40mm is my hero length, then 28 then 75. I have a Hollywood Pentax 28 that works at about 40mm on APS-C and back to 28mm with a speed booster. 75mm is when I use 50mm on APS-C
I like to change up my hero lens depending on the project. Lately, the Tokina 11-20mm has been my go to lens. There’s something about having to get close to the subject to get the shot that completely inspires me.
I learnt that lesson by watching my gf captures fantastic frames with the 50mm, and I struggled to make it work every second of using that focal length. My eyes see the world in 28mm and 40mm. I can struggle my way through others, but it's just a joy to return to those two.
Back in my photography days when I shot with Leicas the 28mm and 35 mm were my go to lenses. Unless I was in a crowd, the 28 was for inside and 35mm for outside I had a 50 but rarely used it. Over the past year I’ve been trying to make movies, I found using the blackmagic OG I can get away 90% of the time with the 28 and a 50, 10mm and 17mm accounting for the S16 crop factor although I do have a 7.5 and 50 mm I rarely use them… and thank you. I’ve learned a lot from your channel.🌞
I shot an experimental film recently using only two lenses. A 7artisans 12mm 2.8 for exteriors and a vintage Nikon NIKKOR Ai-S 35mm f/1.4 for interiors. Thanks the video, always informative.
I started photography in 1971 and always used that doubling theory (back then, for me, 24, 50, 100, etc) but I never thought to approach the "my personal vision" for field of view. This helped me a whole lot. Thank you. (Now I use 20, 40, 90 and 200.)
Most people don't even bother with the intellectual exercise, they just buy a standard zoom. I've often advocated the 2x and 1/2x methodology myself, but the modern world wants it all. I don't want it all, I want it simplified.
I started with a 50. I expanded to a 28 and 85. I ended up shooting on the 28 like 60% of the time, the 85 like 30% and the 50 about 10% 24 feels a bit wide, 100/105 feels a bit long. If you average between the 28 and 85 you'd get a 56... But even a 50 feels a bit long as a middle ground. Because I shoot wider more often, I grabbed a 45 and it has felt pretty dang good. My 3 are 28--45--85 and I've been loving the setup.
@ honestly, I make it work for both some how. I’m S35 I definitely use a 24 a lot as 35 on a still photo camera is definitely my desert island focal length. For still I shoot full frame and for video it’s pretty much all S35.
@ I agree. When I was quite new 20mm was the first lens I owned that I felt connected too. It took ages till I also finally shot with a 35 which was the second lens to just click with me. I come from a photojournalism background which naturally has me wanting to be close so the 50 is a great long lens for me. If I need longer I should probably be closer.
If you shoot APS-C, those new Sirui Aurora AF Primes are amazing for the cheap price! Honestly, they're pretty much just amazing, regardless. They actually have that 3D pop too, which is usually missing on cheap 3rd party lenses.
Don’t underestimate the power of having friends. My decision to shoot Nikon was largely dictated by the fact that a friend had a Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8. When I bought a 50mm f/1.8 we were amazed by the new possibilities. For several years we would constantly swap and share a 28mm f/1.4, a 50mm f/1.4, an 85mm f/1.4, and the 105mm f/2 defocus control. We doubled our budget and got to periodically use lenses we’d otherwise not purchase. I’m also not against having a smaller sensor body to introduce more range variety. A good APS-C sensor camera in the same mount extends the longer reach. And those bodies tend to be cheaper and smaller. I used a D7xxx and D750 for a number of years. Later a Z50 and a Z6ii. Old gear tends to be perfectly fine. In my opinion the only advantage of newer bodies is better autofocus and premium optics. Neither is necessary to produce good work.
24 over the 28 everytime. Just recently added a 35, but almost always cine prime hero on the 24. With 50 and 85 rounding out the kit. Only three lenses for the last couple years with just recently adding the fourth.
