Which one is more "cinematic"?

[Gabor D.]

The AIS lenses have a similar focus throw to the Rokinons. As far as new purchases, it looks like you have the medium an long end covered. You might look into a 20mm F2.8 or 24mm f2 AIS lenses.

Ok, but how good are these lenses for a feature film?
35mm 1.8G DX (it's great for stills, but for feature film shoot... unusable)
50mm 1.8D
85mm 1.8D

The last two could be used I think, but the 35mm DX is unusable.

 

[Gabor D.]

Thanks,you're right! But still I'm the one behind the camera who makes the purchase and like to find out which one is the better. Becasue maybe the audience won't care, I'll

Not a problem. Color correction these days can basically do anything.
If you are shooting a feature with non-name actors these lenses are
very acceptable. On such a feature the weaknesses will most likely be
the quality of the acting and scope of the production design. Last thing
anyone will notice will be the lenses.

here is f2.8 comparison of Nikon 85mm 1.4g vs. Rokinon 85mm....(also called Samyang or Bower depending on country)
Nikon is just little sharper in the corners.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

But all the still lenses are very soft wide open...all of them...Canon...Zeiss...Nikon
The sweet spot is usually 2.8-4.0 for maximum sharpness.
Here is wide open f1.4 comparison of Nikon 85mm 1.4g and Zeiss 85mm...not a very pretty chart...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

 

[Gabor D.]

OFFTOPIC
Am I right that the Red Scarlet has a similar crop factor as APS-C sized DSLRs?

 

[Jiri Vrozina]

Not a problem. Color correction these days can basically do anything.
If you are shooting a feature with non-name actors these lenses are
very acceptable. On such a feature the weaknesses will most likely be
the quality of the acting and scope of the production design. Last thing
anyone will notice will be the lenses.

here is f2.8 comparison of Nikon 85mm 1.4g vs. Rokinon 85mm....(also called Samyang or Bower depending on country)
Nikon is just little sharper in the corners.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

But all the still lenses are very soft wide open...all of them...Canon...Zeiss...Nikon
The sweet spot is usually 2.8-4.0 for maximum sharpness.
Here is wide open f1.4 comparison of Nikon 85mm 1.4g and Zeiss 85mm...not a very pretty chart...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

I just cant believe how sharp my Zeiss 35mm f1.4 is fully open. That chart was pretty useless.
Another sharp lens fully open is Nikon 24mm f1.4.
Canons are sharp fully open. Canon 24mm t1.5 beat Ultraprime 24mm t1.9 fully open. And how about Leicas - especially fast M Primes. Very, very sharp open. They are sharp for stills, so they are sharp for your cropped video sensor too ;-)

 

[Vithya Sharma]

Oky..

Finally best Lens for grade "cinematic" look?

 

[Gabor D.]

Maybe it's not the best topic, but...

According to this site:
http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html

The focus throw of AIS lenses and AFD lenses, are the same.
For example:
24mm 2.8AIS - 80 degrees
24mm 2.8AFD - 80 degrees

So if I can't get an AI version of the 24mm 2.8 which has a focus throw of 160 degrees, then does it make a difference which one I choose, the AIS or AFD? Is there any difference?

 

[Gabor D.]

I need to get a 24mm lens, so I would add the Zeiss ZF.2 25mm f2.8 to the equation also. Right now it's a little bit steep for me in price, but I'm seriously thinking of investing in one. On my crop sensor it would give me a 35-36mm fov. I'm going to focus directly on the lens, and it has a nice focus throw, around 160 degrees if I remember well. In terms of the "cinematic" question, how would this compare to the other two brands?

Is it usable at f2.8, or this needs to be stopped down also?

It's a huge investment for me, but thinking in the long term, maybe this should be the right way. What you think?

UPDATE: I found a good priced Zeiss ZF.2 25mm 2.8, so I took it. Waiting for delivery....

 

[Steve Das]

I just cant believe how sharp my Zeiss 35mm f1.4 is fully open. That chart was pretty useless.
Another sharp lens fully open is Nikon 24mm f1.4.

Ok..let's check them out...Nikon and Zeiss at f1.4...

..Wide Open....Nikon 24mm f1.4g vs Zeiss 35mm f1.4
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

And now stopped down to f2.8...
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

Canons are sharp fully open. Canon 24mm t1.5 beat Ultraprime 24mm t1.9 fully open. And how about Leicas - especially fast M Primes. Very, very sharp open. They are sharp for stills, so they are sharp for your cropped video sensor too ;-)

Compare a Canon 35mm prime at f1.4 to a Canon zoom at f2.8 and you'll see same difference as above.
Remember the chart is full of lines that don't exist in nature so you see the lens at it's worst.
A lens with soft chart lines/edges might make an excellent portrait lens.

As for M lenses...are really in another realm..sort of photo enthusiast category..at those prices people go Pl for motion work.
But it's not all about sharpness...ever hear of Terry Richardson ?

 

[Gabor D.]

Today I got my Zeiss 25mm 2.8 lens. Oh my... I fell in love immediately! I just shot a couple of stills in the garden, but it's amazing how sharp it is wide open! And the close up range is exceptional! The colors also.... This is my first Zeiss lens and I'm addicted already... I love this lens!

