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 :)

Lens Shootout Round I

Daniel Soderberg

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2011
Messages
1,889
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
San Francisco
I decided I wanted to put together a little lens shootout between all of the lenses I own and possibly help people make a better decision on what lens to choose for their project. This was the result of the first round. Tips for round II are appreciated!

I focused more on the feel of the lenses rather than technical aspects (like using charts).


I should also add that all of the shots have been color balanced using temperature and tint to match.


Camera used:
Red Epic Dragon (STH OLPF)


The lenses tested (all available for rent in the San Francisco Bay Area):
Zeiss Ultra Primes
Kowa Anamorphics
Kowa Prominar Spericals
Zeiss Mark II Super Speeds
Cooke S2 Speed Panchros
Lomo T2.3 Sphericals
Zeiss Rollei/Jena

SoderbergFilms.com

https://vimeo.com/131385594
 
I really like lens D, the skin tones pop and the bokeh is smooth, not swirly and distracting. I'm going to guess that's the ultra prime.

Also G is obviously the anamorphic.
 
Yup, D is the Ultra. The key is at the end.
and yeah if you like a really creamy bokeh with less detail and no swirl, the ultra does that pretty well. Personally I like a little more character.

I really like lens D, the skin tones pop and the bokeh is smooth, not swirly and distracting. I'm going to guess that's the ultra prime.

Also G is obviously the anamorphic.
 
Daniel, thanks for the test!

I've a similar taste to yours regarding lenses but I have to admit that I shot a couple of projects recently with Ultras and surprisingly (for me) I was very satisfied with the result...

btw they're not as modern and clinical as most people think...you can still find their Standards roots in some of their traits! ;)
 
I'm a bit confused on the Rollei Jena as on your homepage they are listed as Contax Jena apparently. Can you clarify? They look like an interesting budget solution to me.
 
Yeah youre right, the Ultras aren't super clinical like other modern glass and I do like them for projects from time to time!

Daniel, thanks for the test!

I've a similar taste to yours regarding lenses but I have to admit that I shot a couple of projects recently with Ultras and surprisingly (for me) I was very satisfied with the result...

btw they're not as modern and clinical as most people think...you can still find their Standards roots in some of their traits! ;)
 
Np, the set is 3 Rollei mount Contax Zeiss exact copies, and 2 are Zeiss Jena lenses, all converted to PL mount.

I'm a bit confused on the Rollei Jena as on your homepage they are listed as Contax Jena apparently. Can you clarify? They look like an interesting budget solution to me.
 
Its a Kowa 75mm t2.8 at 2.8, I left it all the way open but when stopped down 1/2 or full stop it sharpens up really fast. Definitely better than a Lomo.

G looks like shot with Lomo ( really soft )
 
Rollei is very different from Zeiss Jena!

Rollei was in the west (actually in my home town) and produced to tight standards, some of the lenses were Zeiss designed, but not all of them. Their coatings were good, but quite different in colors.

Zeiss Jena was in the east and suffered from problematic QC. Their designs were based on pre-war Zeiss designs and some were developed further independently of Zeiss west (Oberkochen). Their optics can be very good if you try a few samples, coatings were weaker than Zeiss T*.
 
I'm curious about a particular effect that shows on the lens flares. At 1:23 the various "lobes" of artifacts get cut off, presumably by the edge of the front element (this characteristic is present in several of the examples); but the lens at 1:48 has a very different manifestation where the "lobes" are present and simply get "filled in" as the camera pans.

I wonder how much of this has to do with sensor aspect ratio covering parts of the image circle beyond the originally designed/intended 35mm film recording area of the lens?

I've also noticed in tests of my own that the wider the aperture the more dramatic the flare. I guess that makes sense in some ways (wider aperture = more light), but I thought the flare happened in the forward elements, not aft of the iris?
 
Lens flares happen from a double reflection, light that goes in the lens, reflects outward, and gets reflected back in again. The back surface of the front element is the first place flairs can originate from, and is also the interior surface that sees the most light, but it can happen at any glass to air interface inside the lens.
 
Interesting how the low cine prominars hold focus more than the others

what stop were these all shot at?

all wide open?
 
Rollei is very different from Zeiss Jena!

Rollei was in the west (actually in my home town) and produced to tight standards, some of the lenses were Zeiss designed, but not all of them. Their coatings were good, but quite different in colors.

Zeiss Jena was in the east and suffered from problematic QC. Their designs were based on pre-war Zeiss designs and some were developed further independently of Zeiss west (Oberkochen). Their optics can be very good if you try a few samples, coatings were weaker than Zeiss T*.

Thanks for this interesting info Uli!
 
Interesting how the low cine prominars hold focus more than the others

what stop were these all shot at?

all wide open?

Hey Stephen, all were shot at T2.1 except the Panchros, Kowa Sphericals and Lomo Sphericals which were wide open at T2.3 And then the Kowa Anamorphic was wide open at T2.8 (the 75mm)
 
Back
Top