Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Aesthetics of Zeiss Superspeeds vs CP.2

I own a set of Mark 3 Superspeeds (including the 65) and a set of Cooke S4's. Matt is right (and it's been discussed here many times) that wide open, the Superspeeds are one lens, stopped down they are another. It's like two lenses in one.
It's a tough choice, but the in-between focal lengths and the slightly more modern look of the S4's often win out for me. But I've done a lot of work with the Superspeeds, especially travel jobs where the smaller form factor means I can hand-carry rather than check or ship them.
The wide-open look that Matt describes is particularly charming, since it combines a slight softening with lower contrast and highlight blooming. Best of all, the effect is somewhat variable between wide open and 2.8, so you have a bit of control if you can light to a certain stop.
As the cameras get smaller, it's nice to have a high quality set of cinema lenses at hand that are also small and light.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Matt, is it true that SuperSpeeds won't cover full frame? I don't have a FF camera to test them on. They seemed fine on the Epic at 5K. Have you had different results?
 
Jason Comparetto said:
Matt, is it true that SuperSpeeds won't cover full frame? I don't have a FF camera to test them on. They seemed fine on the Epic at 5K. Have you had different results?
Click to expand...

The super speeds do not cover full frame. They cover 5K no problem (most likely they vignette slightly in the corners at 5KFF , not to be confused with a FF sensor like the 5D) Cp.2's on the other hand do cover FF.
 
Matt Ryan said:
The super speeds do not cover full frame. They cover 5K no problem (most likely they vignette slightly in the corners at 5KFF , not to be confused with a FF sensor like the 5D) Cp.2's on the other hand do cover FF.
Click to expand...

Right. CP2's are the only "cinema" lenses that cover FULL FRAME. And that's because their origins are in full frame stills glass. This is also the reason why CP2's are overall much slower than Super Speeds (especially on the wider primes). The standard S35 negative makes it more cost effective to make faster lenses, whereas the unorthodox larger Full Frame negative makes even a standard T2 set almost impossible (for the budgets of mere mortals anyway).

The only way I know of to get a Super Speed "look" on Full Frame is to buy older Zeiss still lenses, known as Contax. They were manufactured during the same era as Super Speeds and share similar coatings, etc. The limitation with Contax is again SPEED, on the wide angles. The 18mm is an F4. Whereas the Super Speed 18mm is a 1.2!!!

I own a full set of Contax Zeiss primes, but solved this wide angle slow F-stop problem by later purchasing a Standard Prime 16mm T2 lens. The coating's are remarkably similar, and even the serial number on the Standard Prime was in the same "range" as the stills lenses!

For whatever it's worth....
 
Well, I love the look, weight etc. of the Zeiss STANDARD Speeds.

And with the DRAGON sensor about to come out, I don't see that I will miss the fact
that the Standard Speeds do not open to T1.3
 
Martin Stevens said:
Well, I love the look, weight etc. of the Zeiss STANDARD Speeds.

And with the DRAGON sensor about to come out, I don't see that I will miss the fact
that the Standard Speeds do not open to T1.3
Click to expand...

Agreed. Standards are AWESOME!
 
They are but having the option to go to a T1.3 will always be a bonus even if you don't need it. I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Plus the lenses are identical at 2.1. I'd rather open up to a 1.3 versus pushing the ISO. I still would rather have super speeds with Dragon, think of the extra latitude you will be afforded.
 
Matt Ryan said:
They are but having the option to go to a T1.3 will always be a bonus even if you don't need it. I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Plus the lenses are identical at 2.1. I'd rather open up to a 1.3 versus pushing the ISO. I still would rather have super speeds with Dragon, think of the extra latitude you will be afforded.
Click to expand...

Yes, but since I am use to lighting with film at 100 ASA, I find the whole T1.3 versus T2.1 thing unexciting now.

The 800 ISO on my Epic-X looks great and spoils me.

I would even rather own a set of Ultra Primes over the Master Primes.

But its all good.
 
I ended up setting up rental from Tom at HD Planet Cameras, and he's been great to work with. Very helpful. I should have the lenses for the first day of our shoot on Tuesday (if my insurance company can get my cert right!). I will report my opinions of the lenses. Should be interesting, since this will be my first shoot with genuine cine glass, coming from Nikons.

btw - does anyone know of specific films shot on the Super Speeds? I know Deakins has said he shot films on them for many years.

Matt Ryan said:
http://www.5kcamerarentals.com/
Tom Jordan is a cool guy and a Reduser. They aren't listed on his site but he just got them. I used them last week for a shoot.
Click to expand...
 
I'm pretty sure that "The Shawshank Redemption" and "Midnight Express" were shot with Zeiss Super Speeds.
 
Kubrick used them for Eyes Wide Shut and can't think of the other one. There have been a lot of big beautiful films shot on them. They were the Master Primes of lenses before Master Primes.

Several of Deakins older films were shot on Super Speeds as well.

