Panavision vs. Arriflex

[jordan kersten]

Is there a reason someone would choose an Arriflex, Panavision, or any camera system for that matter, for reasons that would affect the look of the film? Or is it simply whats available or what you can afford? Im a newcomer to the world of cinematography so please excuse me if there is an abvious answer.

[Landon D. Parks]

First of all I should say I'm not 1% as experianced at most people on this forum, so I'll offer advice only on what I know:

 

As fare as I know, the camera itself dont have the power to affect the way the image looks. an older camera will produce the same visual results as a newer one.

 

But primarily, it's the Film stock you use that will effect the image, and also a nice set of lenses won't hurt the image either.

 

Choice of camera really comes down to the D.P, and also what rental house is willing to make the best offer usually.

Edited January 25, 2005 by Landon D. Parks

[David Mullen ASC]

Right off the bat, you can only rent Panavision cameras and lenses, so if you want to own a modern 35mm camera, it will probably be an Arriflex. And if you just own a set of PL-mount lenses, then you'll probably rent an Arriflex to put them on since Panavision cameras have their own special lens mount.

 

Otherwise, the cameras are pretty similar in terms of basic features but are laid out differently ergonomically, some have a few more features than others, some are heavier than others, etc.

 

Whether one choses Panavision over an Arriflex may have more to do with your relation with the rental house or their prices instead of the equipment.

 

What really affects the look of the image are the lenses and the film stock more than the camera. What the camera will affect is how you use it, move it, etc. more operational issues than image issues.

[Landon D. Parks]

And if you just own a set of PL-mount lenses, then you'll probably rent an Arriflex to put them on since Panavision cameras have their own special lens mount.

I dont know if this is true or not, But I thought I read somewhere that some Panavion cameras have been converted to somthing called "Arri-Vision" or somthing like that, where you can use a lot of arri accessories on some the Panavision Camera, along with Arri and general PL Mount lenses?

 

Maybee Im wronge?

[David Mullen ASC]

Panavision cameras have Panavision lens mounts, including the Arris they have bought and converted. They have some older Zeiss lenses converted to Panavision mounts as well. They have Arri-435's, Arri-III's, etc.

 

I suppose it's possible to request a Panavision camera be converted to a PL-mount but I haven't heard of a case. For example, I heard that "The Mark of Zorro" was shot on Panavision cameras but with JDC anamorphics -- now whether they converted the lens mounts to Panavision or the Panavision cameras to PL-mounts to do this, I don't know.

[Landon D. Parks]

Thats cool, Learn somthing new every day (Or every time I check the Cinematography forums!) Which ever comes first.

Edited January 25, 2005 by Landon D. Parks

[Max Jacoby]

For example, I heard that "The Mark of Zorro" was shot on Panavision cameras but with JDC anamorphics -- now whether they converted the lens mounts to Panavision or the Panavision cameras to PL-mounts to do this, I don't know.

 

They probably changed the lens mounts to Panavision. When 'The Mask of Zorro' was shot, the JDC Anamorphics were still BNCR mount, but they now have been converted to PL by Panavision UK who own several sets and rent them out under the name Cooke Xtal Express.

 

I seem to recall that one cannot put a Panavision mount on a PL mount camera. I will have to look this one up, but I think that is because the flange depth is too long.

[Max Jacoby]

I looked up the flange depth of the different mounts. PL is 52mm, PV is 57,15mm and BNCR is 61,4mm. So one cannot put a PL mount lens on a Panavision camera. On the other hand since BNCR mount is even longer than PV mount, the Cooke Xtal Express (BNCR mount) that were used on 'The Mask of Zorro' could have been adapted to PV mount. Of course now that these lenses have been converted to PL mount, fitting them on a Panavision camera is not an option anymore.

[Filip Plesha]

What about the lenses? Are they some noticable differences between arri lenses and panavision lenses?

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

Yeah, Panavision lenses flare and veil like nothing else on earth. I'm sure there's some other tradeoff to lenses which don't do this, but I don't know what it is.

 

Phil

[Kevin Zanit]

Well when you get into the way high end lenses such as the Panavision Primos and Cooke S4s the differences really come down to preference.

 

But personally, I like Panavision lenses over most other brands as far as generic lenses go. If I am going for some "look" a different brand lens may be appropriate, but generally I can find what I like within the Panavision line. A lot of Panavision's lenses are just re-housed glass by a different company. For instance the Panavision "Z series" lenses are re-housed (and modified) Zeiss lenses.

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[Brent J. Craig]

Panavision cameras have Panavision lens mounts, including the Arris they have bought and converted.

 

Actually, as of January 4th 2005, Panavision has purchased the entire camera inventory of William F. White International Inc.

 

That means that they now own a ton of PL-mount Arri cameras. Since they also acquired many complete sets of Cooke S4's and Ultraprimes in the deal, the general consensus is that it just doesn't make economic sense to "Panavize" all those cameras and render millions of dollars worth of lenses obsolete.

 

I'm not sure they are promoting it that way just yet, but I would say Panavision is now a dual-mount shop!

 

Who could have ever imagined that?!?

[Max Jacoby]

Panavision own Arricams as well now. Actually the rental company with the biggest inventory of Arris is Panavision. But to be honest if you shoot with Arri cameras I think it makes more sense to hire them from Arri Rental directly. You always get the absolutely latest gear, their service is impeccable and in Continental Europe at least they give better deals than Panavision.

[Mike Panczenko]

Well, I've never pulled on a Panavision job, since I'm not a 1st, but I've heard, and it does seem obvious, that the large barrels on the Panavision lenses make it much easier to pull accurately than on the tiny Angeniux, Zeiss, and Cooke lenses on most Arris.

[Max Jacoby]

Well, I've never pulled on a Panavision job, since I'm not a 1st, but I've heard, and it  does seem obvious, that the large barrels on the Panavision lenses make it much easier to pull accurately than on the tiny Angeniux, Zeiss, and Cooke lenses on most Arris.

 

That is only the case for older PL mount lenses like the Zeiss Superspeeds and Standards for instance. Modern lenses like the S4s, Ultraprimes and the new Master Primes have large barrels with well-spaced focus-markings as well.