 

[Steve Gibby]

With Red cameras I've used just about every type of Nikon and Canon 35mm still lenses at one time or another - everything from vintage Nikon AI-s to modern Nikon lenses, and everything from vintage Canon FD lenses up to modern Canon L series lenses. Footage from each has its own unique "look & feel". In general the Canon lenses seem to have a bit "warmer" result, while the Nikon lenses seem to be a bit "cooler" in result.

Is one better than the other? The answer to that question will be necessarily very subjective. All of the above mentioned lenses have valid use on Red cameras, depending on what we're trying to "say" in the resultant images. To me there is no universal "right" or "wrong" lens to use on Red cameras - just a definite right or wrong lens for each shot, shot sequence, or entire production. Art is art - and tech is tech. To me the trick as an artist is to match the correct tech in lens/camera combination to validate what we're trying to say to the end viewers and/or clients in each particular shot sequence.

The term "cinematic" gets tossed around a lot. Cinematic is definitely something to strive for in certain genres of motion media production - but non-cinematic is just as valid a mode of artistic expression in a multitude of other motion media genres.

Just figure out what you're trying to convey to viewers with the shots, match the best camera/lens combination for that need to the shots desired, and have fun expressing your artistic gifts!

 

[Samir Patel]

Today I got my Zeiss 25mm 2.8 lens. Oh my... I fell in love immediately! I just shot a couple of stills in the garden, but it's amazing how sharp it is wide open! And the close up range is exceptional! The colors also.... This is my first Zeiss lens and I'm addicted already... I love this lens!

Zeiss ZF? ZE? or Zeiss Contax?

 

[Nick Morrison]

OFFTOPIC
Am I right that the Red Scarlet has a similar crop factor as APS-C sized DSLRs?

Yes, the Scarlet (much like the Alexa) has a sensor that is approx S35mm in size, which is very similar in size to a APS-C sensor.

 

[Nick Morrison]

And how about Leicas - especially fast M Primes. Very, very sharp open. They are sharp for stills, so they are sharp for your cropped video sensor too ;-)

Lieca M glass is designed to sit closer to the sensor/negative (like many rangefinder lenses), which is why many presume they get to be that much sharper.

 

[Nick Morrison]

Oky..

Finally best Lens for grade "cinematic" look?

There is no correct answer. It's subjective. Any lens can be cinematic, it depends on how you use it. Roger Deakins could make a coke botte cinematic if he really wanted to.

Whats important is how all the elements come together: camera, lens, lighting, performance, art direction, and all the other intangibles that go into creating a "scene" or a "moment". There is no magic bullet. If there was, we'd all be Spielberg, and movie making wouldn't be special. What makes film-making "magic" are the unique choices we all make...not just individually...but most often...side by side as a team on set.

 

[Tarek salman]

I agree with Nick, I think this video will help.

 

[Gabor D.]

Zeiss ZF? ZE? or Zeiss Contax?

A brand new ZF.2

I found a deal where the price difference between the Rokinon Cine 24mm T1.5 and this was a little bit less then 100 USD. So I chose the Zeiss instead.

 

[Gabor D.]

Maybe it's offtopic here, but didn't want to start a new thread for this...

Some affordable, yet good lens gear recommendations for Zeiss ZF.2 and Nikon AFD lenses? Redrocks are bulky, maybe the Lanpartes?

 

[Nick Morrison]

Maybe it's offtopic here, but didn't want to start a new thread for this...

Some affordable, yet good lens gear recommendations for Zeiss ZF.2 and Nikon AFD lenses? Redrocks are bulky, maybe the Lanpartes?

Also consider having Duclos or RP lens add permanent gears. The additional cost often pays for itself with the amount of time you save; not to mention fixed gears are in general a joy to work with.

 

[Björn Benckert]

I agree with Nick, I think this video will help.

The test kind of shows what was expected. However no matter what lens you pick of these three will do any drastic change to the look of your film. One thing the zeiss not opening up so much prevents that t1.5 dof. To me that is preferable even if loosing some sharpness. So for that reason I would actually pick the rokinon over the zeiss. I would not spend the money on the canons. To me they are all half decent standard glass. None of them will make your images look any better or even as good as normal EF L series lens. And they will not bring you any new rental clients or improve your work over standard still glass.

Shooting pictures looking like block buster movies or getting that "cinematic look" has extremely little to do with what choice you make between any these three lenses. Any one of them will do well enough not to be blamed at when things look ugly, so will just about any other lens do if you got all the other parameters right like lightning set design makeup and off course grade and post.

 

[Gabor D.]

I don't want permanent stuff, just some tight, compact solution.... This is why I thought of getting some Lanparte lens gears, and cut off the unused part of it.
http://www.coollcd.com/images/lanparte-follow-focus-for-hdslr-video-camera_04.jpg

My only concern is my Zeiss has a focus throw of 320 degrees, and I'm concerned if the zip part of this gear would bother it or not...

Also consider having Duclos or RP lens add permanent gears. The additional cost often pays for itself with the amount of time you save; not to mention fixed gears are in general a joy to work with.