Lens Package Options for Epic (1/2011)

[paul engstrom]

I would prefer the Nikon 14-24 over the 17-35, as would, I think, most people.

[Julio Quintana]

I would prefer the Nikon 14-24 over the 17-35, as would, I think, most people.

Done.

[paul engstrom]

Most would probably get the top Nikon 70-200 II as well, which goes for about $2100. It is the lens most similar to Canon's 70-200 II.

[Julio Quintana]

Most would probably get the top Nikon 70-200 II as well, which goes for about $2100. It is the lens most similar to Canon's 70-200 II.

Ha. Okay.

[Julio Quintana]

I just want to point out that the only lenses on this list cheaper than the RED Pro Primes (besides RED zooms) are ones designed for still cameras. RPP's seem to hold up as a pretty tremendous value.

[James Brundige]

I would prefer the Nikon 14-24 over the 17-35, as would, I think, most people.

14 - 24 is a special tool, and difficult to filter. It's an amazing lens, but my 17-35 spends a lot more time on the camera. When I'm on the move, it's a real go-to, and the screw on filters are quick.

The 17 -35 beats the hell out of my carefully collected AIS Nikkor prime set. There's something about the latest Nikon glass.

I've heard great things about the new G series primes, redesigned for digital. I've heard the new 85 finally surpasses the classic 85 AIS (which I will still keep), same for 35 mm.

For my Epic, I plan to compare those to the Zeiss ZF series.

Thoughts, reactions?

[Julio Quintana]

I own the Nikon 17-35mm and I really love it, but I've never used the 14-24mm so I'm just taking Paul's word for it.

The list is getting pretty comprehensive now. This would be a great time for people to start listing the strengths and weaknesses of the different options presented. It would also be great if people could say which set they would be most likely to buy vs. rent and why. Maybe people could also say how much they would be willing to pay to rent specific sets. Here, for example, are my votes:

Buy: RED Pro Primes
I haven't worked with them, but they seem like an amazing value compared to all other PL mount sets. I only wish they weren't so big. I have also seen some troubling posts about rainbow flares, but most people find it to be a very minor issue.

Rent: Zeiss Super Speeds
Although they are basically unusable wide open, they are really small and light, which is a big plus for me. They are also pretty abundant, so rates are reasonable. Here in Austin, a set of five rents for about $1000-$1200/week.

[James Brundige]

For my style, single operator with no need for AC's and the like, still lenses are great. I believe the new Nikons are every bit as good as most cine primes, optically speaking. (of course the mechanics of the cine lenses are far superior - you ought to get something for the extra $40K)

I'll be testing them against various Zeiss to make sure, but I'd like to nominate this set for consideration:

Nikon 24 mm 1.4 G $1900
Nikon 35 MM 1.4 G $1900
Nikon 50 mm 1.4 G $400
Nikon 85 mm 1.4 G $1800

Total for this set $6000

Add the 14 -24 zoom, 28 -70, and prime telephotos and it's a really full kit. The only thing I don't care for is the extra small size of the 50 mm - harder to share matteboxes.

This will of course rest on the availability of camera based electronic aperture control.

[Julio Quintana]

Thanks James. I added a Nikon 16mm f2.8 to your list just to try and keep it consistent with the other sets. You're probably right, though, that most people would probably cover the wide end with the 14-24mm instead since they're the same f-stop.

[Shane Kelly]

I added a couple of more and went ahead and put them all in order by price. Does anybody know the f-stops for the Unique Optics Razor 7D Set?

here:
http://www.uniqoptics.net/pdfs/uniqo...elist_2010.pdf
I haven't heard anything about these lenses since last NAB.