Weighing lens options (heavy vs. light)

[Michael Tiemann]

I'm sitting on the fence about the next set of primes to buy. My question for you fairly experienced folks out there is this: if you've got equal access to a set of heavy primes (ARRI Master Primes, SONY CineAlta, Cooke S5 and perhaps S4, etc.) and a set of lighter primes (ARRI Ultra Primes, Cooke MiniS4, Celere HS, etc.) how often do you try to tilt the shot in one direction or another. In the grand scheme of things, are you more excited about swinging the heavy but fast lenses, or happier to set things up so that you can move easily with lighter lenses? I have both a super-heavy Fujinon Premiere zoom and a bunch of (lightweight) Canon primes, so I know what the difference feels like. But I'm looking at finding the right middle ground for a true set of Cine primes, and am lost as to whether I should be focusing more on keeping things around 1kg (Celere HS or Sigma) or 2kg (Tokina Cinema). I really like the look of the Tokinas, but I also really like the weight of the Celere HS primes. (I also like the cost of the Sigmas; their speed and weight is also nice.)

 

[Nick Gardner]

I think the only real issue would be gimble work (which I despise, but that's another story). Normal Production, the weight of the lens isn't a big deal. Hand held it's no sweat, and only on certain long, difficult steadicam shots do you need to pair everything down.

Extreme cases would make me stay away from certain lenses, like the cooke anamorphics, or the old ziess VPs, but anything in the realm of normal is fine.

I would be much more concerned with the look of the lenses vs the weight.

Nick

 

[Kyle Jones]

Doesn't answer your question, but as a heads up, there is a Group Buy in the Accessories forum for the Tokina's and Newsshooter's recent article on them was impressive. They are the cheapest lenses I've seen with so little focus breathing (not claiming to have seen them all, but I'm in the market and thats the thing that has been killing every lens I start to fall in love with, including the Celere HS).

 

[Rob_Austin]

Just bought the Celere 25-85 (top 10 lightest out there) after 4 years of Red Pro Primes as my set (top 10 heaviest).

I got em for the vintage look/modern mechanics, still testing them to see if I'll keep them, but damn my arms and
back are thanking me.

I would buy a set of light ones that are convenient to shoot with and rent when you need something special. If I decide
to go back to contrasty/sharp look, I'll be after a set of those new sigmas.

 

[Phil Holland]

I mean technically the Rokinon Cine DS are the lightest ones out there

"technically"

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

It's worth noting that the Sigmas have a solo operator friendly focus rotation of 180 degrees. Most lenses designed for stills acquisition have 90 degrees of focus rotation or less, which can be tricky for focus pulls. A lot of the high end cinema glass has 240° or more to facilitate precise focus pulls with dedicated follow focus systems, which can make pulling on the barrel difficult unless you have a triple jointed wrist.

This feature may not matter to you, but for me and my widely varying assignments, it's a major plus.

Cheers - #19

 

[Phil Holland]

I guess I should expand on that answer and say go with the lenses that best suit your project and or your style of shooting. Sometimes concessions will need to be made if you need to get super lightweight, but generally speaking, it's the look that matters. Mechanics are next really. Then weight.

 

[Rob_Austin]

Top 10 Phil! Don't know exactly where the Celeres fall on that list but they are quite light

 

[Michael Tiemann]

It's worth noting that the Sigmas have a solo operator friendly focus rotation of 180 degrees. Most lenses designed for stills acquisition have 90 degrees of focus rotation or less, which can be tricky for focus pulls. A lot of the high end cinema glass has 240° or more to facilitate precise focus pulls with dedicated follow focus systems, which can make pulling on the barrel difficult unless you have a triple jointed wrist.

This feature may not matter to you, but for me and my widely varying assignments, it's a major plus.

Cheers - #19

Great point! Others, too. Sigma vs. Tokina vs. Celere all day!

 

[PatrickFaith]

I see things and also break things down into weight groups by production budget and cost.

