Canon L Series or Zeiss ZE Primes??? Please HELP!!!

[Rick Augustus]

Now that I have made the leap from the (what now seems to be sorely lacking) world of DSLR to RED Scarlet-X, one particular question contiues to beg at me. Do I keep my perfectly good Canon Glass (16-35mm 2.8, 35mm 1.4, 24-105 f4, 70-200mm 2.8 IS) or go with a set of Zeiss Prime lenses. I'm sure i'm not the first to be dealing with this issue, so if any of you have experience with this, please let me know what you may have done as an option... Thanks.

 

[Jonathan Stevenson]

I have both sets of lenses. For me, it's very useful to have both but it depends on what kind of shooting you do.

The majority of my work is docu-style stuff. In that case, you can't beat Canon L series zooms. I have the 24-70 and 70-200 II L Series and they're great for run and gun type situations. For narrative work, I have a Duclos-modded set of ZF2 primes with the Canon mount modification. This means I have a manual iris ring on the lenses (not present on Zeiss ZE lenses) but I don't have to switch mounts from Canon to Nikon. As far as sharpness and quality, I can definitely notice a better look and feel from the ZFs. They are awesome lenses. But for docu-style stuff, the Canon zooms are a perfect fit. They look great and are light and quick.

A set of the two Canon zooms will run you about $5-6k. A set of the modded ZFs will run you about $11k, plus then you need a mattebox, follow focus, rods, etc etc etc.

I can't speak to the Canon glass that you already have, because I don't have those lenses. But overall, it comes down to what you're shooting and what you can afford. Since you already have the Canon glass, it wouldn't hurt to keep them for a bit and see if you like using them. Maybe down the road you can move to a different set or just add more to your arsenal.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

Now that I have made the leap from the (what now seems to be sorely lacking) world of DSLR to RED Scarlet-X, one particular question contiues to beg at me. Do I keep my perfectly good Canon Glass (16-35mm 2.8, 35mm 1.4, 24-105 f4, 70-200mm 2.8 IS) or go with a set of Zeiss Prime lenses. I'm sure i'm not the first to be dealing with this issue, so if any of you have experience with this, please let me know what you may have done as an option... Thanks.

This may help your decision:
We make the drive by wire professional electronic lens control system- the Optitron/ProLock-i kit.
The smart mount (CPL-i) features positive locking similar to PL for unmodified- stock Canon EF mount lenses.
Combined in a kit with the OptiTron allows for very accurate and simple( one cable- no external motors) focus and iris control of autofocus lenses.
We tap into the internal focus and iris motors and drive them .
Here is a video link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWhB5BvisDE

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Now that I have made the leap from the (what now seems to be sorely lacking) world of DSLR to RED Scarlet-X, one particular question contiues to beg at me. Do I keep my perfectly good Canon Glass (16-35mm 2.8, 35mm 1.4, 24-105 f4, 70-200mm 2.8 IS) or go with a set of Zeiss Prime lenses. I'm sure i'm not the first to be dealing with this issue, so if any of you have experience with this, please let me know what you may have done as an option... Thanks.

Rick,

starting form the obvious, Canon has a warm look to it and Zeiss has a more cool sterile look to it, and I love the sterile cool simply plain Neutral look of Zeiss, and for this my most loved glass are the Master Primes, and all Zeiss are the same, obviously not at the same quality in IQ and BUilt or speed of the MP's, in fact not even close, as this would be one of those cases were you truly pay for what you get.

I have also worked for many, many years with Canon "L" with both Full Frame 1Ds bodies, and 1.3 crop Bodies of the 1D series, which are the same crop factor of the Epic and Scarlet with MX sensor, and I loved that glass, and still do.

First thing I need to say, that I care much less for zooms as they never can and or will provide the performance I want, but modern Zooms are changing that game, but never to be compared to Faster smaller lighter and much easier to use Primes.


Having said that, the question to choose Zeiss vs. Canon Still glass for you should come knowing some of the important factors that set apart one type of glass form the other.


Canon Still glass, even when placed in to Full Manual, are still a type of glass manufactured with Auto Focus in mind, so focusing Manually with it especially at Infinity, or finding your almost inexistent or useless markings, can be a challenge, which only with experience can be surpassed, and this is the only reason I fill very comfortable shooting Canon Glass on Epic, because I know it extremely well, and when you get past the how to of the focusing properly, then Canon glass in my experience even so might have less contrast, it offers a much sharper image, especially with the new Primes, were even at the edges of a wide 24mm are sharp, then you have one of the sharpest if not the sharpest 100mm, the Macro IS, that is. One big negative with Canon Still glass is also that you don't have manual Iris control, and this will not allow you to perform certain shots.


