Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Just Notes.

You don't want to read these notes. No, believe me. You'll bonk your head against the computer when you fall asleep!

1080p has ironically lower compression with HVX
For those who like that kind of thing it's: 1080/24pA for the film look, presuming that your editor can strip out advanced pulldown (Avid can't).
But I think most people like the 720p look with the HVX. So ignore this note.

This is what I want to be paying (with shipping) for Canon lenses (I think):
Under $50 for 50mm f1.4 FD ($69 used at B&H)
Under $160 for 85mm F1.8 FD ($329 new for auto focus) [edit: I got one for under $100]
Under $350 [edit: $425 plus shipping] for 85mm F1.2 FD (over $1400 new for EF)
Under $50 for 28mm 2.8 FD (arbitrary price -- I have no idea what it's worth.)

Update: I bought a couple lenses off of Ebay. I still want a 1.4 but for $25 with shipping I got this 1.8 50mm. Maybe I should have just waited for a 1.4. I don't know. But also, just for weirdness, for $38 with shipping I got this very amusing 200mm. Kinda like an early birthday present for moi when we shoot Maduka in a long hero shot in the desert.

3 comments:

Chance Shirley said...

I never have figured out why fast 50mm lenses are so cheap. I'd really like a wide (18mm) fast lens for Stacey's digital SLR, but they are pricey...

Joshua James said...

I'm sorry, what? I was looking at the funny bunny . . .

Andrew Bellware said...

The 50mm seem a bit more... I dunno... "elegant" maybe... than the 18 or 22mm lenses. I know one of them wides can get you outta a jam though. I was thinking about picking up a cheap zoom (but slow, like 3.5 or... worse) that'll go to like a 22mm.

Josh -- you need lenses to SEE the fuzzy bunny! ;-)