[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Eclair Cameras: angenieux 16-44

The Angie 17 - 68 will just manage to cover S-16. It isn't though, in my opinion, sharp enough for blowup to 35mm with modern color film stocks. In color tests that I ran on 7245, I found that at T2.8, wide shots didn't seem sharp. Extreme close-ups weren't awful - but not "Zeiss" crisp (this test was viewed projected in S-16, not blown up). I once used this lens to make some close-ups in S-16 B&W that was blown up to 35mm and these shots looked ok intercut with shots made with sharp primes, but B&W negative is inherently less sharp than modern color films, and so I assume that B&W is more forgiving of a softer lens --- (Plus-X negative and Double-X negative have not been reformulated since the late 1950s) --- but I leave it to the guys who know more about optics to confirm or deny that. Mark.

PS - As a footnote, I was considering having a special batch of T-Max still-film emulsion coated on S-16 film, but Kodak wants a minimum of 3 dozen 400' rolls to do special orders. It is a shame that they don't just put a batch out there to see what happens. Even if it is not technically the same contrast as P-X or D-X, there may be filmmakers who could accomodate with lighting design. T-MAX 100 would certainly be the finest grain motion picture negative film ever made, and should be compatible-enough with standard processing. But I guess there is no $ in it for Kodak. I was at Kodak in Hollywood the other day picking up some film, and I made a surprised comment that the current price catalog hadn't been replaced in a year. The veteran person at the desk said cynically "Yeah, they're just waiting for a price increase so that the rest will desert us."

This email was sent to: elroro@propagandaindustries.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84xYK.bdbHPA.ZWxyb3Jv
Or send an email to: EclairACL-unsubscribe@topica.com

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!