Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Cinematics - China

A

Adam Howden

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
298
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Australia
Website
adamhowden.com
Hi All, just wondering...

Has anyone heard of these guys? And do we know if they're legit and weather anyone has bought from them?
 
http://www.pchood.com/film lens
looks like they are enclosing the lens in a housing, not rebuilding it. Could be useful for old lenses. I would love to see one in person but I can't imagine this being any good. You should probably spend your money on a real compact prime.
 
I was talking to Zeiss about these lenses. Zeiss is investigating right now if they break their patents or other rights reserved by Zeiss.
The Lenses are rehoused ZE lenses, so they are different to the CP.2 Lens range (less iris blades, no continuos iris).
Nobody can predict how well the housing is made, and how good they lenses are, but i´m in doubt they hold up well.

Glass is something you can use almost a lifetime, so i´d rather go for a trusted source and invest more money instead of taking the risk on a unknown "knockoff" lens.
 
Hey Manuel,

Yah I've sort of been thinking the same thing, but the time you put a kit together its like 10K may as well be a Red Primes kit which I hear really good things about?
 
Nothing wrong in essence with the "shell on" design. I think it's a clever idea. If the workmanship is adequate this is all that indies wanted- larger scales with legible numbers and more substantial barrels. Zeiss should get some motivation- they surely lack it as of lately- the CP line is a prime example of it...
OK putting my flame proof suit on now...:emote_couch:
 
I own a full set of Red Pro Primes and love it. The lenses perform great and are up to par with UP´s or Cooke S4´s. There are only two things about the RPP´s which are not that good, they are big and heavy. No problem when on a dolly or on sticks, but if you plan to do a lot of handheld work, that would count against them.
And 2nd the focus scales are not as wide spread as scales from Cooke or Zeiss, however, they´re still manageable.

The RPPs are not a very famous rental lens at least here in germany, so if you will use them mainly for your own projects it´s fine, but if you try to generate some ROI with renting glass, you´d probably be petter of with the Zeiss CP.2 Lenses (rental market may be different in Australia, so i´m just guessing)

I didn´t like the CP.2 so much because of the different stops of the lenses and especially T3,6 on the 18mm was a deal breaker for me.

I´m planning on extending my RPP´s range with some Cooke S4 lenses to complete the range, I´m missing 135, 180mm on the long end and 14mm on the short end as well as some nice in between focal lengths i really learned to like with Cooke S4´s like the 21mm, the 40mm and the 65mm. I know that one Cooke S4 is about the same than a Set of 5 RPP´s but they´re easy to rent as well.

best regards
Manuel
 
Let's just get this out of the way.

The Plastic hood idea is a terrible one.

They do make some okay other Crap, if that is all you need - crap accessories - like a mattebox you don't mind breaking.

I'm not knocking it, sometimes all you need is a piece of crap to get the job done one job at a time - BUT there mattebox is probably as good as a Redrock mattebox (in my opinion)

Here is a basic breakdown on crap accessories for low prices:

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/562/special-deals-matteboxes-hoods-and-follow-focus

They even have deals. People put in reviews and such as well. One reason I like the idea of the Scarlet or EOS mount on epic is for those smaller jobs I can use screw on filters and lens hoods instead of taking it to "that level"
 
OptiTek said:
Nothing wrong in essence with the "shell on" design. I think it's a clever idea. If the workmanship is adequate this is all that indies wanted- larger scales with legible numbers and more substantial barrels. Zeiss should get some motivation- they surely lack it as of lately- the CP line is a prime example of it...
OK putting my flame proof suit on now...:emote_couch:
Click to expand...
No, nothing wrong with it, I believe innocinema was working on something similar at one time. There is certainly a market for a properly done "shell" but I think that these would benefit from being smaller instead of just copying the compact prime design.
I own both a set of the zeiss zf's and the compact primes and love them both for different applications. I thought that I would get rid of the zf's when I bought the CP.2's but I still use the zf's a lot because of their size and it may be time to get your nikon mount for the epic. I have the red one version and it's been fantastic.
 
