Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

First Look - Schneider Xenon FF-Prime Lenses

Hi Phil, Any info on dimensions, weight and pricing?

Thank you very much

Fury
 
Nick Fury said:
Hi Phil, Any info on dimensions, weight and pricing?

Thank you very much

Fury
Click to expand...

I've seen the lenses. They will be at NAB as well. I'll see what I can learn then in terms of specifics.
 
This is going to be a nice set once it's fleshed out with all the focal lengths. I'm not seeing the CA and other issues I had trouble with earlier on in this thread if I take a little more precautions in terms of filtration and light control. They're not as forgiving as Master Primes, S5's or even the underrated RPP's. But they are beautiful lenses nonetheless and with FF coverage in their small size. They're really a nice alternative to the CP.2's and have the advantage of a consistent aperture across the set. Too bad the 18mm is going to be T2.4. Oh well... Hopefully it's still sized the same. If it has to change sizes, then I think they should go for it and get the T2.1 there as well.
 
Nick Morrison said:
WOW, a full frame 18 T2.4 is still pretty cool. I'm impressed.
Click to expand...

Nikon and Canon can do it... But it is still impressive since so many of the cine lens makers seem to struggle with the shorter focal lengths when it comes to aperture, coverage and other aspects. Zeiss is still trying to re-do the 18mm for their SLR and CP.x series. They know the current 18mm is a complete dud and is the one lens in the set that doesn't cover FF and has a beastly T3.5 aperture. OTOH, their 15mm is frickin' amazing and I see no logical reason as to why this can't translate through to a proper 18mm offering. So for those of you considering CP.2's for lenses. Get the 15mm! Forget the 18mm. You also don't want the 50mm T1.5, it's pretty meh... The 50mm T2.0 macro is the good one. :) Now I've drove the bus off course.
 
It's more or less a lack of popularity in the still market. 18mm and 20mm fall in this weird place for full frame shooters that isn't very popular. People tend to go to 24/25mm or wider at 14/15/16mm. Which sucks because you miss out on the draw of those particular lengths.

Nikon has an 18mm f/2.8. Oh Nikon. Make some cinema glass you crazy rascals.

Sigma has a 20mm f/1.8. If you get a good copy of that lens it's pretty good. That's fast and wide. Oh Sigma. Make some cinema glass you crazy rascals.

Really Sigma. Mechanical goodness + PL Mount.

This is more or less why I like what Schneider has done here with the Xenon FF-Primes. They saw what this market needed and demanded.
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Nikon and Canon can do it... But it is still impressive since so many of the cine lens makers seem to struggle with the shorter focal lengths when it comes to aperture, coverage and other aspects. Zeiss is still trying to re-do the 18mm for their SLR and CP.x series. They know the current 18mm is a complete dud and is the one lens in the set that doesn't cover FF and has a beastly T3.5 aperture. OTOH, their 15mm is frickin' amazing and I see no logical reason as to why this can't translate through to a proper 18mm offering. So for those of you considering CP.2's for lenses. Get the 15mm! Forget the 18mm. You also don't want the 50mm T1.5, it's pretty meh... The 50mm T2.0 macro is the good one. :) Now I've drove the bus off course.
Click to expand...

The 18 isn't THAT bad. The CP2 housing is a joke, because it vignettes. But the ZE/ZF version covers full frame w/out any issues. This 18mm design has remarkably well controlled distortion for a lens that wide (even better than the iconic 21mm), so it has it's plusses. The downside is it's slow, yes. But it was never designed for cinema, so I don't hold it's speed against it. The 15 2.8 on the other hand...I'm sure Zeiss had a number of platforms in mind for this one, film-making included. And yes...the 15mm is out of control. Like OTUS out of control good...
 
How many of you think the 135 is an essential piece of kit , here?

Thank you very much

Fury
 
Nick Fury said:
How many of you think the 135 is an essential piece of kit , here?

Thank you very much

Fury
Click to expand...

That depends on the shooter really. However.....

My true thoughts are:

S35 kit = 18, 25, 35, 50, 75, 100. (give or take a few mm here and there, some eliminate the need for the 75 and 100 with just an 85mm)
FF35 = 25, 35, 50, 75, 100, 135.

That's purely an FOV thing really without weighing DOF in there. Dragon is sort of in between FF35 and APS-H in reality, but I do essentially shoot it like VistaVision which is the whole reason I've invested in it. 35-40mm has become a wonderful length at 6K FF, WS, and HD.

For me 18-200mm is what I use the most. Might be able to say 180mm max in there.

Each focal length provides a unique draw which gives it it's own flavor. The difference between a 25, 28, 32, 35mm prime comes to mind. That's something that is a very, very personal choice and I've had very long conversations with a few top tier DPs about such insanity. Which I enjoy a whole lot.

Because I don't just shoot one thing I personally like a solution from 14-600mm. However, 3 months into this year and I haven't shot a single frame on the 600mm yet. So that's how that goes sometimes.
 
I have the 15mm CP.2. It's great. However I also own another underrated lens which most of you probably don't know about - the Olympus 21mm F2. It is literally no larger than a nifty fifty from canon or nikon. No distortion on the sides. Great lens and fast!
 