Corporate Work ($5k to $50k): Only the lighter lenses, normally nikon ... sometimes things like middle weight cp2 (note also the entire camera rig is lighter, normally under 10 pounds, and the lighting system is fairly minimal)
Gimbal Work & motion control work ($10k to $50k): lighter lenses but normally are to match the feature lens (so I don't use and see the nikons/canons as much, but more of the cp2 weight group)
Feature Film extreme low budge($5k to $50k):lighter lenses, often things like cp2's or middle weight low cost rentals. Note also I see super fast setup times so not huge lighting costs
Feature Film on tripod scenes with full lighting ($50k-$300k): normally the heavier lenses (I use and see things like master prime weight), often it's a truck of lighting equipment

But to me a lot of things are about speed (especially scene setup time) and cost (especially rental and camera cost), and often weight matters on both of them. I am not involved with productions over $300k, I have seen them put things like even master primes on car mounts, but for the lower budget side I never see expensive/heavy lenses put in harms way.

 

[Patrick Tresch]

Since I use RTmotion focus system on the thumbwheel and it maps the lens rotation to the thumbwheel rotation, long focus throw isn't critical anymore. I'm interested in the new Sigma cine prime serie but I wonder if the photo lens Sigma ART has a sufficiently accurate focus motor to pull focus only through the camera? Or if the focus fonction only works for still use?

 

[Jake Wilganowski]

sigma art EF primes work great with no external motors and rt motion latitude

its so amazing to put on a lens and not hook up a motor and have it repeatably auto calibrate

great for gimbal

 

[paulcurtis]

sigma art EF primes work great with no external motors and rt motion latitude

its so amazing to put on a lens and not hook up a motor and have it repeatably auto calibrate

great for gimbal

I'd love to know what the motors are like. I tried using the electronic focusing with a modern Canon 35mm but found the whole thing too 'grindy' and just not smooth at all (i can see sound having a hissy fit over it as well). A lens would need to be designed ground up for smooth electronic focusing and i would have thought the Arts were designed for PDAF and so very fast but not smooth. Is this not the case?

I would love internally electronic focusing but i just don't know that the products are there yet.

I'm try to consolidate my lenses, just have too many so am that junction of do it go down modern, Art style or stick to something like Contax or the last sets of Leica R.

cheers
Paul

 

[Jake Wilganowski]

Im right there with ya and i think I'm going to buy some art ef primes and a set of celeres. Yes every lens works with the auto focus motors differently but the sigma art primes feel and look smooth focus wise

 

[paulcurtis]

Hi Jake,

I remembered i have a Sigma Art 24-35 here, so i just tried that out. I'm using it with fool control so i assume the RT Motion has no lag like the wifi approach? Even so what i hear are streams of tiny clicks as the stepper motors work, not as grinding as the Canon lens though. They're fine enough so as to not be obvious in focus on a small screen - but i do wonder when projected big whether the focus steps are jarring or visible. I lost connection and the lens reset a few times, not sure if that's fool control or just general lens communication.

So the promise is there but i'm just doubtful that these are the lenses to do it - i mean they're stills glass and the target audience uses AF very differently. The cine versions are motorless, ideally they should have changed motors in those.

I just a bit doubtful how reliable they are in the field as well. Have you experience of them in the field?

cheers
Paul

 

[paul engstrom]

There's a lot of variety in stills lenses

The Canon L lenses have many many more steps than Canons cheaper lenses. As a result, many of them focus very smoothly.

I suspect the Arts are similar.

Some of these focus movements project great on screen.

Other stills lenses are a big fail on the big screen. Beyond potential clunkiness in the focus movement you'll want to check for image shift, which is hard to see on a small monitor and yet a glaring problem on the big screen.

So you need to check for good samples -- and make sure you're checking on a larger size monitor.

The lenses that work well are quite fun

 

[Jake Wilganowski]

I shot 2 Mercedes spots on movi with the art ef primes using no external motors just RT motion lattitude, worked great