Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 48 of 48
  1. Collapse Details
    #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    871
    Default
    dang, I should have kept my test clips! Recently, while planning a shoot and which lens to use, I put my Rokinon CineDS against my Sigma 18-35, same settings, same mm, just to note the differences. After pulling the footage up, it was obvious right off the bat, the Sigma had a pinch more contrast and a pinch more sharpness, so the dark in the contrast lead to a PINCH richer/deeper color. And bokeh looked a little different. They were different.

    THAT SAID, a couple quick tweaks with COLOR and I got them to match right up visually and on the scopes. They had personality, but not enough to make a difference when corrected and graded.
    When NOT comparing side by side, they both looked and work just fine. Comparing side by side (like big TVs in a store) the sharper, more colorful one LOOKED better.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,323
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by wwjd View Post
    dang, I should have kept my test clips! Recently, while planning a shoot and which lens to use, I put my Rokinon CineDS against my Sigma 18-35, same settings, same mm, just to note the differences. After pulling the footage up, it was obvious right off the bat, the Sigma had a pinch more contrast and a pinch more sharpness, so the dark in the contrast lead to a PINCH richer/deeper color. And bokeh looked a little different. They were different.

    THAT SAID, a couple quick tweaks with COLOR and I got them to match right up visually and on the scopes. They had personality, but not enough to make a difference when corrected and graded.
    When NOT comparing side by side, they both looked and work just fine. Comparing side by side (like big TVs in a store) the sharper, more colorful one LOOKED better.
    Did you test wide open? I have the Rokinons Cines (not DS) and the Sigma is MUCH sharper wide open. I'm not a stickler for lenses being perfectly sharp wide open - I actually like a little creaminess - but I've found the 35mm unusable at 4K until about f/2.8. The 85mm is a bit better, but really I wouldn't want to use it faster than f/2.8. I'm curious if the DS versions are that much better.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #43
    Senior Member Thomas Smet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,351
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by joe12south View Post
    Did you test wide open? I have the Rokinons Cines (not DS) and the Sigma is MUCH sharper wide open. I'm not a stickler for lenses being perfectly sharp wide open - I actually like a little creaminess - but I've found the 35mm unusable at 4K until about f/2.8. The 85mm is a bit better, but really I wouldn't want to use it faster than f/2.8. I'm curious if the DS versions are that much better.
    They are not. You have to move up to the Xeens to see better wide open performance. The only other option for Rokinon are their special f1.2 lenses designed specially for m43 size sensors. The MFT is much better on those lenses for the smaller sensors and they look much better wide open. They are of course limited to the m43 mount which is probably why they haven’t sold very well. They can’t use a focal reducer to turn a f1.4 into a f1.0 but since they are f1.2 and look much better wide open I think they are a better option for those that want to stick with m43. I bet those would look great on the Pocket 4k.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    871
    Default
    Joe, yes wide open and the DS was not as sharp, agreed. DS def do better dialed down a bit. I don't think the DS are any different than their older ones... different coatings maybe? But those heavy Sigmas don't work on my gimble


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,323
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Smet View Post
    They are not. You have to move up to the Xeens to see better wide open performance. The only other option for Rokinon are their special f1.2 lenses designed specially for m43 size sensors. The MFT is much better on those lenses for the smaller sensors and they look much better wide open. They are of course limited to the m43 mount which is probably why they haven’t sold very well. They can’t use a focal reducer to turn a f1.4 into a f1.0 but since they are f1.2 and look much better wide open I think they are a better option for those that want to stick with m43. I bet those would look great on the Pocket 4k.
    Unfortunately, those are even less cinema-style shooting friendly than the modified "cine" line.

    I keep meaning to rent a Xeen to see if they are actually are sharper wide open, but have yet to get around to it. I would appreciate the longer focus throw, but they are so much more expensive - I just couldn't justify it unless the PQ was notably better.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #46
    Senior Member Thomas Smet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,351
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by joe12south View Post
    Unfortunately, those are even less cinema-style shooting friendly than the modified "cine" line.

    I keep meaning to rent a Xeen to see if they are actually are sharper wide open, but have yet to get around to it. I would appreciate the longer focus throw, but they are so much more expensive - I just couldn't justify it unless the PQ was notably better.
    Is there such a thing as notably better anymore? All of this is subtle differences at best.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #47
    Senior Member Thomas Smet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,351
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by joe12south View Post
    Unfortunately, those are even less cinema-style shooting friendly than the modified "cine" line.

    I keep meaning to rent a Xeen to see if they are actually are sharper wide open, but have yet to get around to it. I would appreciate the longer focus throw, but they are so much more expensive - I just couldn't justify it unless the PQ was notably better.
    There is a cine t1.3 version of the m43 Mount 50mm lens. A bit faster than the t1.5 cine DSLR lens and a bit better wider open due to its APS-C based design vs FF design. Have not used one personally but I do use the Rokinon t2.2 12mm that is also a APS-C based design and it works pretty good wide open. Not as good as native m43 glass but part of that is due to the lack of electronic correction in camera.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    871
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Smet View Post
    Is there such a thing as notably better anymore? All of this is subtle differences at best.
    I watched a video or two of comparing the Rokinon Cine to the Xeen ones, and they looked SO CLOSE. Depending on one's need and usage, one could say one or the other was "better". Size, weight, build and focus throw on the Xeen are true cine like, of course, but the focus throw on the DS are way longer than regular old dslr lenses. Just looking at the Xeen, you'd think it was the exact same size glass, maybe THE SAME glass in both lines.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •