Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Schneider Xenon FF vs Xenar-cine III. FOR Epic-w

A

Aleksandr Frayman

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2017
Messages
181
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
MOSCOW
Hi all friends! Tell that you choose Xenon or Xenar? In What their fundamental differences except the case. On how many the difference is strong? I ordered Xenar but great doubt that I will be able to use it with DJI Ronin.
 
Don't have any Xenar III's handy right now, but I could grab a couple sample of the Xenons on Helium (CF Weapon) in the next couple days if you want to see something specific and requests are not too demanding.

They have a reputation for lots of CA and they do exhibit some in extreme contrast situations. I'm partially to blame for this I think as I was one of the first to show off the Xenons on the Dragon sensor a few years back and heavy CA was very apparent. Newer OLPFs and color science on the RED cameras have helped tremendously in this regard. They perform quite well on Helium and I really like their overall look. The size, weight, build quality and mechanics are top notch on these lenses.

In many ways I prefer them to the Xenar III's which are quite different in the way they look and perform. The Xenar III's are also rather bulky/ heavy and some of their built in optical tracking and breathing compensation can give a strange look or feel to the image when racking focus. The Xenars are technically superior though and can be a bit sharper, bigger aperture, etc.. The Xenons of course cover full frame and are less bulky.
 
Thanks for your response! My requirements from Xenon it is an excellent color rendition, the sharp image, it isn't enough distortions. I want to choose from these two lenses unambiguously the best
 
Xenar III are bigger and have less coverage at 8k, not completely matched apertures... but they don't breathe at all.

I sold my Xenons because the CA was a bit much for my taste but they are otherwise excellent lenses. I really like their flairs
 
Anton Shavlik said:
Xenar III are bigger and have less coverage at 8k, not completely matched apertures... but they don't breathe at all.

I sold my Xenons because the CA was a bit much for my taste but they are otherwise excellent lenses. I really like their flairs
Click to expand...

Thanks for your answer. And what you can tell about a color rendition and sharpness in comparison with Xenar?
 
I was very interested in the Schnieder Xenar I when they first came out about 13 years ago. Schnieder had been in the business for a very long time and is top of the class in large format still photography. There was a set of Demo's that Abel had and sent them to us to look see. They arrived minus one lenses that had become broken somehow. I didn't like the build and feel and sent them back. When you cant have a demo set work right its not a good sign so I passed. Roughly 2 years later Schnieder came out with Version 2 of the Xenar. I looked again and felt similarly that something was wrong, and anytime you have to try a 2nd time to get it right.... then maybe Schneider should not have gotten back into Cine lenses. Well when they came out with V3 I was certain I wanted no part of Schneiders new cine lenses and didnt bother looking at them. Did they take back and replace every V1 and V2 they sold? After 3 versions id guess they finally (maybe) got it right, and many here sing their praise, but..... really, 3 times rolled out the same lens after fixing design problems twice?

I have thought about the Xenon's a few times figuring maybe they've learned something from the crazy history of V3 Xenar's, and now how long its taking to get the 18mm Xenon out, it just makes me wonder about this company in general.
 
Erich Roland said:
I was very interested in the Schnieder Xenar I when they first came out about 13 years ago. Schnieder had been in the business for a very long time and is top of the class in large format still photography. There was a set of Demo's that Abel had and sent them to us to look see. They arrived minus one lenses that had become broken somehow. I didn't like the build and feel and sent them back. When you cant have a demo set work right its not a good sign so I passed. Roughly 2 years later came out with Version 2. I looked again and felt similarly that something was wrong, and anytime you have to try again (V2) maybe Schneider should not have gotten back into Cine lenses. Well when they came out with V3 I was certain I wanted no part of Schneiders new cine lenses and didnt bother looking at them. I have thought about the Xenon's a few times figuring maybe they've learned something from the crazy history of V3 Xenar's, and now how long its taking to get the 18mm Xenon out, it just makes me wonder about this company in general.
Click to expand...

It's OK, thanks. It is essential material. Then what you could on recommend?
 
I now on vimeo to watch many video with participation of Xenon FF and have been terribly surprised... There are so much Chromatic abberation. There was no place in video Phill Holland of it one many less, well except 35 mm of a lens above. And now I is perfect in confusion.
 
My .02... I have the three lens Xenon set. They are lovely lenses, prefer their look to my prior ZF set. The complaints about CA are justified, so a willingness to work around the CA in shots where it appears (or a tolerance for it) is necessary, but it's not like this is an issue in every shot, and the overall look of the lenses offsets this one weakness. Build quality is great, weight and size is great, really CA is the main caveat.
 
The Xenar III's are great lenses. They really don't breathe very much at all and have lovely boheh. I would characterize them as somewhat like Cooke's in their gentle roll-off's and feel that they fill a gap between S4i's and Ultraprimes, yet have strangely never gained much traction. Personally, I think they are great value for the price. But that's just me. The Xenon's feel like DSLR lenses to me by comparison. CA and breathing. They are FF vs the S35 Xenar's, and their convenience is also due to their interchangeable mounts but I don't think they hold a candle to them otherwise. The best value out there however, seems to be the Sony Cinealta lenses which are really cheap as chips, yet perform very well (S35 though). A bit like modern standard primes...
 
Aleksandr Frayman said:
It's OK, thanks. It is essential material. Then what you could on recommend?
Click to expand...

Id say the best bang for the buck in the lower-end Cine lenses plus re-sale ability, is probably Zeiss CP.2's. Add the ability to swap mounts and FF, that's a lot of value.
 
Tim Morten said:
My .02... I have the three lens Xenon set. They are lovely lenses, prefer their look to my prior ZF set. The complaints about CA are justified, so a willingness to work around the CA in shots where it appears (or a tolerance for it) is necessary, but it's not like this is an issue in every shot, and the overall look of the lenses offsets this one weakness. Build quality is great, weight and size is great, really CA is the main caveat.
Click to expand...
thanks for your response and CA has very strongly upset me, I have been located to these lenses.
 
C. Burkhart said:
The Xenar III's are great lenses. They really don't breathe very much at all and have lovely boheh. I would characterize them as somewhat like Cooke's in their gentle roll-off's and feel that they fill a gap between S4i's and Ultraprimes, yet have strangely never gained much traction. Personally, I think they are great value for the price. But that's just me. The Xenon's feel like DSLR lenses to me by comparison. CA and breathing. They are FF vs the S35 Xenar's, and their convenience is also due to their interchangeable mounts but I don't think they hold a candle to them otherwise. The best value out there however, seems to be the Sony Cinealta lenses which are really cheap as chips, yet perform very well (S35 though). A bit like modern standard primes...
Click to expand...

that is you suggest to buy better than Sone Cinealta primes together of Schneider Cine Xenar?
 
Aleksandr Frayman said:
that is you suggest to buy better than Sone Cinealta primes together of Schneider Cine Xenar?
Click to expand...

I think the Xenar's have a little more character, but it depends if you like that character.
Bearing in mind that the Sony glass costs one quarter the price of the Xenar's and that they also only cover S35 like the Xenar's, if that works for you, I think it is an excellent choice for entry level. The Sony glass matches extremely well from one lens to another, with very little CA, very sharp and very clean, maybe a little bit heavy, but nothing unreasonable. Extremely robust, excellent build quality. Minolta glass. Personally, I think the day Sony stops making them, that glass is only going to go up in value. On the other hand, if you are interested in large format such as 8K or vista vision, FF dslr's etc. then it wouldn't be the best choice. Like I said, they are like modern standard primes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top