FS: Zeiss T*2.1 Standard Primes set of 6! (16,24,32,50,85,135) - US$ 25.000,00

[Eduardo Ruiz]

FS: Zeiss T*2.1 Standard Primes set of 6! (16,24,32,50,85,135) - US$ 25.000,00

Option of getting 5 lens set (16, 24, 32, 50, 85) for US$ 20k

 

[Ron Reddick]

pics please

 

[Nick Wernham]

I would like to see some pictures too, please. I am in the market for some primes and considering the RPP package plus an 18mm RPP at the moment, but this might represent a viable alternative.

 

[Christian Munoz D]

Interested on the set.
Where the lens are located?
Do you have close pics of the glass and body?
Thanks!

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Since you are looking at roughly the same cost for a similar set of Zeiss standards or RPPs, this is a very interesting comparison.

The size and weight differences are significant which might be the key issue for some buyers.

The RPPs are faster, not just 1.9 vs 2.1 faster, but effectively a full usable stop faster in my book as the Standards lose a fair bit more "snap" below 2.8 than the RPP's.

The RPPs have more modern coatings to reduce flare and hold contrast.

The Standards were designed for film media and the RPPs were designed for digital sensors. Without going too deep into the details I am convinced that the latest lens designs (Optimo Rouge, Leica C, RPP, Cooke 5/i, Fujinon) interact better with optical low pass filters and do a better job of matching nodal points for red, green and blue. I also believe that digital sensors and the filters they require are best served by greater tele centricity out of the exit pupil which was a much less critical metric on film media. This is most likely to manifest on older wide angle retro-focal lenses where field illumination may fall off more dramatically toward the edges.

I suggest that part of your evaluation of a set of Standards include shooting a flat field wide open so you can see if center to edge falloff is a problem, particularly on the wider focal lengths. Another thing I would check is to shoot a chart with thin red, green and blue lines in a crosshatch to see if there is any problem getting all three in focus at the same time from edge to edge and compare that to an RPP of the same or similar focal length.

Cheers - #19

 

[Nick Wernham]

Thank you for the very useful perspective, Blair. Our Scarlet has been allocated and should be shipping soon (just waiting on the FedEx e-mail informing me that it has shipped). My intention was always to spend several weeks renting some different sets of lenses to do tests with before making a purchasing decision. I would expect that we will do a combination of the types of tests that you suggest (which I need to learn more about) and some real world comparisons using different types of subjects in different settings under different conditions.

 

[Greg M]

Since you are looking at roughly the same cost for a similar set of Zeiss standards or RPPs, this is a very interesting comparison.

The size and weight differences are significant which might be the key issue for some buyers.

The RPPs are faster, not just 1.9 vs 2.1 faster, but effectively a full usable stop faster in my book as the Standards lose a fair bit more "snap" below 2.8 than the RPP's.

The RPPs have more modern coatings to reduce flare and hold contrast.

The Standards were designed for film media and the RPPs were designed for digital sensors. Without going too deep into the details I am convinced that the latest lens designs (Optimo Rouge, Leica C, RPP, Cooke 5/i, Fujinon) interact better with optical low pass filters and do a better job of matching nodal points for red, green and blue. I also believe that digital sensors and the filters they require are best served by greater tele centricity out of the exit pupil which was a much less critical metric on film media. This is most likely to manifest on older wide angle retro-focal lenses where field illumination may fall off more dramatically toward the edges.

I suggest that part of your evaluation of a set of Standards include shooting a flat field wide open so you can see if center to edge falloff is a problem, particularly on the wider focal lengths. Another thing I would check is to shoot a chart with thin red, green and blue lines in a crosshatch to see if there is any problem getting all three in focus at the same time from edge to edge and compare that to an RPP of the same or similar focal length.

Cheers - #19

Excellent comparison. I would also recommend you look at the two in typical settings for your style of work. I own both sets, and they are both great choices. My personal preference is the standards, I love their look even better than our super speeds. That being said they are not as "clean" as the RPP's...but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. The main advantage is obviously size/weight...and if your style is hand held bare bones the standard speeds are an obvious choice, if you are more studio style that may not matter.

 

[Jason Comparetto]

Either way, this is a great price for this set. Seriously, I usually see the 5 lens set for between $21,000-$24,000. So essentially you're getting the 135mm for free, which is like $6 or 7 grand.

