So what you are saying is that a Nikkor 25mm is not a 25mm??
A 25mm lens on a 16mm camera will give a normal perspective no matter what make it is.
A 50mm lens on a 35mm camera will give a normal perspective no matter what make it is.
I don't really get what you are saying...The example you gave is true. A 50mm lens on a 16mm camera will be a telephoto. But that is not what we are talking about. The 24mm Nikkor lens that is wide on your SLR will look normal for the most part on a 16..
Normal is Normal for the format no matter if the lens is made for a still camera or for a movie camera.
Read the threads again.
Good Luck
Angenieux F1.9 8/64mm and F2.8 15-150mm
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
Listen to this and I wouldn't get information from wikipedia as a source. It's not credible. I put a 50mm lens on my K-3 and got a slight telephoto as expected and pretty much looked exactly as the zoom lens that comes with the camera. When I get my 24/25mm, it'll be exactly as my 25mm C mount lens on my Angeniux.A 25mm lens on a 16mm camera will give a normal perspective no matter what make it is.
Revelation: Just repeated ourselves over and over. Go out and try it and see for youself. How about this...normal lenses can be boring to begin with...
-
Evan Kubota
- Senior member
- Posts: 2565
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 9:04 am
- Location: FL
- Contact:
Sorry, somehow I got confused. I was thinking that because the frame size of 16mm is smaller than 35mm that a lens of a given focal length will produce a narrower field of view on 16mm than 35mm - which is true - but somehow forgot that no matter the size of the image circle (the format it was designed for) the field of view will always be the same in a given format for a given focal length.
Nevertheless, Nikkors that would be wide on 16mm are fairly expensive... I remember now that for my project I wanted S16 coverage even though I didn't recenter the lens mount, so I was looking at adapters to use Nikkors. The project will have a lot of fairly wide shots, so I wanted something that would be around 10mm. Obviously this is much wider in 35mm than 16mm, and expensive. I did look into the Peleng 8mm and a Pentax adapter, but my Takumars aren't in as good shape as my Nikkors. Now I have a Kinor with a 5.9 mm lens...
Nevertheless, Nikkors that would be wide on 16mm are fairly expensive... I remember now that for my project I wanted S16 coverage even though I didn't recenter the lens mount, so I was looking at adapters to use Nikkors. The project will have a lot of fairly wide shots, so I wanted something that would be around 10mm. Obviously this is much wider in 35mm than 16mm, and expensive. I did look into the Peleng 8mm and a Pentax adapter, but my Takumars aren't in as good shape as my Nikkors. Now I have a Kinor with a 5.9 mm lens...
Production Notes
http://plaza.ufl.edu/ekubota/film.html
http://plaza.ufl.edu/ekubota/film.html
Thank you very very much for your replies guys!
Since I also wanted to use prime lenses on the zc-1000 (and Beaulieu 6008s) I was already thinking of perhaps selling the 15-150. I have a m-mount adapter for my M-mount leica summicron 50 and 90mm lenses. And have a pentax adapter to c-mount for which I could buy telephoto lenses. So instead of using the 15-150 on the Fujica zc-1000 I could look for some takumars (135mm/150, 200MM?). I want to film Kitesurfing so a big telephoto lens would come in handy.
What do you guys think? Should I sell the 15-150 and look for still camera Pentax telephoto lens. Would it be a comparable or better image quality. And from the economic perspective; what would the 15-150 be woth and what would a good 35mm still photo lens (say 135 or 150 mm) cost. Or should I just keep the 15/150 and use it in the telephoto reach (F2.8 is not bad for 150mm).
Any comments on the f1.9 8-64mm? It's small and not so heavy compared to the Fujinon zoom that came with the zc-1000.
Since I also wanted to use prime lenses on the zc-1000 (and Beaulieu 6008s) I was already thinking of perhaps selling the 15-150. I have a m-mount adapter for my M-mount leica summicron 50 and 90mm lenses. And have a pentax adapter to c-mount for which I could buy telephoto lenses. So instead of using the 15-150 on the Fujica zc-1000 I could look for some takumars (135mm/150, 200MM?). I want to film Kitesurfing so a big telephoto lens would come in handy.
What do you guys think? Should I sell the 15-150 and look for still camera Pentax telephoto lens. Would it be a comparable or better image quality. And from the economic perspective; what would the 15-150 be woth and what would a good 35mm still photo lens (say 135 or 150 mm) cost. Or should I just keep the 15/150 and use it in the telephoto reach (F2.8 is not bad for 150mm).
Any comments on the f1.9 8-64mm? It's small and not so heavy compared to the Fujinon zoom that came with the zc-1000.
-
BK
- Senior member
- Posts: 1260
- Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 11:29 am
- Location: Malaysia, TRULY Asia
- Contact:
Re: Angenieux F1.9 8/64mm and F2.8 15-150mm
I have an Angenieux F1.2 6 to 80 zoom, and the Fujinon 10 times zoom from the ZC1000 which were tested on my Beaulieu 4008ZMII.Roel wrote:I'm looking for user opinions on the two Angenieux lenses. How good are they? Perhaps also comparing with the Fujinon (standard) zoom lens.
From my observations the Angenieux is definitely sharper, even wide open and was less prone to flair, but the colours are not as vibrant or contrasty like the EBC Fujinon.
Bill
PM me if you do decide to sell the 15-150.Roel wrote:
What do you guys think? Should I sell the 15-150 and look for still camera Pentax telephoto lens. Would it be a comparable or better image quality. And from the economic perspective; what would the 15-150 be woth and what would a good 35mm still photo lens (say 135 or 150 mm) cost. Or should I just keep the 15/150 and use it in the telephoto reach (F2.8 is not bad for 150mm).
-
steve hyde
- Senior member
- Posts: 2259
- Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 1:57 am
- Real name: Steve Hyde
- Location: Seattle
- Contact: