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 :)

Canon Cine Primes. Let's talk about it.

This has always annoyed me. Especially with the CP2's. The wide glass is where you need the speed. Not hard to add light on a shot using an 85. Much more difficult to have to employ a ton of light on your wide which may only be used for a few seconds if at all. I think some fast wide glass will be coming in the next two years. Most of us would pay a premium for it.
 
These have to come out in PL mount before they can be taken seriously, the new Canon and Nikon locking mounts from Red are great and very solid... for still mounts! In the end neither is a proper cinema mount like PL or PV and as such I would not invest over $1K per prime in anything but PL mount.

As to why Zeiss just doesn't make more super speeds, trust me, they'd love to. But the Supers required heavy use of lead in the glass design, and that is now illegal in Europe & Japan (Where CPs are made). Interestingly, if they moved the glass production to the US they'd be fine.
 
Evin Grant said:
These have to come out in PL mount before they can be taken seriously, the new Canon and Nikon locking mounts from Red are great and very solid... for still mounts! In the end neither is a proper cinema mount like PL or PV and as such I would not invest over $1K per prime in anything but PL mount.

As to why Zeiss just doesn't make more super speeds, trust me, they'd love to. But the Supers required heavy use of lead in the glass design, and that is now illegal in Europe & Japan (Where CPs are made). Interestingly, if they moved the glass production to the US they'd be fine.
Click to expand...

Hey Evin, i definitely see the difference between the two mounts, but i still see a large number of cp2 with the eos mount to them... even on dslrs! Have you experience major issues with these lenses in this mount? Also, while i have your attention... do you happen to have any knowledge on the image characteristics of the Canons, especially in comparison to the cp2?

Thank you very much in advance!
 
If they made the lenses for Super-35, they might be able to offer better T-stops in the wider end... Too bad that there are so extremely few options for Super-35mm lenses in the lower end of the budget spectrum.

I guess Cooke Panchros and RPP's are the only thrusted options?
 
Matt and Carlos,

So it seems the biggest concern is that the wide lens is slower than the long lens. That is, a 2.2 14mm and a 3.1 135mm would be easier to deal with. Of course having everything equally fast is ideal, but that apparently is very difficult and expensive to construct.
 
Peter Moretti said:
Matt and Carlos,

So it seems the biggest concern is that the wide lens is slower than the long lens. That is, a 2.2 14mm and a 3.1 135mm would be easier to deal with. Of course having everything equally fast is ideal, but that apparently is very difficult and expensive to construct.
Click to expand...

I just don't like having a slow wide lens (Especially when shooting slow mo with a RED and having to window the sensor). I use wides a lot and that is a letdown to have to close down on the rest of my lenses just to match the wides. I just dislike the marketing of a new "high speed" lens set when only 3 are truly high speed and the other two throw off the set... Expensive surely (only in terms of a budget cine set), but I think people would be willing to pay $6-$7,000 to have a 1.5 14mm lens... It would be the most expensive in the set but I'd pay just so I have a matched set who all perform identically... The 3 high speed Canon's retail for 15,000 (so basically $5,000 per lens.) $6-$7,000 would be ideal for a 14mm 1.5! Plus Canon could blow away Zeiss CP.2's in sales if they get a faster wide and telephoto lens and have a matched t stop set. Zeiss missed the mark on their set I think. Sure they sold a lot, but they could have sold more if the set was matched.
 
If Samyang decides to release their lenses in a PL mount, real cine housing, proper focus marks and potentially fixing the optical formula for little focus breathing... and say each lens in the set is under $2-$3k and are all the same speed (T1.5)... they will sell extremely well. They have the engineering prowess and the know how to do so, and hopefully they'll bring competition to other lens manufacturers (Kinda like what RED is doing, remember?).
 
Shervin Mandgaryan said:
If Samyang decides to release their lenses in a PL mount, real cine housing, proper focus marks and potentially fixing the optical formula for little focus breathing... and say each lens in the set is under $2-$3k and are all the same speed (T1.5)... they will sell extremely well. They have the engineering prowess and the know how to do so, and hopefully they'll bring competition to other lens manufacturers (Kinda like what RED is doing, remember?).
Click to expand...

Exactly! This is why I said we need a small company like RED was to the camera industry to do the same with the lens market. Prices have gotten ridiculous and old glass like Super Speeds are selling for more than they cost brand new when they were being made 30 years ago.
 
I don't really understand why Zeiss was able to make a complete prime set in T1.3 speed for sensor sizes bigger than S35, and 30 years later, no one has been able to (re)create the same set in a similar speed, or even faster. It boggles my mind. Canon did almost the same thing with the K35, and even they for some reason aren't making the same lenses from 30 years ago.

Also, on that note, anyone remember the Canon 50mm f/1.0 L lens from the mid 90's? Why was that lens discontinued? And why hasn't anyone made a similar lens since then?

I've got a feel they know EXACTLY how to f*cking make fast lenses for bigger sensors, but they're holding back for some reason.
 
Shervin Mandgaryan said:
Also, on that note, anyone remember the Canon 50mm f/1.0 L lens from the mid 90's? Why was that lens discontinued? And why hasn't anyone made a similar lens since then?

