Do large format lenses require better breathing correction?

[Deniz Zagra]

My local movie theater was screening the new Knives Out movie last week, so I decided to check it out (I didn't like it, but that doesn't matter). As I was watching the movie I noticed that a lot of the focus racking shots had breathing in them; it was very noticeable and kind of distracting. I checked IMDB to see which lenses they used. Apparently they were using Zeiss Supreme Prime lenses on an Arri Alexa Mini LF. I'm kind of surprised; isn't Arri always boasting about the "no breathing" quality of their lenses, particularly the Master Primes? Has it got something to do with the larger sensor size (maybe larger formats require a lot more glass to eliminate breathing), or is the breathing visible because of the choices made in the shot (a lot of these shots seemed to be filmed very close to the actors)? Here are a few examples I found online:

from 0:31 to 0:37:

from 1:39 to 1:42:

 

[Chase Hagen]

Zeiss Supreme Primes are not ARRI lenses at all, they are 100% Zeiss lenses and yes they have a lot of breathing. ARRI Signature Primes are significantly better corrected for breathing than almost all other Large Format lenses. Master Primes are ARRI/Zeiss lenses and are specified by ARRI to have very minimal focus breathing. There is a reason why Supreme Primes cost less than Master Primes.

Edited March 8, 2023 by Chase Hagen

[Robin Phillips]

You also seem to be assuming they didnt want the breathing on the lenses. 

On a show this large, its a safe bet they tested various sets of lenses and chose these for artistic reasons. That is, they wanted the breathing. If they wanted no breathing, like you said they could have chosen master primes. 

[Chase Hagen]

I could be wrong but I assume Master Primes were probably not considered since they are S35 lenses only and they shot LF - although Master Primes 50mm or longer will cover ALEXA LF and MINI LF Open Gate due to over-projection in the lens design. Signature Primes all have the same or less focus breathing as their Master Prime equivalents.

[Dom Jaeger]

I have to say, you're pretty picky if this amount of breathing bothers you. The first example has a fast focus shift of considerable distance back and forth, and the frame barely changes in magnification, and in the second I can't even judge if there's breathing since the background is all quite out of focus and the shot includes a push-in straight after the focus pull. I think perhaps you're confusing expanding focus blur with breathing.

From my testing I would actually say the Zeiss Supremes have pretty minimal breathing, comparable with Master Primes.

In fact, you can check out some online tests of Supreme Primes yourself and watch the breathing tests, it's pretty minimal on all focal lengths:

 

If you want to see breathing, watch a test of a Cooke anamorphic for instance:

 

[Chase Hagen]

This is a great comparison of a Supreme Prime vs a Signature Prime of the equivalent focal length (there is a slight difference in FOV as the Signature Prime is only offered in a 47mm and the Supreme is a 50mm) - both racks start about 0:45 sec in and go from the background to the foreground:

 

 

They didn't do a Master Prime in there most recent round of testing in 2020 but they did do a 50mm Master Prime in their original tests in 2016 - it was done on a totally different camera (RED Dragon) and is a bit different set up but here it is:

 

Edited March 9, 2023 by Chase Hagen

[M Joel W]

I like the lens breathing in those clips. The slight zoom with the focus pull draws attention to what you're meant to be looking at.

[Deniz Zagra]

On 3/11/2023 at 10:41 AM, M Joel W said:

I like the lens breathing in those clips. The slight zoom with the focus pull draws attention to what you're meant to be looking at.

I don't know if I like it in these scenes, but subtle breathing can be good to manipulate the audience and show them where to look. An example would be the arena scenes in Gladiator (2000). The camera focuses from a threat in the background to a tired Russel Crowe while also panning ever so slightly. The breathing is used to emphasize rather than be an illusion breaker. The panning also helps us overlook magnification issues. (Plus, Panavision Primo lenses apparently don't breathe too much)

[M Joel W]

I don't remember that but burying a focus pull in a camera move often works well.

I usually try to not ascribe too much intent to what might be happy accidents, but I think the breathing in these shots was likely intentional given the availability of Signature Primes, Yedlin's technical acumen and how easy it would be to remove in post. 

I feel like there are certain directors who have a more "extroverted" approach and want their presence to be seen. Others would rather control the audience behind the scenes (Fincher) or guide them without getting in the way (Spielberg). Zooms are a more authorial move that someone who tries to guide the story more subconsciously like Spielberg or Fincher would be likelier to bury in a pan or tilt or dolly move like you mention. (I think it was Kaminski who had to push Spielberg to use zooms in Munich and I think Spielberg doesn't even like anamorphic before Bridge of Spies because the distortions in the glass create more of a presidio arch or distracting style; I think he wants immediacy and transparency despite Kaminski's heavy use of lens filtration.) Kubrick and Tarantino will use zooms unapologetically on the other hand. 

I'm definitely over-thinking this but I bet Yedlin and Johnson were aware of this kind of thing. I think they like the little "zoom" (which is all lens breathing is) or they would have staged these shots differently or painted it out in post. I like it, but it's just me. If it's not for you, go with Signature Primes.

[Deniz Zagra]

5 hours ago, M Joel W said:

Zooms are a more authorial move that someone who tries to guide the story more subconsciously like Spielberg or Fincher would be likelier to bury in a pan or tilt or dolly move like you mention.

I agree; the ability to zoom in or out is something our eyes can't do; it might have a detrimental effect, but I think, if used properly, it can greatly help the scene. I think what people miss with zoom shots is that many directors who are considered auteurs use zooms very deliberately and not as a gimmick. If you watch the prequels, you'll see that zoom shots are very effectively used in key shots where the characters have to make big decisions.

5 hours ago, M Joel W said:

think it was Kaminski who had to push Spielberg to use zooms in Munich and I think Spielberg doesn't even like anamorphic before Bridge of Spies because the distortions in the glass create more of a presidio arch or distracting style; I think he wants immediacy and transparency despite Kaminski's heavy use of lens filtration.

Spielberg is very good at moving the camera. I think he doesn't like to stand between the movie and the audience. However, I don't think he doesn't like anamorphic lenses. He wouldn't have shot Jaws with anamorphics , if that were the case. By the way, the way he hides breathing issues and uses them to his advantage in The West Side Story is quite remarkable.