Jump to content

If you had to lens an entire film with only 3 focal lengths


Recommended Posts

Hey guys, 

I have two cameras, one is aps-c and I have enough glass to cover almost any situation for that format. The 2nd camera is full-frame, and I'm trying to choose 3 lenses that will be most useful starting out on this format. I already have 35, and 50mm that will cover the full-frame sensor. I rarely shoot wider than 28mm on aps-c so I think I have the wide and medium end covered. I'm having a hard time choosing the third lens, I'm torn between a fast 85mm or a 105mm macro. Could you please share your opinions/choices if you had to choose just 3 lenses to cover full-frame format?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Why not a zoom? 

A zoom that covers full frame? It would have to meet the following criteria:

CONSTANT minimum aperture of 2.8

Constant length

Manual aperture

Parfocal

Solid build quality

Long focus throw

I think I'd be hard pressed to find anything that fulfills those requirements for a reasonable price.

Edited by Johanan Pandone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I think this is really more of a taste thing than a practical thing. That is, if you have specific fields of view you like to tell your stories with, that step well in terms of cutting tighter, those should be the lenses you get. If you dont know what those are, or are not married to anything in particular, I think a zoom might be your best bet. Otherwise you will be buying more prime lenses to make up for that indecision about which lenses you want to use.

Personally I only really shoot with a 18, 35, and 85 on super35 (or closest set equivalent), so I'll build my lens choices on a rental around those core lenses, followed by a maybe the widest spare I can afford should I literally shoot myself into a corner and cant move a wall. If Im not shooting super 35 I cross check the fields of view on the technical sheets to be sure, especially if testing isnt in the budget. But its a taste thing. I like how the jump between those lenses escalates the audience focus. I also just like how those viewing angles look. So you may need to either test some stuff out (ideally) or watch a lot of lens test samples on youtube and vimeo. 

Unfortunately I just dont think there is any right answer, its all about knowing what your go to lenses are and tracking them down at an affordable price if you're looking to own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

It's a directorial issue but I'd say that if you've got a 35mm and 50mm, then an 85mm makes sense for the next jump for shooting close-ups in Full-Frame in a narrative project with traditional coverage of actors. But if it is a more stylized project where you can get away with most of your close-ups being done on a 50mm, and need a lot of macro shots and inserts, then the 105mm macro might make sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you guys for the insight,  David you're right, the 85 would probably see more use than a 105, and maybe I can get away with tubes or just rent a proper macro as needed. Perhaps I was too hasty to write-off zoom lenses. The only thing on my radar that meets most of the criteria I would need in a zoom lens is the tokina atx pro 28-70 2.8. It's internal focus/zoom so the barrel length remains constant. Has a manual aperture,  and is built like a tank. It's not parfocal, and it's got a rather short focus throw, but I can live with those drawbacks if I gear it down and resist the urge to zoom while I'm rolling.  I've used other tokina's in the past and the sharpness and contrast left much to be desired. Does anyone have any first hand experience with this particular lens? Is there another zoom that I could own for a few hundred dollars (used) that would be a better choice? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
7 hours ago, Johanan Pandone said:

A zoom that covers full frame? It would have to meet the following criteria:

CONSTANT minimum aperture of 2.8

Constant length

Manual aperture

Parfocal

Solid build quality

Long focus throw

I think I'd be hard pressed to find anything that fulfills those requirements for a reasonable price.

The Sigma's are full frame. 
DZO's are full frame. 
Tokina's are full frame. 

They all have constant aperture and minimum of 2.8/2.9 across the board. 

You will be spending more than a prime, but being able to get multiple focal lengths is a great feature. I rarely shoot with primes unless I need the speed. The power of the zoom is compelling, especially when you light properly and can compensate for the loss of speed. The chromatic aberrations, breathing and close focus issues aren't a big deal, your audience does not care. You already have lenses that can do close focus anyway. You'll get way more bang for your buck on a zoom and then if you suddenly need to change focal lengths, you've got it covered. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/28/2022 at 12:09 PM, David Mullen ASC said:

It's a directorial issue but I'd say that if you've got a 35mm and 50mm, then an 85mm makes sense for the next jump for shooting close-ups in Full-Frame in a narrative project with traditional coverage of actors. But if it is a more stylized project where you can get away with most of your close-ups being done on a 50mm, and need a lot of macro shots and inserts, then the 105mm macro might make sense.

Hey David,

You seem to be a fan of nikon glass. I've always been keen on them since the AI and AIS manuakl focus lenses have a mechanical aperture and can be adapted to almost any other mount. I find them good enough for cinematography with no modifications aside from a focus gear and a step-up ring. Since i already had a 35mm 2.0 AI and 50mm 1.8 AI in my kit, I decided to hunt for the 85mm F2 AIS, and I managed to steal one in excellent condition for a mere $75.00 today!!!

This leaves plenty of money leftover to pick up a macro lens as well. I'm currently negotiating a sweet deal on a 105mm 2.8 AF (D) The optics are fine on this particular sample, and I think I can get it for a very good price becaus the seller claims the autofocus doesn't work. I have a feeling that the seller might have tested it on a body that lacks a focus motor, either way I would never use autofocus anyways. 

I want the 105 AFD because the older AI and AIS 105 2.8 macro lenses don't focus as close and are only capable of 1:2 ratio. The AFD is the first nikkor to acheive a 1:1 reproduction ratio and I think the coatings on the AFD will be a close enough match to the rest of the nikkors in my kit. 

I wanted to ask you if you have any advice on using teleconverters to extend the working distance? I think 1:1 is enough magnification for the types of ECU's I like to shoot, but It might be nice to have more room to light. Since I'm using simple mechanical adapters with no chip on these lenses, I don't require any electrical contacts or etc. I would prefer an EF mount teleconverter so that it could work with all my Canon glass as well as my Nikkors that already have EF adapters that (almost) permanently live on them.; but I don't really trust the optics of 3rd party converters and everything made by canon is fetching exorbitant prices on the second hand market. I mean...come on, $250.00 for a used doubler? That's ridiculous. I've found an OEM Nikon TC-201 2X converter at keh.com for about $40.00 it's a genuine nikon converter from the AI-AIS era.  

Thanks for all your help!

 

Edited by Johanan Pandone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...