With Zeiss still glass, if you go with the ZE type for Canon mount, then the issues of Iris control are the same as in the Canon glass, but if you choose the ZF.2 type then with this Nikon mount glass you don have a hard ring to manually control your Iris as with PL Cine glass, and that is a big plus, just know that they Focus via going the opposite way of Canon's, Zeiss Still glass is a bit less sharp then Canon but has more contrast, problem with their primes is that they breath more then the Canon, and the 100mm Macro even so excellent, can't be used really as it extends so much while focusing that is almost unusable for my purposes.


If we are talking about zooms, then there is no question, Canon all day long, just note that the 16-35 II is a far superior then the original, same goes for the 24-70, and I mean this by a LARGE amount, when instead the 70-200 have always been stellar zooms, and in fact the NONE IS version is still the sharpest of them all, yet the newest of the 70-200 offers some serious improvements too.

As far as the 35mm i.4, that lens has not had an upgrade in forever and there is a reason for it, it is one of the most highly regarded lens in the Canon L series line up, and only finally put to question by the newest 24 1.4 II.


So my suggestion... Keep your Canon glass and upgrade as you can... Happy shooting!!

 

[Rick Augustus]

Thank you guys so VERY MUCH. This has helped a GREAT deal. I truly appreciate it. This COMMUNITY of RED USERS is amazing. I can't thank you enough. RED ROCKS!!!

 

[Patrick Wieland]

I had lens fever for a while after buying my Scarlet. I had a really decent set of Canon L lenses and all I wanted was to sell them and get PL lenses.... The more and more I researched the more I figured out that I could get amazing images with the Canons. A lot of videos that blew me away were shot on Canon L lenses... So now I'm just going to invest in can Epic!

 

[Jon Thomasberg]

Nice post Ketch.

 

[Carlos Reyes]

Agree with what everyone else stated. It depends on your shooting style and the type of work, but since you already have a big range with your canon zooms and assuming you have the money for a new set if you went the ZF2 route it might help you in the long run. You could offer your clients the canon look with zoom lenses for run and gun docu style work or the zeiss look with a more cinema style set of fast light weight primes with better mechanics. Having both options could be a big advantage. I would definitely go with the duclos ZFs instead of ZEs, but if you decide against the new glass, your canon lenses will make great images regardless.

 

[dennys bisogno]

Reading Ketch Rossi feedback is one of the reasons I come to this forums frequently - awesome information and much knowledge gain :yesnod:

 

[Brian Merlen]

Get the ZF's modded instead, they got an iris ring. Or get Nikkors modded. Or spring for CP2's if you can...

 

[Ron Steinberg]

ZF.2 modded with Leitax mounts and Duclos cine mod. Far superior to Canon L. My Canon L glass is fine for stills, I would never want to shoot cinema with them. If you're on a budget, go with Nikkor Ai or Ai-S, I've got a full set of those from 16mm fisheye up to 105/2.5, wonderful glass for a budget price.

I have the utmost respect for Jacek and his products, but you should be aware that Canon autofocus lenses are not continuous focus, they have discreet steps, points of focus, and this will be evident when you are pulling focus. You can see it in the short clip that Jacek posted above, the focus pull "steps" through the focus. Only a manual follow focus can pull smoothly, and I'd hate to use one with an autofocus lens.

 

[Jacek Zakowicz]

ZF.2 modded with Leitax mounts and Duclos cine mod. Far superior to Canon L. My Canon L glass is fine for stills, I would never want to shoot cinema with them. If you're on a budget, go with Nikkor Ai or Ai-S, I've got a full set of those from 16mm fisheye up to 105/2.5, wonderful glass for a budget price.

I have the utmost respect for Jacek and his products, but you should be aware that Canon autofocus lenses are not continuous focus, they have discreet steps, points of focus, and this will be evident when you are pulling focus. You can see it in the short clip that Jacek posted above, the focus pull "steps" through the focus. Only a manual follow focus can pull smoothly, and I'd hate to use one with an autofocus lens.

sorry to jack this thread for a bit:
Yes the Canon lenses use stepper motors. 2000 steps on average. Virtually indistinguishable with a steady hand and good working lens. (just try to turn the mechanical FF with 2000 stops in between and see haha) I have quite a bit of footage now but can't release per customer request. Sorry can't jeopardize his job :blush:
Also this is just the beginning. We are improving the S/W continuously.
There is a new version coming with the wireless release..
Again- sorry for the derail- now back to (cought.... Cosina... cough)Zeiss bashing

 

[Ben Scott]

Nothing wrong with Cosina...

