Thoughts on “House” Finale

Vincent:

Where can we find more explanation or a list (if you will) to some of the lenses that work well on the 5D as “video lenses”, and by that I mean DSLR lenses that are meant to be used with video and not just still imagery. I’ve used the 70-200m 2.8 that you mentioned above and now I find myself looking for other solutions. Specially zoom lenses, very hard to understand which can be better suited for video.

Is there a definite lens list? I swear some POVs are very familiar… like 50L, 35L – wide open, of course

I think they used most if not all of the L-primes.

Vincent: Can your statement 3 above (about lighting) be re-stated as, “dynamic range is about the same but the amount of light needed is less by one or two stops?”

lighting in that episode was key and goes to show that the 5D can hold up on a major production as long as all other filmmaking principles are followed. (ie. lighting!) we have seen some great things that the 5D can do in low light, but in this case, HOUSE did everything the same in terms of large scale production, then just swapped the camera to the 5D. it looked great.

The show was incredible…I mentioned this on other blogs/forums and I’ll def say it again

I already own a 5DMKII and this makes me wanna go out and buy another for the fact of…how good they are, how small and how cheap

I think the awesome Vincent and Greg proved…theres no excuses anymore, get out there and start shooting some amazing stuff

Cinema lenses have a couple of special features. First is that the aperture marking are in T-stops. The difference is that a T-Stop of 2.0, is an aperture of 2.0 with a theoretical lens that doesn’t darkens at all. So a real lens might have a marking of 2.1 or 2.2. That means that at 2.0 of physical aperture, it lets as much light as a perfect lens at 2.0. So, if you use the same film stock, you can get exactly the same exposure with different cameras and lenses by using the same T-stops.
As was previously said, not only is necessary a large progressive throw in the focus ring, it has to have precision markings for distance (i.e. feets and meters). Why, because the actors have set markings of where to stand, and the focus puller sets the markings on the lens for each scene with great care and precision. If the actor hits the markings, the focus is perfect. Canon EF lenses use a slipping servo to drive the focus, so you don’t really have precision marking nor slow throw.
Other problem is that it might change the FOV as you change focus. This is not that important in a photographic lens, but it’s not nice in a motion picture.
Another problem is with zoom lenses. When you zoom a lens, it might slightly change the focus plane as you zoom. Again, not a problem for a photographer, but not good for a cinema lens.
Now think what I said about the focus marking in a zoom that has focus shifting when zooming.
Or one that doesn’t exactly keeps its aperture while focusing. Or a lens that does keep its aperture while focusing but slightly changes its luminance.
As you see, a cinema lens designer has to take a lot more issues in account when doing a cinema lens. And that’s also why a cinema zoom lens is so expensive. I’m sure that scale of economics is a big cost factor. But it does take a lot more factors to design and build a cinema lens.

I believe that the Zeiss/ARRI “junior” lenses are now available for the Canon mount. Not just the ZF style Zeiss lenses, but the real video lenses with T-stops, precise focus and the like.

Vincent,
Thanks for you last two posts about the season finale of House. I think it’s awesome that DP Gale Tatersal decided to use the 5d for this episode. It showcases what the camera is truly capable of and it proves that the technology in a relatively inexpensive camera can go toe to toe with the big gun 35mm cinema cameras.
However, I think you hit a couple of major points that I think are often glazed over by most.
You mention that regardless of the 5D’s capability to produce fantastic quality in low light, you still need to light carefully. Attention to detail with lighting and composition are imperative to producing good results. No matter how good the camera, the quality of the end product is based largely on what you (the user) do with that camera.
Secondly, I love that you pointed out that the season finale of House cost more than the shooting of a regular episode. True, there were more special effects and extras. But, I think it is often overlooked that the production of a large shoot is still expensive!!! Any high quality, high production shoot is going to cost an incredible amount of money. The use of the 5D on House wasn’t done to save coin. It was done to prove what it’s capable of. I think it’s great that D-SLR’s are now HD video capable. It opens up the world of video to so many more users. The cost of entry into video is now down to a couple of thousand dollars. (Incredible considering what that cost used to be.) But, the cost of producing professional quality results (like this episode of House) will always cost an exorbitant amount of cash.
I think there are some out there who believe that the new HD capable DSLR’s are the magic bullet that will drive the cost of high production video down so low, that any Joe off the streets will be able to produce the same results for a fraction of the cost. Simply not true. I think you made that point very clear.
To me, the amazing part of this whole DSLR- HD video revolution is the fact that it opens the technology to so many more users. But more importantly (as you noted) this technology allows for a variety of shots that one could never have obtained before. Due to it’s light weight and small size, one is able to put a camera where they never would have ever dreamt of taking a 35mm cinema rig.
Enough of my ramblings and I apologize if I come off a little long winded. Thanks so much for these recent postings. I think your posts and commentary really “hit the nail on the head” here Vincent.
And thanks for the time and effort you put into your blog. I love your insights and openness to sharing your knowledge.
Cheers.- Ian Coble

this was an awesome episode, it’s good to see that the TV and movies are using new methods and workflows to tell their story. can’t wait to see where all this DSLR videography is going.

This is a great moment, as you’ve said. I’ve watched 2x feature films shot only with one (pro) camera, because that’s all the producers could afford.
The 5DII has not yet been picked up by the serious film world, but as new lenses become available, this will surely change.