Eugene Lehnert

What lenses are designed to be their sharpest when the aperature is wide open?

Cool thanks!

Yes, ok, and I'm using RX lenses so I'm not calculating for 1/80 of a second I'm calculating for 1/65. Thanks!

So according to Kodak's technical data on their website their 500T Vision 2 stock needs 80 ft candles to be exposed at normal. But this is based on a shutter angle of 170 degrees. So for the Bolex with it's 133 degree shutter and prism the light exposing the film is 1/80th of a second. Which is about 1.6667 times slower than 1/48th of a second. So therefore it should take 133 ft candles to expose film on an RX5 Bolex at an f-stop of 5.6?

Can I set my Sekonic's shutter speed to 1/80th of a second for taking readings for the 133 shutter angle and prism? Also does anyone know if the Switar prime 10mm and zoom 16-100mm are marked in F-stops or T-Stops? F-stops right?

Good to know. Thanks for the advice. I should have shot more tests. I just didn't think I could get much detail in the woods at all without a full moon. I also kind of like a contrasty image when everything falls of quickly. It seems to make all the blacks look darker. I guess it then makes it all look like it might be on a set but I dont' know if that will be a terrible thing. I was also under the impression that it is best to shoot a stop or two obove wide open to get the sharpest image possible. And since I was going to do a 35mm blow up and the fact that I am using older equipment like the Switars that this would be the best way to get the best picture possible. Thanks.

If I am able to light the background area with a 2k Blonde underexposed by two stops why would I need to shoot nearly wide open? Do I not sacrifice sharpness? I am shooting labor day weekend and there will not be a moon out. I could see shooting wide open to get some background detail from that but since there will be very little light other than what I am using. I will be shooting in upstate NY where there will be little to no light pollution. I would like the 35mm blow up to be as clean and as sharp as possible. I'm learning so I just want to understand all the reasoning for this. On a night without any moonlight will I see much of anything even if my lens is wide open?

Forgive me if this doesn't make sense, but I want to rate the 7218 stock at 375ASA therefore overexposing by half a stop. I want to shoot everything at a 2.8/4.0 split. I know 40 ft candles would be normal then at 4.0. So I want my backlight to be at 80 ft candles and my key/fill to be 5 ft candles. Then I would print the final print down half a stop. This is a night scene so my ratio between backlight and key/fill will be 4 stops. Only two lights on our actor other than the lights from the car. But the scene will be foggy as well and I plan on lighting the trees in the background under 2 stops with a Blonde 2k with a 1/8 CTB gel on it. I'm using a Bolex with RX lenses. I just want to make sure I am shooting my film for the best possible blow up to 35mm with what I have available to me. Does this all make sense?

I am going to be shooting a night scene in two weeks. I have access to 3 650 watt Arris and a 2K Blonde. I'm shooting with 7218 at night with a SBM Super 16 bolex with a prime and zoom Switar lenses. Originally I wanted to light for an f-stop of 5.6 and overexpose the film by 2/3 stops. I wanted my backlight to be 1-stop overexposed and my key to be 3 stops underexposed. But I realized that I would need to have my backlight (650 watt Arri) about 8 feet from my actor so I was thinking of lighting at a 4.0 and overexposing by 1/2 stop instead. This way I could keep my backlight about 15 feet from my actor giving him more room in the scene allowing me to shoot wider shots. My prime's lowest f-stop is a 1.6 and my zoom is a 1.9. I'm trying to make my image as sharp as possible and at the same time attempting to suppress as much grain as possible witht the lights I have. I am using the Blonde with a 1/8 CTB on it to light the trees behind him in this scene that takes place at night. I am also using a Chimera softbox on a 650 Arriflex as the key and that is all. We will also have a smoke machine on set too. The scene has the actor digging a hole in the ground using the car lights as his light. So I wanted to then back that up a bit with another Arri to make it look like the car lights were lighting up more of the scene. Any opinions would be appreciated.

This was shot with 500T Vision film.

