Anybody have some info on the Alura zooms?

[Daniel Christensen]

I was browsing around for fun on the Arri website the other day, and was looking at their lenses and came across these Alura lightweight zooms. I get confused because you have Arri's collaborations with Zeiss and Fujinon, but then Zeiss and Fujinon also have their own products that aren't Arri branded, and so I just never actually looked into the Arri/Fujinon zooms.

Anyway, I thought since they were Arri/Fuji they would cost a boatload of money. I get on AbelCine, turns out the lightweight zooms only run at about $24K. Then I look at the studio Aluras, and they're not that much more.

My question is, then, why can I find no information on these lenses? At this price point, and with the specs these things have (constant t stops, identical size on the lightweights), why has no one picked them up and used them? People are going nuts over the Zeiss Compact Zooms, and in my mind these Aluras look waaaaaay better. So am I just not looking in the right places, or do these Aluras have some fatal flaw that I'm not aware of? If not, then by golly I might just pick at least one up.

If anyone can give me any info on these lenses, or can direct me to someplace where I could find some info, I would appreciate it greatly!

 

[paul engstrom]

The Alura studio lenses have become workhorse lenses. They are used a LOT. They have displaced the 12x and 4.7 Optimo studio zooms on many, many productions because they are fast, relatively light, match Ultras and Masters very, very well, cover 5k, don't require 6x6 matte boxes, etc. They are GREAT lenses.

The Alura lightweight zooms are a much rarer animal because the lightweight Optimos are so fantastic.

The Zeiss Compact zooms are getting a lot of buzz because they cover a much larger frame than these other lenses. But only the long zoom is currently shipping.

 

[NateWeaver]

I've used both the Aluras and had a charts to both a 18-80 Alura and a 70-200 CZ.

The Aluras are very good lenses, but they are not perfect. They do fall down a little in the predictable ways. But I would not hesitate to put them on any job.

The 70-200 Compact zoom I tried out though, it had an edge in sharpness. Not that that should be the only criteria anyone chooses their lens by, but it was not too hard to see. Especially to the edges, on a S35 sensor area. Maybe at full frame the CZs don't hold up as well.

 

[Charles Papert]

I own the two Alura studio zooms and have used them on three seasons of television as well as a feature currently in theaters, and last year added the two Alura lightweights.

I find the Alura series to be extremely capable, a very nice neutral lens that can work in a multitude of genres. While some may extoll the virtues of various lenses due to their "personalities", the Aluras form a great basis to gather either a clean "negative" or add filtration (or post work) to coax them into a different mode. In other words, great workhorse all-arounds.

I have been extremely happy with the lightweights in the past year that I've owned them. The Optimos that I previously have used in combination with the studio Aluras simply didn't match as well. I've read a bit on this forum how certain people have feelings about the Optimos vs the Aluras. I think it would be an interesting experiment to shoot some tests and all sit together and watch a blind comparison and see who picks what at the end of the day (probably everyone will end up going the opposite way that they thought--including me)!

 

[Chad Lancaster]

I asked arri recently what the image circle on each was, heres the info

45-250 30.0mm
18-80 30.0mm
15.5-45 31.5mm
30-80 31.5mm