 

[Maik Müller]

Not much to add, because everything has been said about Canon vs Zeiss, but the initial question was also about replacing zooms with primes. And that i wouldn't do, because there many situations that require the one or the other. So i would keep the Zooms and add more Primes as needed.

I like my Canon glass alot, can even live with the mechanics (thats where Zeiss is better, but still not perfect). With my Canon still glass i get AF and IS (here and there) as a bonus, the Optitron looks like a great way to "fix" the mechanics-problem too (but you loose AF and metadata). Canon Primes would match your Zooms better than Zeiss Primes.

What bugs me a bit with Zeiss' current line-up of still lenses is that they're inconsistent, they've great lenses but also a few not so good ones, really old designs and fresh stuff mixed up. There is a reason why Zeiss is starting a new line with that very interesting 55mm 1.4 (followoed by a new 85mm and a unspecified fast wide-angle later). Maybe those lenses will end up being the missing piece between "cheap" cinema lenses like the CP.2s and the real big boys.

And hey, there are more options out there, even cheap ones like the Rokinon/Walimex/Samyang-stuff or old glass, it's not just Canon/Nikon/Zeiss anymore. More stuff is coming, Schneider's Xenon, the mentioned new Zeiss line and even Leica is preparing a "cheaper" line of cinema-glass (but i guess it won't be in the price-range of still-lenses).

Mixing up lenses is also not that bad... Why not just add a few of the good ones from Zeiss to your kit?

"Lens fever" hehe, good to know the name for that.

 

[PC Greene]

Hi Jacek,

thanks for the information. I've felt for some time that the inevitable evolution of glass must end in the smallest most finely crafted lenses possible w total continous electronic control. Unnecessary size is wasteful & a burden to carry or rig. That said, will your mount actually provide anything resembling usable smooth continuous AF w/ canon lenses?

can u pm me the price of your system, including the wireless solution? Is anyone using this system w/ steadicam?

Thanks again,
PCG

sorry to jack this thread for a bit:
Yes the Canon lenses use stepper motors. 2000 steps on average. Virtually indistinguishable with a steady hand and good working lens. (just try to turn the mechanical FF with 2000 stops in between and see haha) I have quite a bit of footage now but can't release per customer request. Sorry can't jeopardize his job :blush:
Also this is just the beginning. We are improving the S/W continuously.
There is a new version coming with the wireless release..
Again- sorry for the derail- now back to (cought.... Cosina... cough)Zeiss bashing

 

[Mohammed El Sharqawy]

as we find lens experts here in this thread would we add the Rokinon cine series to the comparison?
how would they compare to the Zeiss and Canon.? they are all still glass..
the info would be much appreciated..

 

[Björn Benckert]

Even though I have not tested it I would actually spend my money on the OptiTek stuff instead of buying a low priced "cine lens" set. Personally I have a very nice selection of FD lenses they got a long focus throw and are all manual and super small and light weight. And in comparison they out preform even some of the most respected and highly priced Cine primes when it come to picture quality as the have better coverage, are sharper and more rectilinear. Pepole do not think so but the proof is in the pudding.

But having a nice set of EF primes and use their internal motors and gear it for a full rotation as the optitek does is really a setup that we will see more of in the future, and I think we will see less oversized cine primes with external motors etc.

So my advice is to buy a Optitek and Im not biased as I stated above, I never even tested it. lol.

Cheap cine lenses will not rent or render nice images and they will not get your AC thrilled, so it's kind of a bad investment all together if you ask me.

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Rokinon / Samyang is incredibly good for the price. Maybe not Zeiss but still getting scaringly close. Same for canon. Check the dxo comparisons www.dxomark.com they have Rokinon up there.

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Sorry to derail... Björn, do you use an FD mount? If so which one? Or did you convert them?

 

[JustinC]

I think there are lots of good comments about Zeiss vs Canon, especially the primes vs stills side of things.

I'd like to offer a counter opinion to the ZF.2 over ZEs argument. I own ZE's for the reason that I don't rack iris during takes unless I'm doing a drama in which case I'll use hired in lenses.

ZE's without the iris ring are better for anything where remote control over the iris is appealing. For example up high on a jib, monitoring from a viewing station with the REDmote and the operator is way off with the camera, even time lapse have all been places I've found digital control over the iris useful. I have the side SSD buttons configured to be iris open and iris close so it's not at all a bind to open and close the iris quickly when self operating. I'd also find using ZF.2s with a follow focus wheel so tight for space that I can't imagine racking the iris is all that easy. If you really want manual control pay for CP.2s.