Thread: EPIC ~ PL vs EF Lenses

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickWebb View Post
    However, I find it impossible to find good references for these lenses or videos shot with them ~ understanding that probably a lot of videos I have already seen have been shot with them!

    For a great (relatively) recent film shot on Red Epic MX with Zeiss Standard Speeds, check out Holy Motors. Cinematography by Caroline Champetier. It's a beautiful film!

    https://youtu.be/NWu9WjEcdbk
    Nils J. Nesse

    Epic-W Helium 8K in Bergen, Norway | Red Pro Primes | Tokina Cinema 16-28 & 50-135
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member PatrickWebb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Norway.
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt W. View Post
    I actually own Mk1 standard speeds but I use them for personal projects and I'm still grappling with the ergonomics, but the image is nice. The Mk2 I think have a bit more coverage from the larger front barrels and should cover 3.2k Alexa, but not quite as fully as Cooke S2/S3s. The are nice, sharp, a bit of swirl bokeh but not too much CA. Ergonomically it really is night and day but the Mk2s were HEAVILY used in the 80s and 90s and I've read the focus mechanisms can show a lot of wear. The Mk1 are Arri Bayonet mount, which converts to PL, but less securely. I like the image (though it is more vintage than modern) but couldn't recommend the lenses for PL mount professional use unless you really knew what you wanted. The focus ring is in a terrible place and the fronts are not designed for standard matte boxes. It's a nice lens for the money but not a professional lens imo. The Mk2 is for sure, but costs five times as much. (Still a bargain imo.) The MK1 B speeds are also a bargain, but I think they're bayonet mount, which at least is a little more secure, and most have been converted.

    It's funny to me how high the mark up on better ergonomics is (Milvus to Supreme primes comes to mind) until I actually have to shoot anything lol.

    I posted this a while ago, but the 24mm f2 and 32mm f2 are standard speeds on an EVA1:

    https://vimeo.com/433294674

    I have since sold a lot of these lenses and moved to an Alexa. The generic 80s/90s look is my reference for personal work, which is what I use them for.

    For something truly vintage I would go Cooke S2/S3, for something truly modern Otus, Sigma Art, etc.
    Thank for the insight, Matt! The Zeiss standards look clean to me in this image. The Schneider has an interesting "swirlyness" to he background, which I thought was artsy.

    What are peoples thoughts on an early 70's Angenieux 20-120mm T2.9? I have spotted on on the used market here for about 14000kr. (1600USD Approx.) ~ deal or waste of time?
    Patrick Webb,
    Director of Photography
    Heapsgood Productions, Norway.
    (www.Heapsgood.no)
    EPIC-X #06833 "Monsta" & SCARLET-X #01773 "Scratch"
    Carl Zeiss & Voigtänder Glass
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member PatrickWebb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Norway.
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by Nils J. Nesse View Post
    For a great (relatively) recent film shot on Red Epic MX with Zeiss Standard Speeds, check out Holy Motors. Cinematography by Caroline Champetier. It's a beautiful film!

    https://youtu.be/NWu9WjEcdbk
    Hei Nils!
    I just watched the video shared. That look nice ... I might have to watch it! Thanks for the share!
    (hils fra midt-Telemark!)
    Takk!
    Patrick Webb,
    Director of Photography
    Heapsgood Productions, Norway.
    (www.Heapsgood.no)
    EPIC-X #06833 "Monsta" & SCARLET-X #01773 "Scratch"
    Carl Zeiss & Voigtänder Glass
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member PatrickWebb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Norway.
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Morrison View Post
    Standard Primes are amazing (basically the predecessors to Ultra Primes), but have a small image circle. They were designed for Academy 35, not S35. So anumber (but not all) of the lenses below 50mm won't cover the entire Epic MX sensor. The 16 and 24 in particular barely cover S35. The 28 has a very wide image circle and does. The 35 goes a bit small again. The 50 and 85 are almost full frame (Vista).

    They are very punchy, high contrast and sharp even at T2. But still have a wonderful low-con flare. And great bokeh. They are wild.
    Hi Nick!
    Thanks for the insight! Ah shame about not all lenses covering the S35 on the EPIC... Are you referring to the mark 1's and 2's here (I guess so!) That's a pity, really.

