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 :)

Sigma Cinema Lenses

Dan Kanes said:
Going off topic for a minute...

Anamorphic is just plain incredible to shoot with. From an imaging standpoint it's just super cool, incredible and different than what we are used to experiencing behind the camera if we have only shot spherical, but watched Anamorphic movies for a large portion of our film watching lifetimes...

Here's the real secret sauce about Anamorphic:

You get the vertical field of view of your focal length's number.

You get Twice the horizontal field of view of your focal length's number comparing to Spherical (talking about 2x anamorphic here aka original Cinemascope style format)

(a 50mm 2x anamorphic has equivalent horizontal field of view of a 25mm, and vertical field of view of a 50mm)

You get roughly the depth of field properties of your focal length compared to spherical (so again - wide horizontal field of view of a 25, but shallow depth of field of a 50mm)...

with the added benefit (or drawback depending on your perspective) of astigmatized bokeh (referring here to "classic" anamorphic look - not Master Anamorphic).

The major problem with Anamorphic in our time is the mechanics are mostly SHOT on anything that isn't maintained by Panavision, or by other master lens technicians and babied by Cinematographers and AC's...

All the other problems of "resolution" or "crop factor" or "windowing" are "just numbers" (In My emotional "Artist" opinion) - and have nothing to do with the artistic result of imaging...

But... back on Topic...

Sigma Cine Lenses.

Damn, I love me some Sigma Art optics for contrasty, clear, nice draw, aspherical, low chromatic aberration, solid, dependable imaging.
Click to expand...
I personally also love the anamorphic look. Especially more so with real anamorphic lenses (having used none)
 
Does anybody has a side by side with the 18-35mm 1.8 vs the new sigma 18-35mm T2 in IQ.
 
Variations in IQ would only come from Qualty variations in the still lens. They are optically identical. The cine versions have even higher QC standards from what I was told
 
Patrick Grossien said:
Variations in IQ would only come from Qualty variations in the still lens. They are optically identical. The cine versions have even higher QC standards from what I was told
Click to expand...

Yeah I expected that.
I did a quick comparison and it was similar but not exactly! Though my 18-35mm is old (first week of release).

Here are some shots with an Ultracon 1.







 
Last edited:
Beautiful images, Note!
They produce the glass for both lenses, but of course a full metal jacket like that should tend to be less prone to quality differences through inaccuracies. And they probably pick the best crop - if there is such a thing - for the more expensive lenses.
I would love to see how exactly they'd differentiate. But maybe it's all in the tweaking during assembly.
 
Dan Kanes said:
Gorgeous shots note !
Click to expand...
thanks Dan! Glad you made the suggestion!

Patrick Grossien said:
Beautiful images, Note!
They produce the glass for both lenses, but of course a full metal jacket like that should tend to be less prone to quality differences through inaccuracies. And they probably pick the best crop - if there is such a thing - for the more expensive lenses.
I would love to see how exactly they'd differentiate. But maybe it's all in the tweaking during assembly.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Yeah the build difference is definitely striking.
 
That is what I need. Have a full set of m lenses and bought a scarlet -w and can't use them. Do I buy a set of r lenes? Don't want to work backwards.
 
Any confirmation on price of the primes since it's NAB?
 
Gonna be interesting seeing the Sigmas go up against the Zeiss CP.3's. Theoretically the Sigmas have a newer optical design and are 1.5 vs 2.1-2.9 for the CP.3's.
 
It's a great time for lenses!
 
I was told $3400/ lens with the 14mm and 135mm being somewhat more. Shipping is supposed to start for pl mount primes in May.

Primes looked good on a helium weapon camera. There was some chromatic aberration on the 50mm until t2.5 but all the other lenses were comparativly clean. Also an e-mount 50mm on a Sony fs7 didn't show the same kind of purple fringing. So I'm not sure if it was related to the helium sensor's pixel density or a bad copy of a prototype lense.

Very rectilinear and good build quality.

Vince
 
If you ask me, the same way that Sigma are half the price then Zeiss in the stills market (Milvus vs Sigma art), they should be about half the price in the cine market, so about 2000$ per a lens will make sense.

It's a much harder sale than Zeiss in my opinion, when you speak to people (normal one's not lens geeks and pixel peepers like us)they mainly relate to a brand.

Zeiss is just a much stronger name then Sigma, if you say to some producer that asks you what lenses you have? and you answer: Zeiss. the name speaks for itself.
if you say: Sigma, he wouldn't even understand the connection to cinema, then you need to explain it's a cinema version of Sigma art, but usually they don't really know what Sigma art means lol , so you need to explain that the art are on par with Zeiss or even better in some cases, then they ask themselves : why did he buy a lens on par and not Zeiss, did he cheap out? This is from my experience, that Zeiss is the holy grail and the benchmark.
 
Vince Arvidson said:
I was told $3400/ lens with the 14mm and 135mm being somewhat more. Shipping is supposed to start for pl mount primes in May.

Primes looked good on a helium weapon camera. There was some chromatic aberration on the 50mm until t2.5 but all the other lenses were comparativly clean. Also an e-mount 50mm on a Sony fs7 didn't show the same kind of purple fringing. So I'm not sure if it was related to the helium sensor's pixel density or a bad copy of a prototype lense.

Very rectilinear and good build quality.

Vince
Click to expand...

That was kind of dissapointing... $3400/lens sounds a bit steep, I was hoping for around $2000-2500 to be really competitive.
Hmm, maybe time to reconsider and look at other options then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top