Cooke 20-100mm> S-16 Conversion

[Marc Berger]

Does anybody have experience with a converted Cooke 20-100mm to a S16mm 10,5-53mm, aperture 1,65? Made by Cooke.
Sound´s very interesting to me.
Thanks to share your knowledge!
Marc

 

[Steve Phillipps]

Sounds like you're talking about 2 different lenses here? I think the 20-100 is a 35mm lens and the other is a S16?
Steve

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Does anybody have experience with a converted Cooke 20-100mm to a S16mm 10,5-53mm, aperture 1,65? Made by Cooke.
Sound´s very interesting to me.
Thanks to share your knowledge!
Marc

It is not cheap... sorry that is all I know. (apart from you end up with very big fast s16 lens)

There are prices on their web site for the 18-100 conversion.

Michael

 

[Larry Gebhardt]

The Cooke 10.5 to 53mm (actually 10.4-52mm) is a converted 9-50mm ...not a converted 20-100mm (the later is a 35mm lens). The conversion replaces the group 4 elements (the rear group) with ones that expand the image to cover the larger image circle of S-16. I have both, and they are very sharp lenses. Harry Clark just tested his 9-50mm and it covered the 2K cropped area of the Red 4K sensor at all focal lengths and apertures. Good news.

 

[Steve Gal]

There is a conversion of the 35mm 20-100 & the 18-100mm Zoom lenses to super-16. These are not 9-50mm conversions which will make the zoom a 10.8-60mm T3. The lenses are big and should only be used on a tripod.

RU953 35mm to Super16mm Factory Conversion:
Cooke 18-100mm, T3.0 zoom converted to 9.5-53mm T1.6

RU1053 35mm to Super16mm Factory Conversion:
Cooke 20-100mm, T3.0 zoom converted to 10.6-53mm, T1.65

 

[Steve Phillipps]

Why??? Who'd want to pay a big chunk of cash for a 20-100 then another chunk to convert it to an enormous S16 lens with a small zoom range and mediocre focal lengths?

 

[Steve Gal]

it is an expensive conversion

 

[donatello b]

"Why??? Who'd want to pay a big chunk of cash "

= T 1.6 worth every $$

 

[Steve Phillipps]

Why not just get a Zeiss 10:1 T2, you're only losing about 1/2 stop, saving a ton of weight, getting twice the zoom range and almost certainly better optically as it's S16 designed. Putting 35mm lenses on smaller formats does not always bring great results with the familiar issue or resolving power needing to be greater the smaller the format.
Still sounds crazy to me, but what do I know!:huh:
Steve

 

[Marc Berger]

Canon S16 6-66mm /only 2.7 is about $16000.-
Cooke S16 9,5-53mm/ fast 1.6 is about $ 41000.-
Conversion 20-100 or 18-100 is about $14000.-
I think it make sense if you need a fast S16 Zoom Lens.
It´s great Cooke offers this "added value" to this older lenses. So, if the Red 18-85mm Zoom will be a great lens, this is an opportunity for what to do with lenses in the same focal range.
I´m really interested to see test pictures.
Thanks!
Marc

 

[Matt Uhry]

Those were made for TV show's shooting 3-cam S16mm. They are good, but I'm not sure if it would be a good choice for the Red when you can shoot with tasty 35mm format lenses.

The guys at Panavision Hollywood have one - I think it last saw battle on "Hart to Hart"

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com

 

[Mark Crabtree]

I have a Cooke 10-30 T1.6 Super 16 lens in excellent condition I would entertain selling for any offer above 5K. PM if interested. It was a factory conversion of the 35mm Cooke 20-60 T3.

 

[donatello b]

"Why not just get a Zeiss 10:1 T2, you're only losing about 1/2 stop, saving a ton of weight, getting twice the zoom range and almost certainly better optically as it's S16 designed"

the 10-100 T2 is 16mm .... zeiss did make a S16 version that was 11-110 T2.2 ... most of the used 10-100 converted to S16 are 12-120 T2.4 ... so a T1.6 is very FAST and for some worth every $$ ...
for a project where the camera is mostly on a dolly and shot in a studio it works excellent ...

the 10-100/11-110/12-120 has got to be the one worst lens when it comes to focus breathing !! more then a sprint runner at end of a 800 meter race !!!

 

[Marc Berger]

BTW I will not change my Cooke into a S16 now, but I still think it would be a good possibility for 2K highspeed shooting with the Red. 1.6 or 1.65 is a great aperture for a 5x Zoom (and make sense with the noise level of the Red chip at 2K).
Thank you all for your input!
I would still love to see examples. So if somebody have the chance to test this lens, please post the result in the forum.
Marc