Dude this started off so well and I thought it was one of the most interesting observations anyone had made and actually perhaps had never made but by the end of the video how is it that we seem like we are back humping a 5 lens set. I guess maybe there is a reason why we have 16-35 24-70, 70-200 as the holy trinity in docs and why the 28-105 is maybe the best compromise if it’s one lens albeit a zoom. The fact is imo and perhaps yours that people do psychologically gravitate to a particular way of seeing the world that maps to a focal length. The 40mm is where most of us end up for reasons you state but the main reason is probably optical and practical and psychological and that is why the 35mm has also been so popular. Why? Simple I think.. a 40mm is as wide as you can go without creating distortion when being close enough for a typical close on a face and you don’t have to be in Timbuktu to get a wide. Our minds don’t like distraction and distortion particularly faces really feels unnatural. Here it’s maybe worth noting Roger Deakins aesthetic for naturalism. Maybe editing is where things really get specific. Editing is usually really about maintaining consistency across the edit and that is why a 40mm can work so long as the camera moves to shoot at appropriate distances. Like with three lenses there have to be three distinct different distances from the subject. Thats is usually not that easy but that’s kind of the trick imo. The same can be done I think with an 80mm which is oddly enough possibility what psychologically I see the world through but practically speaking is a tough gig because it means to need to be able to move around. A typical range probably works best imo as 3ft, 15ft 40ft away from the subject. For the 40mm which’s s you say is a great single option as the hero lens then maybe watch Son of Saul. Inspiring. As for wides I personally prefer to avoid at all cost close ups and distortion. I know many people live all that. Sure I get it. But imo a 14mm full frame is fantastic if it’s rectilinear and used as a wide in 2.35:1. Think the shining. Try to Keep the frame straight as you move and it’s fantastic. I have to admit my heart sank a little when you mentioned the work with nisi and you brought out their 40mm but it was a blip maybe and not the reason for the video at all. A genuinely thoughtful and original perspective that can go on forever. Thx for the thoughts and genuinely presented post.
The reason i brought up Nisi is because i dont know too many cheap cine lenses that even have a 40mm in their set. But also, i dont see how i ended up “humping a 5 lens set”, a makro & and an extreme wide were just options i was throwing in for someone that felt a three lens set would be too limiting.
When the Panasonic GF1 came out, I was obsessed with the 20mm f/1.7. That’s a 40mm fixed of view on 4/3s sensors. I sold all my lenses and bodies and forced myself to use just that focal length for a couple of years. One prime can do a lot. I think this is one reason why the Nikon Zf has been popular. You get the body and either a 28mm f/2.8 or the 40mm f/2. You don’t really need anything else. Low light sensor tech is so good that f/2.8 or f/2 is mostly fast enough. And the one lens and camera are so good looking that you are encouraged to constantly carry it. I also once experimented with primarily using an iPhone. That was pretty usable too when I attached an anamorphic lens. Ultimately I couldn’t get comfortable with holding a thin glass slab as my main camera. But an anamorphic adapter and an iPhone can also be a pretty versatile, basic tool.
I'm only a few minutes in but I really like this idea of starting with a hero lens and then building out from there. But I feel like what the focal length of the hero lens is depends on setting to setting. So for example, in a dynamic situation like action, I feel like my hero lens is probably between a 28 and 35. But in a more passive situation I feel like the hero lens is between a 35 and 50. And in a static situation I have found that that hero lens being between a 50 and 85. So in a static situation I e lecture - If 50 or 85 is my hero, then I find my 135 to be my close up. And then a 35 to be my wide. In a dynamic setting like capturing action, my 28 or 35 depending on my mood is my main. And then I'll have a wide angle at maybe between 16 and 18. And occasionally I might pair it tight shot with a 55. And in a passive situation, if I've got my 40 or 50 as my hero. I'll have my 85 or 100 as my tight. And 20 or 24 as my wide.
You put into words what my intuition has been nagging me about … Been cramming other people’s “standard” focal range into my head ….. I straight up loathe 50mm. It makes me feel claustrophobic. But 40mm, had no idea that was a sweet spot for me until recently. But always known I’ve loved 24 when up in the action. Definitely has a feel to it.
My hero is a 50. The second native lens I got was a 28. Love it. After that, I got an 85 and 20(viltrox). I feel very happy with my kit. With the math, the 28 should have been a 24, and the 85 should have been a 105, but I find that 85 already feels too tight, I couldn't imagine a 105.
Ok. I've read some of y'all comments, maybe I haven't shot enough, but i went to b&h in new york and i got my hands on the director's viewfinder-both the cheap and the Alam Gordon', I tried to look through the different focal lengths to acquaint myself with "how i see the world", but i just couldn't get there. Maybe I just haven't spent enough time with it. Maybe. So now I'm wondering, how do you really go about finding your Hero Focal? For lack of a better term? Thank you.
