CP2 50mm 2.1 or 50 2.1 Makro?

[Ryan Lalonde]

Anyone have experience between these two lenses? I'm seriously considering getting the CP2s instead of the RPZs now they have pulled 50-150 and the 17-50 doesn't cover 5K.... Hopefully that will change in the next month or so...

 

[Justin Marx]

I have the normal 50mm CP2, with the macro you gain the ability to focus a lot closer, other than that it's pretty much the same.. I would go on Zeiss's site to see the exact details

 

[Ryan Lalonde]

I have the normal 50mm CP2, with the macro you gain the ability to focus a lot closer, other than that it's pretty much the same.. I would go on Zeiss's site to see the exact details

How do you like your CP2s Justin? I think I am going to get the 28,35,50,85 to start and wait for the updated wider versions. Where did you get yours?

 

[Justin Marx]

How do you like your CP2s Justin? I think I am going to get the 28,35,50,85 to start and wait for the updated wider versions. Where did you get yours?

I LOVE THEM! I Got them for my 5D package which basically made me the only one in the US to have them for about a month.. I paid them off in about 3 months.. I also got the PL mounts for them which I now use on the EPIC, so it's quite the amazing little transformers they become.. I think you will love them.. I got mine from Abel Cine Tech. They will also discount them! I have the 21mm, 28, 35,50 and 85.. And the case they have is amazing!! I LOVE MY 21mm, and so will you.. I don't think they will come out with a CP2 that is much better and faster because it will get really heavy and way more expensive.. I know they are working on a new 25mm..

Good luck!

 

[Curt Schulz]

I too am looking at the CP.2s. I currently shoot with a 7D but would like to upgrade to an Epic-S next year. Justin, two questions for you. What are your three favorite lenses in your CP2 set and how much is the EF to PL conversion? Thanks!

 

[Häakon]

I think the best attribute of the CP2s is that they cover a full-frame imaging circle. I have no idea what cameras are coming down the pipeline in the next few years, but I wouldn't want to invest in non-full frame glass at this point in time.

 

[Michael Hastings]

I think the best attribute of the CP2s is that they cover a full-frame imaging circle. I have no idea what cameras are coming down the pipeline in the next few years, but I wouldn't want to invest in non-full frame glass at this point in time.

Thats why the canon oun is such a sweet option.

 

[Häakon]

Thats why the canon oun is such a sweet option.

Well, still glass is still a pain to operate in a cine-style environment, especially when it comes to pulling focus. I get why it's going to be popular... it's 1/10th of the cost of other cine glass. That being said, Epic is no cheap machine itself... I'm actually surprised at how much interest there is in the Canon mount on Epic, personally.

 

[Lee Saxon]

I'm confused, are we talking about buying the CP.2 50 vs buying the ZE 50 Macro? Why?

I thought Zeiss just released a CP.2 version of the 50 Macro?

Anyway, the 50 Macro is a completely different optical design than the other, it's a much better lens. Definitely sharper, and I think a little more contrasty.

 

[Lee Saxon]

Well, still glass is still a pain to operate in a cine-style environment, especially when it comes to pulling focus.

I've never used cine glass, so I'm really asking this, not being a smart-ass:

What does a $5k CP.2 do for focus pulling that a $1.2k ZF.2 with a $40 FF gear from Redrock can't?

 

[Lee Saxon]

I think I am going to get the 28,35,50,85 to start and wait for the updated wider versions

The 28 sucks. Really sucks. Get the 21, it's the best lens in the set.

I think it's just the 18 that's being updated (since it's only f/3.5). Can't see any reason the 21 would be.

 

[Ryan Lalonde]

The 28 sucks. Really sucks. Get the 21, it's the best lens in the set.

I think it's just the 18 that's being updated (since it's only f/3.5). Can't see any reason the 21 would be.

Why does the 28 suck? I was hoping to have them all 2.1

 

[Häakon]

I've never used cine glass, so I'm really asking this, not being a smart-ass:

What does a $5k CP.2 do for focus pulling that a $1.2k ZF.2 with a $40 FF gear from Redrock can't?

First of all, the CP2s go for around $3,600. Also, the ZF.2s are Nikon mount, though there is a ZE series for Canon. You can get an adapter to mount a ZF to a Canon body, but that isn't really what I was talking about.

I believe that most people are hungry for the Canon mount because they already have a bunch of (good) Canon glass, and want to throw it on the Epic. That sounds reasonable. And yes, many of those lenses (especially the "L" series) have great resolving ability and the smaller-than-full-frame Epic sensor hits right in the sweet spot of the lens (for even better performance). But it's not the sharpness that's in question.

Before Gibby jumps down my throat, all of this is being said from a cine-style perspective... we discussed this briefly in another thread recently, but that needs to be clear.

The biggest difference, focus-wise, between a cine lens and a still lens is that they are designed for different environments. Modern still lenses are typically autofocus lenses, and they're built to attain proper focus as quickly as possible. To do this, their angle of rotation is made significantly smaller, and that means that the range of travel between two focal lengths is greatly reduced. Great for stills, bad for motion. When a focus puller wants to make precise focus shifts, it's important that the range is big enough that focus can be dialed in perfectly. The smaller it is, the vastly harder that is to do. The Compact Primes, for instance, have a 300 degree focus rotation on a large barrel. It's designed for cine-style use. The ZF.2s are manual focus lenses and better than the Canons in this regard, though the physical barrel of the lens is much smaller than the CP.2s so you can't get the same range of travel for focusing no matter what you do.

