Benjamin Reece

Yes. Love that analogy. Fully absorbed and "grokked" as they say in the software engineering world. Thank you David. Such a powerful piece of knowledge. 

Quote

As Karim points out, you are incorrect. Perspective / distortion / compression of a face has nothing to do with focal length, it had to with the camera to subject distance. Focal length just provides the field of view. So you can match camera distance and field of view between two formats and get the same perspective on a face in close-up, and what you'd mainly see is a difference in depth of field.

This is the magic quote and understanding I have been looking for, without knowing it. Mind blown. All these years without this understanding. Totally makes sense now that I hear/see it. 

So if I understand this correctly, it might feel like wider focal lengths distort the face more, but that is simply because the lens/sensor is moved closer to the human face to fill the frame then a more narrow focal length would need to. On a larger sensor with lets say larger resolution and higher pixel pitch, you could crop those between the two and it should almost exactly the same given the same optical design and external conditions. 

Thank you both for this clarity! It makes my 25MM vs 27MM master prime thread/question almost irrelevant given my concerns. 

In the context of being asked why he does not use zoom lenses, Bruno Delbonnel said in FDT June 2019, 

Quote

I always asked myself why a 27mm is much nicer than a 25mm which is very close? I don't have the answer but it is a nicer lens.

He also said when speaking about his journey to establishing his wide style
 

Quote

I always liked wide angles. If I could shoot an entire movie with a 27mm lens only, I would. I'd be happy to do it. But it's not really wide angle. In some ways, Amélie was a bit wider than that. We use the 25mm and the 18mm a lot, which I don't use much any-more. The wide angle has always been interesting for me.

I don't like long lenses because of the lack of depth of field. The background is usually soft. The character on screen is suddenly in a soft void were there is no connection with any environment.

This lack of environment seems wrong to me; it's just talking heads.

I entirely agree with Bruno. As I've shot thousands of hours of footage, with one lens at a time for periods of time, I've evolved to agree with this eye for storytelling over the years. Polanski seems to have the same eye as well as Bradford Young, Joshua James Richards, Chivo, Janusz kamiński, and many other modern DPs. Generally, I love the look of these filmmakers' work and aspire to reach their aesthetic in my own way. 

Questions for general storytelling

• Deakins recently told me on his forums, he would choose a 32MM catch-all, what would you choose, and why? Any specific lens? S4, Ultra, etc
• Would there be types of emotions or projects you would lean towards the wider 24/25, and some, you would lean towards the 35 end? 
• Do you see any general advantage for storytelling that a 25MM offers over 27MM other than a few degrees of FOV? Disadvantage being the rendering of the human face at close-ups. Any others? 

Questions for my situation

Following up on my last post, I recently acquired a crazy good deal on a 25MM Master Prime, I would have never purchased such a high-end lens except for the deal I got. I've shot extensively on 28, 24, and now I will be on the 25. 

• How sad should I be, that I am not sitting in this comfortable sweet spot of cinema history. And in fact, I am "stuck" in a compromise, without the "much nicer" 27? 
• Can I convince myself that a 25 MP (due to its increased DOF and rectilinear correction tech) may render facial character/close-up distortion as nicely as a 28 Ultra? ? 
• Or will I be forever unhappy and should I start the long journey of selling the MP while enjoying it, and start looking out for a single 28 Ultra, or 27 MP? 
   

TLDR:
Considering my preference for a 28mm-35MM look, 60-70 degree FOV for storytelling and my current ownership of a variety of 24-28MM still lenses (28/f2 Nikon AIS, 24/1.4 Sony GM, Rokinon 24/1.8) Atlas Anamorphic 40mm Orion and a pre-ordered 42mm Mercury, would you recommend I invest in a 25mm Master Prime lens to provide an alternative to the Atlases? Are there better alternatives considering a budget of about 15K for a single? Goal: to have the ultimate 1-2 stylistic single punch between the Orion and my new lens. 

More Background:
I've been involved in directing, moving from larger commercial productions to a more minimalist approach over the past 10 years. Currently, I direct 1-2 documentaries annually with a budget, operating with a compact crew and a single-lens kit. My Atlas Anamorphic 40mm Orion and a pre-ordered 42mm Mercury serve me well, but I am exploring the idea of adding a 25mm Master Prime lens to my toolkit. My real use case is documenting my family and my life. It's my legacy- and I want to be inspired as I do it. I have no problems carrying around a 5lb lens and hand focusing. I love it. 

My style leans heavily towards a 28mm field of view for storytelling, though I do appreciate/prefer 35mm look for portraiture (thus one reason for my love of anamorphic). But, if it comes down to choosing, my preference always leans towards field of view. This preference arises from the fact that I only carry one lens at a time, a method that enables my passion and streamlines my process. 35MM is not great for z-axis handheld movement.

Given this context, I am considering the 25mm Master Prime lens as a potential complement to my existing kit. I'm interested in hearing your insights and experiences with this lens. Specifically here are some questions: 

1. From my research Chivo prefers the 18-25 for portraiture medium/closeups in many of his seminal films while Deakins prefers the 32/40 (but he emphasizes "it depends" constantly) - personally, as a stylistic goal "I just want to create documentaries that look / feel like tree of life" - do you think this is the best lens on this goal given my own personal preferences noted above (35mm for close-ups/medium close-ups)- is it wide enough for z-axis movement on super 35? I have more FF experience on 24-28.
2. Is the focus throw heavy (bonus, compared to Atlas Orion) as I find the Orion a joy to pull but worried the MP will be heavier 
3. Can you mount screw in filters to the 114 from or is it clip on / Matte box only? 
4. Considering the price and the quality of the 25mm Master Prime lens, but also age- are there much better alternatives at a 15K price point? My personal instincts would be to look for other 32-40mm anamorphic options as many dislike the Orion look and I have limited experience 
5. Do you have a personal "if I owned one focal length this is what it would be" for S35 preference/alternative? 

Thank you for your guidance and expertise!

Benjamin Reece
bnjmn.org & deltree.com 

(p.s. I don't rent lenses to feel them out as it takes me a long time to soak in a lens- we become married and partners in style and vision over time- I'd rather buy and resell down the line if I have to)