Hi Shane, thanks for your response.

Do the Zeiss ZFs telescope out very far at the front when focusing? and How's the breathing during focus? I'm leaning back toward a set of ZFs as they seem like the best value price wise. Again a little slow on the wide end - frustrating!
 
Hi All,

I got this response from Leon at Cinematics yesterday :-)

Good day!
Thank you for being interested in our products and sorry for replying late
as I was out of office.
1. Yes, we add an accurate distance marking to each lens, and we do not
change the optical part of lens, so just assemble case to original lenses.
2. It is better to order Nikon F mount Zeiss, and then change the mount to
Canon, as add an aperture ring is very difficult and cost high.
3. Please check the attachment for pictures.
Looking forward to receiving your reply.

Best regards!

Yours sincerely
Leon
 
This is not a new idea. It is also not a good one. A few years back P+S Technik tried adding wraparound housings to the Zeiss ZF lenses. The pressures exerted on the mechanics of these lenses made for very stiff and uneven movement, and I believe would cause damaging wear over time. P+S abandoned the project. Good luck getting anyone to service your lenses after this shell screws them up and voids their warranty. I consider the version a non-starter.
 
Adam Howden said:
Hi Shane, thanks for your response.

Do the Zeiss ZFs telescope out very far at the front when focusing? and How's the breathing during focus? I'm leaning back toward a set of ZFs as they seem like the best value price wise. Again a little slow on the wide end - frustrating!
Click to expand...

They don't telescope much, maybe about a 1/4 inch max. It depends on the lens but if you have a bellows in your mattebox it's not an issue. The 100mm telescopes a lot but in macro mode so really not an issue. Any breathing has not been apparent or an issue for me. They really are fantastic lenses, I've owned them since they were first introduced (zf.1). Get the duclos conversion or add 77mm stepup rings to them so you only have to buy one set of filters.
I also use a nikon 17-35/2.8 for the wide end
 
Mitch Gross said:
This is not a new idea. It is also not a good one. A few years back P+S Technik tried adding wraparound housings to the Zeiss ZF lenses. The pressures exerted on the mechanics of these lenses made for very stiff and uneven movement, and I believe would cause damaging wear over time. P+S abandoned the project. Good luck getting anyone to service your lenses after this shell screws them up and voids their warranty. I consider the version a non-starter.
Click to expand...
Isn't there a possibility that, with typical P+S pricing , the lenses would end up costing more than CPs- so they would not sell any?
I'm not saying that's the reason but it just could be:angelsad2:
Sorry Mitch, couldn't resist- all for good fun, hope you don't mind...
 
P+S tried their shells several years back, well before the Cmpact Primes were even a project at Zeiss. They were relatively inexpensive (certainly less than the overpriced Chinese concept here) and abandoned for the reasons I gave -- namely that it was a bad idea.
 
paul ross jones said:
P+s still make ziess based lenses. They don't look like a housed kit-
http://www.pstechnik.de/en/optics-lensset-35mm.php

I think these kits are a fair better solution than the cp2s as the cp2s are far too slow IMO.
The ziess zf lenses when I tested them are ok open and sharp stopped down to f2 .

Paul
Click to expand...

so t2 is ok but T 2.1 on the Cp's is too slow?
They're the same glass: the zeiss zf, the ps technic and the cp.2's.
 
Shane Kelly said:
so t2 is ok but T 2.1 on the Cp's is too slow?
They're the same glass: the zeiss zf, the ps technic and the cp.2's.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've read about the zf sharing the same glass... But when I did quite a few tests (as stills, as I'm a stills guy), the cp2's were sharper with no ca at f2.
I don't know why, maybe the construction of the cp2s are better? I would have bought a set of cp2s for both stills and motion if they where f1.4, I think the build quality is excellent. I also only shoot manual when shooting stills wide as the canon focus is very inconsistent.

Paul
 
Started a thread on this at Lens Test section.

Should have done a forum wide search.

Has anyone tried these to date?

Very interested in the Zeiss 50mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top