Nikon/Canon vs. PL Lenses

[Jarek Zabczynski]

So I know there are some good lens threads, but here's a dilemma I am facing.

I will have approximately 10k to spend on glass after getting my Epic. Do I stay in Nikon/Canon land or step it up and go PL? Pros Cons?

Currently shooting Panasonic AF-100 with Nikons. Primarily use the Tokina 11-16mm, Nikon 17-55mm and Tokina 50-135mm. Great lenses for the price, not complaining too much as they work well with my camera.

Initially I was pretty set on going with a set of Duclos Cine-modded Zeiss ZR.2s, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, maybe 100mm. Would still use the 11-16m for my wide as it is an awesome lens. This set will run around 7k. Pretty much where I want to be as far as budget goes.

The I was thinking...I'm getting an Epic...shouldn't I step up my glass game and go PL? I would Definitely get the PL modded 11-17mm, then I'd be looking at maybe 2-3 nice primes, at this point would be between Zeiss CPs or RPPs.

I guess my question is, am I shooting myself in the foot thinking the Zeiss Nikons are a good idea? As far as I know they are optically the same as the CPs.


Then there's the Canon mount and lenses...which look really cool.

What to do....?

What would you do with a 10k lens budget in my position?

 

[Anson Fogel]

Search the forums here - there are literally hundreds or thousands of posts, threads and thoughts about this subject. Quickly (then search):

The answer depends largely on WHAT you are shooting, HOW you are shooting it and WHERE you are showing the finished results. Are you renting your gear out and/or working on sets as a hired gun within a larger team? Are you shooting narrative? Do you work with an AC / Focus Puller?

Optically, the basic fact is - high end still glass is optically very close to even the best PL glass - the differences even on a large screen can be subtle. Some will argue this point, and yes, there are differences, even material differences, but they are subtle. On the web, invisible. On TV, probably invisible. On a big screen, noticeable in certain contexts and situations with certain glass at certain apertures.

The difference is mechanics and behavior when pulling focus and zooming. These differences generally do not justify the cost of entry (in dollars as well as in pounds) for most doc, run and gun or small, non narrative work. The Duclos mod Zeiss ZF's (not avlbl in PL mount) are mind blowing at the price point, and provide the same advantage in mechanics as decent PL glass.

For this reason, we shoot Nikon glass (not Canon due to the Iris control challenges) on our own work, docs, outdoor/adventure sports, and lower budget commercial and industrials. For higher budget commercial work, where the team demands PL glass, we rent PL glass.

 

[Vladimir Eugene]

I'll sum it up. For 10k glass and under, you're lenses may not rent out too much, so it's mainly a personal use glass you'll be getting.

My preference for personal use are

Zooms-2.8, 6500

Nikon 14-24
Nikon 24-70
Nikon 70-200 VRII

At 1.4 85G
And one other Nikon I haven't selected yet. That will round out my Epic personal use glass

 

[Rémi Sello]

We decided to go PL with our EPIC-M and got a RPZ 17-50mm & RPP 85mm (~11k$). It covers pretty much everything we need for what we do (commercials).

We didn't chose Canon / Nikon because the mounts are still unavailable and because I wanted proper focus pulling. Maybe that'll change when Redmote Pro + AF lenses control will get in the game.

 

[Stephen Pruitt]

I am really counting on Canon lens control on the Epic. Without a Birger on the Epic, RED is likely to be the only EF Canon game in town.

Stephen

 

[Rob Gardner]

I think the great divide between people who either need or desire true cinematic production values and those who are willing to or able to compromise on production values, is in the lens mount choice and all that goes with it.

its a pretty big decision, but I don't see what the point is in buying into all the work-flow issues and cost of a Red system unless you want to follow through with a professional lens system, recognizing that this means more expensive (and more durable) lenses, the more frequent need for a professional AC, more elaborate matte-box and follow-focus gear and so on. This discussion has gone on forever on this forum, but in the end, I think you are either going to create images that take the most advantage of the tools, or you are going to compromise.

There are lots of used PL lenses in the world, and lots of options when cost is the issue, but in the end, professional cine lenses are designed for professional high-end motion picture work and still lenses are not. Period. You can make them work (as Gibby and others have shown) but it is never optimal. There are reasons that these tools are designed the way they are. This is not meant to demean those who choose to work with still lenses, and everybody has to make compromises at one level or another, but I really think this is a fundamental dividing line.

We stretched to buy PL mount lenses for our Reds and we are all set for our Epic-X when it arrives. The genius of this camera system is that it allows almost any production to reach higher for less than has ever been possible. Why step down from that, unless you absolutely must?

My two cents...

 

[Mike 'Fireman' Ross]

Rob,

As you pointed out, but perhaps didn't make enough of, Steve Gibby would have something to say about what constitutes 'professional' when it comes to lenses for EFP-style work. RED, more than ever, is about more than just traditional approaches to cinematography. DSMC, remember... that line is becoming less fundamental every day, IMHO.

I'd make three observations:

1. The OP hasn't yet told exactly what they plan to shoot; if they're backpacking into the wilds single-handed they're NOT going to drag a set of primes or a huge PL zoom.

2. If their budget is only $10k they're not going to get very far with PL glass.

3. Something to factor into this is the forthcoming (when? big question!) RED electronic lenses. They won't be PL mount, but I'm sure they will be cine quality in every other respect, and they could change the way people work.

I have decent high-end Nikon glass which I'll be happy to use in manual mode (and auto mode when the RED Nikon electronic mount emerges) on our EPIC when we get it. I'm unlikely to invest further in PL glass until I see exactly what RED bring to the table with their electronic lenses - and when they bring it.

As for now... if my budget was only $10k and I was determined to have PL glass... I'd probably go to the RED store and buy Battle Tested. For price/performance.

Mike

 

[Johnny Friday]

Sure depends what you are shooting and in MOST cases you as operator don't make that decision. And also add, if at $10k to invest in glass and you are NOT a rental house, why try to compete with one....you'll likely never have the glass your client wants...that said, client will usually tell you what they want to shoot and the rare occasion they ask you for what you think as DP, then that's another story....Feature film and budget---you are going to use PL and cine lenses. Doubt you would use a Nikon or Cannon mount lens other than a modified for Cine PL version....but if this is your own kit and you are shooting yourself and for hire....you can accomplish a LOT with Nikon and Cannon mount glass. Sure depends the genre you are shooting...

Personally i have a good mixture of PL glass and Nikon. And probably shoot 85% of the time with my Nikon glass....the many questions are what is your deliverable and like many on the forum it may be television....so no question you can achieve amazing results with still lens glass. I've shot a number of documentaries & commercials using still glass and results are nothing short of excellent. But case in point is your budget...as Mike pointed out, you won't get far with $10k in PL....but in still world you can cover the spectrum with $10k.....but back to question one....what are you shooting and is it for hire; feature; doc; television or feature etc......most of these questions will reveal an answer that should determine what route you take.

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Well, for starters, I'm not a rental house. Any "rentals" include myself. I'm primarily doing music video, commercials and independent films. I know some people may say why bother getting a RED when most of the final output will be on the net, but RED shines no matter how small you shrink the image down.

I suppose the smart thing do do is go Nikon till I can afford PL. Honestly, it's been my experience to learn that most client don't much much about gear, at least technically. They may know the "phrase Canon 5D" and insist on shooting 5D because "it's awesome!" I've been forced to rent them many a time because that's what the client wanted. As I'm sure with people that want a RED, as long as it says "RED" on the side they will be happy.

Aside from all that, I've been shooting with cheap Nikons for the past 6 years with 35mm adapters, DSLRS and cameras like the AF-100. It's gotten me from nothing to being able to afford going RED. I'm sure a set of ZFs will already be a massive step up in term of what I've been used to. Paired with an Epic, I think I'll be fine. It's then end product that matters right?

Plus it'll be a heck of a lot lighter!

 

[jimhare]

Hi Jarek, I have used Zeiss ZFs (Duclos mod) and the Tokina 11-16 with my Red One with Nikon mount for a couple of years now. I can confirm they are fantastic, both in optical quality and in build. With the mod they don't feel like still lenses at all, much more like CP2s.

Pros: Cost effective, astounding optical and build quality, look and feel like cine lenses
Cons: Focus marks are useless, minor breathing (though not problematic), stigma of using still lenses


For me the Cons don't come into play. The breathing is almost imperceptabe and I happily do large focus pulls without the image expanding and contracting. As for the stigma, because they don't look like still lenses and I don't walk onto set yelling it out, it doesn't really come up.

Everyone who has borrowed my set have fallen in love and it has become the go-to set for a lot of Red One owners.

My advice would be to go for Duclos ZE/ZFs, keep your Nikons around in case you need to call on them, and be happy with the decision.

In my opinion the best ZFs to get:

28mm F/2
35mm F/2
50mm F/2 Macro (don't be tempted by the F/1.4 as the build isn't as good and it's nowhere near as sharp, plus the Macro really comes in handy for close focus.)
85mm F/1.4 (this is the most beautiful lens ever!)

The 18mm and 25mm are too slow and the 100mm is too expensive. The 28mm-85mm range goes a long way.

Hope this helps!

