Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

Canon Cinema Prime VS Zeiss CP.2 Super Speed

Stephen Franchek

Stephen Franchek

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
196
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
NYC
Hi all,
Just wondering if anyone has used either the Zeiss CP.2 Super Speeds or Canon CN-E Primes (hopefully both). I'm getting close to buying a set of cinema primes for Scarlet and, much to my chagrin, I can't find a single good review of either lens type. The CP.2SS has yet to be released but even BSH doesn't have any customer reviews of the already released CN-Es.

What we know so far:
.The Canon CN-Es only come in 24mm 50mm and 85mm (so far). This is a negative IMO, since I'm looking for a standard set and 24mm is sort of an odd focal length (Most pros I know use 35, 50 and 85 in their basic grab-and-go prime kit)

.The Canons can stop down to T/1.3 while the CP.2SS can only do T/1.5. This might give your follow focus guy nightmares, but I like the idea of being able to stop down that much more. Also, I've heard that the CP.2s get wonky below T/2.1 and that's why Zeiss limited the original CP.2s. Not sure if that's the case with the new superspeeds.

.The Zeiss lenses have interchangeable mounts so you don't have to deal with any dumb and/or stupid adapters when going from Sony-E to Canon EF to... whoever makes PL mount >_>

Someone help! I don't know which to choose!
 
Patrick Wieland said:
Silly that canon and zeiss both don't make lenses a constant T stop for all the lens in the line. Would be nice to get a set of lens all same T Stop.
Click to expand...

exactly my thought...
 
Matt Ryan said:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...een-or-touched-them&highlight=canon+vs.+zeiss
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?87299-Canon-Cine-Primes-Let-s-talk-about-it
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...ve-Zeiss-Compact-Prime-CP-2-or-Red-Pro-Primes
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?85034-Aesthetics-of-Zeiss-Superspeeds-vs-CP-2

Check these threads out first. Lots of threads on these lenses.
Click to expand...

Interesting! Some are saying the Canons are way sharper at T/1.5 with less chromatic abberation and LESS BREATHING than the CP.2s! Despite the negatives... I'll go with the Canon glass if all that is true.
 
Personally I'd lean Canon, I've just had poor experiences with CP.2's. But I'd probably not invest in either unless the set had consistent t stops. I hate that the wide and telephotos are slower than the rest of the set. From an investment standpoint, CP.2's are a better bet for rentals given they are Zeiss.
 
Patrick Wieland said:
Silly that canon and zeiss both don't make lenses a constant T stop for all the lens in the line. Would be nice to get a set of lens all same T Stop.
Click to expand...

They do. They are called Ultra primes, or master primes. Making fast lenses near the normal range, 35mm, 50mm, 75mm etc.... Is relatively simple. It's making wide lenses that's expensive. I'd wager that in any given set of primes, the cost is roughly evenly split amongst the lenses. For example S4's. lets say they cost about $20,000 each. In reality I bet the 35,50, 75, 100mm are probably only worth about $10K, but the 25mm, 18mm, 14mm, 12mm, and 100mm+ are likely extremely expensive, 30,000+, but the costs are distributed. Seems to me why the CP's, and canon primes sit in the middle of the range.
 
Timur Civan said:
They do. They are called Ultra primes, or master primes. Making fast lenses near the normal range, 35mm, 50mm, 75mm etc.... Is relatively simple. It's making wide lenses that's expensive. I'd wager that in any given set of primes, the cost is roughly evenly split amongst the lenses. For example S4's. lets say they cost about $20,000 each. In reality I bet the 35,50, 75, 100mm are probably only worth about $10K, but the 25mm, 18mm, 14mm, 12mm, and 100mm+ are likely extremely expensive, 30,000+, but the costs are distributed. Seems to me why the CP's, and canon primes sit in the middle of the range.
Click to expand...

Best take on the lens market I've read in a longtime. I agree 100%. It's the wides that are the problem. If it was an easy problem to crack affordably, someone would have done it. There's a reason no one has made a T2 19mm wide-angle that can cover 5D/Full Frame. It would probably cost A LOT.
 
