M Joel W

I have a 12mm Mk 1 on which the focus rotation is stiff and a bit inconsistent. Makes me wonder if it took a tumble and got warped. Is this beyond repair? Also, I feel like with the focus ears you get more torque than with a follow focus. How crazy would I be to ask an AC to pull off the focus ear? These are for "home movies" but any S16 home movie is a little expensive.

You might be right. I heard or read this somewhere, but it doesn't make much sense. Maybe it was in this video, but what he says is closer to what you said, the mtf (contrast) feels too high for digital whereas it's perfect for film:

There's an interview somewhere on YouTube (can't find it now) that implies that OLPF on digital cameras actually sharpen up vintage lenses but make Master Primes, for instance, feel "over sharp." I think the vintage crazy is largely in response to digital, taking the edge off. On the other hand, I remember comparing cibachrome prints to digital prints from 135 and 6x7 slides and the cibachromes were so much softer. I think you can get away with shooting softer lenses on digitally scanned film because you can add contrast back in the DI and I suspect scanners sharpen a bit too in post (I don't know), regardless I think digital scans are usually a lot sharper than film prints. So S16 or vintage lenses on S35 or 2-perf etc. become viable again. I think you're good... the only thing I didn't like about Sigma Art is the green flare.

The SSC coating apparently is on the nFD lenses, that's true, but it evolved over time to take on a less magenta and more reddish orange if I'm not mistaken tint that flares less aesthetically imo. Not sure how much difference it makes, but I have some newer nFDs (85mm f1.2, 50mm f1.2) and older (24mm f1.4) and the older one flares nicer, as did the SSC Aspherical FD I owned before. These prices have gotten so crazy across the board, though, imo. But I think people are looking for the K35 look and the SSC Aspherical line is as close as it gets, early nFDs perhaps next closest.

Looking to upgrade my tripod. Will be used with an Alexa Plus. Vinten 100 looks the most promising based on 44lb maximum capacity and used price around $2000; but I feel that O'Connor is the gold standard. I am used to shooting with a Miller tripod, but it is not robust enough for my Alexa. Thanks. This is for personal work, so I'm trying to find the kind of gear that's good but maybe less desirable to clients or for rental but as a result costs less. Hence the Vinten is tempting. I don't make a lot of videos either so it needn't be as robust as an O'Connor.

I think the aperture is intact? I'm assuming it's behind the rear element.

There's also a 19mm Kowa that might cover IMAX: Edit: pretty sure it's a fisheye lens though...

Nikon 300mm f2.0 ED I believe.

I impulse bought a 300mm f2.0 Nikkor that was being sold for parts. It seems to be missing the mount but otherwise intact. What can I do to get this lens working? Ideally PL mount.

I always thought the still lens trend was catering to large format Alexa LF before the forthcoming S35 4k+ Alexa got Netflix approval. What's wrong with Rokinon? They go fast and wide (24mm f1.4, 20mm f1.8, 16mm f2 for APS-C) and are manual focus. What's wrong with ZF? The designs include updated versions of the much-vaunted 28mm f2 and 21mm f2.8 and the coatings match whereas Contax don't match as well? What's wrong with Zeiss Rollei? The coatings are consistent (single coating in gold I think) and the 24mm f2.8, 35mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f2.8 are all excellent compact lenses. And I believe they are West German and very affordable. What's wrong with AIS Nikkor for that matter? Also, I've read that old coatings, curved glass that can no longer be made, lead glass, etc. were responsible for the old school "magic" but none of this seems to be the case. After all, now we have Cooke Classic lenses that look to me at least close enough to Panchros? Full disclosure: I'd still go with Panchros and/or K35s given the chance.

