@kankala Don't get too focused on the "stills" aspect of what I was talking about. I was simply using that as an illustration that so many of the things that get discussed here and elsewhere about what it takes to get "cinematic" images out of their camera aren't actually the most relevant factors. If they become irrelevant looking at a pause of a motion picture, anywhere in the course of the film, then odds are they're not "the answer", they're at best a smaller piece of the puzzle, perhaps.

I don't want to get into the whole "crop factor" debate here, but looking at few Red Epic operators, pretty much all of them have these fast (under f 1.5) lenses in their arsenal;

24 / 35 / 50 / 85

Considering the AOV of S35 vs GH2 16:9 mode, would these be close enough?

14 / 24 / 35/ 50

Looking at the Nikkor lens list, I would say that for "cinematic" feel one should try to get the good framing / color grading with Lumix glass for the wide end, and use 35 1.4 and 50 1.2 or 1.4 for the tele end. I don't see any fast Nikkor primes under 35mm.

Correctamente? :D

@Riker the speed of the lenses gives you room to stop-down to a better place. Those 1.4, 1.2, etc. lenses are going to look much better at 2.8 than they do fully-wide. You can get a 24mm and 28mm Nikkor that performs decent at this stop but, the Lumix and Noktors (budget allowing) preclude full-coverage, which may not be a consideration for everyone but we shouldn't forget the real investment with any camera package is the lenses.

Stops below 2 are generally going to fall into the completely unlit, at night, just hoping to get something and shouldn't, in most circumstances, be a target stop to live in. It's nice knowing your lens could go there if necessary but it doesn't represent a solution for getting "cinematic" or how actual movies are generally shot.

Much of the "cine like" aspects you're paying for are luxuries that don't necessarily have to do with the optics. Those IMAX action sequences for The Dark Knight Rises were mostly shot through medium-format stills lenses adapted to the 65mm camera system, sorta like what we're doing with 16mm and 35mm lenses and these cameras.

Personally, though it does negatively impact my options for anamorphic shooting, I have a lot of pause considering any lens these days that would have to sit unused in my bag if I wanted to Speed Boost. Just saying.

Oh, I'm kinda broke too, so that trumps any other consideration regarding lens purchase ;)

@stonebat

Befriend with more people. Borrow their lenses for free :) well.. almost free.

Hah! That's how I got a sack full of L-Series glass to shoot Sick Boy. My buddy has a serious investment in lenses for his 1D. I think that 85mm f/1.2L was worth more than all my lenses as a whole.

"Really, I won't scratch it, promise."

LOL, I did keep that promise though. For all exteriors where we had the camera (also a loaner from one of the exec producers) strapped to or inside a moving vehicle I stuck to the 7D's kit lens.

@BurnetRhoades

"the speed of the lenses gives you room to stop-down to a better place. Those 1.4, 1.2, etc. lenses are going to look much better at 2.8 than they do fully-wide."

Not always true. Some Contax lenses that start at 2.8 look better than their 1.4 counterparts at the same aperture, and the 50mm 1.7 looks better than the 1.4 at the same stop.

After downsizing lens collection, here's my manual focus lens set.

• SLR Magic 12mm 1.6
• SLR Magic 25mm 0.95
• Vivitar Komine 28mm 2.0 Close Focus FD
• Konica Hexanon 40mm 1.8 AR
• Canon FD 50mm 1.4
• Vivitar Komine 55mm 2.8 Macro AR

Total around $1500 including adapters.

Just curious @stonebat, how different are the SLR 25mm and Vivitar 28mm at f2.8 regarding "cinematic" (what the f*ck is this anyway, i mean "filmmaking wise") quality?

These are the lenses that I use the most.

• Tokina 11-16 2.8
• Pany 20 1.7
• Nikkor 28 2.8 Ais
• Nikkor 50 1.8 Ais
• Nikkor 105 2.5 Ai
• Nikkor 135 2.8 Ai

Bit heavy on the long end, but I found that I use long lenses a lot. These nikkors are very nice and sharp, sturdy, they cam be easily declicked and match nicely. Also, all of them having 52mm thread is very convenient.

What keeps them from being great cinematic lenses is a bit of breathing, but that's the case with most photographic lenses more or less. When used with anamorphic it is even more pronounced.

There is a nice pic of them all together hanging out.

What keeps them from being great cinematic lenses is a bit of breathing, but that's the case with most photographic lenses more or less. When used with anamorphic it is even more pronounced.

Anamorphic lenses breath. This is listed in the plus column, a defining look even, on Panavision's website.

I like nikkors and don't mind the breathing, only trying to be objective. If you compare them to any real cinema prime they do breathe and their front element extrudes while focusing, which is another pita for matteboxes and anything screwed in and fixed infront.

Maybe that comparison is not fair, since these are pristine photo lenses, but still, we are talking about using photo lenses for cinema, and I'm just pointing out things that should be taken into consideration.

...and lens breathing might actually be the new king of "things audiences don't give a shit about"... right after the current champion: Rolling Shutter.

hahahah, lol. THis little breathing as these nikkors have really should not bother anyone.