28mm is the widest I usually go but it's also the lens I use the most (on full frame, not S35). You don't actually have to go wider than your hero lens.
for the last year i''ve pretty much only shot pictures with a 28 and a 58 the problem with using them for video is that the 58 is a helios and i would like to have something with a bit less character for regular use, how ironic
Hey Justin! A pleasure to see another lovely presentation from you. Thanks !! "Our thoughts"? (1) it's expensive to see your video's; I always feel like buying something new.... :-( ! (2) Your "hero-lens" theory is kinda cool but also kind of weird: are'nt we supposed to see (frame) the way we want to see/frame (depending on the scene and what we want to include or not ) rather than how we "actually" see ( our eyes usually focus on a center object and the rest is peripheral ) !? (3) The 24,40 and 100mm shots of you improvising frantically at the piano :-) are nicely decorated ( a tree in the background )!! So, merry Xmas to you and best wishes from over seas! Mike
🤣 it was a an 85mm not a 100, but who's counting? In regards to question 2, i believe we're still saying the same thing. They shot 1917 on a 40mm, the entire movie, but there were a LOT of wide establishing shots in the that film. You can go wide and tight on any focal length. food for thought
Sorry if you mentioned this already. But I forgot to ask where is a good place to find an eyepiece viewfinder that you showed us in this video? Thanks.
Just math. Mulitply your “hero” or standard focal length by the squeeze factor. 40mm at a 1.5x anamorphic squeeze would be a 60mm in the anamorphic world. When i had the Aivascope my lens set was a 40, 60, & 90mm
I think I'm gonna pick up one of those directors' viewfinders. I have a Voigtlander 40mm f2 pancake lens that I love. I'm not sure if I would make that my "hero" lens though. I also love the 100-135mm range. So maybe a 20 or 24, a 40, 85, and 105 or 135.
oh man i forgot! i could have included that in the video. I shot a movie using the Aivascope and the voigtlander 40mm pancake! LOL, see that 40mm haunts me!
@@JustinPhillip I bought it to use with an anamorphic Sankor 5E scope and a Rapido FVD. Kept it cause it's just a good lens. Although, I didn't feel that way with the 58mm Voigtlander.
Great video. I completely agree! I always see people trying to force themselves to shoot on focal lengths just because other people say they are standard. I’m very much a believer in “Find your own way”. BTW: what slate app are you using on your iPad?
For S35 format : 28 T 1.4 >> 42 equivalent. Then 22 T 1.8. Get that one. There's no way I go straight to >> 14. Up, 46 T 2.4 not a >> 56. I'm sticking with people, I don't play basketball on a field.
My left eye has a focal length of 75mm-ff, my right eye field of view is 36mm-ff… that’s my director’s view finder - 😂, but I think in the 50mm space, and take vacations with a 19mm-ff, go figure.
Justin, thanks for pointing that out. I will start trying to figure out what my hero lens is. **RANT ON** On another point, as a certifiable old fart and someone old enough to remember testing vacuum tubes at the grocery store, I would like to point out that analog tech is still tech. Using a director's viewfinder is using tech. Lighting a campfire is still tech. Technology is just the application of verifiable (could be scientific) knowledge to solve practical problems. Currently the tech-of-the-day happens to be digital. I remember when it wasn't. You may live long enough to see it become something else (maybe quantum?). We would be lost without tech, language is tech. **RANT OFF** BTW thank you for your usually careful use of language. Much appreciated.
I can count on one hand how many times a client requested a specific focal length. And it was never one that i didnt have. In other words, it was a cliché focal length. Btw, anytime a client starts making requests like that, that is a perfect time to start doing rentals. My days of catering gear to clients is long gone.
Thanks for watching! If you found it helpful, don’t forget to SUB for more unique vids like this one www.youtube.com/@JustinPhillip?sub_confirmation=1
Just past 50mm for me! Once we get to 55-60, it starts to feel like we’re connecting with the character so much more!
