question about Zeiss vs. Nikon

D

Danielisnotadrummer

Member
I'm currently looking into purchasing the Brevis35 adapter. On their website, Cinevate is selling some pretty nice Zeiss glass.


Are ziess primes usually more expensive/higher quality than nikon primes?

a 50mm f1.4 ziess prime is 500 dollars.

How much would an equivalent Nikon be?
 
might want to look into C/Y Zeiss primes, a 50mm f/1.4 = $200, and you have a lot more selections. Lots of adapter manufactures offer the C/Y Zeiss mount, but if they don't, you can get the EOS mount and purchase a C/Y to EOS conversion lens mount, (I use those, works great) also fits right onto my Canon SLR.
 
Daniel, there's a head to head comparison of the Zeiss 50mm to a f1.8 50mm Nikon in the "Brevis MP.1 Zeiss Lens Review...." here.

It was the testing in that segment that got us all fired up about the Zeiss glass (and resulted in us stocking them) as there is a very obvious difference in terms of both contrast and sharpness. Footage taken directly from the EX1 to our 42" 1080p display shows the difference a lot better than the web encoded file, but it's still obvious there. The high MTF values provided by the Zeiss lenses results in what I've come to describe as an organic feel to the image. The best way I could quantify this quality is to look at HVX, or DVX cinegamma output, and compare that to "bare" (no profiles loaded) Sony or Canon camera footage. Most folks use words like organic and warm to describe the difference.

The other notable exception is in the build quality. Breathing on the 50mm is very low, and the focus ring is silky with a great deal of precision. Comparing it to a Minolta 50mm f1.4, Canon FD 50mm f1.4 , it's heavier as there's no plastic.
 
Do you have a good place for those C/Y to EOS mount? I am not quite confident on off-shore like those posted on eBay.
 
would theZF be considered higher quality than the C/Y?


These CF lenses are obviously extremely high quality. I've seen them compared directly to Nikon lenses on the Cinevate website, and as david said, the image is so much better
 
I used a red with zeiss glass recently and my eyes almost melted. Zeiss glass to me is extremely nice. If you want to ensure compatibility with future camera systems and slrs I'd just bite the bullet if i could and get the nikon mount ones. Those can be used on any adapter, on red, and who knows what else down the road. C/Y seems limiting to me unless you plan to only use them on a 35mm adapter. Cinevate sells the nikon zeiss for less than redrock.
 
The C/Y & Nikon Zeiss are virtually the same quality. If there are any small differences, I wouldn't know.

These are the adapters I got, I got quite a few of them:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Contax-lens-t...photoQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1742.m153.l1262

Also, every adapter accepts Canon EOS, there are Nikon to EOS, Leica to EOS, ContaxZeiss to EOS,... and it goes on, there seems to be a lens adapter from any mount to EOS... (except PL OCT18... and yea...)

Nikon mount is only limited to nikon lenses, there is no other adapter to adapt any other lenses on a nikon mount.

There is a 3rd party Canon EOS mount for RED... I forgot where, but it exists.

Also, a big factor to consider. C/Y Zeiss lenses' focus barrel spins the same way as cine-lenses. Nikon lenses spins the wrong direction... just food for thought.

obviously im biased towards the C/Y, anyone want to debate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top