Super 16, 35mm lens

Tenolian Bell · February 7, 2004

I may have this all wrong.

Shooting super 16 with 35mm Zeiss super speeds. The guy at the rental house is telling me 35mm lens double in focal length if used on super 16mm cameras. I've done this a couple of times before and I don't remember the focal length doubling.

He's saying that since 35mm lens are made to cover twice the area of super 16 all of the light is focused on on the half sice frame that it dobles the focal length, which does make sense, but I've never heard that it does that.

It does make sense though.

Mitch Gross · February 7, 2004

He's saying that since 35mm lens are made to cover twice the area of super 16 all of the light is focused on on the half sice frame that it dobles the focal length, which does make sense, but I've never heard that it does that.

He's an idiot and he shouldn't be working in a professional camera rental house in a magor market like New York. What happens to the "extra light" that doesn't get used in the 16mm frame area? Nothing--it just bounces off the black painted areas inside your camera. This guy absolutely doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. ALL lenses cover an area greater than that of your chosen frame otherwise they will vignhette. A lens made to cover 35 will just have more unused potential coverage area, but a 25mm lens for 35mm and a 25mm lens for S-16 will give the identical image on a S-16 camera. Simple physics. The guy should be fired.

Max Jacoby · February 7, 2004

Also it isn't such a good idea to use 35mm lenses for super 16 if you are going for projection. The quality won't be as good as super16 lenses.

Mitch Gross · February 7, 2004

Also it isn't such a good idea to use 35mm lenses for super 16 if you are going for projection. The quality won't be as good as super16 lenses.

I find that's only true in theory not practice. In theory, since a lens made for S-16 only has to work for the smaller frame area, the lens can be optimized for the cleanest, sharpest performance in that area. A 35mm format lens needs to cover a far larger area and makes a number of compromises in order to best work for the larger frame. In practice the R&D that has gone into lens design for 35mm lenses far outstrips that of S-16 lenses and generally there is little to no difference visible when using either in S-16.

Tenolian Bell · February 8, 2004

A lens made to cover 35 will just have more unused potential coverage area, but a 25mm lens for 35mm and a 25mm lens for S-16 will give the identical image on a S-16 camera. Simple physics.

Thanks Mitch

The shoot is in LA. The producer called me and told me this is what a guy at the rental house was telling him. I've never even heard this before, so I was really thrown off by it. We can't put this one on NY, this is an LA guy.

Mitch Gross · February 8, 2004

I'd bet a steak dinner that it was the producer who just heard him completely incorrectly. I think I can guess the rental house and there's no way that anyone associated with that company could misunderstand anything about Super-16 or something so basic as this.

Max Jacoby · February 8, 2004

In practice the R&D that has gone into lens design for 35mm lenses far outstrips that of S-16 lenses and generally there is little to no difference visible when using either in S-16.

I haven't seen a direct comparison, but that's what the head technician at Arri Munich told me. But he also added that they certainly won't complain if people want to use 35mm lenses on Super 16, since they can charge more for rental. :D

Fredrik Backar FSF · February 8, 2004

I may be out on a crazy thought here.... But I´ve shot videos like that a few times, and I always have to -on theory- double the 35mm lens mm to know what I´m putting on the camera in 16 terms...

The 50mm superspeed gives me a very good telephotolens character... would say about a 100mm or so.

Shouldn´t the lesser image in s-16 read a lesser area of the lens and give a "tighter view"?? It seemes like it to me.....

Could I be crazy or have I just missunderstood the dialogue prior?? I am from Sweden u know :D

Fredrik Backar FSF · February 8, 2004

nevrmind what I just wrote!!!!!! :D

Fredrik Backar FSF · February 8, 2004

I was comparing to using a 35mm cam... Ofcourse I know that focallength is always the same and the format changes how much u see.... I just got confused :)

Matt Pacini · February 10, 2004

I think the confusion is over absolutes, and relatives.

What I mean is, (as has been posted on this forum many, many times), that in reality, 25mm is 25mm is 25mm.

Hoever, in practice, a 25mm lens on a 16mm camera, will "LOOK LIKE" what a 50mm lens does on a 35mm camera, so "IF" we're using 35mm as the benchmark to decide what a given composition is going to look like, then you can mentally sort of double the #'s in your head.

But none of this is exact either, since everyone's always saying that 50mm is considered "normal", but that comes from 35mm still photography, where the image size is much larger than a 35mm motion picture frame.

Matt Pacini

Tenolian Bell · February 11, 2004

I think the confusion is over absolutes, and relatives. A 25mm lens on a 16mm camera, will "LOOK LIKE" what a 50mm lens does on a 35mm camera, so "IF" we're using 35mm as the benchmark to decide what a given composition is going to look like, then you can mentally sort of double the #'s in your head.

It seems that what Matt explained is what the guy at the rental house meant. The producer did expalin it to me the way the guy explained it to him, but the producer didn't really understand what the guy was talking about. I think the way the guy explained it was a bit of an over simplification which confused even me.

He was trying to talk the producer out of using longer lens' telling him they double in focal length. As in 25 is normal in 16mm and 50 is normal in 35mm. But of course me being the cinematographer already know this and picked the longer focal lengths for a reason. Knowledge the guy in the rental house didn't have, which is the problem with him trying to talk the producer out of the lens' I'd chosen.