40mm is my hero length, then 28 then 75. I have a Hollywood Pentax 28 that works at about 40mm on APS-C and back to 28mm with a speed booster. 75mm is when I use 50mm on APS-C
I like to change up my hero lens depending on the project. Lately, the Tokina 11-20mm has been my go to lens. There’s something about having to get close to the subject to get the shot that completely inspires me.
such a unique perspective to hear on TH-cam. Great channel.
thank you
35 - hero , 85 and 24mm are my go tos. I like 135mm also but it's very niche
I learnt that lesson by watching my gf captures fantastic frames with the 50mm, and I struggled to make it work every second of using that focal length.
My eyes see the world in 28mm and 40mm. I can struggle my way through others, but it's just a joy to return to those two.
Back in my photography days when I shot with Leicas the 28mm and 35 mm were my go to lenses. Unless I was in a crowd, the 28 was for inside and 35mm for outside I had a 50 but rarely used it. Over the past year I’ve been trying to make movies, I found using the blackmagic OG I can get away 90% of the time with the 28 and a 50, 10mm and 17mm accounting for the S16 crop factor although I do have a 7.5 and 50 mm I rarely use them… and thank you. I’ve learned a lot from your channel.🌞
Thank YOU 🙌🏼
Great watch! Ty for making this vid
you bet!
I shot an experimental film recently using only two lenses. A 7artisans 12mm 2.8 for exteriors and a vintage Nikon NIKKOR Ai-S 35mm f/1.4 for interiors. Thanks the video, always informative.
I started photography in 1971 and always used that doubling theory (back then, for me, 24, 50, 100, etc) but I never thought to approach the "my personal vision" for field of view. This helped me a whole lot. Thank you. (Now I use 20, 40, 90 and 200.)
Nice! 🙌🏼
Most people don't even bother with the intellectual exercise, they just buy a standard zoom. I've often advocated the 2x and 1/2x methodology myself, but the modern world wants it all. I don't want it all, I want it simplified.
I started with a 50. I expanded to a 28 and 85.
I ended up shooting on the 28 like 60% of the time, the 85 like 30% and the 50 about 10%
24 feels a bit wide, 100/105 feels a bit long.
If you average between the 28 and 85 you'd get a 56... But even a 50 feels a bit long as a middle ground.
Because I shoot wider more often, I grabbed a 45 and it has felt pretty dang good.
My 3 are 28--45--85 and I've been loving the setup.
Thank for great idea! I definitely gonna use this method! 🙏
The 24mm and 50mm if i were allowed two lenses, 40mm if it has to be one. 105mm if i can have a third.
Solid
20, 35 and 50 for me. I’ve often dubbed this my storytelling kit.
for super 35?
@ honestly, I make it work for both some how. I’m S35 I definitely use a 24 a lot as 35 on a still photo camera is definitely my desert island focal length.
For still I shoot full frame and for video it’s pretty much all S35.
@@Alexratson I am with you then. especially if you move the camera. the 20mm is perfect for that
@ I agree. When I was quite new 20mm was the first lens I owned that I felt connected too. It took ages till I also finally shot with a 35 which was the second lens to just click with me.
I come from a photojournalism background which naturally has me wanting to be close so the 50 is a great long lens for me. If I need longer I should probably be closer.
I use a zoom lens because I don't have the budget for fast primes.
My dream kit would include a character filled 21mm, 40mm, and 85mm.
If you shoot APS-C, those new Sirui Aurora AF Primes are amazing for the cheap price! Honestly, they're pretty much just amazing, regardless. They actually have that 3D pop too, which is usually missing on cheap 3rd party lenses.
Don’t underestimate the power of having friends. My decision to shoot Nikon was largely dictated by the fact that a friend had a Nikkor 80-200 f/2.8. When I bought a 50mm f/1.8 we were amazed by the new possibilities. For several years we would constantly swap and share a 28mm f/1.4, a 50mm f/1.4, an 85mm f/1.4, and the 105mm f/2 defocus control. We doubled our budget and got to periodically use lenses we’d otherwise not purchase.
I’m also not against having a smaller sensor body to introduce more range variety. A good APS-C sensor camera in the same mount extends the longer reach. And those bodies tend to be cheaper and smaller. I used a D7xxx and D750 for a number of years. Later a Z50 and a Z6ii.
Old gear tends to be perfectly fine. In my opinion the only advantage of newer bodies is better autofocus and premium optics. Neither is necessary to produce good work.
24 over the 28 everytime. Just recently added a 35, but almost always cine prime hero on the 24. With 50 and 85 rounding out the kit. Only three lenses for the last couple years with just recently adding the fourth.
Thank you very much. Fabulous advice.
🙌🏼
Rocking the sigma 24, 40 and Sony 85 1.4 here with 16-35 and 70-200 as speciality lenses in creative or limited cases. Thanks for the video!
Dude this started off so well and I thought it was one of the most interesting observations anyone had made and actually perhaps had never made but by the end of the video how is it that we seem like we are back humping a 5 lens set. I guess maybe there is a reason why we have 16-35 24-70, 70-200 as the holy trinity in docs and why the 28-105 is maybe the best compromise if it’s one lens albeit a zoom. The fact is imo and perhaps yours that people do psychologically gravitate to a particular way of seeing the world that maps to a focal length. The 40mm is where most of us end up for reasons you state but the main reason is probably optical and practical and psychological and that is why the 35mm has also been so popular. Why? Simple I think.. a 40mm is as wide as you can go without creating distortion when being close enough for a typical close on a face and you don’t have to be in Timbuktu to get a wide. Our minds don’t like distraction and distortion particularly faces really feels unnatural. Here it’s maybe worth noting Roger Deakins aesthetic for naturalism. Maybe editing is where things really get specific. Editing is usually really about maintaining consistency across the edit and that is why a 40mm can work so long as the camera moves to shoot at appropriate distances. Like with three lenses there have to be three distinct different distances from the subject. Thats is usually not that easy but that’s kind of the trick imo. The same can be done I think with an 80mm which is oddly enough possibility what psychologically I see the world through but practically speaking is a tough gig because it means to need to be able to move around. A typical range probably works best imo as 3ft, 15ft 40ft away from the subject. For the 40mm which’s s you say is a great single option as the hero lens then maybe watch Son of Saul. Inspiring. As for wides I personally prefer to avoid at all cost close ups and distortion. I know many people live all that. Sure I get it. But imo a 14mm full frame is fantastic if it’s rectilinear and used as a wide in 2.35:1. Think the shining. Try to Keep the frame straight as you move and it’s fantastic. I have to admit my heart sank a little when you mentioned the work with nisi and you brought out their 40mm but it was a blip maybe and not the reason for the video at all. A genuinely thoughtful and original perspective that can go on forever. Thx for the thoughts and genuinely presented post.
The reason i brought up Nisi is because i dont know too many cheap cine lenses that even have a 40mm in their set. But also, i dont see how i ended up “humping a 5 lens set”, a makro & and an extreme wide were just options i was throwing in for someone that felt a three lens set would be too limiting.
When the Panasonic GF1 came out, I was obsessed with the 20mm f/1.7. That’s a 40mm fixed of view on 4/3s sensors. I sold all my lenses and bodies and forced myself to use just that focal length for a couple of years. One prime can do a lot. I think this is one reason why the Nikon Zf has been popular. You get the body and either a 28mm f/2.8 or the 40mm f/2. You don’t really need anything else. Low light sensor tech is so good that f/2.8 or f/2 is mostly fast enough. And the one lens and camera are so good looking that you are encouraged to constantly carry it.
I also once experimented with primarily using an iPhone. That was pretty usable too when I attached an anamorphic lens. Ultimately I couldn’t get comfortable with holding a thin glass slab as my main camera. But an anamorphic adapter and an iPhone can also be a pretty versatile, basic tool.
I'm only a few minutes in but I really like this idea of starting with a hero lens and then building out from there. But I feel like what the focal length of the hero lens is depends on setting to setting. So for example, in a dynamic situation like action, I feel like my hero lens is probably between a 28 and 35. But in a more passive situation I feel like the hero lens is between a 35 and 50. And in a static situation I have found that that hero lens being between a 50 and 85.
So in a static situation I e lecture - If 50 or 85 is my hero, then I find my 135 to be my close up. And then a 35 to be my wide.
In a dynamic setting like capturing action, my 28 or 35 depending on my mood is my main. And then I'll have a wide angle at maybe between 16 and 18. And occasionally I might pair it tight shot with a 55.