Of particular drawback to the ZF.2s is that they telescope when focusing, and especially on the longer focal length lenses, they can extrude a good amount. This can make work with matteboxes tricky.

Most Canon lenses don't have hard focus stops... you reach one end and the ring keeps rotating. The ZF.2s have an advantage here with hard focus stops, but they focus in the opposite direction which can be quite unnerving.

Another drawback to the ZF.2s is that the longest non-macro they make is an 85mm... that can be a little limiting on the long end.

The witness marks on the CP2s are calibrated and precise. The marks on most still lenses - especially the ones designed for autofocus - are just general indicators and can't be used as a reliable reference.

Breathing, while it still exists on the CP2s, is much more controlled than the majority of still lenses. The ZFs fare better than the Canons, however, in this regard.

Iris control on Canon lenses is done electronically. That means you must change it in the menu system of the camera (via some button, ring, or wheel on the body) rather than on the lens itself. The ZF lens does have an aperture ring, but it has hard stops at different iris intervals. In neither of these cases can you do smooth iris changes during a shot. The ZF.2 lenses can be "de-clicked" from a company like Duclos, but now you're sinking hundreds more dollars into the total ownership cost of the lens.

The CP.2s have a singular, unified barrel size and front diameter, so when you switch lenses you don't have to adjust your mattebox or follow focus. Still lenses can vary all over the place.

The iris marks on the CP.2s are labeled as T-stops, whereas still lenses (including the ZF.2s) mark in F-stops.

Finally, the mechanics of a lens should not be undervalued. The CP.2s are solid metal construction with precise and smooth gearing. Many components of still glass are made of plastic, especially around focus mechanisms (where it really counts) in order to keep autofocus operation fast and light. Again, the ZF.2s have a leg up on most still glass here.

So, I post this information simply to answer your question. Does that make still glass downright BAD for cine use? No, of course not. It is my expectation that within a year we are going to be seeing some phenomenal films shot on Epic with Canon glass. But my gut feeling is that people will choose the still glass based on price, not because it's really offering them something that cine glass doesn't. In my opinion, the ZF.2s are definitely a step up from Canon glass, especially if you can have them modified by Duclos. I think the CP.2s are yet another step up still. And of course you can keep going up and up from there. Ultra Primes, Master Primes... then you're talking tens of thousands of dollars per lens. Why am I not shooting Master Primes on every job I do? Cost. And so I suspect this will be the main motivation for most people here. However, as I stated, Epic itself is not a cheap camera and I would expect Canon glass to be more in the realm of Scarlet owners than Epic owners. The great thing about Epic, of course, is that you can go any route you wish. No one can tell you what is "best," because everyone has different needs. Even the holy Master Prime can't cover full-frame 35mm, so the basic still lens has a leg up there.

 

[Ryan Lalonde]

I'm confused, are we talking about buying the CP.2 50 vs buying the ZE 50 Macro? Why?

I thought Zeiss just released a CP.2 version of the 50 Macro?

Anyway, the 50 Macro is a completely different optical design than the other, it's a much better lens. Definitely sharper, and I think a little more contrasty.

We are talking about the CP2 50 mm vs CP2 50mm macro

The standard cp2 50mm is smaller and doesn't focus as close
The macro cp2 50mm is larger and focuses closer

Which one?

 

[Häakon]

We are talking about the CP2 50 mm vs CP2 50mm macro

The standard cp2 50mm is smaller and doesn't focus as close
The macro cp2 50mm is larger and focuses closer

Which one?

Sorry to derail the topic Ryan.

The lenses are very similar, but I believe the focus scale is shifted to prioritize close focusing on the macro lens. Both will focus out to infinity, but if your primary use for the lens is not macro work, it may suit you better to get the "standard" as focusing at "normal" distances is much easier. I'll see if I can get a more precise answer for you.

 

[Shane Kelly]

If the 50 makro had been available when I bought my set of cp2's, I would have bought that instead. Why? well because I can foresee a 50mm makro coming in very useful. I've been using zeiss zf1's for years and the 100mm makro comes out on most jobs, maybe only once or twice but I always carry it and it is a very beautiful lens.
The larger size of the 50makro is the only thing that would give me pause.

 

[Ryan Lalonde]

Sorry to derail the topic Ryan.

The lenses are very similar, but I believe the focus scale is shifted to prioritize close focusing on the macro lens. Both will focus out to infinity, but if your primary use for the lens is not macro work, it may suit you better to get the "standard" as focusing at "normal" distances is much easier. I'll see if I can get a more precise answer for you.

No problem Häakon! That post was directed at Lee.
Very interesting to learn about the ZF&ZE series

 

[Justin Marx]

I too am looking at the CP.2s. I currently shoot with a 7D but would like to upgrade to an Epic-S next year. Justin, two questions for you. What are your three favorite lenses in your CP2 set and how much is the EF to PL conversion? Thanks!

Sorry for the delay, hmm, this is like picking your favorite child or something! I would say to be covered the 21, 50, and 85.. The EF to PL conversions were around 400 Per lens? Worth every penny!

 

[Ryan Lalonde]

So does anyone have an inside source on what focal lengths they are updating? I've heard a new 15mm, and updated 18&21. Maybe someone from Abel Cine...?

 

[albert rudnicki]

Anyone have experience between these two lenses? I'm seriously considering getting the CP2s instead of the RPZs now they have pulled 50-150 and the 17-50 doesn't cover 5K.... Hopefully that will change in the next month or so...

Cp2 50mm macro is optically superior to standard cp2 50mm; as a bonus it also a close focus.