I've got a feel they know EXACTLY how to f*cking make fast lenses for bigger sensors, but they're holding back for some reason.
Click to expand...

That Canon 50/1.0 was twice as heavy as the Leica Noctilux. Maybe not enough people bough it. I wouldn't. Heck, I wouldn't even buy the Leica. What for? Most photographers probably agree.

I suspect that camera companies are seeing more growth in the consumer and enthusiast segment. So they won't bother with Super Speed recreations, even though today's software would make it much easier. Hell, all I would want would be T/2.0. Even then I'd try to to stick with T2.8 at the widest.

And, speaking only for myself, I wonder why RED did not do Super Speed clones instead of RPPs from the beginning.

I also wonder, if nobody wants to use lead anymore, why nobody uses ceramics. Ceramic optics have been around for maybe five years or so AFAIK.
 
Shervin,

There are the Illuminas, but I was not impressed with their build quality when I saw a set a few years ago.
 
Matt Ryan said:
Exactly! This is why I said we need a small company like RED was to the camera industry to do the same with the lens market. Prices have gotten ridiculous and old glass like Super Speeds are selling for more than they cost brand new when they were being made 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

Agree, agree! But it starts with the users... DOP's could try to do good stuff and find esthetics that don't require a SILLY amount of money spent on glass... on the other hand, the prices of cine-glass is often not driven by the need of optical beauty, but rather the need of mechanical decency... More Super-35 lenses in the range of T2 and 1500-5500 USD per Lens needed.

In a perfect world production of Cine-glass should be adapted to new reality of thousands and thousands of digital PL-cinema cameras... S4 should cost 7500 USD per lens, Panchros 3500 USD per lens and Ultras should cost 6 500. It would probably make Cooke and Zeiss/Arri sell 10 times as many lenses. And most Alexa and Red owners would be able to buy decent glass for their decent cameras.
 
Jon MIchael Puntervold said:
Agree, agree! But it starts with the users... DOP's could try to do good stuff and find esthetics that don't require a SILLY amount of money spent on glass... on the other hand, the prices of cine-glass is often not driven by the need of optical beauty, but rather the need of mechanical decency... More Super-35 lenses in the range of T2 and 1500-5500 USD per Lens needed.

In a perfect world production of Cine-glass should be adapted to new reality of thousands and thousands of digital PL-cinema cameras... S4 should cost 7500 USD per lens, Panchros 3500 USD per lens and Ultras should cost 6 500. It would probably make Cooke and Zeiss/Arri sell 10 times as many lenses. And most Alexa and Red owners would be able to buy decent glass for their decent cameras.
Click to expand...

Well, even though I can see why those lenses cost that much amount of money, what it is true is that a gap is being created between the quality of the cameras people own and the quality of their lenses. Most of us have a god damn pretty decent camera here (talking about RED owners), and a high number of us have... ok lenses. I guess technology has opened to buyers on the camera side of things but not really (not sure it will!) on the lens side of things. It just seems like a lens, no matter what, is such a delicate and precise designm that requires excellent materials for it to be awesome. (A camera could be made out of plastic almost and still produce awesome images)
 
I say get the FD mount and top class canon FD lenses if you want canon glass. Then if you want to spend big get something that rent well, I think these canon lenses will never rent like the UP's or the Cooke's or other more prestigious glass. They will, even if they are probably super nice all ways fell like the lenses made for the C300 and that will not land to well within the film community. I think it will be more of a dream lens for the 5D guys, but if they get the chance to rent PL glass they spend the extra buck and grab a set of old UP's as soon as they get a chance to do so. Thats my guess.
 
Legacy and technology- perfect marriage

Legacy and technology- perfect marriage

Haha I'm very close to proving this discussion wrong and illustrating the mistake that Canon made by going backwards with the lens tech.
And yes it's a real, tangible product. The demo video is being edited "as we speak" The paradigm will be shifted, again:yesnod:
 
I was going to make a post about how Canon is a big company that needs a huge customer base for every product that needs a good deal of R&D and exclusive assembly line real estate, but I don't think any of us will care once Jacek unveils his surprise.
 
Yes have fun while you can smarty pants:wink5: - I'll have the final laugh:001_tt2:
 
Björn Benckert said:
I say get the FD mount and top class canon FD lenses if you want canon glass. Then if you want to spend big get something that rent well, I think these canon lenses will never rent like the UP's or the Cooke's or other more prestigious glass. They will, even if they are probably super nice all ways fell like the lenses made for the C300 and that will not land to well within the film community. I think it will be more of a dream lens for the 5D guys, but if they get the chance to rent PL glass they spend the extra buck and grab a set of old UP's as soon as they get a chance to do so. Thats my guess.
Click to expand...

you are probably right Bjorn. However, at this point the one thing I care the most is what is the nicest glass I can afford, putting possible rental calculations second. I have been asked from producers a few times already for cp2, I know I could have a decent rental return ywith them, but I am suspicious of some of their characteristics, and I would love to own a set of lenses that I truly look forward to shoot with. This is why I got slightly excited about these performing well for their price optically, and still having a good build and marks, etc.

I wish I could step it up to panchros but....not there yet!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top