And in a passive situation, if I've got my 40 or 50 as my hero. I'll have my 85 or 100 as my tight. And 20 or 24 as my wide.
Man...i love that Leica 40 c...i know that's not the subject here but...I used it for more than 20 years and love it like no other...lol
Same! Lol i think it uses its tiny size to win you over at first 😂
You put into words what my intuition has been nagging me about …
Been cramming other people’s “standard” focal range into my head ….. I straight up loathe 50mm. It makes me feel claustrophobic. But 40mm, had no idea that was a sweet spot for me until recently.
But always known I’ve loved 24 when up in the action. Definitely has a feel to it.
💯
Pucker ..🔥🔥once again came away from your video with food for thought and a little bit more educated .. thanks fella 💪👊💯
Thank you! 🙌🏼
My hero is a 50. The second native lens I got was a 28. Love it. After that, I got an 85 and 20(viltrox). I feel very happy with my kit. With the math, the 28 should have been a 24, and the 85 should have been a 105, but I find that 85 already feels too tight, I couldn't imagine a 105.
The unexpected scatting at 5:15 really completes this video
🤣 was hoping that make someone laugh
So accurate, so perceptive.
🙏🏼
Ok. I've read some of y'all comments, maybe I haven't shot enough, but i went to b&h in new york and i got my hands on the director's viewfinder-both the cheap and the Alam Gordon', I tried to look through the different focal lengths to acquaint myself with "how i see the world", but i just couldn't get there. Maybe I just haven't spent enough time with it. Maybe.
So now I'm wondering, how do you really go about finding your Hero Focal? For lack of a better term?
Thank you.
I have a set of vintage nikor lenses I’ve had forever
28 2.8 50 1.4 and 100 2.8
As a 85mm vision guy I feel heard and respected 🙂↕️
35,85 and 100-400 for myself. 15mm fish eye for specialty and skate boarding or underwater
28mm is the widest I usually go but it's also the lens I use the most (on full frame, not S35). You don't actually have to go wider than your hero lens.
My hero is 85mm 1.8x anamorphic. The kit consist of a 150mm 1.6x and a 35mm 1.6x
When i used to own the Aivascope my favorite on that one was the Leica 60mm
for the last year i''ve pretty much only shot pictures with a 28 and a 58 the problem with using them for video is that the 58 is a helios and i would like to have something with a bit less character for regular use, how ironic
Something with less character for corporate
I like this. Thanks
Thank you!
So I should get the Blazers then?
😂
😂🤷🏼♂️
@@JustinPhillip LMAO but thank you for this actually informative video. Thinking about the hero lens is a new perspective for me now.
Hey Justin! A pleasure to see another lovely presentation from you. Thanks !! "Our thoughts"?
(1) it's expensive to see your video's; I always feel like buying something new.... :-( !
(2) Your "hero-lens" theory is kinda cool but also kind of weird: are'nt we supposed to see (frame) the way we want to see/frame
(depending on the scene and what we want to include or not ) rather than how we "actually" see ( our eyes usually focus on a center object and the rest is peripheral ) !?
(3) The 24,40 and 100mm shots of you improvising frantically at the piano :-) are nicely decorated ( a tree in the background )!! So, merry Xmas to you and best wishes from over seas! Mike
🤣 it was a an 85mm not a 100, but who's counting? In regards to question 2, i believe we're still saying the same thing. They shot 1917 on a 40mm, the entire movie, but there were a LOT of wide establishing shots in the that film. You can go wide and tight on any focal length. food for thought
My go to lens is 20-35-50-180 on DX sensors.
Sorry if you mentioned this already.
But I forgot to ask where is a good place to find an eyepiece viewfinder that you showed us in this video?
Thanks.
amzn.to/4gcWcGt
@
Thank you!
Now this is also spherical, how will an anamorphic lens affect our Hero Focal? Seeing that we kinda see wider than taller in life.
Just math. Mulitply your “hero” or standard focal length by the squeeze factor. 40mm at a 1.5x anamorphic squeeze would be a 60mm in the anamorphic world. When i had the Aivascope my lens set was a 40, 60, & 90mm
~27/28/29 , 65mm and 14 or 21mm
21mm, 35mm and 75/85mm for me.
