John Holland Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 Does anyone have any experience of the Panavision "G" series anamorphic lenses ?
Mike Panczenko Posted June 11, 2008 Posted June 11, 2008 I just did a few days on a job with them, and while I can't speak for their aesthetics, I can speak from an assistant's perspective. They are not big- bigger than the "C" series, but very manageable. Each one is about the size of an Ultra Prime. All the barrels are the same diameter, so you don't need a new ring with each lens change. The focus scale is extremely large and well defined, and labeled on both the dumb side and operator side. They were used quite a bit (we also had "C" series and some "E," so I am sure they are nice looking lenses, although I can't speak in specifics. But for the assistant, they are very user friendly compared to some other anamorphic series.
John Holland Posted June 12, 2008 Author Posted June 12, 2008 Thanks Mike for that very helpful . Out of interest any idea why C and E were also used ?
Mike Panczenko Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 I was just a dayplayer on the job, so I didn't have a lowdown on the artistic reasoning behind the lens selection, but from what I could tell, the reason seemed to be that it was very big with many cameras simultaneously- 4 or more for entire days. I think it was just to accommodate the need for a large amount of lenses. There was one shot though where we switched to get a shorter minimum focus, but, by and large, I believe it was just to get enough lenses to cover the large amount of cameras.
Mike Panczenko Posted June 12, 2008 Posted June 12, 2008 I can't edit the post, wanted to add one thing: I was just a dayplayer on the job, so I didn't have a lowdown on the artistic reasoning behind the lens selection, but from what I could tell, the reason seemed to be that it was very big with many cameras simultaneously- 4 or more for entire days. A few instances where we had to go to longer focal lengths that I don't believe the "G" series had, so we'd switch to the longer "E" series primes, but I think it was mostly just to accommodate the need for a large amount of lenses. There was one shot though where we switched to get a shorter minimum focus (just an extra inch or two), but, by and large, I believe it was just to get enough lenses to cover the large amount of cameras, with a few extra longer lenses from other series to fill out the set.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now