I want to try shooting some timelapse stars at night and I was wondering what kind of film to use. I have a wide angle lens and a prime that open to a 1.6 and 1.9 respectively. My plan was to shoot a stop above the widest opening to get the sharpest image. But I was thinking of using a slower film like 50D to get less grain in the image. I know there will be little to no light but I will be keeping the shutter open for seconds at a time so I thought this approach might work. Does anyone have any exerience shooting shots like this? I will be in the country with little to no light pollution in upstate NY.

The buildings will fill the shot mainly with the sky in between the buildings. Check this out: www.gettyimages.com/film Type in: "659-17 or 806-30" I'm trying to avoid the look of the 806-30 shot and get the look of the 659-17 shot. There is a lot more detail in the 659-17 shot. It looks like it was shot at a slower frame rate too. The cars on the ground are hard to see what when you do see them they do seem to zoom by. So I was thinking of trying to get an extra stop by shooting at 12 fps instead of 24. What are some good lenses that are fast and sharp when they are wide open? Are most primes set up to shoot wide open? Is there any benefit to shooting with a slower film and pushing the film stock? Probably not right? The 500T Vision 2 is probably most suitable for this situation.

I think this camera looks fantastic. I can easily imagine shooting with this camera with two P2 cards with a station set up with a laptop, hard drive and DVD burner. This way when one card is not in use dump the files to the hard drive and burn a DVD for back up. Not much different than having a film loader on set. I've been to a few informational sessions about this camera and people seem angry about the cards. I really don't understand why people get worked up. This camera actually has some life to it. As time goes on it becomes just as valuable because new cards will have more storage. But what about the lens and the 1/3" chip? How will it compare to the Varicam? The DVX100a footage looks great. I can only expect similar footage but with more resolution to play with. How does DVCPRO HD compare to the codec Sony uses for their cameras?

No, the lab has not. I wanted to know what I am talking about before I talked to them. Thanks!

I have a 10mm Switar and a zoom so I'm find there. The stuff I have shot with this lens looks really interesting. What kind of aberations could there be that I am not seeing?

The plan is to shoot from a friends rooftop in lower Manhattan. I'm not trying to get a beautifull wide skyline, just some generic looking buildings.

I'll have to look at the footage more closely. I see to remember it being about the same through the entire roll. I haven't been near anything that would produce x-rays (that I know of). What is shutter bounce? Does the shutter on the Bolex stick? This is home movie footage that I shot last summer. After the wedding I put the roll in my refrigerator for safe keeping. Would a light leak be more consistent? If I did not have the filter in all the way could that have caused this?

I guess this lens must fall within the boundaries that allow it to work alright with RX Bolex cameras? Maybe I would see a difference if the footage were blown up on a big screen?

I want to shoot some shots of the NYC skyline at night in real-time. I was thinking of shooting the skyline before the light in the sky is completely gone. I want to be able to see detail in the buildings and not just the lights from the buildings. Using the Vision 2 stock with a fast prime lens seems to be the way to go but I wanted to post here to get some advice.

I understand for the most part why I shouldn't use any lens but an RX but I have recently shot footage with this lens and the footage looks quite nice and sharp but with a very narrow depth of field. I originally thought the lens was a standard 25mm lens but I can only focus the lens a few inches from the camera so I thought it might be a macro lens. Could this macro effect be caused by the fact that it isn't an RX lens?

Here they are. The first is alright the second has a light haze over it. I pulled these from the mini-dv tape so it's a little tough to see. Where do you think this might have occurred?

I have a reflex SBM Bolex converted to Super16.

I just got back a batch of film from the lab. I had the negative transferred to mini-dv. One roll however was pulsing with bad frames every second or so. The frames looked extremely grainy. Could this be a light leak? I find this strange because only one of my rolls came back like this. The rest were fine. I was shooting with an Rex-5 Bolex. I thougt maybe the filter holder wasn't in or something but I thought that would give me a constant washout on all the frames not this strobing/pulsing effect. Could this have been a lab issue?

Is rating a filmstock at a lower ASA the same as overexposing it? I read American Cinematographer and I keep seeing people say that so I just wanted to check it out. Thanks!