I really wish there was a lens database for films so it was easier to find out. Imdb is great but not the most helpful.
 
Matt Ryan said:
They were the Master Primes of lenses before Master Primes.
Click to expand...

I think it's fair to say that the Ultra Primes were the "Master Primes" of lenses before the Master Primes.

;)

But not for speed.
 
Martin Stevens said:
I think it's fair to say that the Ultra Primes were the "Master Primes" of lenses before the Master Primes.

;)

But not for speed.
Click to expand...

Not at t1.9. Yes Ultra Primes are great and sharp as hell, but before t1.4 Master Primes were the t1.3 Super Speeds. I'd take Master primes or Ultra Primes any day. But Super Speeds are still amazing and great on a budget unlike the other two zeiss options.
 
Matt, and anyone else who might chime in - as someone who's spent a lot of time shooting on old Nikons (which I do love, but they have their place in budget and project), what advice can you give someone shooting on Super Speeds for the first time? As a DP, nearly every time I encounter a new piece of equipment or try a new technique, I discover new possibilities, but there are usually unexpected thorns that only experience teaches, which I have to get bitten by first to know the next time around to avoid.. What might one of those thorns be with the Super Speeds? Are there any, shooting at 4K? One thing I will avoid, unless the director really wants it, is shooting wide open. I would probably stay 1.8 or higher, and project res will be 4K at 24fps.
 
Brant--Cutting back and forth between a shot at T1.8 and a shot at T3 could be distracting.

Let's say you've got actors with different skin tones. You might be tempted to open up for one and close down for the other. As folks have said here, superspeeds behave very differently stopped down as compared to T2.8 and below.

Also--the MK1 set has fewer witness marks and only three aperture blades. If you find a discount to-good-to-be-true deal somewhere, it's probably MK1. If you like triangle bokeh and aberrations, go for it! The best indie film of the year was shot on 16mm MK1 speeds...

beasts-of-the-southern-wild.jpg
 
Really other than knowing what look your lenses will get you, the benefits of cinema glass is proper focus and irirs rings, consistent t stops, and the matching of color and contrast throughout the set. Obviously there are other benefits, but in terms of what to expect from Super Speeds is slightly softer look up until t2, low contrast below t2, all of which change for the better at t2. Honestly I love the look of the lenses wide open, but that's my personal aesthetic choice. Flares tend to basically make the image "milky" rather than a typical flare. Highlights glow which I like below t2. Other than that there really isn't anything to watch out for. The lenses are light, although not as light as still lenses and they are small.

First thing I'd do when you get them is shoot a shot with humans in it both wide open and at t2 without changing anything else. Then look at them in REDCINEx at 100% to get an idea of the differences. Try to also shoot a shot with a light source or hot spot so you can see how they flare below t2 and at t2.

Don't go in expecting them to be super sharp. They are sharp at t2 and above, but not as sharp as some still lenses and Master Primes. I don't think you can really go wrong as your used to the pitfalls of still lenses.

Like Ryan said don't change exposure from one shot to the next in a scene. I don't know anyone who does this but just be cautious. Always bring in lights if you need to bring up exposure in certain shots to match exposure. Your DOf and bokeh will be different if you mix t stops in a scene and especially if going below t2 your contrast will be off.

I like shooting wide open and adding contrast back in in post. Wide open looks like your shooting through a pro mist.
 
Thank you both for that excellent advice. A couple other questions.

First, Matt, I think you rented the Super Speeds from HD Planet Cameras. That's my source as well (thanks for the referral). What mark are they? I, II, or III?

Do any of the lens focal lengths stand out for one reason or another? One of the things I like about some of my Nikons is their soft roll-off, obviously at wider apertures, until they loose too much contrast wide open. My favorite lens, the Nikon 50 f2 has a wonderful bokeh and color. Would you say that the Super Speeds at f2-f2.8 are "warmer" than they are at f6or f4? At more narrow apertures what exactly happens to the image? Does it get contrasty, and "videoish"? (especially on Epic/Scarlet)? This is something I do not like about the Canon glass on digital cameras like Red, and other optically more "perfect" glass. I think the inherent precision of the MX sensor makes somewhat less perfect lenses a bit more attractive a match at times.
 
They are Mark II. They are in perfect condition. I rented a set of MK3's once that we're falling apart. Which is why I went to Tom for his MK2's.

My favorite focal lengths are the 18mm and the 50mm.

The lenses will never give a video look. They are still somewhat soft closed down. They are really kind on skin specifically. The super speeds do not warm up at all. Zeiss tend to be neutral/cold whereas Cookes are on the warmer side.
Bokeh remains consistent when stopping down. Like I said earlier I love Super Speeds.

I'd take a look at the Supers wide open before you discount shooting wide open. I'll post a pic from the 50mm wide open of my gf in available light in the living room. The rolling on the lenses is consistent even when closed down. It will continue to have a soft white blooming around sources like a promist. It's more pronounced wide open but still similar. Supers aren't known for being very contrasty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top