Eric Weindel

Woa! Thats a big boy lens. Sounds like like this is a scenario where you mount the camera on the lens. Found one of these on Ebay it's a bit more than I have to spend at the moment. It would also be nice to find something a wee bit smaller too I like that my camera is small and nimble, It's just a bummer I can never get a zoom shot. And changing lenses when I'm shooting alone is a bit of a pain. Anyone else out there find a still zoom that doesn't telescope yet?? -ERIC

WOW! That's big range. Is this Angenieux a cine lens? It's a "T" 2.9 so I'm assuming so, also because it's so rare to find a still lens which doesn't extend the front element. (being a non issue in still photography) I don't particularly care about using the lens to zoom and retreat for focus, because the 7D and most modern digital camera offer a 1:1 mode for focus. (or even more, 5x 10x on 7D) Currently the monitor I use for my 1st AC has a 1:1 mapping function during shooting which few low end cameras support. (7D, 5D, etc) I'm just looking for glass which won't reap vengeance on my matte box filters when zooming in for a close up. Granted, I could use a clamp on box instead of a rail mounted one... but the build of still lenses just doesn't seem up to holding the weight requirements. -ERIC

Thanks Alain. I've taken pictures with the 10-22 and I couldn't agree more. Just wish that front element didn't zip so far out when zooming. That was the main reason I went with the Tokina over this lens. I've been looking around online and saw that you could put many Angenieux zooms on a 7D without modifications due to their retrofocus design. My concern here is heaviness both in weight and cost but it's not a deal breaker because I think my next camera will certainly support PL glass. During my lookabout I found some Angenieux still glass! Totally affordable and seems to have a lot of quality to offer. Thinking about this one in particular. Angenieux 28-70mm f2.6 Anyone own or have experience with one? Does the front element extend when zooming? I was unable to find the answer to that for either the 17-55 mentioned by Alain or the Angenieux. Still photographers just don't care! Thanks, -ERIC

Bill I think all Arri B-mount lenses are for 16mm yes? This means your lenses won't cover the 7D sensor without huge vignetting. I believe the 4/3 sensor systems are your only option if you want to shoot with your glass. And you might want to check and see if your lenses can even cover this format which is also larger than 16mm. -ERIC

I have tried my isco's on a 35mm lens, and you're right there's no vignetting. The problem that does come up there is that the sides of the frame seem to have a slightly different squeeze than the center. Since the isco's were really for still anamorphic photos (from my understanding) this isn't an issue there. As long as you don't pan you don't really notice it, but as soon as you start tracking or panning the camera, the shot looks quite odd. Here's a link to someone else making this mistake. Currently my wide setup is a 25mm with a Century 1.33x anamorphic. Dismal performance compared to the isco's sharpness. Below f5.6 is a waste of time and the different squeeze is confusing in post. I think the performance is probably similar to the Panasonic 1.33x adapter but I can at least use diopters with the Century. I've also got to mention that the focus throw gets reversed from the isco's because the ZF lenses focus lefty. (perfect for making a frustrated 1st AC) Back to FOV, the 25mm with the Century adapter yields something in the horizontal range of 62 degrees so similar to a 20mm. But I really would like to achieve this FOV with a 1.5x squeeze and keep things easier in post. (and sharper too if possible and keep my 1st AC sane) -ERIC

Yes SLR lenes can be modified to be a bit more like a cine lens. The mods which are typically done however are to the iris ring. This simply involves taking the "clicks" out of the ring and dampening it so that you can smoothly adjust the iris while shooting. Often a standardized collar is added to the front of the lens to fit clamp on matteboxes as well. I've never seen anyone claim to modify the focus throw, which was the main point of contention in this thread. Check out http://rplens.com/ These guys do the mod I was talking about... I've seen other sites but forgot their URL's. -ERIC

Can anyone recommend an effective zoom to use on a 7D? I'm looking for something in a wide to short tele range which has a constant aperture and would ideally have no telescoping since I use a rail mounted mattebox. I own the Tokina 11-16 which has the properties I'm looking for ie constant aperture, internal focus and zoom, though clearly the range can't really deliver a "zoom shot". I know these aren't common characteristics in SLR lenses but if anyone knows of anything which would fit my needs here I'd be very happy. Also if there are any cine lenses which can be adapted without body mods that would also be useful info, even if the price calls for a rental. Thanks -ERIC

Does anyone know of a wide 1.5x anamorphic? Ideally around 25mm to 35mm or a 1.5x adapter which would fit these focal lengths without vignetting or distorting. Currently I have the isco 36 and 54 which I'm using on a 50mm and 100mm primes. I don't like having to keep moving the adapters from one lens to another that's really a mess. But when I need to shoot wide I'm using a 25mm lens with a century 1.33x anamorphic which isn't as sharp as the isco's, has different flare characteristics, and is a pain in post with the different squeeze. Somebody help!

Thanks again... You were right. The element in the teleconverter is actually quite small, forcing the widest aperture to be probably just a tiny pinch wider than F4 on the 50mm.

Ok so this is the equation to why I'm right. But there's a weirdness here. Did a test with the teleconverter on and off shooting at a blank wall and taking a shot at each stop. According to this test the closest shot to the wide open "100mm" was the 50 at f4. Could this just be chalked up to element loss in the teleconverter... light transmission? So the F stop might be 2.8 but the T stop would be closer to f 4??? That's a pretty big jump usually a T stop is pretty close to the F stop right? Thanks -ERIC

I'm trying to settle a debate with a friend of mine. He's convinced that using a teleconverter on a shorter fast prime gives you the equivalent DOF as that lenses F stop but with the teleconverters light loss as ND. So using a 50 f1.4 with a 2x teleconverter would be equal to a 100 f1.4 with an ND.09 in front. I say its not a 100 f1.4 but actually wide open a 100 f4 since the light loss is from changing the aperture's relation to the rear/front element. Can someone just say I'm right?