Thread: Optimo Style 25-250 or Alura 45-250? Opinions please.

Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1 Optimo Style 25-250 or Alura 45-250? Opinions please. 
    I’m in the market for a big zoom and have it narrowed down to either the Optimo Style 25-250 with the wider range or the Alura 45-250 which is faster at t2.6 vs 3.5.

    If you have experience with, or own, either please share your comments.

    Thanks everyone!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Vince Arvidson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Posts
    113
    I don't have experience with the optimo style but I would personally got with the canon 30-300 t2.6 over the alura.

    that canon lens is one of the most under rated lenses out there in my opinion. reasonable size to work with and beautifully sharp without being harsh on faces

    Vince
    Vince Arvidson

    candelacollective.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,635
    Quote Originally Posted by Vince Arvidson View Post
    I don't have experience with the optimo style but I would personally got with the canon 30-300 t2.6 over the alura.

    that canon lens is one of the most under rated lenses out there in my opinion. reasonable size to work with and beautifully sharp without being harsh on faces

    Vince
    The Canon is a very nice lense but not T2.6.

    1:2.95 at 30-240mm
    1:3.7 at 300mm

    But still a nice piece of glass
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    The Canon doesn't seem to be nearly as popular. Likely wouldn't rent as well I would think. Plus it's also the most expensive. I'll have to look into it more though.

    Would still love to hear from those who have more experience with either of these.

    Thanks everyone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    3,446
    Just curious, what do you plan on using it for? I sold all my big zooms as I just hardly ever used them. If you are on a dolly in a studio all day it makes sense. I had a technovision 25-250 t2.3. Great lens, I just never used it. About the size of the optimo.

    Nick
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Tom Greenberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    1,480
    Not making any quality assessment, because it's so subjective, but Angenieuxs will rent better than Aluras all day long...
    BRAINCELL CAMERA - MICHIGAN Renting Weapon Helium, Gemini, Raven, Alexa Studio, Alexa Mini
    Primes: Atlas Anamorphics, Cooke Panchro Classic, Sigma Cine, Celere HS, Leica R, Zeiss Contax
    Zooms: Optimo 15-40, Optimo DPs, Cooke 18-100, Duclos 11-16
    Support: Ronin 2, Black Arm, Alpha Wheels, Tero, ReadyRig, EasyRig, Teradek RT FIZs, Teradek Bolts, Bright Tangerine matteboxes, FSI monitors
    ------
    Cinematography/Production Professor, Compass College of Cinematic Arts, Grand Rapids, MI


    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Hey Nick

    Mostly indie features. So a big zoom lens comes in very handy.

    Very good to know Tom. Thanks

    I'm very interested in how they perform compared to each other. Google brings up very little info.

    Anyone out there have first hand experience with either?

    Thanks everyone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    1,652
    I have zero experience with either. I'm also not a DP. You still want my opinion? ;-)

    I would go for a wider AOV than 2/3 more 'speed'. Goodness, we aren't stuck with Kodachrome 40 or Eastman 125T anymore. So take the Optimo. The Allura isn't wide enough and the Canon has a sliding aperture (and is 5mm longer at the wide end).

    For Super 35 I would probably want an 18mm at the wide end and 135mm at the long end if I want to cover 99% of situations. 250mm is a luxury, but a nice one to have. T stop is fine at 3.5. The fastest lens I own for photography - and the one that I use the most - is an f/3.5 zoom which is probably a T4. If I needed faster I wouldn't bother, as an f/2.8 zoom is only 1/3 of a stop faster than f/3.5. What's the damn point? You can't have T1.4 and a 10x zoom and have a compact, affordable lens for S35.

    If you want a wide aperture, consider a set of T2 primes.
    Good production values may not be noticed. Bad production values will be.
    Pinterest
    | Flickr | Instagram | Martini Ultra (blog)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member Daniel Stilling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    US, Denmark
    Posts
    1,910
    I have a set of 2 of the small styles, and I absolutely love them. Have not used the 25-250, but being in the same family, it gets my vote. I find the Fuji lenses a little too clinical, and if they did, like the Canons, and used their ENG 2/3 lenses as a base, they get my down vote. I have used Canon zooms, and when flared, they look just like ENG lenses with their large amount of elements, showing their ENG origin, and I really do not like that.
    Also, considering that the Angie 24-290 is pretty much the standard zoom in many many productions, makes the 25-250 the front runner imo
    Daniel Stilling, DFF (Danish Society of Cinematographers)
    Director Of Photography
    www.danieldp.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    33
    I used both a lot for documentary work and the Angenieux has a big plus with the 25mm vs 45mm on the Alura. Probably this isnīt an issue if itīs used mainly for feature work. On the other hand the t2.6 is a great advantage of the Alura for night work or even day interiors. Itīs actually one stop faster, right?

    But the question for me is much more about the look and with which primes do you want to intercut it potentially. In my opinion the Alura is quite sharp & clinical, intercuts very well with Zeiss Ultras & Masters and probably Leica Summilux/cron-C and the Optimo is a bit softer, more gentle and seems do play better with Cooke S4 or older lenses like S2/3, Zeiss Super & Standardspeeds, Leica-R. It has some distortion on the wide end as well.
    Last edited by Jesse_M; 01-21-2018 at 10:40 PM.
    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