Question, regarding the premise the less technology the better - would the same work when tried with zoom lens?
Yea one zoom is also a solid option. Especially for documentary
Hello. What was the app you were using on your iPad that shows your details of your lens?
Digislate
How do you feel about the Nisi flare? I've just been using them on a job and I really wasn't a fan.
Formal test coming soon. The tuned flare was really nice.
@@JustinPhillip Looking forward to seeing the results
I think I'm gonna pick up one of those directors' viewfinders. I have a Voigtlander 40mm f2 pancake lens that I love. I'm not sure if I would make that my "hero" lens though. I also love the 100-135mm range. So maybe a 20 or 24, a 40, 85, and 105 or 135.
oh man i forgot! i could have included that in the video. I shot a movie using the Aivascope and the voigtlander 40mm pancake! LOL, see that 40mm haunts me!
@@JustinPhillip I bought it to use with an anamorphic Sankor 5E scope and a Rapido FVD. Kept it cause it's just a good lens. Although, I didn't feel that way with the 58mm Voigtlander.
Great video. I completely agree! I always see people trying to force themselves to shoot on focal lengths just because other people say they are standard. I’m very much a believer in “Find your own way”.
BTW: what slate app are you using on your iPad?
Thanks! DigiSlate is the app
I need that device 😮
Keep in mind you can crop to get Inbetween focal lengths.
mmmmm, not quite the same as a true focal length. Whatever lens you’re shooting on doesnt magically change with a crop
For S35 format : 28 T 1.4 >> 42 equivalent.
Then 22 T 1.8. Get that one. There's no way I go straight to >> 14.
Up, 46 T 2.4 not a >> 56. I'm sticking with people, I don't play basketball on a field.
What focal length is the most romantic?
Everyones idea of romantic is different as well.
40mm is mine too :D
Im tired of being tricked into learning 😂😂 wheres the drama, i was waiting for a gun in the background 😅😂😂
😂 smh
@ 😂
Interesting🧠
My hero is 40mm too
My left eye has a focal length of 75mm-ff, my right eye field of view is 36mm-ff… that’s my director’s view finder - 😂, but I think in the 50mm space, and take vacations with a 19mm-ff, go figure.
There is no hero focal length. There is only the vision you see in your mind and then you just kinda know which lens to pick for the shot.
Okay 🤷🏼♂️
i never had a 50mm shot in all my life. nor did i had a 50mm lens. always lower or way higher
I'm constantly working with 35, 50, and 90 as my go-to lenses. But if I think about the lenses I'm happier with it's probably more 50, 90, 135.
My perfect lens set:
Canon FD 24 2.8
Canon FD 35 2.8
Canon FD 50 1.4
Canon FD 35-105 3.5
And all of these lenses I got for maddddd cheap
K35 style
Justin, thanks for pointing that out. I will start trying to figure out what my hero lens is. **RANT ON** On another point, as a certifiable old fart and someone old enough to remember testing vacuum tubes at the grocery store, I would like to point out that analog tech is still tech. Using a director's viewfinder is using tech. Lighting a campfire is still tech. Technology is just the application of verifiable (could be scientific) knowledge to solve practical problems. Currently the tech-of-the-day happens to be digital. I remember when it wasn't. You may live long enough to see it become something else (maybe quantum?). We would be lost without tech, language is tech. **RANT OFF** BTW thank you for your usually careful use of language. Much appreciated.
Good point!
Who else clicked on this video because you thought this was Diplo?
🙈
50 mm is the worst lens to use. It's a very difficult lens to shoot.
Uncomfortable, because it forces to choose and select. The results however are often less boring than the easy focal lengths around 35mm.
6, 12 and 25 for me. Just kidding.
😅
What if your client has their own idea of what they want ? No business minded artist will think it such limited mind set
I can count on one hand how many times a client requested a specific focal length. And it was never one that i didnt have. In other words, it was a cliché focal length. Btw, anytime a client starts making requests like that, that is a perfect time to start doing rentals. My days of catering gear to clients is long gone.
4:3 what is this 😂
it's called no space! 🤣
In my experience 18-55, 55-200 and 150-600mm provide sufficient coverage, weirdly enough
😂
0:36 wtf was that? are you one of these weirdos who enjoys dog mask bondage gear?
🥱