Clayton Burkhart said:
I have the 15mm CP.2. It's great. However I also own another underrated lens which most of you probably don't know about - the Olympus 21mm F2. It is literally no larger than a nifty fifty from canon or nikon. No distortion on the sides. Great lens and fast!
Click to expand...

Great little lens. I've had two and oddly kept the 18mm f/3.5 for some reason.
 
Nick Morrison said:
The 18 isn't THAT bad. The CP2 housing is a joke, because it vignettes. But the ZE/ZF version covers full frame w/out any issues. This 18mm design has remarkably well controlled distortion for a lens that wide (even better than the iconic 21mm), so it has it's plusses. The downside is it's slow, yes. But it was never designed for cinema, so I don't hold it's speed against it. The 15 2.8 on the other hand...I'm sure Zeiss had a number of platforms in mind for this one, film-making included. And yes...the 15mm is out of control. Like OTUS out of control good...
Click to expand...


18mm is NOT full frame in ZF/ZE.

So how much is/will be Schneider 18mm ? $7-10,000?
 
Jiri Vrozina said:
18mm is NOT full frame in ZF/ZE.
Click to expand...

Im sorry but you're likely misinformed. The Zeiss ZF/ZE 18mm is a full frame design. To quote Ken Rockwell:

"This is a full-frame (Barnack 24x36mm) lens and I will review it as such. It is a waste to use this on any format other than full-frame."
Click to expand...

The CP2 "housing" makes it vignette on full frame, and probably even on Dragon 6K, which is a real shame. Because the actual design has incredibly well controlled distortion (even better than 21) and covers 5D full frame completely. I have the older Contax 18mm (which is the original Zeiss full frame 18), and trust me...it covers.

Here is a video showing the 18 ZE on 5D:

 
Last edited:
Really hope that the dimensions, 100 mm barrel, weight, etc., are identical to the rest of the set. In the meantime the Tokina 11-16 Duclos ver2 will have to do

Thank you very much.

Fury
 
I'm trying to decide right now between the Xenons and CP.2s. I'm planning to purchase one or the other at NAB. The only way I can justify this purchase to the boss (my wife) is if the set can generate significant rental revenue.

I have a strong personal preference for the Xenons because they are purpose-built cine glass and they are (mostly) T2.1 across the entire range. The addition of the 18 (even though it is T2.4 and a year out) and the 135 really help round out this set for me. However I'm concerned that Schneider is not nearly as well known and that the CP.2s are the "safer" choice for rental purposes because they say "Zeiss". I'm also wondering about the feasibility/ease of changing mounts on these two brands…it would be great to have PL and EF capability for rental flexibility.

Since these two lenses are relatively affordable and compete head to head in price, I think a lot of folks will be making this choice…thoughts?
 
Hi Tom,

Although the Schneider mounts can be changed out, it is something that, IMHO, someone with a experience and, preferably testing equipment should be doing. The shims have to be precise, for bench mounted quality and, if you are desiring as perfect a mounted lens as possible, these change outs are arguably best done in a shop that has that expertise. I, personally, would never trust a rental client do do the changeout and even, in my usage, have even decided to stay PL, for now, as I suspect that the market for the Schneiders is, at least for now, there. Curious on the reason that you are buying your lenses at NAB. Is there a price break?

Thank you very much

Fury
 
Tom, I'd like to steer you toward the Xenons, but then there's the practicality of the whole thing… Especially when you say rental revenue. The CP.2's have a rounded set of focal lengths to choose from that you can buy now. They are a desirable set for many and should be easier to keep rented out vs. the Xenons. Like you say, that Zeiss label makes a big difference in perceived value and rental desire.

My choice set for the CP.2's would be:

15, 21, 35, 50T2.1 macro, 85, 100, or possibly the 135. They are working on an updated 18mm, but no ETA and the current 100mm is a close-focus design, but not macro. Although I would probably opt for the 135 if I had to choose between the two unless that close focus was really important. I'm also making the assumption that you're looking to put together a typical 6 lens set.
 
Nick Fury said:
Hi Tom,

Although the Schneider mounts can be changed out, it is something that, IMHO, someone with a experience and, preferably testing equipment should be doing. The shims have to be precise, for bench mounted quality and, if you are desiring as perfect a mounted lens as possible, these change outs are arguably best done in a shop that has that expertise. I, personally, would never trust a rental client do do the changeout and even, in my usage, have even decided to stay PL, for now, as I suspect that the market for the Schneiders is, at least for now, there. Curious on the reason that you are buying your lenses at NAB. Is there a price break?

Thank you very much

Fury
Click to expand...
Nick, I wasn't planning to have rental clients change out the mounts, I have a great lens tech here in town that could easily do it for me (he does a lot of the custom work for RP Lens). In our market, there are a lot of people shooting various kinds of cameras with EF mounts (Blackmagic 2K & 4K, 5d Mk 2 & 3, C300, etc.) who are all potential rental clients, so it would be nice to keep them in the loop. Personally I prefer PL, and I do have both mounts for my camera, but again, I am trying to broaden the rental "gene pool".

As far as NAB, I don't know of any specific deals (although many companies offer them), but it is a great chance for me to see the lenses in person, feel their mechanics, see their images, and talk to people face to face about them. Buying lenses here in Michigan is a lot different than LA…you can't actually see or touch anything beyond a Canon L-series…very frustrating when you are trying to make a tough decision about expensive products.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top