Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

  • 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 :)

First Look - Schneider Xenon FF-Prime Lenses

Decided to keep my order with HRC. ultimately they beat the discount and I still get a case with my lenses. I'm in the first batch. Hoping Christmas comes early.
 
I too will wait until a full set is available on the market (talking wider than the 25mm).
I currently own a 6 lens CP2 set (including the 15mm). I definitely need the interchangeability of EF and PL though.
I will wait to see what the reviews here are and the price comes down (meaning buying a full set vs individuals).
There are a couple of things which concern me. Phil's initial review spoke about some CA on one of the lenses I believe (yes, I know it was only a production model)...
The other thing is that no one has spoken about the ease of interchangeability between PL and EF and how much additional mounts will cost (or even if they will be available).
Lastly, there is a heck of a lot of play in the mount on the EF version of the CP.2's. I want to know about that on these lenses and not just for a RED, but also on a Canon 5D and a Sony ZF > EF adapter. This is really important because it forces me to use a mattebox (and thus rails) even when I don't want to in order to make sure there is no extra play there.
 
Lastly, there is a heck of a lot of play in the mount on the EF version of the CP.2's.

This has nothing to do with CP.2. The play is inherent in the design of the EF lens mount, and is the result of the size of the release pin on the camera body(or mount) as compared to the receiving slot on the lens. EF mounting a cinema lens has always been a compromise, but in recent time it's become easier to live with the drawbacks.

EF camera mounts with some pressure are helpful at minimizing this play (like the pressure twisting EF mount that Red makes). It's the same problem with most every DSLR mount, the problem is exasperated when you have a stiffer/larger lens and no support. With stiffer/larger lenses (zooms lenses in particular) you have far more leverage with those lenses and the rotational play becomes much more noticeable, if you have a particularly bad EF mount/adapter you will see this play in your footage every time you focus.

I've attached a pic with the problem circled so you can see what I'm talking about.

I've gotten to spend some time with the pre-production Schnieder EF mounts and they are really quite good, easily on par with the best EF lens mounts out there, also as the lenses have a provision for a bottom mating Hot Rod Cameras-esque PL support, and assuming you are willing to work with rods, you won't ever have rotational play with Xenon lenses in EF mount, assuming you add an appropriate support.

As an aside, this is the same drawback to the click-in PL to EF adapters that some unscrupulous folks peddle on ebay (if you can get a PL lens to fit, you then also get rotational play, and non-accurate focus marks, a lose-lose).

All HRC Xenon customers seeking a lens support for their lenses automatically qualify for a discount on a compatible support manufactured by a 3rd party.

Happy Thanksgiving!
 

Attachments

  • EFMount1.jpg
    EFMount1.jpg
    36.7 KB · Views: 0
This has nothing to do with CP.2. The play is inherent in the design of the EF lens mount, and is the result of the size of the release pin on the camera body(or mount) as compared to the receiving slot on the lens. EF mounting a cinema lens has always been a compromise, but in recent time it's become easier to live with the drawbacks.

Thanks Illya for your reply. Much appreciated.
However, this does not explain to me why I DON'T have play with big heavy Canon lenses or with Leitax mounts.

If those mounts work, why shouldn't the CP.2's have one that works?

The new Otus 55mm from Zeiss weighs more than a 50mm CP.2, I am willing to bet that there is no play in that EF mount. Catch my drift?
 
Thanks Illya for your reply. Much appreciated.
However, this does not explain to me why I DON'T have play with big heavy Canon lenses or with Leitax mounts.

I'm yet to see ANY EF lens from any manufacturer make an EF lens mount without some play (including the Leitax add-on mounts). I'm certain the Otus has it as well.

If you have a Zeiss CP.2 mount that has more play than any other lens, my first impulse would be to declare it defective. How many lenses do you have with an unusual amount of play? I'm yet to see a CP.2 with that, so I'm guessing it's rare. If you have multiple lenses like that- a bad batch? Curious if the lens in question was factory EF or factory PL and swapped? Also wondering if serial numbers were close together?

There was a shop in the valley doing (unauthorized) CP1 to CP.2 Lens mount conversion, if you purchased your lenses second hand, you would want to be sure you got factory lenses, and not conversions.

If you haven't I would contact your dealer or perhaps Zeiss directly, as I'm sure if it's out of spec they'd want to get that taken care of. If you are local to Hollywood you're welcome to bring it by our shop. I'm happy to break out the calipers and see if your mounts are different from anything else. We also keep all the EF mounts in stock so we could compare it side by side with another.

Hope this helps,
 
Thanks Illya,
The EF mounts are new and used, they are original factory mounts.
They all perform in the same way and were purchased in the US by reputable dealers.
The ones I have seen in Paris (where I live) perform exactly the same way as well.

There is a reason that little screw mount exists on the CP.2's.
However, I have never needed one on my Canon lenses. No play.
Therefore it can only be a design issue, wrong choice of materials or specifications which are not tight enough.

Thanks for the offer to break out the calipers though!
 
