Contax Zeiss Survival Guide

[Chris McKechnie]

Video samples of GH4 coming soon with contax...but here are a couple of frame grabs from today of one of my boys playing in the snow. Not tact sharp since he was moving towards me. hehe

Shot on the 35 - 2.8 lens with the Metabones making it a 2.0.
Rocked the Tiffen Vari-ND
Shot 4K - 4096x2160
ISO 800
Straight from the camera. Love the skin-tones I'm getting with my custom profile and these contax lenses. These lenses are really a great combo with the GH4.

 

[Paul Russell]

While I'm still waiting for my 35mm to be Leitax'd - turns out this time of year isn't good for fast turnarounds - I've been shooting a pop video with a couple of local talents. I've worked with the director before and he insisted that I bring my HBM filters for this one. The ladies love this glossy, yet analog look. The two CU's were shot with the HMB 1/2 on the Contax 85mm AEG f1.4 and the duo singing with the 25mm AEG and HBM under 2 x 2K Arri Blondies for a strong glow.

Happy New Year, everyone.

 

[liam howlett]

Congrats on the macro! I LOVE THAT LENS!!

Not sure about GH4, but I'm pretty sure there were some GH3 samples early on in the thread!

I'm still going through the thread, currently on page 50 seems like I haven't gotten to them yet. Been taking notes from everyone's post and compiling them in a word file so I can be more informed about what to purchase. Planning to use this lens on a GH4 for starters. Heard that they work well on the Speedbooster M43 to CY adapter. We'll see. Once I get all my things I'll post examples for DSLR shooters.

I was thinking of not even buying the 2.8s for starters but simply going after the 1.4 35mm. That would put me at a wide angle, a macro, and then I'll need a tele. I'm shooting for investing into 3 good ZC lenses right off the bat, and thus far I've already gotten one. I'm a fan of long lenses, Tony Scott / Bay style of filmmaking therefore seems like I'll need to get a 200 or 300 as a third lens.

 

[liam howlett]

Video samples of GH4 coming soon with contax...but here are a couple of frame grabs from today of one of my boys playing in the snow. Not tact sharp since he was moving towards me. hehe

Shot on the 35 - 2.8 lens with the Metabones making it a 2.0.
Rocked the Tiffen Vari-ND
Shot 4K - 4096x2160
ISO 800
Straight from the camera. Love the skin-tones I'm getting with my custom profile and these contax lenses. These lenses are really a great combo with the GH4.

Wow. This is all GH4? incredible, please post more and with all the ZC lenses you've got. I'm fascinated looking at these examples. Incredible. But then again, a good shooter has to be behind these. I've seen a lot of examples of people shooting on ZC - mainly stills, on flickr and they just do not do these lenses justice. But these photos showcase them quite well. Please MORE!

 

[Nick Morrison]

I'm still going through the thread, currently on page 50 seems like I haven't gotten to them yet. Been taking notes from everyone's post and compiling them in a word file so I can be more informed about what to purchase. Planning to use this lens on a GH4 for starters. Heard that they work well on the Speedbooster M43 to CY adapter. We'll see. Once I get all my things I'll post examples for DSLR shooters.

I was thinking of not even buying the 2.8s for starters but simply going after the 1.4 35mm. That would put me at a wide angle, a macro, and then I'll need a tele. I'm shooting for investing into 3 good ZC lenses right off the bat, and thus far I've already gotten one. I'm a fan of long lenses, Tony Scott / Bay style of filmmaking therefore seems like I'll need to get a 200 or 300 as a third lens.

Consider the 80-200 then if you are on a budget. It's a superb zoom that covers much of the "long" end. Has tremendous close focusing too. Can focus down to 3 feet, when most 200's focus down to 10 feet.

 

[Greg McDonald]

Nice shots J! Chris, those are the best frames I've seen from the GH4. Most of the other stuff I've seen from the camera is fairly video-y looking.

 

[Jake Wilganowski]

these are 50mm 1.4MMJ on Dragon

 

[liam howlett]

Consider the 80-200 then if you are on a budget. It's a superb zoom that covers much of the "long" end. Has tremendous close focusing too. Can focus down to 3 feet, when most 200's focus down to 10 feet.

Hypothetically, if I am not on a budget - what else is a perfect investment in the tele range? I'm assuming a "prime tele" then. Also I plan on covering an entire 'range' in 2015 - from wide to tele - so I can own a 'set'. But I want to own the best lenses in this set. I know that I'll be looking at 50, and 85 down the line, as well as 180 I believe, and on the wider end I've heard talk of 28. I think.

 

[Jake Wilganowski]

How can I get photos to show up large and embedded in the post?

 

[Chris McKechnie]

Here are some more GH4 and the Contax examples. Mostly shot on the 35mm. Again with the metabones S version, so shooting wide open. NO F-Stop control unfortunately.

Honestly, I think these lenses are the best line of lenses for this overly-sharp camera. I have the sharpness turned all the way down too, which I think is perfect. I've played with so many different profiles and done experimenting on my own. I've landed on a variation off of Natural, with some customization with curves, pedestal, etc. I get it close to the Epic.

4k motion grabs - handheld
ISO 800
5000K
Custom profile

 

[liam howlett]

These look phenomenal man. I'd love for you to keep going with your other lenses. People need to see this combination!

 

[Uli Plank]

The 180mm s a wonderful prime, I tried the 200's and this one stayed with me.

 

[J Obertone]

Chris. wonderful shots, cinematic tone, I haven't messed with the Gh4 yet but now I kinda cant wait to.

 

[Chris McKechnie]

These look phenomenal man. I'd love for you to keep going with your other lenses. People need to see this combination!

Liam, I don't have time to "test" my entire line, as I'm pretty busy. Contax's are very consistent through the line in terms of sharpness, color, bokeh, etc.

Chris. wonderful shots, cinematic tone, I haven't messed with the Gh4 yet but now I kinda cant wait to.

Yea, it's a great combo! The GH4 does have it's problems, but if used correctly (like any tool), you can yield pretty good results.

 

[liam howlett]

Just received my 60mm 2.8 in great condition. Amazing looking lens, and the build - oh my. Makes me addicted now.

And Chris, that's fair. I'm thankful for these tests. I was only curious in how the GH4 renders these lenses after the Speedbooster, as you don't really get the exact FOV. I appreciate your time for these tests. Great look! Curious what "problems" does the GH4 have in your mind? I've seen it side by side with a RED and some tests show that GH4 is almost identical if not better than RED Epic. I'm aware of the issue with the GH4 when you shoot in 96fps, quality drastically drops, but everything else...as close if not better than Epic. At least those are the test results I've come across.

 

[Nick Morrison]

I've seen it side by side with a RED and some tests show that GH4 is almost identical if not better than RED Epic. I'm aware of the issue with the GH4 when you shoot in 96fps, quality drastically drops, but everything else...as close if not better than Epic. At least those are the test results I've come across.

Liam, suggesting the GH4 is "better" than than an "Epic" on a forum full of RED owners is always going to come across as provocative, so please bear that in mind. These cameras are two different animals that serve two different markets.

I don't doubt the GH4 is great - every camera is great 70% of the time. However when I'm producing/directing a high end broadcast job, I need as much flexibility in post as possible. That means RAW, 4:4:4, high dynamic range, and often more than 4K.

An Epic Dragon's 6K RAW 16bit 4:4:4 workflow gives it TREMENDOUS flexibility in post. There's a reason Fincher, Ridley, Jackson, Soderbergh and Cameron shoot films on it. When my clients know we're shooting "talent" that require grading/beauty work in post, the RAW workflow is a major advantage. Again, high end cameras are about making HARD jobs easier. Most cameras handle easy and medium jobs fine.

The GH4 is great yes - but it's internal 4K 8bit 4:2:0 H264 format serves a different market. An valuable one, but not the same.

Please keep this in mind as you post on a RED forum, where many are highly invested in their RED workflows (often for reasons listed above).

Best.

 

[liam howlett]

Liam, suggesting the GH4 is "better" than than an "Epic" on a forum full of RED owners is always going to come across as provocative, so please bear that in mind.

I think you misunderstood or I misspoke. I didn't apply it against all RED, just the EPIC. I'm well aware of the capabilities of the Epic and Dragon. I was only referring to the tests I've seen (and did not myself conduct) with GH4 and Epic side by side. Was in no way trying to provoke anyone, was looking for more perspective or proof to what I've already seen and heard about the similarities/difference of GH4/Epic.

 

[Nick Morrison]

I think you misunderstood or I misspoke. I didn't apply it against all RED, just the EPIC. I'm well aware of the capabilities of the Epic and Dragon. I was only referring to the tests I've seen (and did not myself conduct) with GH4 and Epic side by side. Was in no way trying to provoke anyone, was looking for more perspective or proof to what I've already seen and heard about the similarities/difference of GH4/Epic.

Liam, let me remind you again this is a thread about Contax Zeiss lenses...not GH4 vs Epic. If you're interested in having that discussion, perhaps do so on another thread, or maybe try DVXUSER?

I don't think you mean to be provocative, but please understand that asking a number of RED owners for advice on Contax glass, and then informing them their $30K cameras are outclassed by a $1.5k DSLR....could very well be interpreted as provocative?

And to be honest...I'm not sure you do understand the difference between an Epic and a Dragon...as they're very often the SAME THING (ie there are EPIC DRAGON cameras...and EPIC MX cameras).

Nonetheless, sweeping statements about which "camera is better" have no place on this thread. Especially when the very concept of saying one camera is "better" than another is likewise incredibly subjective and hard to answer. Better by what criteria? The truth is there are so many variables to what "better" is that most professionals understand that cameras are "tools" and each one can be "perfect" for the right job.

An Alexa has more DR than an Epic MX, but less resolution.
A Dragon is much smaller than an Alexa, but similar DR
A Dragon has more resolution than Alexa, but similar to Arri 65
A GH4 consumes less power than an Epic or Alexa
Epic MX and Epic Dragon have larger sensors than Alexa or GH4
Alexa has a larger sensor than a GH4
GH4 weighs less an Epic and Alexa.

Which of these many "variables" makes one better than another? The truth is, each camera can be right for the job. And generally speaking it's a fools errand trying to crown one the "best". The best is what's best for YOU and best for the JOB.

So lets keep camera opinions to ourselves, and focus back on Contax glass, ok?

Thanks!!

 

[liam howlett]

Liam, let me remind you again this is a thread about Contax Zeiss lenses...not GH4 vs Epic. If you're interested in having that discussion, perhaps do so on another thread, or maybe try DVXUSER?

I don't think you mean to be provocative, but please understand that asking a number of RED owners for advice on Contax glass, and then informing them their $30K cameras are outclassed by a $1.5k DSLR....could very well be interpreted as provocative?

And to be honest...I'm not sure you do understand the difference between an Epic and a Dragon...as they're very often the SAME THING (ie there are EPIC DRAGON cameras...and EPIC MX cameras).

Nonetheless, sweeping statements about which "camera is better" have no place on this thread. Especially when the very concept of saying one camera is "better" than another is likewise incredibly subjective and hard to answer. Better by what criteria? The truth is there are so many variables to what "better" is that most professionals understand that cameras are "tools" and each one can be "perfect" for the right job.

An Alexa has more DR than an Epic MX, but less resolution.
A Dragon is much smaller than an Alexa, but similar DR
A Dragon has more resolution than Alexa, but similar to Arri 65
A GH4 consumes less power than an Epic or Alexa
Epic MX and Epic Dragon have larger sensors than Alexa or GH4
Alexa has a larger sensor than a GH4
GH4 weighs less an Epic and Alexa.

Which of these many "variables" makes one better than another? The truth is, each camera can be right for the job. And generally speaking it's a fools errand trying to crown one the "best". The best is what's best for YOU and best for the JOB.

So lets keep camera opinions to ourselves, and focus back on Contax glass, ok?


Thanks!!

Whoa, defensive much? I didn't even try to continue going on with the topic, all I did was clear up what I meant. Chill out? Christ.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Whoa, defensive much? I didn't even try to continue going on with the topic, all I did was clear up what I meant. Chill out? Christ.

I'm passionate about Contax, and passionate about RED cameras, let's just leave it at that!

Nevertheless...congrats on getting the 60 2.8 Macro! One of my favorite Contax lenses EVER!

I hope you make some movie magic with it!!