 

[Jim McKinney]

Yeah but 5 years ago, these lenses were going for half the price or less, and the prices seem to be drifting lower at a gradual rate. (But if I was in the market at this moment, I'd be a happy buyer, I should add.) Having said that, they are very nice lenses still.

 

[Mark Pedersen]

Yeah but 5 years ago, these lenses were going for half the price or less, and the prices seem to be drifting lower at a gradual rate. (But if I was in the market at this moment, I'd be a happy buyer, I should add.) Having said that, they are very nice lenses still.

Where did you see a set of standards in the 12K range? They must have been shit, or before the RED ONE was released. Once RED hit the market, Zeiss standards and supers (and any 35mm PL glass) went up in price. From what I've seen, the price has been pretty stable recently around 20-25KK for that set... (in good shape).

I think you'll find that the 16 and 24mm will vignette a bit at 4K, and will probably a fair amount at 5K.

Greg, what's your experience? We both have Ultras as well I considered the standards but went with LDS Ultras because they were faster, more modern lenses with better coverage and coatings, better focus marks, etc. But certainly more expensive.

M

 

[Jim McKinney]

Where did you see a set of standards in the 12K range? They must have been shit, or before the RED ONE was released. Once RED hit the market, Zeiss standards and supers (and any 35mm PL glass) went up in price. From what I've seen, the price has been pretty stable recently around 20-25KK for that set... (in good shape).
M

About 5 (or maybe 6 now) years ago, you could buy a good set of Zeiss standards for that cheaper price. Then Red came out and BOOM! the price went up! There were a lot of cameras and not nearly enough lenses. That has been rectified now. Fortunately (and deservedly), the Zeiss are back in style, but with the advent of 5K and a greater supply of lenses on the market, I have to think that the market value of the older Zeiss will gradually drift lower over time.

 

[James T Mather]

I have a set and find them very pleasing to shoot on - they haven't got even field illumination below 28mm but it is a nice effect with a very subtle darkening at the edges below 28mm (this is only apparent wide open and even then you need to be filming a very evenly illuminated flat surface to see it) - similar to the effect we often introduce in post to sweeten the image so for me is not a problem (in fact I like it).

More filmy looking than most modern glass I find (which tends to make digital sensors look somewhat video-ish in my opinion). I have other lenses but, outside of my anamorphic sets, these are my favourite lenses.

Yes the price has fluctuated but isn't that the nature of supply and demand in an open market? Vistavision cameras were a few grand in 1976 but after ILM used them to shoot opticals for Star Wars the price ballooned to a couple of hundred grand as there was a requirement again for them. Nature of the market.

 

[Eduardo Ruiz]

Great discussion on the Zeiss Standards! I am almost giving up selling them (kidding). To me personally the 2.1 set is the most pleasant and "film-like" set of all when used with R1 or Epic. Modern lenses (master, ultras, S4, optimos) tend to look like video to me. I see a lot of cinematographers choosing ultras/masters and them using a lot of filtration (black pro mists or shneider classic softs), I really don't understand that. As a rental house I need to move forward, but as a cinematographer (that I am) it's heart breaking to let this one go.

 

[Christian Munoz D]

Great discussion on the Zeiss Standards! I am almost giving up selling them (kidding). To me personally the 2.1 set is the most pleasant and "film-like" set of all when used with R1 or Epic. Modern lenses (master, ultras, S4, optimos) tend to look like video to me. I see a lot of cinematographers choosing ultras/masters and them using a lot of filtration (black pro mists or shneider classic softs), I really don't understand that. As a rental house I need to move forward, but as a cinematographer (that I am) it's heart breaking to let this one go.

oh! Those lenses are a rental house inventory?

 

[Eduardo Ruiz]

oh! Those lenses are a rental house inventory?

Yes Chris, they were on rental.

 

[Eduardo Ruiz]

 

[D Fuller]

Where are they?

 

[Eduardo Ruiz]

NYC

 

[Matt Choules]

Can you tell us when and where they were last serviced?

 

[Eduardo Ruiz]

Can you tell us when and where they were last serviced?

Do you mean cleaning/collimating? I think around 6 months ago, but I plan to do it again by the time it sells. By the way, when something has "made in west Germany" engraved ... it is build to last, believe me.