I'm yet to see ANY EF lens from any manufacturer make an EF lens mount without some play (including the Leitax add-on mounts).

Therefore it can only be a design issue, wrong choice of materials or specifications which are not tight enough.

Yep on all those fronts.

I have to agree with Illya here. The real issue itself is the EF mount (the on lens and camera mount) is not designed for motion use. It was designed for the lightest and quickest way to attach a lens to still camera. There's been a few advancements like the locking/tightening collar on the Red DSMC Canon Mount for instance, which helps. But give a lens a firm handshake and you see that wiggle. I shoot with Canon and PL glass. I've got over 40 EF lenses. It's there.

Is it unusable? Hell no. I use them all the time. But there's zero chance the EF mount concept is as sturdy as a traditional PL mount. That comes down to the materials used and the overall design.

I see it the most using electronic and mechanical follow focus units. The less friction the lens focus ring has the less noticeable it is. But, with EF glass you're often combating a combination of things that don't play super nice together when working in motion. That's just what it is.

The mounts in general are real sturdy on the Xenon FF-Primes:

phfx_SXFFP_02_EFMount.jpg


However, the final production mount is a bit different than the picture above. Still rock solid though, which is good.

You don't ever want to do it, but a good solid mount is a mount you feel like you can lift the camera from the lens without ripping the mount off the lens or body. Again, don't try that though.
 
Yep on all those fronts.

I have to agree with Illya here. The real issue itself is the EF mount (the on lens and camera mount) is not designed for motion use. It was designed for the lightest and quickest way to attach a lens to still camera. There's been a few advancements like the locking/tightening collar on the Red DSMC Canon Mount for instance, which helps. But give a lens a firm handshake and you see that wiggle. I shoot with Canon and PL glass. I've got over 40 EF lenses. It's there.

Is it unusable? Hell no. I use them all the time. But there's zero chance the EF mount concept is as sturdy as a traditional PL mount. That comes down to the materials used and the overall design.

I see it the most using electronic and mechanical follow focus units. The less friction the lens focus ring has the less noticeable it is. But, with EF glass you're often combating a combination of things that don't play super nice together when working in motion. That's just what it is.

The mounts in general are real sturdy on the Xenon FF-Primes:

phfx_SXFFP_02_EFMount.jpg


However, the final production mount is a bit different than the picture above. Still rock solid though, which is good.

You don't ever want to do it, but a good solid mount is a mount you feel like you can lift the camera from the lens without ripping the mount off the lens or body. Again, don't try that though.

That mount looks a lot like a Leitax...which as Clayton said, is super robust and solid.
 
That mount looks a lot like a Leitax...which as Clayton said, is super robust and solid.

The mount itself is strong, that's not the problem (and also this isn't exactly what the production model mount looks like).

It's the EF mount design overall that isn't exactly optimal for motion use. It's too thin without enough surface area in reality and as Illya mentioned the locking mechanism can be a concern.

This is literally why several manufacturers including Schneider with the Xenon FF-Primes provide a lens support bracket mounting point.

phfx_SXFFP_08_OpNotesLensSupport.jpg


This combats the slight movement seen when pulling focus. In fact it's visible in my sample video on the first page because I used an EF mount without a support bracket while being very careful with the follow focus.

On the final production lenses the focus movement is a bit more effortless than the prototypes tested here. If you want pristine image quality while operating the lens and choose an EF mount it's good to know that the support bracket is there.

Do you need to use lens support always when shooting with the EF versions? Nope. Will you need to use it when shooting with the PL version? Nope.

That's pretty much the long and the short of it.
 
I can absolutely assure you that there is no play with ANY Canon mounted lens used with our ProLock camera mount.
We've been doing it way before anybody else- since 2009 (Nikon ProLock) so we have plenty of experience and feedback. Only extremely worn out mounts on 30+ year old beater lenses may develop play. Those mounts should be replaced on the lenses anyway...
The fact that we can eliminate the play with a proper mounting system on the camera proves that the issue is not with the lens mount but rather with the camera receiving end. I hear that Canon followed our suit and finally made locking EF mount on their flag ship C500 camera...
kudos to them- better late than never...
 
I can absolutely assure you that there is no play with ANY Canon mounted lens used with our ProLock camera mount.
We've been doing it way before anybody else- since 2009 (Nikon ProLock) so we have plenty of experience and feedback. Only extremely worn out mounts on 30+ year old beater lenses may develop play. Those mounts should be replaced on the lenses anyway...
The fact that we can eliminate the play with a proper mounting system on the camera proves that the issue is not with the lens mount but rather with the camera receiving end. I hear that Canon followed our suit and finally made locking EF mount on their flag ship C500 camera...
kudos to them- better late than never...

Hey that's great.
How about making a dumb version of it though?
Don't need the electronics, don't want it for the future, and don't want to pay for what I am never going to use either!
 
Stay tuned... My guess is very near term.

Thank you very much

Fury
 
I'm still holding out for some Xenon news this year!


I Was told my lenses would ship this or next week so hopefully news soon.
 
Film Tools.
 
Back
Top