I bought one of these from KEH for $800 a few years back and it felt too expensive so I returned it. ? But I picked up some super speed FDs the next year so I guess it evens out. The 21mm Olympus is good. I found the Olympus lenses mixed, mostly good. I think the 35mm f2 or one of them is poor wide open and the rendering is a little different from some other systems or more inconsistent. I kept the 50mm f1.2 for shooting film (stills). A while ago I shot these comparisons: On S35 (EVA1). If you don't need speed past f2.8 there are still a lot of affordable options. Particularly on full frame, where 24mm feels like 16mm or 18mm on S35 to me. The Nikon lenses are fine, the Rolleis to me are the best deal as they're small, sharp, easy to adapt to EF mount, and have older designs and coatings with enough character but not as crazy as the early Nikon lenses. But the focus rings are a bit stiff, so maybe after servicing them it's not a deal. I don't really understand why ZF and Rokinon are as cheap as they are. They're mostly fine from what I see. I found the early multi-coatings on FD lenses (from early 80s or earlier) nice, the newer ones are more boring. Of course it depends on camera, I think the Alexa is already a little more forgiving so you can get away with Ultra Primes or CP2s or whatever and the "vintage" look works better with high contrast natural light regardless of camera, so on a bigger set maybe there's less desire for "vintage." Either that or this is a cinematography forum so naturally we care too much.

Zeiss Jena. I guess they're not as cheap as I remember though!

I think a significant portion of the Master was shot with East German lenses that are still pretty cheap.

I think my greatest aspiration in life is putting both a 1.4x teleconverter and a .7x wide angle adapter on the same lens.

I think it's fine (I think on Invictus there were issues with IR and I have had them with Velvia 100 I think) but following this thread as I recently sold my Tiffen ND filters in favor of a set of 8 Tokina IRNDs that I plan to use with digital and film and curious about this myself as I never A/B'd them.

You could be right. Check the names of the taking lenses, I suspect it's OKC1-75-1 and OKC1-50-1 which, again, I think are f2. And, looking online, variously marked between t2.1 and t2.3. But not sure.

I think the taking lenses have the name of the lens written on them. Google that and look for the t-stop of those lenses. I think it's around t2.2 or t2.3. I think these lenses are f2.0 and t2.5 is the t stop of the entire assembly not the f stop. I'd overexpose 1/3 stop relative to the marking to be safe. Just a guess btw. I actually own a similar kit and like 4-5 50mm and 75mm Lomos and when I get a chance I can check.

Is it a net behind the lens or something? I don't see this in the footage I'm working with now, but there are only smaller areas in it that are blown out in this footage. But some windows and point sources do blow out here and there.

I don't see it in the footage I'm working with now. 3.2k Alexa. But it's all pretty high key lighting without too many light sources in frame so I only found one or two clips with much clipping. But I don't see this happening there even around blown out lights. But the areas that are blown out are smaller so I can't tell.

Curious what you find. I was tempted to look through my library of Alexa footage but realized how infrequently it blows out! What do you think of 2.8k ArriRAW vs 3.2k ProRes btw? My work is ProRes 3.2k but I couldn't afford an Amira so I bought a 4:3 Plus and Gemini recorder instead. But I like 2k ProRes enough I think for me. ?

Thanks. I had an old Vinten I sold for next to nothing and regret selling, it was good. This is the type of thing I plan to shoot with like a crew of three so really anything would be good enough but I think I'll just rent a Sachtler Ace for a few days or the other option is a Benro S8, which is probably what I'll go with. For what I'm working on, that is good enough.

As cheap as possible, a few hundred dollars. I don't mind renting or buying used if there's nothing decent and affordable. It doesn't have to be great but I am a bit spoiled now so I'd probably rather rent something good than own something bad. Edit: I'm not that spoiled, though. Decent is fine.

I'm getting back into shooting smaller projects with my Panasonic S1. I'd like a tripod with a fluid head that's inexpensive and small and balances with a 3lb camera. Any recommendations? I know this site isn't tailored toward consumer equipment, but I figure people here have high standards. Which unfortunately after operating an O'Connor head even once so do I. ? But it just has to be decent. Cheap and compact would be nice. I will also use this with a friend’s C100 and plan to travel with it between coasts. Or I could just rent but recommendations there would be nice, too. Manfrotto? Sachtler Ace?

So cool! I think I ended up owning most of the owner's old stuff. Birns and Sawyer tripod from way back when, a few 2m cameras, and a bunch of lomo lenses. Is it safe to store everything in normal conditions? The cameras etc. are just out in the open, the lenses are in a humidity controlled cabinet.

What do you think of old Nikkors?