Thread: Cooke Announces Prototype Panchro/i 65mm at IBC

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    135
    Just curious, why all the love for the 40? Does it look better than a 50? more "normal"?
    Scarlet-X #1510 "Brigitte Bardot"

    "When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down “happy”. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment. I told them they didn’t understand life." ~ John Lennon

    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12 Cooke were our flagship set of lenses for many years. 
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    588
    Back in the 1990′s we used Cooke S2/3 rehoused with PL mount by Van Diemen, then we moved to Cooke S4. Cooke S4 lenses went very well with film cameras for their special look, passed smoothly into the digital era with the Red One camera and became even more popular once Arri Alexa was out.
    http://www.dnkarentals.com/cooke_s4/

    We also have a few Cooke zooms and we will have more sets next year stay tuned

    David Namir
    Israel
    www.dnkarentals.com
    +972-50-7753000
    gdv@actcom.co.il
    davidnamir@gmail.com
    Skype: echinopsis
    David Namir
    Israel
    www.dnkarentals.com

    +972-50-7753000
    gdv@actcom.co.il
    davidnamir@gmail.com
    Skype: echinopsis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member Stephen Williams's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by William Graydon View Post
    Just curious, why all the love for the 40? Does it look better than a 50? more "normal"?

    35 is normal for S35 .
    Epic M owner
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Robert Horwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,252
    The 40mm is my Favourite around lens on the s2/3 speed panchros. I have had a deposit on the 135 i/panchro for maybe 8 months so should be high up the line to get one, soon as it comes in I'll post.
    EPIC M & X / RED MX / ALEXA .

    "If you want to be free just be free, do not ask anyone.
    You must have a hypothesis of your own fate and follow it without submitting yourself and by ignoring the circumstances". Andrei Tarkovsky.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member Tom.Wong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    New York/New Jersey
    Posts
    1,955
    i think it's something magical with the compression of the 40 mm. it's just very aesthetically pleasing, and feels very close to what the human eye sees, but ... better :)
    Local 600 IATSE Digital Imaging Technician
    Phantom Certified Technician
    Da Vinci Resolve Colorist
    Scratch Lab Operator

    https://vimeo.com/41679679
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member Timur Civan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,229
    Quote Originally Posted by William Graydon View Post
    Just curious, why all the love for the 40? Does it look better than a 50? more "normal"?
    Its intimate. Its like normal view, but that extra little bit makes you feel like you are leaning in to listen more closely.... at least that what the 40mm seems like to me.
    Director Of Photography
    RED Epic M - Fujinon Cabrio 19-90 T2.9 - Oconnor 2060 + accesories
    www.TstopCinema.com
    Timurcivan@gmail.com
    9175894424
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    26
    In my personal -non scientific- opinion, yes 40 is more "normal". Bah! It's the only "normal", being the 50 just slightly tele and the 35 just slightly wide.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    I am confused how anyone can be anything others than very causal in saying 'normal'...

    Unless we know..

    Imager size
    Screen size
    And assumed audience distance

    You can shoot on a UP 8r and make it look normal..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lindsay View Post
    I am confused how anyone can be anything others than very causal in saying 'normal'...

    Unless we know..

    Imager size
    Screen size
    And assumed audience distance

    You can shoot on a UP 8r and make it look normal..
    I'm pretty sure everyone understood that my question was very casual...I was simply wondering what attracted people to the 40 so that I could have some sort of baseline when looking through one myself.
    Scarlet-X #1510 "Brigitte Bardot"

    "When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down “happy”. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment. I told them they didn’t understand life." ~ John Lennon

    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    26
    For "normal" you mean same perspective rendering like human eyes. You may know that wides distorsion get things in the rear looks like they are further and the teles the contrary, they make the rear and the front looks like in one plane. For normal you mean that the perspective reminds the same. It's a matter of perspective, not a matter of pict size.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts