What lenses would you get if you had 10K for a Scarlet-X AL-Canon mount?

[Marcos Montenegro]

I've everything Canon, the only non Canon Lens I have is the Tokina 11-16. The problem with going and mixing other manufacturers lenses for me (notice this is from shooting in 5D, 1D and 7D) is that each manufacturer has its own color tint. Yes, you can try to match it in post but, in Canon DSLR footage, for example, the difference in look is significant and provides a big challenge in color grading. The Tokina, however, looks remarkably similar to the Canon's. That was one of the main reasons I went for it vs getting a Sigma, which has a much closer look to Nikon lenses.

Sergio:

Good point. I remember the Zeiss tint was different than my Nikon 24-70mm tint when I rented a Zeiss 85mm for a photo shoot a few years back, so I can definitely see an issue in post if I mix and match lenses for video production.

All:

So, here's 3 options I've narrowed down this decision to:

A) DUCLOS ZEISS ZF.2 KIT
Duclos Zeiss ZF.2 kit (21mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.0, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/2.0 (MACRO) and 85mm f/1.4)
$9,070 with shipping
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX**

B) CANON KIT (with Tokina)
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 $719
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 $1,209 (with -$120 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 35mm f/1.4 $1,255 (with -$150 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 50mm f/1.2 $1,358 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 85mm f/1.2 $1,859 (with -$230 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,074 (with -$300 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
$8,474 ($980 in rebate savings)

C) Nikon KIT
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 $1,996.95
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 HAVE IT ALREADY
Nikon 35mm f/1.4G $1,649.95
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G HAVE IT ALREADY
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G $1,699.99
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,396.95
$7,743.84
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX while I wait for the smart RED Nikon mount**

A, B or C? What say you?

 

[David W. Jones]

Use the Nikon lenses you have now with F to EF adapters.
Then save your money for a PL mount and a production zoom.

 

[Sergio Perez]

Sergio:

Good point. I remember the Zeiss tint was different than my Nikon 24-70mm tint when I rented a Zeiss 85mm for a photo shoot a few years back, so I can definitely see an issue in post if I mix and match lenses for video production.

All:

So, here's 3 options I've narrowed down this decision to:

A) DUCLOS ZEISS ZF.2 KIT
Duclos Zeiss ZF.2 kit (21mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.0, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/2.0 (MACRO) and 85mm f/1.4)
$9,070 with shipping
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX**

B) CANON KIT (with Tokina)
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 $719
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 $1,209 (with -$120 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 35mm f/1.4 $1,255 (with -$150 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 50mm f/1.2 $1,358 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 85mm f/1.2 $1,859 (with -$230 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,074 (with -$300 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
$8,474 ($980 in rebate savings)

C) Nikon KIT
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 $1,996.95
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 HAVE IT THAT ALREADY
Nikon 35mm f/1.4G $1,649.95
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G HAVE IT THAT ALREADY
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G $1,699.99
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,396.95
$7,743.84
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX while I wait for the smart RED Nikon mount**

A, B or C? What say you?

I would say B if it was me, with one simple change- I would switch the 24-70 2.8 for the 24 105 4L IS. The IS is absolutely fantastic and that lens i a workhorse for run and gun doc shooting. Not as fast but the IS does miracles at 105. I would also really recommend the 24 1.4L. I would skip the 35 1.4 and get the 24 1.4. Its one of my favorite Canon lenses. In my signature is my vimeo page. Check out the video "Macau Sa Assi", a small narrative musical I did. most of the restaurant scenes were shot with this lens. Its absolutely stunning.

 

[Marcos Montenegro]

Sergio:

I can replace the 35mm with the 24mm as you state. I've tried the 24-105mm and I was not impressed with it; too soft, especially in the corners. I can also buy a Fotodiox Nikon-Canon Pro adapter ($139) and keep my Nikon 24-70mm instead of buying the Canon equivalent, although I hope the tint difference isn't as noticeable in post.

B) CANON KIT (with Tokina)
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 $719
Canon 24mm f/1.4 $1,481 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 50mm f/1.2 $1,358 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 85mm f/1.2 $1,859 (with -$230 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,074 (with -$300 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
$7,491 ($890 in rebate savings)

What do you think?

Marcos

I would say B if it was me, with one simple change- I would switch the 24-70 2.8 for the 24 105 4L IS. The IS is absolutely fantastic and that lens i a workhorse for run and gun doc shooting. Not as fast but the IS does miracles at 105. I would also really recommend the 24 1.4L. I would skip the 35 1.4 and get the 24 1.4. Its one of my favorite Canon lenses. In my signature is my vimeo page. Check out the video "Macau Sa Assi", a small narrative musical I did. most of the restaurant scenes were shot with this lens. Its absolutely stunning.

 

[D Fuller]

Now it's your choice, we've all said what we'd do.

The Nikon kit is both the least costly and the best glass. You can add the Tokina and still be under the Canon number. (not including the mount)
If you go that way, buy the Optitek ProLock. It is solid. I don't expect to see the Red electronic mount for 6 months. With the ProLock, you won't miss it.

David

Sergio:

Good point. I remember the Zeiss tint was different than my Nikon 24-70mm tint when I rented a Zeiss 85mm for a photo shoot a few years back, so I can definitely see an issue in post if I mix and match lenses for video production.

All:

So, here's 3 options I've narrowed down this decision to:

A) DUCLOS ZEISS ZF.2 KIT
Duclos Zeiss ZF.2 kit (21mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.0, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/2.0 (MACRO) and 85mm f/1.4)
$9,070 with shipping
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX**

B) CANON KIT (with Tokina)
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 $719
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 $1,209 (with -$120 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 35mm f/1.4 $1,255 (with -$150 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 50mm f/1.2 $1,358 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 85mm f/1.2 $1,859 (with -$230 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,074 (with -$300 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
$8,474 ($980 in rebate savings)

C) Nikon KIT
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 $1,996.95
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 HAVE IT ALREADY
Nikon 35mm f/1.4G $1,649.95
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G HAVE IT ALREADY
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G $1,699.99
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,396.95
$7,743.84
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX while I wait for the smart RED Nikon mount**

A, B or C? What say you?

 

[Marcos Montenegro]

David:

A production zoom like the RED PRO 18-85mm T2.9 ZOOM?

Use the Nikon lenses you have now with F to EF adapters.
Then save your money for a PL mount and a production zoom.

 

[David W. Jones]

Yes, on the lower end of the price scale, the Red 18-85, or Cooke 18-100. The Cooke 20-100 would be a few bucks less. The Red 17-50 if you are into handheld work. Then the Duclos 11-16 to fill out the wide end. While having a nice set of prime lenses is a good thing, having a nice production zoom in your kit can also go a long way when needed.

 

[Sergio Perez]

Sergio:

I can replace the 35mm with the 24mm as you state. I've tried the 24-105mm and I was not impressed with it; too soft, especially in the corners. I can also buy a Fotodiox Nikon-Canon Pro adapter ($139) and keep my Nikon 24-70mm instead of buying the Canon equivalent, although I hope the tint difference isn't as noticeable in post.

B) CANON KIT (with Tokina)
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 $719
Canon 24mm f/1.4 $1,481 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 50mm f/1.2 $1,358 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 85mm f/1.2 $1,859 (with -$230 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,074 (with -$300 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
$7,491 ($890 in rebate savings)

What do you think?

Marcos

Well, Marcos, I think its just a matter of preference. I actually started with old Nikon Lenses with the 35mm adapter movement. It was great glass. In the old film days, I actually owned a Nikon DSLR. Nikon lenses are fairly good. The question is simply about using the Lenses in video NOW. Red did a fantastic job with their Canon mount. It allows IS and control of Canon's aperture, as well as autofocus if you want to use the still functions of the Scarlet-Epic. We don't know when the Nikon mount will come. Unitll then, you'll be using the lenses without IS and in full manual mode all the time. Both Nikon and Canon glass hold their resell value fairly well, mainly due to their client base, the DSLR still photographers.

The tint thing is definitely a problem for me. I really love my Nikon 50 1.4 but never use it (even though I have a nikon mount adapter for my Canon DSLR's because it just doesn't match with my Canon lenses. Does it look good? Absolutely. But so does my Canon glass. Different tint, the Nikon being more greenish, the Canon more Redish.

The 24-105 is indeed more soft than the 24-70 but I'm not sure if this would show in the Scarlet/Epic 4K image. If you have the chance I suggest you take another look to it!

I would also take a look at the 1.4X extender for your 70-200. Essential tool for certain scenarios when you need tele, and not that expensive.

The 80 1.2 is a STELLAR lens. Cannot wait to use it in with my Epic!

I think all your 3 options (A,B and C) are good and you'll be happy regardless. My option goes for B, but the other 2 are as valid.

One last thing: The Tokina really does look like a Canon lens in terms of color tint. Funny thing is I hardly use this lens in my DSLRs because due to its sharpness it just brings tons of aliasing artifacts, like the 14 2.8L. The softer 16/35 is much better for video, for example... I can imagine all this will revert when shooting Epic and Scarlet. The sharpest lens is the best!

 

[Michael Hastings]

If you go with the Nikon kit I have an Optitek epic/scarlet Nikon mount for sale as well as a70-200 2.8 ED for sale (bought it from steve gibby) at a good price. Can also get you a good deal on a14-24). The Optitek mount and Nikon glass is great, we just need the electronic iris and focus control that is already available on the canon mounts for our use in underwater housings.

Sergio:

Good point. I remember the Zeiss tint was different than my Nikon 24-70mm tint when I rented a Zeiss 85mm for a photo shoot a few years back, so I can definitely see an issue in post if I mix and match lenses for video production.

All:

So, here's 3 options I've narrowed down this decision to:

A) DUCLOS ZEISS ZF.2 KIT
Duclos Zeiss ZF.2 kit (21mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.0, 35mm f/1.4, 50mm f/2.0 (MACRO) and 85mm f/1.4)
$9,070 with shipping
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX**

B) CANON KIT (with Tokina)
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 $719
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 $1,209 (with -$120 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 35mm f/1.4 $1,255 (with -$150 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 50mm f/1.2 $1,358 (with -$180 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 85mm f/1.2 $1,859 (with -$230 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,074 (with -$300 rebate exp Jan 7 '12)
$8,474 ($980 in rebate savings)

C) Nikon KIT
Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 $1,996.95
Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 HAVE IT ALREADY
Nikon 35mm f/1.4G $1,649.95
Nikon 50mm f/1.4G HAVE IT ALREADY
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G $1,699.99
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 $2,396.95
$7,743.84
**I have to buy a Nikon mount, like an optitek, or a couple of Nikon-Canon adapters, like a FOTODIOX while I wait for the smart RED Nikon mount**

A, B or C? What say you?

 

[Demetri Zuev]

I have the same situation here, choosing between B and C. In the end, since the ergonomics of all three kits are not great for cinema use, I think quality of the glass matters most, so I'm leaning more towards Nikon G primes.

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

Nikon G series F1.4 primes and the 14-24, 24-70 & 70-200 VRII zooms. The G primes are approaching Master prime sharpness wide open and the 14-24 matches them. The only still glass that really surpasses them is Leica.

Yes but 50mm G is a JOKE! No nano coating...made in China.

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

Also would take Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 over newer 24-70 any day.......

 

[Marcos Montenegro]

Even tough I'm a Nikon fan boy, I have to admit that the Canon's are nice. Today I went to a local photo shop to compare side by side and shoot around a bit, even took some to post, and here's my take:

* Canon 85mm f/1.2 vs Nikon 85mm f/1.4G- I was VERY impressed with the quality and feel of the Canon, similar to the Niknon, but the IQ was in its own league; most people won't dare to film with this lens wide open to f/1.2 as the focus is razor thin and sometimes has trouble finding the focus, especially if talent is moving, but if it's a static shot, I can see very creative opportunities with this lens than wouldn't be there with other 85mm's. The Nikon is nice and much quieter than its predecessor, but I really didn't see and advantage in terms of IQ between the G and the D Nikon lenses.
WINNER- CANON

* Canon 24mm f/1.4 vs Nikon 24mm f/1.4G- VERY SIMILAR in almost every category (build, feel, AF and IQ).
WINNER- DRAW

* Canon 50mm f/1.2 vs Nikon 50mm f/1.4G- Nikon feels cheap (it IS 1/4 the price of the Canon), and although it produces great TACK SHARP pictures, the Canon feels superior in every way.
WINNER- CANON

I also compared the 24-70mm and the 70-200, and prefer the Nikons, so if you plan on going for zooms, I'd recommend the Nikons.

Unfortunately, Canon doesn't have an answer for Nikon's 14-24, which is an absolute AWESOME lens, but I did played a bit with the Canon 14mm f/2.8, but at $2K (same price for the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8!) a prime should be faster than f/2.8.


So, looks like if I go primes, I'll go the Canon route, not just because of what I saw and felt today, but that way I can use the RED mount from the get go and take advantage of its features and future capabilities in firmware. Also, I originally wanted the 70-200mm f/2.8 but I realized that there will be a lot of crop on the Scarlet-X, so my 85mm might turn into a 135mm or more, so I asked myself how many times have I needed that 200mm zoom distance in the past while filming, and really not many. Thus, rather than spend the extra $2k for the zoom I'd rather get a 135mm f/2.0 or a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and save some money for other accessories.

If I go for zooms, I'll take the Nikon route and finish the trilogy (14-24mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8); that should cover 90% of my shooting range but f/2.8 might be too slow at times.

Hmmm....

 

[Julio Quintana]

The other thing to consider is that the Nikon focus gear is opposite of cinema lenses (and every other lens for that matter). It's not an issue if you get a reversible follow focus like the Arri MFF-1. Just something to keep in mind. Again, personal aesthetic preferences are a huge factor, but I think that when you weigh all the options, the Canon primes give you the most flexibility on Epic/Scarlet in the under $10,000 range.

 

[Ryan De Franco]

Julio, I agree, Canon wires are excellent for repeatable autofocus. It's just autofocus might be less important than the look and character of the lens--for some people. Maybe for others, a bunch of Canon primes and zooms with touch screen autofocus outweighs the "character" of Zeiss any day.

As for ZF over ZE, ZF has manual iris adjustment, but the lens barrel moves backwards compared to most lenses. Once the intelligent F-mount is out, perhaps this won't be a problem?

My set of Zeiss Contax primes ran me 6,000.

21mm f/2.8
28mm f/2
35mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.4
60mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro
85mm f/1.4
135mm f/2.8

There is a 15mm option available as well, too expensive for me though. The Tokina covers the wide end.

 

[Marcos Montenegro]

Ryan:

Thanks for your input. How long ago did you buy the set for $6K? The ZF.2 bundle with case from B&H is $6K:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/818446-REG/Zeiss_410951_0000_033_ZF_2_SLR_5_Lens_Bundle.html

However, it only includes the 21mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm (not macro) and 85mm. If you got those with the 60 macro and 135 for 6K you got a deal!

Marcos

Julio, I agree, Canon wires are excellent for repeatable autofocus. It's just autofocus might be less important than the look and character of the lens--for some people. Maybe for others, a bunch of Canon primes and zooms with touch screen autofocus outweighs the "character" of Zeiss any day.

As for ZF over ZE, ZF has manual iris adjustment, but the lens barrel moves backwards compared to most lenses. Once the intelligent F-mount is out, perhaps this won't be a problem?

My set of Zeiss Contax primes ran me 6,000.

21mm f/2.8
28mm f/2
35mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.4
60mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro
85mm f/1.4
135mm f/2.8

There is a 15mm option available as well, too expensive for me though. The Tokina covers the wide end.

 

[Ryan De Franco]

Mine are cheaper because they are Zeiss Contax. Pre-ZF. Optical formula is 95% the same. The Contax also bear the famous T* coatings, but with rare earth elements Zeiss can no longer mine--environmental reasons or simply too costly. The newer T* coatings (ZF, ZE, Compact Primes) are better at controlling flare, but there's a scientific intensity that isn't there in the older Zeiss glass. Barely noticeable in some of the vimeo comparisons but very apparent when you're tight on anyone's face.

