Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

When someone tells me they're using rokinons for their shoot..........

I suppose part of the "lust" for certain gear is the desire to have a piece that can be manipulated with precision, with predictable and repeatable results. While you may not be able to distinguish which lens was used in viewing the finished product, it's worth noting that things like bad lens mechanics can lead to blown takes. For some projects, having to roll a few extra takes isn't a big deal, OTOH, in some situations, messing up an otherwise perfect take - blocking, dialog, spot on reaction, etc - puts the camera department under the bus.

Clearly, there are a lot of people who place far too much value on a brand name or reputation. All I ask is that a "cinema" lens has the performance characteristics necessary for the operator/puller to achieve storytelling techniques like rack focus, slow push ins, etc with finesse - and without breathing/image shifts/etc that can divert the audience from the visual grace notes you are working so hard to mix in.

Cheers - #19
 
Once in a while I shoot film. Every time I do I am reminded why we get driven nuts by lenses with poor build or poor focus markings. It literally costs me money.
 
JayEmm said:
Once in a while I shoot film. Every time I do I am reminded why we get driven nuts by lenses with poor build or poor focus markings. It literally costs me money.
Click to expand...

That's why you can use the Xeens which are built properly.
 
I like my Roki set.

dawson_crying.jpg
 
I used to be known for been a "LENS" snob... The fact that I almost certainly used every lens ever made, and owned my Personal set of Master Primes didn't help the cause... Master Primes are an absolute "Master" piece of glass engineering and designing... Still my most favored glass...

However... So it happened that I lost every dollar I had and then some in building a Project of mine... So left with no lenses I went out and bough the absurdly CHEAP Rokinon's...

And I was truly surprised of how well they did for the money, I mean stop for a moment and look at what you get for what you pay, and then just STOP all together saying anything bad about this glass... :)

attachment.php


attachment.php



All shots below taken with the Rokinon 35mm @f16 no filters, and while not the best images, shot with only ambient light, I still am impressed by a couple of hundred dollars lens.

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


Will I use this lenses again? NO, I wan't because I can afford better... But if I had nothing other then this? Yeah of course I would.
 
Exactly, and these aren't even the Xeens, which are much better built and has better coating and focus engineering in them. Yes, it's the same glass, but I find it ridiculous that people complain about lenses for those prices. Of course they aren't Master Primes and everyone who compares them to Rokinons for reasons of criticize the Rokinons are rather stupid in my opinion.

What do you get for the price of the Xeens? You get full frame 11-blade aperture images and can work with a focus puller that doesn't complain. It's the most basic thing you can do on a low budget production and to do it for this price is an absolute wonder. The Rokinons should be considered the "basics", the bottom line of professional cine-work. That means if you want to shoot a film with a camera crew, they are the absolute basic cost you need to put out. Everything above that should be considered improving upon that.
 
For the price rokinons are awesome , and like guys said if you can't get good image out if rokinon on red - quit shooting and start selling hardwood floor, you'll be more successful;
yes - bmw is better then kia, yes - lion has bigger dick then coyote , tell me something i don't know;
i rarely use them now, but i would if i don't have a better choice;
 
A friend of mine just bought a set of these: http://www.syopt.com/en/
I did not have much time to check them out, only touched them and shot some snaps on his canon. The result was not bad in any way but I think there is so much other cool glas out there, even for less money, that has so much more character and features that are so much more likable to me. So I can not see the reasoning behind getting these lenses. The shit thing is that he bought them as he is shooting a lot of stuff for the Swedish Airforce, like hanging out of the back barn door of a hercules plane shooting jet fighers doing barrels right in front of him... Then he choose to do it with these lenses.... I can not get my head around that logic. A Fujinon Zoom comes to mind or any cool looking primes could probably be borrowed for even a cheap bottle of wine for such event, but no he is going to shot it on his F€%€ing Samyang lenses. It makes me twirl. :)
 
I haven't seen a reply that criticizes the optical quality.

I have heard that the 24mm is soft wide open, but I haven't tried it.
I think any lens that doesn't look good at its max aperture is unworthy of purchasing.

If anybody hates on the build quality, ugliness of their "cine" build or short focus throw, I can understand. But I think you can get over an ugly lens if the image looks good and you can put a lens gear ring around a still lens with a short throw (ok, yeah it might look even uglier, lol, but look at the cost).
 
Akin A said:
I haven't seen a reply that criticizes the optical quality.

I have heard that the 24mm is soft wide open, but I haven't tried it.
I think any lens that doesn't look good at its max aperture is unworthy of purchasing.

If anybody hates on the build quality, ugliness of their "cine" build or short focus throw, I can understand. But I think you can get over an ugly lens if the image looks good and you can put a lens gear ring around a still lens with a short throw (ok, yeah it might look even uglier, lol, but look at the cost).
Click to expand...

Then you don't want the Ultra primes... since from my testing, they have as much CA and errors as any other cheap lens when opened completely :P
They also breath a lot. After testing, if you want lenses with better quality than that on full opening, the CN-E primes beat the shit out of them. They are usable wide open and in my opinion the most underrated cine-primes out there. They only get a bashing because of the EF only mount, but the optical quality is better than many of the more expensive ones.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
Then you don't want the Ultra primes... since from my testing, they have as much CA and errors as any other cheap lens when opened completely :P
They also breath a lot. After testing, if you want lenses with better quality than that on full opening, the CN-E primes beat the shit out of them. They are usable wide open and in my opinion the most underrated cine-primes out there. They only get a bashing because of the EF only mount, but the optical quality is better than many of the more expensive ones.
Click to expand...

What camera and format did you test Ultra's on?

I mention this because I need to remind people that Ultra Primes and other lenses were designed to meet optical standards at S35mm format. Just because the image circle covers a larger sensor, doesn't necessarily mean the quality of that area will be on par with the intended image quality the lens designers originally achieved. I wouldn't be surprised if CN-E lenses had better corner and edge performance than many Cinema lenses on Dragon formats over 5k.
 
Tested on a Dragon, but the CA were overall and sharpness wide open weren't as great as on the CN-E (can't really judge at T1.3 but at T1.8 otherwise the sharpness plane is too shallow anyway to see if it's sharp or just out of focus).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top