Last edited:
HTML:
I am about to pull the trigger (I think) on the canon lenses. Looks like they share the good build characteristics with the cp2, at a better t stop, and, and, they seem to slightly outperform the cp2, especially around the widest setting (24mm). Matt is right in the sense that they prob won't be taken as seriously by possible renters, but at the end of the day, image quality is what matters.

And yea, as Timur points out, I am afraid a matching t stop set is not going to happen at a "low" price point.

Will make sure to post stuff if I do go ahead and get them
...there is so little reviews and useful info on them!
 
Also, it seems at 18mm is a very difficult focal length. Lens techs please chime in.

I pose a question. Is there a construction/design technique that differs between wide angle lenses and normal lengths? Is the 18mm focal length where that design has to change from one to the other? I see sharp 8mm, 12mm 14mm lenses that are reasonably fast, yet the 18mm always seems the weak link in most sets. The S4 T2.0 18mm is rather soft compared to the 14mm, 16mm, and 25mm in the same set. Same with ultra primes, often rental sets start at the 16mm, jump to 24, and go up from there. Rarely do you see 18mm ultras or masters.

That said, the 18mm iPanchro is razor sharp, far better than the S4, and I wonder if its T2.8 stop means its easier to produce with optical competence.

What do you guys think?
 
Good wide glass is indeed tough to make. To make matters worse 18mm and 20mm have been relatively unpopular in the "still world" for whatever reason and whether Canon or Zeiss are willing to admit it they are basing their cinema primes on existing lens designs and manufacturing. This is both a good thing and bad thing for us. The good is we get crazy things like a 50mm T1.3 for a reasonable cost. The bad is we get nothing new in terms of lens design or consistent transmission.

But lets consider some things.

-Zeiss makes a good 21mm f/2.8
-Leica made a good 19mm f/2.8 (R)
-Canon makes a 20mm f/2.8 that should receive an update any minute now (I have a good copy of this lens).
-Nikon makes both a 20mm f/2.8 and an 18mm f/2.8 and they have recently patented new 20mm f/1.8 and 18mm f/1.8 designs
-Olympus made an extremely compact OM 21mm f/2 and an 18mm f/3.5 (which I have adapted to EF) a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.
-Sigma makes a 20mm f/1.8 that you can find good copies off, although a bit on the warm side.
-Nikon, Canon, and Rokinon have good 14mm offerings in the f/2.8 range.
-Rokinon is working on a 10mm f/2.8 rectilinear lens (originally planned to cover APS-C, but I hinted that larger coverage would be a good idea)

The downside is these are all not truly cinema designs.

This isn't to mention the Canon 18mm K35 T1.5, which could be revived one day with modern optics and coatings. (a fella can dream can't he?)

In reality something like the Elites or Illuminas that cover FF35 are really what we all desire. Fast, affordable, consistent transmission through the range, cinema housings, and focus friendly designs.

Canon and Nikon could pull that off. Zeiss won't because it competes with other products. Same for Leica.

This is the exact reason the Red Pro Primes were/are such a fantastic deal at T1.8.
 
Dang Phil really nailed it on the head there.
One thing I will say is that in terms of lens design for most normal lenses, they aren't very drastically different.
Ultra wides however vary quite a bit, hence their inconsistency.
 
I have been testing these C lenses for some time now. There is a wider one coming out to complement the three that are out already.
These are the lenses I have been waiting for a very long time and will have a permanent place in my kit well into the future...

When I get a break in my current jobs I will make and post a proper review of the complete set - including the two compact zooms (the two large zooms are of no interest for me due to extremely high cost (each lens is more then a Epic brain) and due to floating F stop through the zoom range)...

These lenses will also feature in my first very own feature documentary that is currently in pre-prodution...