    ... Modern and leather bound have their qualities and I'm interested in trying out all possibilities here. :)
    Patrick Webb,
    Director of Photography
    Heapsgood Productions, Norway.
    (www.Heapsgood.no)
    EPIC-X #06833 "Monsta" & SCARLET-X #01773 "Scratch"
    Carl Zeiss & Voigtänder Glass
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,229
    Quote Originally Posted by PatrickWebb View Post
    Thank for the insight, Matt! The Zeiss standards look clean to me in this image. The Schneider has an interesting "swirlyness" to he background, which I thought was artsy.

    What are peoples thoughts on an early 70's Angenieux 20-120mm T2.9? I have spotted on on the used market here for about 14000kr. (1600USD Approx.) ~ deal or waste of time?
    The EVA1 is a sharper camera than Red or Alexa (less "cinematic" you could say) but the Mk1 Standard Speeds are fine performers even by today's standards. Softer at t2 than a Sigma Art or something, and softer than an Otus or Milvus, but very respectable performance wide open and very sharp by t2.8 but with some desirable vintage characteristics and a Ninja Star bokeh I like. At t2.8 they might be sharper than some CP2s, but not too different and they cover less area. More interesting bokeh than CP2s imo, and more flare. The 50mm is an ancient design, I suspect, going back to Contarex, and has an oddly harsh bokeh.

    The Schneider is the king of swirl. It's sort of a poor man's Cooke S1 Panchro, or so I understand. Again, if I had the money I'd get Cooke or Kinoptic or something, and the coverage for the 28mm is particularly bad, there's a bit of hard vignetting in the corners as you stop down, whereas the 25mm S3 Cooke looks great and covers 3.2k on Alexa (but lacks the swirl). They also have 49.5mm front threads and again ergonomics are poor. It is an interesting lens though because the corners are unusably soft, but the center is actually very very sharp.

    I would make sure it covers your sensor and you like the look, and I think it's also quite a large lens, but for $1600 that is a very good deal from what I understand. There are probably examples on Vimeo.

    The Mk2 standard speeds have a bit more coverage than Mk1 I believe just because of the wider fronts on the housings. They all seem to cover Alexa 3 perf S35 to me, but the 16mm vignettes a bit you add a step up ring (it has a 49mm front threads, tiny) so I am trying to figure out a solution for that now. The Mk1 lenses are the size of small rangefinder lenses, it's a bit wild. For professional use I'd go Mk2 but it's a big investment imo, they cost about $20k+ for a set. Imo those and the B Speeds are good values because the ergonomics are more usable, but I'm not an AC so I dunno!

    I bought a bunch of old vintage lenses because I don't shoot professionally much (if at all) anymore but the ergonomics are the issue. There's a strong case to be made for just getting an 18-35mm Sigma Art PL zoom. It's a beautiful sharp lens with only one flaw that bothers me at all (the flares are a green color I don't like) and is as good a performer as anything. I'd get the Mk2 standard speeds if I shot more professionally, but that's just me, and I don't shoot much anymore.
    Last edited by Matt W.; 04-01-2021 at 09:51 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member PatrickWebb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Norway.
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt W. View Post
    ... just getting an 18-35mm Sigma Art PL zoom. It's a beautiful sharp lens with only one flaw that bothers me at all (the flares are a green color I don't like) and is as good a performer as anything. I'd get the Mk2 standard speeds if I shot more professionally, but that's just me, and I don't shoot much anymore.
    Yeah, I had the 18-35 with EF mount and I also didn't like the green flares too much either. That being said, it was a lovely, sharp lens and did produce me some great images ... a little too sharp for my liking though in some areas, especially portraits. There I would fix that by putting the ZE zeiss 50mm or Voigtländer 40mm Ultron on an they produced pleasing images from f/2.

    As I have a set of ZE Zeiss Classics already, and I am pleased really with the results I get from them! Problem is the electronic aperture which makes those slight, subtle iris chances impossible. Therefore, I thought to start with, now after this very insightful thread (thank you guys!), I might start chipping away at a MK2 PL Classic set. But first, I might just check out that image circle on the MX and see what does what for coverage. I would love a 24mm, 32mm and 50mm to start with maybe.

