Kong: Skull Island

P

ProSimex

Member
Local time
7:23 PM
Joined
Jan 31, 2017
Messages
38
Watching this movie right now. I dont expect much from hollywood but a Leica M with viewfinder blackout, mirror slap and motorwinder sounds that are audible overtop of a helicopter is a bit much. Why not give the photographer a F2 with motorwinder?
 
Shooting in the jungle with an M camera and a 3.5 lens. Come on. Haven't seen the movie yet but, that's funny. Possible but in all practical terms as a pro you would need a fast camera and lens. With an f3.5 lens would be like shooting in the dark.
 
Well, she was using the lens to shoot an Aurora at night, but only after reading her MC meter :) On the bright side, there were M3 framelines.

In another forum there were comments on the rifles, and respective details that were off. Sounded very much like this thread :)

Just saw the movie on Sun, I liked it. Set up for a Kong against Godzilla sequel, too :D.
 
ferider said:
Well, she was using the lens to shoot an Aurora at night, but only after reading her MC meter :) On the bright side, there were M3 framelines.

In another forum there were comments on the rifles, and respective details that were off. Sounded very much like this thread :)

Just saw the movie on Sun, I liked it. Set up for a Kong against Godzilla sequel, too :D.
Click to expand...

I just can't fathom why movie directors and art directors or who ever head honchos the art department or the common sense department in movies can't get in your face details like the proper equipment to use?!? I mean, after more than 100 years of movie making, these little details make things more credible, even if it's just a fantasy movie.

I mean, look at my avatar pic - use my camera man! Better suited than a 3.5!
 
teddy said:
Shooting in the jungle with an M camera and a 3.5 lens. Come on. Haven't seen the movie yet but, that's funny. Possible but in all practical terms as a pro you would need a fast camera and lens. With an f3.5 lens would be like shooting in the dark.
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. I have shot in lots of jungles with my M3 and 35mm Summaron 3.5. Goggled just like this one.
You only lose two stops compared to an f2 lens. If you don't know how to compensate for that by either using faster film or pushing your film, well....

(Sunny F16 - 400 speed film in the shade is 1/125 @ f8)
 
Huss said:
No it wouldn't. I have shot in lots of jungles with my M3 and 35mm Summaron 3.5. Goggled just like this one.
You only lose two stops compared to an f2 lens. If you don't know how to compensate for that by either using faster film or pushing your film, well....

(Sunny F16 - 400 speed film in the shade is 1/125 @ f8)
Click to expand...

I would LOVE a Summaron 35/3.5 - I have the 2.8, but a pro would perhaps most likely choose an f2. A 3.5 is possible - ofcourse, anything is possible. Look at the old photo pioneers, but it would be impractical. Not so if I was a sucker for punishment.

Anyway, my point is I guess - how easy would it have been to pick a 35/2 with a Finder Attachment - honestly? Film gurus with connections. People would have been saying - awesome move - look at that pro girl with an M and a 35 f2!!!

Each to their own. The lenses with Finder Attachments like this 3.5 looks like a steampunk object. Actually, a Biotar 58/2 with in an Exakta would have been totally steampunk! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top