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 :)

85mm lens or Scarlet

N

N.T. Bullock

Active member
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
NOLA
Website
www.sequentialpictures.com
There's been a lot of lens talk that I've sifted through here on the forums. From that info I ordered us a Tokina 11-16 and I'm hopefully also going to get the Canon 50mm f1.4 soon. Those two lenses came up quite a bit. I really want a decent 85mm prime lens, as well. I didn't leave my research feeling confident in a direction for an affordable, yet acceptable quality, 85mm lens. Until we get a PL mount, what sub-$500 lens works best with a Canon mount Scarlet?

A quick Amazon search finds me the Canon 85mm f/1.8 Series EF Telephoto Lens USM for $380. How do the Rokinons hold up? Thanks in advance.
 
Hey N.T. If you are going to be getting the canon 1.4 i would suggest the canon 1.8, they match perfectly. The focus on the 85 is much smoother than the 50 and a little easier to use imh. We wore out our 50 and the 85 is still working great. For 3 hun and change, there's not much to lose. It's easy to say it's not a big deal if they match or not, but in reality it's huge and speeds up post grading tremendously.
 
N.T. Bullock said:
There's been a lot of lens talk that I've sifted through here on the forums. From that info I ordered us a Tokina 11-16 and I'm hopefully also going to get the Canon 50mm f1.4 soon. Those two lenses came up quite a bit. I really want a decent 85mm prime lens, as well. I didn't leave my research feeling confident in a direction for an affordable, yet acceptable quality, 85mm lens. Until we get a PL mount, what sub-$500 lens works best with a Canon mount Scarlet?

A quick Amazon search finds me the Canon 85mm f/1.8 Series EF Telephoto Lens USM for $380. How do the Rokinons hold up? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Do keep in mind that your 50mm will act like a 80mm at 4k and a 100mm at 3k
 
@Nicholas
"If you are going to be getting the canon 1.4 i would suggest the canon 1.8, they match perfectly."
Click to expand...
Are you speaking about the 50mm here? I know there's a cheaper $100 Canon 50 mil, but from what I've read I feel like the extra buckage is worth it. Not so? Can I skimp here for all intents and purposes?

@Kamal Good point. I'm still trying to get used to thinking about the crop factor. We'll be shooting most of our footage at 2K and 3K, using 4K for graphic elements and when re-framing in post would be beneficial. So the Tokina at 16, shooting 2K, would be equivalent to about what, roughly? 50mm? Thanks guys.
 
Oh yeah sorry, the 50 1.4 The $100 1.8 50mm is optically decent but the build is impractical and super cheap, focusing is difficult and no room for a future follow focus. 2k has the equivilant crop factor as 16mm film, I forget the formula.
 
The Samyang 85mm 1.4 seem to do the job, for its price. But it'll act like a more telephoto lens at 4k. Or the nikon 85mm 1.4 afd, which I find better.
But remember that these are no "pro" lenses !
But for sure you won't get the same results as with a canon 85mm 1.2 or a nikon 84mm 1.4 !

If you want a "85mm ratio" there's also the carl zeiss Planar T 50mm 1.4 ZE which could be a good choice for you, but it's all manual ! ;)
 
@Nicholas Gotcha. Will definitely go with the 1.4. I'm trying to save us money where possible, but that one didn't seem to be the place to do it. :]

@ Franck I'll look into those you mentioned in a bit here. We'd definitely be renting/borrowing better lenses when we shoot larger productions, but I'm looking for filler lenses that we can own for smaller projects in between the bigger ones.
 
While I do understand the budget limits, there has to be mentioned how much a good quality lens is needed for a system like this. You cant buy a 4K camera of X amount of dollars and put a plastic 50 1.8 in front of it. If you have to and that is your budget then thats where your at. I would suggest nothing less than a zeiss ZF lens if you are using the canon mount. If you can't afford that then look into older canon FD lenses, sharp and manual. The biggest aspect of a cinema lens is the focal throw. If you have AF lenses and want to add then thats your choice, but I would highly recommend looking at the manual alternatives for the canon mount. Your image is only as good as the lens that it passes through. Try to play within your budget, everyone has to, but stretch in for zeiss if you can.
 
The zeiss ZE 50mm 1.4 costs around 500$ and is not a bad lens for this price. Manual, smooth ring and nice glass...
 
N.T. Bullock said:
There's been a lot of lens talk that I've sifted through here on the forums. From that info I ordered us a Tokina 11-16 and I'm hopefully also going to get the Canon 50mm f1.4 soon. Those two lenses came up quite a bit. I really want a decent 85mm prime lens, as well. I didn't leave my research feeling confident in a direction for an affordable, yet acceptable quality, 85mm lens. Until we get a PL mount, what sub-$500 lens works best with a Canon mount Scarlet?

