Which one is more "cinematic"?

[Jiri Vrozina]

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.

Mate Canons CNE are selling Down Under for around $3,000 US each. Amazing value for money and they give you 0% Loan. That 24mm is fantastic and built like a Tank for US$3,000. Just amazing Value till stocks Last. Would stay away from Rokinons.
Regarding the "test" . Why was not NEW ZEISS 25mm T2.1 tested??

 

[Gabor D.]

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

BTW is this Zeiss 25mm T2.9 CP lens is the "cine version" of the Zeiss 25mm ZF.2 2.8 lens?

 

[David W. Jones]

Yes.

 

[Gabor Kutyik]

Hi,

Beside Rokinon and Nikons consider Zeiss Contax as recommended before. They draw beautiful "cinema feel" picture and their focus ring turn is way much longer than Nikons - so pulling focus is just much easier. And the focus direction is also correct not like Nikon. If you want to have a PL mount, take a look of the GL Optics rehouse kits.