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 :)

Do you think Canon and/or Nikon (especially) will get in the cine glass game?

Nicholaus James

Nicholaus James

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2006
Messages
157
Reaction score
0
Points
16
With the advent of RED, I would assume within the next couple of years, Canon and (I hope) Nikon will get in the game with more high-end quality glass.

I'm not saying that they don't already have good stuff, but the bulk of their product lines are for moms and dads that take lots of pictures of their kids and so forth (you get what I'm saying.)

Me, being a Nikon shooter myself, I would like Nikon to bring back the 28mm f/1.4 and more fast lenses and at even wider angles.

Does anyone think they will expand their product lines with more higher end glass (i.e. more primes at more focal lengths, with faster f-stops (under f/2.0), and maybe even bringing the aperture ring back in Canon lenses)

Should I dare ask that they even break out of still lenses and open whole new product lines with cine model glass?
 
It will never happen. Sorry.
 
Why's that? "Never" is a pretty strong word.
 
scenedirector said:
With the advent of RED, I would assume within the next couple of years, Canon and (I hope) Nikon will get in the game with more high-end quality glass.

I'm not saying that they don't already have good stuff, but the bulk of their product lines are for moms and dads that take lots of pictures of their kids and so forth (you get what I'm saying.)

Me, being a Nikon shooter myself, I would like Nikon to bring back the 28mm f/1.4 and more fast lenses and at even wider angles.

Does anyone think they will expand their product lines with more higher end glass (i.e. more primes at more focal lengths, with faster f-stops (under f/2.0), and maybe even bringing the aperture ring back in Canon lenses)

Should I dare ask that they even break out of still lenses and open whole new product lines with cine model glass?
Click to expand...


Maybe Nikon will bring some discontinued lenses back, like the 28 1.4 if there is a demand. But I think their business model is not in any direction for limited production needs like 35mm movie cameras.

Canon is probably more situated for producing Digital Cine lenses, as they make them for the smaller video formats. Again I think it would depend on the potential sales volume, which at the moment is way too small.

It would be nice for us if they did, but maybe the RED optics will be as good as Nikon or Canon glass.
 
These are companies that depend on a certain volume in the manufacture of their products. Even a run of 10,000 is considered a starter point. Often a product is produced in a run such as this and then doled out of a warehouse until supplies are depleted. If ever single RED owner purchased five sets, then it might just warrant production, but it would cost several million dollars to go into production.

It will never happen, sorry.
 
I think Mitch is right. Nikon manufactured B4 video lenses in the late eighties and early nineties and even that was not enough for them so they abandoned it, and the number of B4 cameras made per year was tens of thousands.

Also, in a way they do - as I think if you could add it all up you will find that within 2 or 3 months the number of people using Canon on birger and Nikon with the Nikon still mount will far exceed the number of RED owners using PL lenses.
 
Having played with the Birger at NAB, and having tested several of the better Canon zooms, I don't know that I could ask a whole lot more.

Maybe less breathing? Even then, they were all acceptable to my eye... less breathing than my Red 18-50.

In my humble opinion, Canon L glass + the Birger mount are ready for primetime indie features (as long as the Birger is durable and reliable).

-Thor
 
Hmmm...I'm pretty happy with my existing Nikon glass, if I'm gonna get a cine lens I may as well go Arri/Zeiss or Cooke, given their experience in the special characteristics of cine lens design.

Besides, doesn't Panavision use Nikon produced glass for many of their lens lines?
 
Thor Wixom said:
In my humble opinion, Canon L glass + the Birger mount are ready for primetime indie features (as long as the Birger is durable and reliable).

-Thor
Click to expand...

I think Image stabilization is going to be a game changer too - not available on cine glass but built in on many Canon lenses. That's why I bought the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS which is basically a scaled down version of the 24-70L zoom for APS-C (and therefore red also) cameras. It is essentially an L series optically - they just don't put the L on anything not ok for full frame. I hope to check it for breathing performance later today. Erik said the 24-70 performs very well from a breathing standpoint and I'm hoping the same is true of the 17-55
 
Perhaps...

Perhaps...

Cine glass is a game huh? I want to play!

This question used to come up from time to time in the pre-digital days. Things have changed significantly in two ways since then:

1. Most digital cine camera do not have reflex mirrors, reducing the interference issues and thus being compatible with a broader range of lenses. I would also include the optical adapters (P+S, MovieTUBE) in this.

2. The number of single chip digital cine cameras, plus number of adapters, now exceeds, and soon will FAR exceed the number of 16mm and 35mm motion picture cameras in use.

So, I think the economics of the situation have changed.

One fact that is overlooked my many: Both Canon and Nikon have already produced cine lenses.

Canon produced a set of cine lenses in BNCR mount called the K-35 primes. They were T1.4 and proudly announced they used aspherical surfaces. Focal lengths were 18, 24, 35, 55, 85. The coatings they used were not as good as Carl Zeiss, so the contrast was a bit less, but the resolution/sharpness was excellent.

These lenses also had beautiful mechanical construction with large brass Acme-thread focus helix and a very nice iris with many blades (probably around 20 blades). These lenses pre-dated PL mount. Had they been made in PL, I think they would have been serious contenders and reduced the dominance of Zeiss in the '80's.

Nikon made c-mount cine primes for 16mm and 1" or smaller TV formats. Not quite the same thing but they were legitimate Nikon cine lenses.

Panavision is well known to have taken many of the best performing still lenses and built cine lenses out of them.

The mechanical requirements (and optical requirements of a zoom lens) are vastly different for cine use than for still camera use. Unmodified manual focus fixed focal length still camera lenses are less suited to motion picture work than dedicated cine lenses. I don't think auto-focus lenses are suitable at all. I have to plug in a *computer* to a USB port on the lens mount just to change the aperture? Oh, nothing will go wrong with that on the set.

I think still camera zoom lenses are mostly totally unsuitable for motion picture work. There are a few notable exception, all on the telephoto end: Nikon 50-300 and Canon 150-600L (which required major rehousing to hold focus - see Century Precision conversion).

OK, coffee time is over. I've got cine lenses to fix.
 
While I agree with Jorge on the majority of his points, I do think that some still camera lenses in standard and shorter focale lengths are useable for cine work. One prime (pun intended) example is the Zeiss 21mm f2.8 in Contax mount. This is considerd one of the sharpest lenses in any focale length ever made. While not a speed lens and with a short throw on the footage scale it does focus in a cinewise direction. But at that focale length your not doing that much focus pulling and are relying on the split to assure sharp focus. Another Zeiss lens is the 15mm f2.8 with the attributes of the fore mentioned 21. While both of these lenses are not cheap, about 3k for a clean 21 and around 3.8k for a new 15 they are still less espensive then what used series Mk1 or 2's seem to be going for. There are some macro and shift lenses also designed by Zeiss that are of very high quality to be had. While rare, Zeiss also made a 50 and 85mm in f1.2 in the Contax mount. AS Jorge said some of the telephotos are very useable for cine work. One that comes to mind is the Zeiss APO 200mm f2. This lens when combined with the Mutar 1.4x and the 2x extenders gives one a 200 f2, a 280mm f2.8 and a 400mm f4 which all fits in one case. Also I think I read somewhere here on the Reduser site that Sanjin likes some of the optics made by Leica. lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top