Peter
 
Phil Holland said:
Good wide glass is indeed tough to make. To make matters worse 18mm and 20mm have been relatively unpopular in the "still world" for whatever reason and whether Canon or Zeiss are willing to admit it they are basing their cinema primes on existing lens designs and manufacturing. This is both a good thing and bad thing for us. The good is we get crazy things like a 50mm T1.3 for a reasonable cost. The bad is we get nothing new in terms of lens design or consistent transmission.

But lets consider some things.

-Zeiss makes a good 21mm f/2.8
-Leica made a good 19mm f/2.8 (R)
-Canon makes a 20mm f/2.8 that should receive an update any minute now (I have a good copy of this lens).
-Nikon makes both a 20mm f/2.8 and an 18mm f/2.8 and they have recently patented new 20mm f/1.8 and 18mm f/1.8 designs
-Olympus made an extremely compact OM 21mm f/2 and an 18mm f/3.5 (which I have adapted to EF) a long time ago in a galaxy far far away.
-Sigma makes a 20mm f/1.8 that you can find good copies off, although a bit on the warm side.
-Nikon, Canon, and Rokinon have good 14mm offerings in the f/2.8 range.
-Rokinon is working on a 10mm f/2.8 rectilinear lens (originally planned to cover APS-C, but I hinted that larger coverage would be a good idea)

The downside is these are all not truly cinema designs.

This isn't to mention the Canon 18mm K35 T1.5, which could be revived one day with modern optics and coatings. (a fella can dream can't he?)

In reality something like the Elites or Illuminas that cover FF35 are really what we all desire. Fast, affordable, consistent transmission through the range, cinema housings, and focus friendly designs.

Canon and Nikon could pull that off. Zeiss won't because it competes with other products. Same for Leica.

This is the exact reason the Red Pro Primes were/are such a fantastic deal at T1.8.
Click to expand...

Yes, and they are mostly F2.8, with a few exceptions. Seems a fast 18 is tough.
 
Phil Holland said:
In reality something like the Elites or Illuminas that cover FF35 are really what we all desire.
Click to expand...

...but it seems like the FF35 format is the problem. I would rather see affordable (RPP price range) excellent quality S35 lenses with a consistent T-stop. With all the new (thousands and thousands) S35 cameras around, there should be some good lenses to go with them... CP2 and the new Canon lenses are really great DSLR lenses, but it's a different segment.
 
I don't get why some would rather every lens be T2.1 than having some at T1.2? OCD? Or lack of self control? I wouldn't even mind a wider lens opening up further at the expense of going softer ie T2 instead of T3.5). I have the reserve to stop down for all but the exceptions.
 
zeiss cp.2's have a bunch of advantages. 14 iris blades, which means the bokeh is so much creamier compared to the canon cine primes, which only have 11 iris blades. interchangeable mount is an huge advantage for me, not possible with the canon primes! cp.2's are cheaper too!

1.2 is great, but do you really need it? of course it's nice to have, but the image quality full wide open is mostly not perfect. a fast lens is nice for some shots, but for 95% i'm using f2.8 - f8! i have an huge set of zeiss cp.2's, including the new 15mm (which is superb - nearly no distortion!!!), 21, the three super speeds (35, 50, 85), 100 macro. am also using the zf.2s from zeiss, which have the same optical design of the cp.2's, but without cinema housing, less iris blades etc...
 
Very interesting and informative thread, thanks to all who contributed.

I agree fast & wide is tricky. But Zeiss cracked the 'good enough, fast enough 18mm' with Superspeeds *decades* ago, at T1.3; this is what I need and want. Not the optical perfection of MPs, but characterful and a good workhorse.

With modern manufacturing techniques, couldn't Superspeed clones be made relatively cheaply? If Zeiss could make one in the 1980s - heck, they started as a 1970s design! - why hasn't someone else cracked it? If RPPs had come in at T1.3 instead of T1.8 I would have been all over a set.

Why *did* Zeiss stop making Superspeeds anyway?! Given the price used sets command at present the demand is obviously there.

Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top