The ZF T* coatings were made for stills, after all--the macrocontrast you want for a print is not really the same you want for a 40' screen, even motion on a computer screen. The Contax were of course designed for stills as well. Maybe it's the West German design & manufacture, maybe its the older Schott glass, maybe it's just my imagination, but I really dig the older Contax look.

You have to piece together a set via eBay, craigslist etc for months, but I had a lot of fun doing it. The 28-85 zoom is fantastic, tack sharp and dirt cheap, a bit slow, and doesn't work with a follow focus, but for fast handheld work with a long focus throw nothing compares. (I've owned Nikon zooms and primes, Canon 24-70 and 70-200, people always point out the Zeiss Contax shots in a project with multiple lens systems).

 

[Nick Morrison]

I want just quickly agree with Ryan that the Contax Zeiss lenses ARE GREAT.

I own about 15 lenses myself, and like Ryan pieced them all together on ebay, at B&H and Adorama.

It's been fun building the collection, and I keep adding every month.


The pluses are as follows:
1) Work great on DSLR and Scarlet
2) Cover FF
3) Have great T* coating
4) There are 30-40 lenses to choose from.
5) Easy to cinemod at Duclos
6) Aperture is fully manual
7) They focus the right way
8) Relatively affordable

Cons:
Hard to find. You have to really have the time and patience to build a set.

I've spent over a year pouring over the reviews of each lens at fredmiranda.com, but I'm not sure if everyone has that kind of time.

But I love them. And as Ryan says, people notice the look. Contax lenses stand out. Bear in mind it's the same glass and coating used on Hasselblad C & CF lenses (made by Zeiss at the same time).

I started shooting DSLR with them. And their cinematic "look" has certainly helped us get to the point where we've put a deposit on a Scarlet, and will likely order a second before Dec 31st.

I owe them a lot.


But that being said, I'm sure Nikon AIS primes are great. And Leica primes look amazing too. Both have lots of fans.

And even more affordable route would be older Minolta primes, from the 70's and 80s. Minolta used to manufacture (and even design) lenses for Leica, so Minolta coatings from that era are said to resemble Leica's a lot (amazing color rendition). The 58 1.2 is a very famous lens.

- Nick

 

[Marcos Montenegro]

Nick:

So I'm assuming you have to use an adapter (Contax-Canon) to use these Contax Zeiss lenses with a Scarlet, correct? Which one are you using?

Marcos

I want just quickly agree with Ryan that the Contax Zeiss lenses ARE GREAT.

I own about 15 lenses myself, and like Ryan pieced them all together on ebay, at B&H and Adorama.

It's been fun building the collection, and I keep adding every month.


The pluses are as follows:
1) Work great on DSLR and Scarlet
2) Cover FF
3) Have great T* coating
4) There are 30-40 lenses to choose from.
5) Easy to cinemod at Duclos
6) Aperture is fully manual
7) They focus the right way
8) Relatively affordable

Cons:
Hard to find. You have to really have the time and patience to build a set.

I've spent over a year pouring over the reviews of each lens at fredmiranda.com, but I'm not sure if everyone has that kind of time.

But I love them. And as Ryan says, people notice the look. Contax lenses stand out. Bear in mind it's the same glass and coating used on Hasselblad C & CF lenses (made by Zeiss at the same time).

I started shooting DSLR with them. And their cinematic "look" has certainly helped us get to the point where we've put a deposit on a Scarlet, and will likely order a second before Dec 31st.

I owe them a lot.


But that being said, I'm sure Nikon AIS primes are great. And Leica primes look amazing too. Both have lots of fans.

And even more affordable route would be older Minolta primes, from the 70's and 80s. Minolta used to manufacture (and even design) lenses for Leica, so Minolta coatings from that era are said to resemble Leica's a lot (amazing color rendition). The 58 1.2 is a very famous lens.

- Nick

 

[Nick Morrison]

Hey Marcos, I COULD use Contax to EOS adapters on the Scarlet, but I don't plan to. The truth is, though these adapters work perfectly well, they do tend to slip off. I've had a lens or two almost fall in my hand more than once.

I plan on using the ALLSTAR mount. That way I can swap in both Contax glass and PL glass quickly without a hassle.

- Nick