 

[Stephen Pruitt]

I agree completely that the 28 to 85 range goes a long way. Extend that to 24mm if you're using Nikon or Canon glass and it goes a VERY long way. We very seldom feel the need to go wider than 24 or longer than 85. That's like 95% of our shots right there. I'd guess that would be true for just about anyone. Throw on the Tokina 11-16 and you're almost all the way there. And it's darn easy to hit that range for quite a bit less than $10,000 using old Nikon glass (which, as Gibby and many other have noted, looks just great on the RED!).

Stephen

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Sold...Zeiss ZF it is! It's kinda where I was leaning anyway. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't making a tragic mistake. I can always rent PL glass if needed or requested. I'll probably be ok with the Nikons for 90% of my work.

Jim, are you using the standard 11-16mm or is it the Duclos mod as well? From what I understand the Epic Nikon mount will have iris control so it wouldn't be a big deal.

I can actually just get the lenses now and use them on my current projects while I wait for the RED. Even better!

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Few days ago I projected the 50mm f1.4 ZF and I was shocked.
It was so bad wide open that I would consider it unusable. Frankly I want to see more FLs projected first because I would absolutely not recommend the 50.
It was a brand new lens so I doubt that was just a bad example....
Make sure you test thoroughly before you pay....

 

[jimhare]

Jacek, I agree about the 1.4. Check out the F/2.0 macro and you will be impressed. It's beautiful!

 

[jimhare]

Hi Jarek, you will not be disappointed! Jacek's comment above confirms what I was saying about the 50mm 1.4, definitely get the f/2 Macro, it's fantastic.

With the Tokina, I have the standard one. Since I always use it at 2.8 I jammed the iris control wide open with a bit of plastic and just leave it there. When I get the Epic Nikon mount I'll pop the plastic out.

Any other questions please let me know, happy to talk about these lenses!

Sold...Zeiss ZF it is! It's kinda where I was leaning anyway. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't making a tragic mistake. I can always rent PL glass if needed or requested. I'll probably be ok with the Nikons for 90% of my work.

Jim, are you using the standard 11-16mm or is it the Duclos mod as well? From what I understand the Epic Nikon mount will have iris control so it wouldn't be a big deal.

I can actually just get the lenses now and use them on my current projects while I wait for the RED. Even better!

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Hi Jarek, you will not be disappointed! Jacek's comment above confirms what I was saying about the 50mm 1.4, definitely get the f/2 Macro, it's fantastic.

With the Tokina, I have the standard one. Since I always use it at 2.8 I jammed the iris control wide open with a bit of plastic and just leave it there. When I get the Epic Nikon mount I'll pop the plastic out.

Any other questions please let me know, happy to talk about these lenses!

Thanks, appreciate it.

Still debating if I should get them straight from Duclos or shop around and send them in. Did a bit of searching and after calculating shipping here, there and back, I'd be saving about $300 bucks on a set of lenses if I get them somewhere else. Wonder if it's worth the risk of all that shipping around.

 

[D Fuller]

Thanks, appreciate it.

Still debating if I should get them straight from Duclos or shop around and send them in. Did a bit of searching and after calculating shipping here, there and back, I'd be saving about $300 bucks on a set of lenses if I get them somewhere else. Wonder if it's worth the risk of all that shipping around.

Get them from Duclos. My understanding is that they test the lenses when they come from Zeiss, and do not accept all of them. These are not Master Primes, and there is more sample variation than you'd expect from Cine lenses. The $300 will be well spent.

Just another thought... For my money, the optical quality of the new Nikon 1.4 lenses (24mm, 35mm, 85mm) is significantly better than the Zeiss ZFs. They have a really short focus throw, and no iris rings, but oh, my, they make nice pictures.

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

Get them from Duclos. My understanding is that they test the lenses when they come from Zeiss, and do not accept all of them. These are not Master Primes, and there is more sample variation than you'd expect from Cine lenses. The $300 will be well spent.

Just another thought... For my money, the optical quality of the new Nikon 1.4 lenses (24mm, 35mm, 85mm) is significantly better than the Zeiss ZFs. They have a really short focus throw, and no iris rings, but oh, my, they make nice pictures.

Yeah, I'm leaning on just getting them from Duclos and not worry about it.

Will have to look into the Nikons, but for some reason I am bent on the ZFs!

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

IMO the ZFs are a dead end street.
When the electronic mount for the Epic comes out the ZFs will only work with it as dumb mount. The motorized Nikons will take the production dynamics to another level with the full features enabled. The ZFs will remain what they are today- the poor's man attempt at film-making.
This has nothing to do with you Jarek- you know that. These lenses just have no further potential in them IMO- unlike the Nikkors.
I'm just trying to follow the "future proof" Red approach...

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

By that logic wouldn't Zeiss Master Primes also fall under "poor's man attempt at film-making" ?

Or any other mechanical lens...aren't all PL mounts essentially "dumb" other than transmitting lens data...which the ZF.2s also do.

Just saying...