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 :)

Angenieux 25-250 T3.9 ?

Sure.
Cut my teeth with that lens. Was a standard issue for many many years. There were a couple of versions. I bet it was produced from the 1970's all the way up to the late 1980's.
If it's in good shape it can look quite nice. LOTS of breathing though, and slow, with a far minimum focus.
Ironically we are using one today, and older vintage from the 1970's, with a stocking and Classic Soft, to recreate a 1950's TV show look. We looked for an older lens but couldn't find one in time for the job. Even with the stocking and filter it's still a bit "modern" for that era.
But whatever resolution deficiencies it has might serve the look quite nicely depending on what you are doing. Certainly it's kind to actors' faces.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Thank you very much Harry!

So, you think is good to shot a feature film? all film with this lens + redone.
This lens is for free for me....you think I have to find absoluty a better lens?
 
Well... many many films have been made with this lens. But...
I would shoot a test.
When you say "feature" I assume that you hope it will end up on a big screen.
You should try to see your test this way (also testing a more modern zoom to see the difference) and judge for yourself.
On the small screen (where I mostly live and work) I would not hesitate to use it.
But keep in mind that it's pretty slow at T.4, and the close focus is far away, and the breathing is pretty bad. If you can live with these limitations and you like the look, why not?
Cheers,
Harry
 
I have one of these and love it. Not the sharpest lens in the world but has a style unto it's own. One thing worth mentioning is the focus is external so the whole front of the lens moves in and out when racking focus. I built a tube out of lexan that the front can go in and out of without leaking light into the matte box. It is a kind of leading lady lens with it's inherent softness. You may want to shoot for 5.6 or a 5.6, 8 split.

I'm attaching a lens test I did which compares my 12x optimo with 10x angenieux you are interested in. They were both shot at T4, 250mm. The 12x is the one on the left.

Best, Peter
 

Attachments

  • Optimo 12x vs. 10x.jpg
    Optimo 12x vs. 10x.jpg
    12.7 KB · Views: 0
Well, yes.
Remember that 35 years (or more) passed between development of those lenses, and Angeniuex went through two newer series (HP and HR) on their way to making the Optimo. And there are good examples and bad example of this lens. In 30 or 35 years, one lens may have worked every day of its life and never had an overhaul and may be so out of adjustment and worn out that it will never again look OK. Another lens, one serial number away, let's say, was purchased by a would be indie film guy and spent most of it's life packed away in a storage room somewhere. While it won't look like an Optimo, it may be perfectly acceptable, and will probably look as good as this lens can look.
Again, do a test. The extreme magnification you see in Peter's frame grab is not what you'd see in HD or SD, even on a large TV. And it's hard to get an idea of what digital projection or a filmout would look like without, well, actually seeing it.
And if you can get ths lens for free vs. $65,000 for an Optimo, well, then...
Do a test.
Cheers,
Harry
 
Harry has made some very good points here. My test is extreme in all senses. I should have stated that it is an extreme magnification of the lens chart as can be seen by the small size of the slider bar on the screen grab.

The 10x angenieus lens looks beautiful to me but I have had considerable work done to it. I believe mine was built in the mid 60s. If I were you, and the lens checks out OK, I'd use it.

Here are a couple of examples of mine...

Except for the initial macro shot all other shots in this were with the 10x.
http://web.me.com/plaidass1/Site/6os_-_7os.html

This was entirely shot with the 10x, I also shot it with my 12x optimo but did not like the 12x results. http://web.me.com/plaidass1/Site/1950.html

One thing to keep in mind is that in 4k the imagery looks quite a bit better.
 
Massimiliano Mauceri said:
Another question: better Angienieux 25.250 or a Zeiss Set Super Speed (16mm,36mm,50mm,80mm,100mm) ?

I have possibility to choice one of those.
Click to expand...

Depends on your needs.
If you're doing hand-held work, the super speeds are perfect. If you want an all in one tele zoom, the Angenieux is your best bet.
Also, speed is a huge factor here as well. The super speeds are T1.3 and the Angenieux is T3.9.
Really depends on what you need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top