Jump to content

M Joel W

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


M Joel W last won the day on August 3 2019

M Joel W had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

16 Good

About M Joel W

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

6794 profile views
  1. Looking for an Arri standard mount 40mm Schneider Cine-Xenon late serial number
  2. If you're using LEDs (or lower power fluorescents), maybe you can get way with flimsier soft boxes. They generate less heat, though more than strobes. The Chimeras are meant to endure the heat of an HMI or tungsten lamp. There might be some middle ground like the Aputure ones.
  3. Not in a rush, but if someone has these and doesn't need them, I'm trying to complete a set. Can't afford Baltars or Cookes. Non-rehoused only please.
  4. I would try both out if you can before buying either. I was on a job that was shot on standard speeds primarily and the zoom was an Alura or Fujinon I believe. Anyway, it had a good image and intercut but also some pincushion distortion that I didn't care for. Might have been another zoom entirely, but it bothered me enough for me to notice.
  5. Next time I do muzzle flare vfx I'm going to add flash banding to make it look practical. To be fair to Arri, the rolling shutter on the Alexa is very well-controlled. I've seen a hint of it in whip pans but it's vanishingly low compared with other cameras (excepting F55/F35 etc.).
  6. Thanks, Phil. Are there any textbooks on optical design that are comprehensible to someone with a fairy limited understanding of physics? I want to be able to read a lens diagram and understand roughly what it's doing.
  7. Obnoxious question, I'm sure. What would happen if I were to take the front from a 28mm f2.8 Nikon lens (everything in front of the aperture) and put the back (everything behind the aperture) of an 18mm f3.5 Nikon lens behind it? Even though the rays from both converge in the middle, if I'm not mistaken, I doubt it would make a functional lens and strongly doubt the focus scale would line up at all, but would it even create an image? If so, what would that most closely resemble? I've read the Tegea 9.8mm and 5.7mm share the same front half, but have a different rear half and some Angenieux lenses can be converted between FF and crop by swapping the rear group. So I'm just curious what this would do. Also, if Panavision anamorphic lenses are based on Nikkor taking lenses, how do they have a t1.1 model when the fastest 50mm Nikkor is f1.2? Or how is there a 75mm model at all?
  8. I forgot that there's a rumor Panavision has a 1.3/1.4 anamorphic option for S16 that's cheaper than Hawk. I wouldn't know. Worth calling, though!
  9. I was just looking into this, but mostly out of curiosity. With an Iscorama you get a 1.4X stretch, which gives you 2.35:1 exactly. I think Gaspar Noe shot 4:3 2x anamorphic for one feature. Hawk makes 1.3X anamorphic lenses for S16 that look beautiful but are very expensive. Others will know more than I do.
  10. Schneider Cinegon 10mm f2 Schneider Cinegon 16mm f2 Schneider Cine-Xenon 24mm f1.4 Will the rear elements hit the mirror in an S16 reflex camera? All in Arri B mount. Also curious about the 8mm Zeiss, I know it's not meant to, but neither is the 9.5mm super speed if I'm not mistaken and it does well enough.
  11. Thanks. I've had similar experiences with NDs but I've read other people have had issues with some less expensive Schneider filters. The Misfit mattebox is at the top of my budget, so that makes that decision easier. What are the 6X6 matteboxes even for? I'm assuming 4X5.65 will be good for anything except ultra ultra wides and crazy zooms?
  12. Also, if I can only afford half-strengths (0.6, 1.2, 1.8) to start, would it make sense to complement them with a 0.3 and stack them? I suppose I wouldn't be using Classic Softs that much. The Tegea also has a 2x2 filter tray so I suppose I can go without the mattebox when I use it.
  13. I'm looking to get a mattebox. I suspect I will need a 4x5.65 or larger mattebox, but I want to keep it as small and affordable as possible. If I could get away with a 4x4 mattebox I would. Unless there's a 4x5.65 mattebox that is almost as small and still good. Until now I have been getting away with screw-on filters, which is my preference, but there are too many sizes for it to remain practical. I will be using mostly Zeiss standard speeds from 16mm to 85mm, but also a Tegea 9.8mm and maybe renting Cooke Speed Panchros or similar lenses. I also have an Angeniuex 12-240mm zoom for S16 (it doesn't cover fully but close enough) but I've tried this with a 4x4 filter and it works okay. (I also use it with a 2x expander and it covers S35.) With K35s, the 18mm t1.5 has a 110mm front I believe? So would you need a 6X6 mattebox for that? Thanks. How do I know without buying/returning/etc. what I can get away with. I suppose I'd want a two-stage mattebox. I often want to use ND and Classic Soft together. The more stages the more worry over vignette, though? Lastly, any recommendations for NDs for digital? There are Arri FSND, Schneider Rhodium, Lindsey Optics, TrueND, etc. but they're all kind of expensive.
  14. I believe there's an Aputure 120T or something similar but maybe it's discontinued. Also, a 650W frensel (if you don't mind the heat and additional power consumption) is a lot less expensive than either and has an even higher quality of light. If you do use a gel on an LED, look at the Lee gels specifically designed for LEDs. (Haven't used them, but I hear they improve color rendering relative to traditional CTO/CTB.) Do you want a hard light or soft light? By the time you diffuse and gel an aputure 120D it might not be as bright as you were hoping. A cheap kinoflo 4 bank is another option but I find them a bit awkward to set up compared with LEDs.
  • Create New...