Fast lenses..

Soldato
Joined
1 Sep 2005
Posts
10,001
Location
Scottish Highlands
Like really fast lenses. Any idea how much any of these go for, and where one would look to pick one up?

Repro-Nikkor 85 mm f1.0
Mt. Prospect 90mm f1.0
Rodenstock XR-Heliogon 68mm f1.0
Nikon 35mm f0.9
Kowa 62mm f0.75
Rodenstock TV-Heliogon 42mm f0.75

Or any similar? Not looking to buy at the moment, but im just curious.
 
Surely they're nigh-on unusable wide open? Just reading about the DOF problems Kubrick had in Barry Lyndon with that Zeiss f/0.7 is enough to put me off.

Edit for a bit more substance:

John Alcott said:
The objective was to shoot these scenes exclusively by candlelight - that is, without a boost from any artificial light whatsoever. As I mentioned earlier, Stanley Kubrick and I had been discussing this possibility for years, but had not been able to find sufficiently fast lenses to do it. Stanley finally discovered three 50mm f/0.7 Zeiss still-camera lenses which were left over from a batch made for use by NASA in their Apollo moon-landing program. [...] But when you looked through this lens it appeared to have a fantastic range of focus, quite unbelievable. However, when you did a photographic test you discovered that it had no depth of field at all - which one expected anyway. So we literally had to scale this lens by doing hand tests from about 200 feet down to about 4 feet, marking every distance that would lead up to the 10-foot range. We had to literally get it down to inches on the actual scaling.

[...]

The point of focus was so critical and there was hardly any depth of field with that f/0.7 lens. My focus operator, Doug Milsome, used a closed-circuit video camera as the only way to keep track of the distances with any degree of accuracy. The video camera was placed at a 90-degree angle to the film camera position and was monitored by means of a TV screen mounted above the camera lens scale. A grid was placed over the TV screen and by taping the various artists' positions, the distances could be transferred to the TV grid to allow the artists a certain flexibility of movement, while keeping them in focus.

They're a nightmare requiring multiple people to keep things in focus even when you're directing actors and have shots planned out perfectly, I can't imagine what they'd be like trying to do it single-handed with a less cooperative subject—well, I can, and I imagine it would be possible.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom