Premium Member Mark Kenfield Posted August 9, 2017 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2017 Shot the first part of a low-budget short over the weekend. It's the first narrative piece I've shot on the F3 for quite a while, and a handy reminder that just because newer cameras arrive on the scene, it doesn't mean the old ones lose any of their mojo. It was also my first outing with the new Sigma 18-35mm T/2 PL-mount zoom. And I'm definitely now a fan, great little lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted August 9, 2017 Share Posted August 9, 2017 Looks good sir.. have you tried the 50-100.. the only negative I read was alot of breathing .. which isnt in the 18-35.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted August 9, 2017 Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2017 Nice work. I keep counselling people to buy older, used cameras. They don't go bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Field Posted August 9, 2017 Share Posted August 9, 2017 Looks very unique for the body used. How did you get that... rustic look? Not everyday you get a digital camera and a brand new lens producing a vintage vibe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Mark Kenfield Posted August 9, 2017 Author Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2017 Looks good sir.. have you tried the 50-100.. the only negative I read was alot of breathing .. which isnt in the 18-35.. As a one-two combo, they sound amazing on the surface, but I've seen tests of the breathing on the 50-100mm, and it's pretty extreme. I've used zooms on S16mm that have had similar intense breathing, and it drove me bonkers - so I don't think the 50-100mm has much interest for me. That said, for sit down interview type shoots, where racking focus isn't really part of the equation, I think it could make an excellent pairing with the 18-35mm. To have all that range in two lightweight zooms with proper focus mechanics and a T/2(!) aperture is pretty amazing. The 18-35mm wasn't parfocal when I received it though. Sent the first one back, and the second one had the same issue. Dom Jaeger at Panavision here in Melbourne was able to take it apart and shim it back into tolerance for me though, and now it's fine. Looks very unique for the body used. How did you get that... rustic look? Not everyday you get a digital camera and a brand new lens producing a vintage vibe. Lots of haze, promist and a factory filled with metric tonnes of birdshit and dust! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Field Posted August 9, 2017 Share Posted August 9, 2017 promist quarter? half? eighth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Mark Kenfield Posted August 9, 2017 Author Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2017 quarter? half? eighth? Just a quarter on this one. I didn't want it too bloomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Field Posted August 9, 2017 Share Posted August 9, 2017 Kept it 70's and not 40's lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted August 9, 2017 Share Posted August 9, 2017 Not par focal.. ! thats a shame.. are they sold as such.. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Mark Kenfield Posted August 9, 2017 Author Premium Member Share Posted August 9, 2017 Not par focal.. ! thats a shame.. are they sold as such.. ? Sigma say they're 'not quite parfocal', but a number of high-profile bloggers have had them tested out by lens techs and received the 'okay'. I figured on that basis, I'd probably be safe. The reality was that the lens was surprisingly far out of tolerance (it was okay at the long end of the zoom, but markings were out by almost a foot by the time you zoomed back to 18mm). Fortunately, Zeiss shims fit the Sigmas (once you punch some fresh holes into them), and we were able to shim the lens back into tolerance (so it's near enough to parfocal now to make no difference). But it's certainly something to test out if you get the lens. The good news is that it appears to be fixable (the sad news is that they're not fixing every lens before it leaves the factory). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin R Probyn Posted August 9, 2017 Share Posted August 9, 2017 Not quite par focal.. nice one..its good they are not in the Aero industry.. this plane doesn't quite fly.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob spence Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 I have huge faith in the F3...this looks great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob spence Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 Mark, can you tell us about the picture profile...or slog ? ...grading etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Mark Kenfield Posted August 19, 2017 Author Premium Member Share Posted August 19, 2017 Hi Rob, Shot this in SLOG 4:4:4, recording to ProRes4444 XQ on an Odyssey 7Q. Graded in Davinci using SLOG > Cineon > Print LUTs, with some filmgrain overlaid to give it a little added texture. It's a very simple grade really, hardly any tweaking needed, and no secondary correction. I never bother recording internally on the F3, and only ever shoot in SLOG. I find applying a (modified for SLOG1) LC709a LUT to SLOG footage is much easier than mucking around with in-camera custom modes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob spence Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 Thanks for the workflow Mark. great stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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