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 :)

FOR SALE : Super speeds - freshly serviced

Sidney said:
hehe forgot ... you are a nationalized Dane:)

By the way I really like your commercials... your work is way up there... for a swede that is:)
Click to expand...

Thanks!!! Are you going to the True Awards tonight? If you are we should hook up.
 
apparantly i missed that one.... worked to much:)

We have a common friend in Peter H. (3d guy). Think Peter said you had around 80 lenses!

I saw your list of toys... mmmmlomo´s... also saw the nescafe ofcourse:)

But i think we should hook up anyways - I get my RED next week, we can play I show you mine and you show me yours!


I sent you a PM,
 
Sidney said:
apparantly i missed that one.... worked to much:)

We have a common friend in Peter H. (3d guy). Think Peter said you had around 80 lenses!
Click to expand...

Hahahaha Peter he most probably will be there tonight though. Well let's hook up another time.

Yes I have around 80 lenses, anamorphic, primes and zooms.
 
weirdcrew said:
Also - grabbed from internet

The Mk. II focus scales are calibrated in feet and meters. The scale rotates 170º and each side of the lens has one calibration, ether feet or meters. The marks are oriented along the optical axis of the lens. When the camera assistant needs to switch sides on the camera, he can “flip” the lens by loosening the PL mount and rotating into another of the four available positions. In this way either the feet or meter scale can be used on either side of the camera.

The much larger diameter of the focus helix thread and the larger linear guides reduce play in the focus mechanism and give a much smoother and more consistent focus feel. The guides are also adjustable on the Mk. II.

The larger lens housing has a much more stable lens mount, held by 8 screws instead of a 1.5mm pin and a lock ring. The mounts can be easily changed from Bayonet to PL by replacing the lens mount.

The aperture closes down to T16 rather than T11 of the Mk. I lenses.


I think that clearly describes my lenses?
Click to expand...

Fredrik,

If you're going to post this information and then e-mail me asking me to help you (for free, of course), would it be too must to ask that you give me credit for my work instead of stealing it?. That wasn't grabbed from the "internet" it came from my website, cinematechnic.com, and my hard work:

http://www.cinematechnic.com/resources/zeiss_super_speed_f1,2_lenses.html

So I go through the trouble of posting some of the best information on the internet regarding cine lenses, and not only is the material stolen, but I can't even get credit for my work? What reason do I have to update my site and keep paying to host it, just to give my work away for free. Perhaps I should take it all down.

I will stand by what I said, and I don't disagree with Stuart. The difference is based on East Coast and West Coast naming conventions. Stuart is correct, based on the way AC's and Techs describe things on the West Coast. It's just like the 15mm vs. 19mm rod issue, or the East Coast/West Coast Rap War.
 
filip kovcin said:
i am not sure how precise this list is - i used "print screen" method to capture this, and unfortunately cannot say where from it was. (i took that a few months ago)

filip
Click to expand...

Filip... It's from *my website*

This is getting ridiculous... Do the users here think I have an *obligation* to give away information for free and not even get credit for it? Does anybody respect copyright on the internet anymore? Does anyone ever even *consider* asking for permission before copying large sections of copyrighted work?

Right now, my business is struggling since my film camera service business revenue has dropped 90%. And I am still paying to keep that website up so 30,000 people a month can view the info for free.
 
Jorge,

It's the false economics of the internet. People think everything should be for free, and they also don't understand why all information is not published on the web for all to have access.

My recommendation is to superimpose a huge watermark graphic over every page on your site that says your company name and website.
 
Jorge,

It was in no means meant to be disrespectful by not mentioning you. It was a stressful situation.

I did stop and think if I should mention you or not. I did choose the latter because I didn't want to involve you in the situation (especially if I wasn't quoting you right). After my post I noticed that Justin had already posted a link for your website and I therefor assumed that people had already visited it to read. Maybe that was to take to much for granted. Anyway I do apologies for not mentioning you and as I said it was not meant to hurt or disrespect you in any kind of way, I'm truly sorry for that.

I did write to ask you to help out in a situation that had escalated to I don't know what.

After all, from my knowledge these are Mk II's and here I had people saying that they weren't. So what was I to do? I wrote and asked for you to read the thread to hopefully clarify this, since you had the expertise and you would be objective to all of this.
 
bob by the way the master primes is the latest version of the super speeds. as the ultraprimes are the latest version of the zeiss primes t2.1
and if you think your purchasing mkii and not mki go ahead and bye the set it is worth much less
evin grants post is correct you are selling mki the b speeds were never called mki simply
t1.4 b speeds. and if you are selling mkii than what are the next two sets called mkiii and mkiv there was no mkiv
Stuart
 
We could ask Carl Zeiss... except they would say "Why do you bother with such old lenses?". I know, because they tell me that a lot.

