F55: Any reviews on the new Sony 4k prime lens set?

Macgregor

What is your overall opinion of them? How do they compare to other sets that you've owned or rented? What are their strengths? Weaknesses?

Thanks
 
Optically they are superb.
Price wise they are great as you all know. What other set can you buy for this price? RPPs? CP2s with mismatching apertures?
Mechanically they are probably the best I've ever used. Focus ring, iris ring, they couldn't be better built. I say more solid than UPs and MPs that I once owned.
I only bothered to test the 20 and 135mm being the most extreme ends because I didn't have much time to spend with them before a shoot. I didn't see any major CA or vignetting and they were incredibly sharp.

Downsides: they're heavy, like really really heavy.

I bought them because all of the above reasons plus the fact that
- I really liked the fact that they are all the same Tstop
- The lenses chosen in the kit are exactly what I needed. I never go wider than 20mm and I much prefer to have a 135mm than a 100/95mm as the longest lens in the set, which is what most lens kits come with these days.
- I don't care about the brand as long as the product is good. I don't need to rent to other people. So I'd take this set anyday before having to shoot with crappy CP2s (crappy as mismatching aperture and huge CA on lenses like the 50mm).
 
I have the 6 pack, there is not much to add to what has been said already, optically they are perfect, dimensionally they are identical except the 135mm which is a little longer, they are heavy as noted, and all share the T2.0 max opening. They match up perfectly. They don't communicate any information with the viewfinder, but have large bright markings on the barrel. They do ship with a shim set, don't include any instructions, come packaged in brown boxes with expandable foam. $20k is still a lot of money but if you want to start with a complete kit, don't need zoom, it's well equipped.
 
I'm sure the Sony lenses are excellent, but if someone is looking to take a higher step up the ladder, I'm selling my set of five first-generation Schneider Cine-Xenar lenses for $24K (25mm, 35mm, 50mm, 75mm, 95mm). They are in mint condition and include the custom cut Pelican-style case.

Here's a link to the third-generation lenses: http://www.ducloslenses.com/products/schneider-cine-xenar-iii-set that sell for $48.7K. (note: my set does not include the 18mm)

The physical design of my first-generation lenses is a little different than the newer models, but optically (and that's what counts!) they are exactly the same. It's great deal for someone who wants to save over $20K on a set of Cine-Xenars.
 
Did a read somewhere that Zeiss made the Sony's? I'm quite sure I heard that from a reliable source but I'm sure no dealer or rep will admit that.
 
Here is a link to an article on the 1st gen Sony PL lenses. In this one it sounds like Zeiss although I have heard Cooke, Contax.

http://notesonvideo.blogspot.ca/2011/05/sony-pmw-f3-and-pl-lenses.html

I've seen A/B tests of the Sony PL lenses beside the Zeiss CPs and Cookes. The Sonys did not have the same rolloff in the skintones from the highlights to the midtones that you saw in the Zeiss lenses. It is possible a white balance recalibration could have accounted for this (if there was one done) but the Sonys and the Zeiss lenses in this shootout did look noticably different.

EDIT:

i now realize the discussion was about the second version of the Sony lenses.
 
Last edited:
I guess they would stick to Japan. Sigma or Tokina? I know they aren't going to work with Canon.... Oh well, we may never know!

Wait a sec. didn't they take over Minolta? Bing!
 
Last edited:
Mitch Gross said:
I know the origins of the Sony lenses, and I can tell you that the above companies are not correct.
Click to expand...

Since Sony bought Minolta in 2006, there would be no reason for Sony to outsource them. In fact, if I recall correctly the Sony A mount is the same as the Minolta A mount.

The confusion comes because Zeiss also makes Minolta lenses.
 
Last edited:
why not Schneider Xenon? if f2.1 is ok for you, its good price + from a known lens company + they offer pl ef conversion set
 
derbrocks09 said:
Cmon Mitch. Spill.

:)
Click to expand...
Not gonna happen.

But let me ask you this: What does it matter? Who cares where they come from if the results are good/bad/indifferent? It won't tell you about mechanical or optical performance, that is unless you had a host of other knowledge, in which case you'd likely know where they were from anyway or it wouldn't matter.

Anyway, not telling. But the truly observant might be able to figure it out.
 
Mitch Gross said:
But let me ask you this: What does it matter?
Click to expand...

Because if you are pitching your camera package on your own jobs and production is used to renting the standard bearers, it helps to be able to say nicer things about your gear. Especially when Sony is an unknown / means nothing in cine lenses. They're neutral at best. Not good, not bad, but totally unknown.

But you knew this. I know why you asked why it matters, because for a ton of folks it should not.
 
I agree with Nate.

It's similar to the reason I have black spray paint and a stencil so I can spray paint "ARRI" on the side of my fake chinese knock off tungsten lights.

:grin:
 
It really doesn't matter, other than I'm curious as all get out.

Why not tell someone who can spill?

Seriously though, I find it very strange that there aren't more reviews and head to head comparisons of these online? Why? They've been out for a while now.
 
starcentral said:
. . . so I can spray paint "ARRI" on the side of my fake chinese knock off tungsten lights.
Click to expand...

You do that too? Dang, I thought I was the only one to do that. Now I need some white paint to put "RED" on the side of my old Sony HDV camcorder.:thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top