going to mark out the lenses, do it using a lens projector at a rental house. Before Abel Cine Tech moved from Staten Island to Manhattan, I stayed late one evening with Rich Abel and we used thei lens projector to run my Zeiss Contax lenses down a 100'+ hallway to get very accurate marks which I then engraved on my lens barrels with an engraving pen. For your case you'd have to find someone with a lens projector that took your lens mount, which might ot be so easy.

 

I'm not as worried about using filters for the lenses because my NPR has been fitted with 15mm rods thereby allowing the use of a matte box.

 

But you still need to get the rear donut of the mattebox to fit every lens. One simple solution is to use a Scrunci, which is a hair-tie that is a ribbon on an elastic band that will hold tight to your lens but is voluminous to block light from reflecting onto the back side of filters. You can also get some neoprene or even computer mousepads and cut them to fit your lenses.

 

Lenses are a fairly individual thing, especially when they are not critically engineered to specifically match one another (not an issue in the stills world). The only way to know is to shoot some tests. The differences may be so minor that it doesn't matter to you. I intercut my Canon zoom, Zeiss primes, Zeiss Contax primes and occassionally use Nikon lenses with an adapter. The Nikons are the toughest to match to the rest, but not impossible. The big question mark is your 15-150. These lenses could be great and could be lousy. You need to have it checked to know. If these lenses check out, I don't think anyone in the blowup would ever know to think,"if only we shot with Zeiss SuperSpeeds."

 

I don't think you're necessarilly "wasting your time," but I do think you need to know what you're getting yourself into. Using these lenses can be a bit of a task. For one thing, Nikon lens barrels turn the "wrong way" to adjust focus. This can be maddening as you switch back and forth between lenses. These lenses might breathe a lot during focus pulls, and they may transmit camera noise right at the actors. They don't have follow focus gears (although you can add them) and they do not have fast apertures. All of this can combine to really hampering your work. What's better, lighting with a huge amount of light (and the crew & time needed for that) in order to accomodate slow lenses that are difficult to pull focus on, or shooting with smaller light levels on faster cine style lenses?

 

Also, I don't know where you are or what your market is like, but remember that you are competing in an industry. Do others (either private owners or local rental houses) have more professional lenses available and at what prices? Will you realistically be able to rent the use of this camera and lenses for much? Even if you got expensive lenses, would the fact that you are shooting on an Eclair NPR limit your rental abilities? These are business questions you need to answer before you move forward with any expenditures. That "ultra low budget horror movie" may decide to shoot on video or may find someone with an Aaton or SR package with a S-16 zoom and go with that. They're still going to have to spend many thousands of dollars on film stock and transfers so it might be worth it to them to get the better package.

 

Don't want to rain on your parade but these are things to consider.

 

For depth of field and field of view questions, the pCam and pCine programs are great. They are free (check the archives of the cinematography.net site) and are made for the Palm operating system, although I know that you can download a Palm emulator for your computer somewhere (check Google). For a field of view calculator, go to this website from Panavision New Zealand:

 

http://www.panavision.co.nz/main/kbase/ref...lenseqvform.asp

 

Depth of field is a question of circle of confusion. I always go by a tight coc, the same in 16 & 35. If you're blowing up to 35 or just projecting onto a large screen then you'll want it tight anyway. So go ahead and use the 35mm charts. Better yet, get the pcam program and use that, or invest in a SamCine calculator. It's a sliderule/wheel that is incredibly fast and easy to use, and no cameraman (or at least his AC) should be without one.

 

Hope this helps.

[Scott Bullock]

I appreciate all of the help that you guys have been offering. You've helped to clarify things that were a little hazy for me, underscored things that will become problematic, and have offered solutions to things that are of concern. For that, I extend my thanks to each of you.

 

Have any of you ever seen footage that was shot on S16 using 35mm still primes and then blown-up to 35mm? I'd love to hear any and all experiences, especially with regard to end results: I mean, it might be a real bear to get those images in the can, but at the end of the day are you satisfied with the results given the limitations of these lenses?

[Mitch Gross]

Have any of you ever seen footage that was shot on S16 using 35mm still primes and then blown-up to 35mm? I'd love to hear any and all experiences, especially with regard to end results: I mean, it might be a real bear to get those images in the can, but at the end of the day are you satisfied with the results given the limitations of these lenses?

 

As I said, I own some 35mm still lenses and have used them and others on my Aaton for 35mm blowup. The results can be excellent, but there can be a great variation in contrast and color if you don't test them first.

[Scott Bullock]

Thanks again. It's time for some testing. To that end, can anyone recommend a good way of projecting S16 so that I can see it in its natural aspect ratio having been shot on reversal film stock? Is it possible to obtain an S16 projector, whether by renting, buying, or modifying?

[David Mullen ASC]

Thanks again. It's time for some testing. To that end, can anyone recommend a good way of projecting S16 so that I can see it in its natural aspect ratio having been shot on reversal film stock? Is it possible to obtain an S16 projector, whether by renting, buying, or modifying?

 

Some labs can project Super-16. Otherwise, you can look for a 16mm projector that has been modified, or get one yourself and have the gate filed out. You won't be able to show 16mm prints with soundtracks on it after that though...

 

Someone talks about projector conversions here:

http://members.aol.com/Super16ACL/misc7.htm

 

If you're going to project a reversal original, I hope it's just a test or other footage that you don't mind getting scratched.

Edited December 31, 2005 by David Mullen

[Scott Bullock]

David Mullen wrote:

 

"If you're going to project a reversal original, I hope it's just a test or other footage that you don't mind getting scratched."

 

Absolutely, I'm strictly talking test footage here. And thanks for the input and links regarding labs and modifications.

[Charles MacDonald]

Can anyone explain what the problem is with modifying my K-3 camera (or any 16mm camera) lens mount to fit a 35mm still camera lens to allow me to use many lower cost highly available stll camera lenses?

 

Many of the K-3 ARE made to take a 35MM SLR lens, from the screw mount Pentax family. (Pentax, Ricoh, GAF, Cosina Practica and the russian ZENIT) You will find adaptors on the net to use many different SLR lenses on "C" mount 16mm/Video Cameras

 

Maybe my queation should be...what's the difference between a movie camera lens (16mm) and a still camera lens (35mm) besides the projection size and focal lengths? The difference between T-stop and F-stop seems negligible to me when shooting 16mm film.

 

Movie lenses tend to be of more sturdy constuction, with marking intended to allow one to change the lens settings during a shot, also zooms are designed so that zooming during a shot will not cause any unexpected image movement. As others have mentioned the lenes in a given series are often matched for "looks" so that their is not a colour shift when you swap lenes.

 

Still lenses may "wobble" as you focus as that would not be a problem in making stills.

 

I'm assuming I can create a new front lens mounting plate for my K-3 to fit an EOS lens at the correct focal distance, deal with the larger 35mm projection size, and deal with the lens focal lengths through tests and experience. Am I missing something?

 

As long as the backfocus will clear the shutter! If you have the K-3 with the M-42 Screw mount - rather then the bayonet mount, you may find it all together more effective to look for some Pentax Super Multi-Coated Takumars. (the smc coating is a real improvment over the preSMC lenes)

 

The only Canon lens I have played with is off a AL-1, and I notice that it rests at an intermediate stop when off the Camera, and I have yet to figgure out what lever on the back runs the stop-down. Your still lenses must be able to run in stopdown mode in order to take movies with them.