Zeiss never used any Mk.I / Mk.II terminology. I think that nomenclature must have come out of England since the English are fond of naming things Mk. II etc.

Zeiss never called them Super Speed either. They were called Lichtstarker Satz, and in English: High Speed lenses.

So it's entirely arbitrary what is called Mk. I etc, and certainly not worth this reduser food fight...

Unless someone from ARRI can opine on this (I will forward this thread to some of my buddies at ARRI, and hopefully after they stop laughing they might be able to add something).

BTW, hasn't anyone on this thread noticed that the lenses in question are Opton branded?
 
this was not a west coast east coast thing
there are five sets of superspeeds
set one bspeed t1.4
set two mki 180 rotation of focus
set three mkii 360 rotation one fill turn
set four mkiii 360 rotation one fullturn with engraving flipped right side up with all feet or all metric engraving and engraving on both sides of lens.
set five are the newest superspeed design master primes.
now lets take a pole everyone for Stuart do a post and every one for Fred do a post.
this should be interesting
Stuart
 
I'm staying the hell out of this debate. Looks like Matt Duclos is as well.

Call me when you wanna buy a Mark 5 or whatever the heck you want to call a Master Prime. Meanwhile I think it's all a disservice to what appears to be some nice lenses being sold here.
 
FocusOptics said:
this was not a west coast east coast thing
there are five sets of superspeeds
set one bspeed t1.4
set two mki 180 rotation of focus
set three mkii 360 rotation one fill turn
set four mkiii 360 rotation one fullturn with engraving flipped right side up with all feet or all metric engraving and engraving on both sides of lens.
set five are the newest superspeed design master primes.
now lets take a pole everyone for Stuart do a post and every one for Fred do a post.
this should be interesting
Stuart
Click to expand...

Stuart,

If you can show me any old ARRI promotional material using those designations, not only will I concede the point, but I will re-write the articles on my website (or maybe delete them). It seems to me these designations are not official.

I'd ask Zeiss but we know what the answer is going to be... Amused indifference to our obsession with old lenses.

AFAIK, those designations I mentioned on my website were common in the industry. The information we are both conveying is almost the same, but out terminology differs.

That said, I never thought that the Master Primes were in any way related to the HS primes. I was at the factory for training when the prototype MP's were being built. They never referred to them as an evolution of the HS primes (optical design is totally different - as you know).

Actually the Zeiss tech that trained me was worried that someone in the USA would get upset that they were called "Master" Primes (as if that was an insensitive reference to slavery) and that there would be complaints. Mr. Bajerke thought the idea that anyone would protest the name of the lenses was totally ridiculous.

While we were sitting there having dinner in a little German restaurant and talking about this I imagined Al Sharpton with a bullhorn protesting in the parking lot of ARRI in Blauvelt...
 
well. since we can't determine a price on these short throw mystery lenses, I'll start the biddng at $1000.

do I hear any takers at $1000 for these lovely lenses?

In all seriousness, does anyone have an estimate on what these things are worth? I'd like to know.
 
CinemaTechnic said:
Actually the Zeiss tech that trained me was worried that someone in the USA would get upset that they were called "Master" Primes (as if that was an insensitive reference to slavery) and that there would be complaints. Mr. Bajerke thought the idea that anyone would protest the name of the lenses was totally ridiculous.

While we were sitting there having dinner in a little German restaurant and talking about this I imagined Al Sharpton with a bullhorn protesting in the parking lot of ARRI in Blauvelt...
Click to expand...

Well, it's not like they called them Massah Primes.

I know some Steadicam guys who were afraid it would cause confusion that would hurt them. At the time the Steadicam Master series was being surpassed by the newer Steadicam Ultra series. They were afraid that the reverse order of branding in the Arri lenses would confused producers into thinking that the guys who had just poured a fortune into their new Steadicam Ultra rigs somehow had lesser equipment.

Okay, now I'm officially guilty of hijacking this thread.
 
maxwax said:
In all seriousness, does anyone have an estimate on what these things are worth? I'd like to know.
Click to expand...

Interesting, these are Opton branded. My rough guess of market valuation is about $25K US.
 
someone was curious what the costs were. I won't say where I got this quote (I got a few about a week ago), but here they are:
 
Mitch Gross said:
Jorge,

It's the false economics of the internet. People think everything should be for free, and they also don't understand why all information is not published on the web for all to have access.

My recommendation is to superimpose a huge watermark graphic over every page on your site that says your company name and website.
Click to expand...

Or offer paid subscriptions to your wealth of information. It’s not that hard to do really and you could even set up a Q&A Forum of your own Jorge.

I know for one I would sign up..keep the cost reasonable, update it enough to be a place people want to return to and you’d cover your hosting and then some.

And thanks for the chat today Jorge. Second after receiving our RED it was the highlight of my day. And you had me laughing though 90% of it!

Cheers,
Billy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top