A quick Amazon search finds me the Canon 85mm f/1.8 Series EF Telephoto Lens USM for $380. How do the Rokinons hold up? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

A used Nikon AIS 85 1.4 is a great option. You'll need a Nikon F to Canon adapter, but they are cheap and work great. I bought my 85 1.4 AIS for $700 in immaculate shape used. They are getting more and more rare, but check out the review here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/85mm-f14.htm
 
daniel caruso said:
While I do understand the budget limits, there has to be mentioned how much a good quality lens is needed for a system like this. You cant buy a 4K camera of X amount of dollars and put a plastic 50 1.8 in front of it. If you have to and that is your budget then thats where your at. I would suggest nothing less than a zeiss ZF lens if you are using the canon mount. If you can't afford that then look into older canon FD lenses, sharp and manual. The biggest aspect of a cinema lens is the focal throw. If you have AF lenses and want to add then thats your choice, but I would highly recommend looking at the manual alternatives for the canon mount. Your image is only as good as the lens that it passes through. Try to play within your budget, everyone has to, but stretch in for zeiss if you can.
Click to expand...

I have to say as much as I agree with this statement, I have both the 50 1.4 Canon and the much more expensive 50 1.2 L and the 50 1.4 resolves a better image at anything above f 2.0 . The lens is great and produces good images for the cost. Is it as good as a Zeiss or Cooke? I doubt it but if you are looking for a lens that will suit you until the budget gets a bit bigger, the 50 1.4 Canon is a great choice for around $300 Don't expect to focus pull like a cine lens however. On the other hand; see my other post about the 85 1.4 AIS NIkon. That lens is a beast and built like a tank with smooth focus.
 
I agree eric, it all comes down to budget. I had a kit (sold to go PL)of 7 nikons all wide open and ai or ais, the 85 is amazing. But what i try to explain to people who do not know is that your cinematic image is not all camera. There is a reason why a rack in a movie looks beautiful, because it takes a good 2 inches to reach a foot or two in focus. You cant dimiss manual lenses, there is a reason for them. Resolution is something to be tested as you have, but for serious film work i am against the AF choices, just my preference. For example, a lot of AF lenses dont have secure elements, so when you rack the elements move and you have image shift, which will not make you 4K image quality anymore. It is give and take with lenses vs camera for budget, which one gets more money.
 
daniel caruso said:
It is give and take with lenses vs camera for budget, which one gets more money.
Click to expand...
not for me my man,
i don't shoot for 'big screen', camera is always priority, i can tell RED from AF100 or FS100, but I don't hink a lot of people will see the differense between Zeiss and Tokina looking at the computer monitor,
but i might be wrong
 
Paramon Ivanovich said:
not for me my man,
i don't shoot for 'big screen', camera is always priority, i can tell RED from AF100 or FS100, but I don't hink a lot of people will see the differense between Zeiss and Tokina looking at the computer monitor,
but i might be wrong
Click to expand...

Of course! but put a piece with quick racks from an AF lens against smooth racks from a cine lens with long racks, it will scream AF lens and loose its cinematic quality, whether you have a S35 gate or note. What i mean is dont ruin the beautiful quality and feel of the S35 camera with an AF lens, thats my comment. It is more about the mechanics of the lens than optics, but you get both on a cine lens (or manual glass) anyway.

I dont mean to bring this thread off topic, but all points mentioned are good points to consider when choosing lenses.
 
daniel caruso said:
I agree eric, it all comes down to budget. I had a kit (sold to go PL)of 7 nikons all wide open and ai or ais, the 85 is amazing. But what i try to explain to people who do not know is that your cinematic image is not all camera. There is a reason why a rack in a movie looks beautiful, because it takes a good 2 inches to reach a foot or two in focus. You cant dimiss manual lenses, there is a reason for them. Resolution is something to be tested as you have, but for serious film work i am against the AF choices, just my preference. For example, a lot of AF lenses dont have secure elements, so when you rack the elements move and you have image shift, which will not make you 4K image quality anymore. It is give and take with lenses vs camera for budget, which one gets more money.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I think there is absolutely no substitute for good cinema glass. Plus the value of lenses seem to really hold the test of time; one thing a camera typically doesn't do. I know some friends that purchase the best lenses and rent cameras as the value lowers over time so much. Good glass in good shape can be worth even more in the future.
 
Oddly enough, that is what some had said as advice to my scarlet purchase, get a lens kit and keep the af100 (which is pl mount). But even the price of my entire scarlet kit wouldnt be close to a cooke S4 set. Plus camera packages are more expensive to rent, so it was that fine balance of what to do and do in the future. Ohh lenses, could talk about them all day =].
 
If you're looking to do mostly narrative work and are on a tight budget to only get one lens, I'd suggest getting a 24, 28, 32 or 35 before going for an 85. In all honesty I've probably used the 24-35 lenses 90% of the time while the 85 has been used about 10% of the time. You're going to want something in between 16 and 50.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top