JosephCampanella

So helpful! Thank you Mr. Mullen!

I suppose that makes sense! Just wanted to find out from an expert, and I think I got my answer! So you recommend doing an actual color correction before turning it monochrome? Are there any suggestions for best practice after the conversion, or should ALL correction (contrast, exposure) be done prior to making it black and white? Thanks!

I'm getting ready to shoot a short movie on a Panasonic AF100 with a set of Zeiss Compact Primes. The short will be in black and white. I've shot digital shorts before that were intended to be finished in monochrome and this is typically done by just desaturating the image after the fact. I shoot black and white film and as most of you know, the use of color filters is important. Is it recommemended to use color filters when shooting on video (Like a Yellow 12 for outdoor shots)? I'd have to find ones that would fit into an OConner matte box if the answer is yes. Is this common practice?

Hey Guys I am going to be shooting a short in the very near future with a set of Zeiss Compact Primes and the Panasonic AF100. One shot in the movie will require a split field diopter. I've used these before on my old Canon FD mount lenses, but they were threaded circle filters. Since the Compact Primes don't have a thread I have purchased the Oconner WM O-Box with 4 x 4 and 4 x 5.6 trays. The problem is, I can't seem to find any split field diopters to fit a square filter tray. I've done quite a bit of internet sleuthing and have found nothing but circle filters with threads. Am I crazy, or are these hard to come by? I even asked a Zeiss Rep. who didn't have an answer for me (I suppose he wouldn't know what other companies sell anyhow, but I thought I'd give it a shot.) I was going to call Tiffen or Schneider (I'm assuming both make them) but figured I'd post here first, hoping that I cannot only be reassured of their existence, but also, maybe for some tips? Any different than using them on those old FDs?

Going to be pulling the trigger on a few lenses soon and just looking for some advice. The goal is to get a 2-3 lenses set. I was thinking of going with the CP.2 set, but the fact that they are more or less rehoused ZF lenses is holding me back. The Schneider Cine-Xenar lenses look promising, but for the very few lenses tests I've seen done with them, I'm not as impressed with the images I've seen (very limited and of course could be chalked up to camera, lighting, etc...) Then I started looking at the new glass by Luma Tech. They are very fast at T1.3, but kind of an unproven brand. Not sure I want to sink $20,000 into lenses that will have less of a resale value and job appeal. Cooke has recently released a new version of their Panchro series, which, to me, seems like the best deal. I was told and have read that at T3 they are nearly indistinguishable to the S4s which to me sounds too good to be true. I'm constantly pinging back and forth on this. Should I get a 5 kit lens CP.2 set? Three Luma Tech Illuminas, which are faster by almost 3 stops on the wide end (18mm) Are the Schneider's better than I'm giving them credit? Are the Cooke Panchros the most sensible option in terms of quality glass vs. price vs. T-stop? Or should I instead of getting 3 Cooke Panchros that are all T2.8, go with 2 Zeiss Ultra Primes, which would be just a few thousand more? Also, we have to take into account that shooting at 800 ISO is becoming more and more of a reality, therefore making a T2.8 stop the T2 of yesteryear. Then of course it comes down to the look of the lenses which is more important than T-stop or price. Also, quality of build. I think I prefer the warmer softer look of the Cooke lenses to the harder look of the Zeiss, but to be honest, I can go either way. This is a bit of a rant, and kind of annoying for a first post. Just wondering if anybody here as any opinions on any of these lenses. I'm leaning towards the Cooke Panchros right now. An 18mm, 32mm & 75mm. All at T2.8 which I think will be fine. Most of the time I'm sitting comfortably at T3 anyhow, and if I can get the quality of a $20,000 Cooke lens for $8,000 it sounds like a great deal to me. Thanks in advance.