    I like that classic look with some nice contrast. We will see. Time to hunt. Cheers guys!
    Patrick Webb,
    Director of Photography
    Heapsgood Productions, Norway.
    (www.Heapsgood.no)
    EPIC-X #06833 "Monsta" & SCARLET-X #01773 "Scratch"
    Carl Zeiss & Voigtänder Glass
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,229
    The Mk1 standard speeds have hard aperture stops (and Arri standard mounts) and the aperture rings are tiny and not designed to be geared anyway. I like the look from them but they do suck ergonomically, and I'm weighing the pros and cons of saving so much money by buying a set with having to figure out how to get them to work on my Alexa. They're about $1000-$1200 each compared with $4000-$5000 each for Mk 2. At least in the US.

    But the Mk2s seem better mechanically, just make sure you get a set without too much mechanical wear. I'd look to get the 16mm t2.2, too, it's a lovely lens and really sharp and that combination of speed and wide angle is special. The 16mm standard speed is very sharp and just great. Consult with your ACs first, I am very inexperienced with this stuff, I just spend too much on it. The focusing mechanism seems much better than on the Mk1, but it isn't cam-based I think, or as good as truly modern lenses.

    Yes, the Sigma is too clinical for me lol. It's mostly the flares but it is a little too modern. I'm glad I'm not the only one, but I thought it was an excellent lens otherwise.

    For the money the older Nikkors are quite nice, too fwiw. I also have a set of Rolleis for sale (25mm-135mm), but they're basically just ancient precursors to CP2s. They convert easily to EF but I don't know if they can be de-clicked, they have half stop aperture clicks, and the focus rings are a bit stiff.
    Last edited by Matt W.; 04-01-2021 at 11:33 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member PatrickWebb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Location
    Norway.
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt W. View Post
    The Mk1 standard speeds have hard aperture stops (and Arri standard mounts) and the aperture rings are tiny and not designed to be geared anyway. I like the look from them but they do suck ergonomically, and I'm weighing the pros and cons of saving so much money by buying a set with having to figure out how to get them to work on my Alexa. They're about $1000-$1200 each compared with $4000-$5000 each for Mk 2. At least in the US.

    But the Mk2s seem better mechanically, just make sure you get a set without too much mechanical wear. I'd look to get the 16mm t2.2, too, it's a lovely lens and really sharp and that combination of speed and wide angle is special. The 16mm standard speed is very sharp and just great. Consult with your ACs first, I am very inexperienced with this stuff, I just spend too much on it. The focusing mechanism seems much better than on the Mk1, but it isn't cam-based I think, or as good as truly modern lenses.

    Yes, the Sigma is too clinical for me lol. It's mostly the flares but it is a little too modern. I'm glad I'm not the only one, but I thought it was an excellent lens otherwise.

    For the money the older Nikkors are quite nice, too fwiw. I also have a set of Rolleis for sale (25mm-135mm), but they're basically just ancient precursors to CP2s. They convert easily to EF but I don't know if they can be de-clicked, they have half stop aperture clicks, and the focus rings are a bit stiff.
    Ok, such a difference in price! 15k opposed to 3-4k! That is a big difference. Might be nice to wait and see. The last single lens that I saw for sale was a 40mm (mk1 I think, as I don't see a 40mm in the mk2 set) and that was in good condition and was selling for 40k NOK ($4500 USD). But I was very interested in that lens, as that is my fav focal length to work with normally, but it sold quickly.

    We will see, I haven't started fully back to larger productions because of the COVID madness, but when I do, I might get my heads together and talk about the options of a set between a couple of ops. 20k between a few is much more affordable!
    Patrick Webb,
    Director of Photography
    Heapsgood Productions, Norway.
    (www.Heapsgood.no)
    EPIC-X #06833 "Monsta" & SCARLET-X #01773 "Scratch"
    Carl Zeiss & Voigtänder Glass
    Reply With Quote  
     

Tags for this Thread

View Tag Cloud

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts