Cine lenses vs. Still photography lenses on HVX

abalex

abalex

Well-known member
I'm going to be working on a feature film in the next three months and I've been thinking about renting cine lenses instead of using still photo lenses for my HVX. Could anyone give me their opinion on this? Has anyone ever tried using cine lenses on their HVXs instead of the regular, canon, nikon, etc still photo lenses?
What about image quality? Superior?

thanks
G.
 
Superior. PEriod. From the ergonomics to the optics, to the reliability. SUPERIOR. Ther is a reason why a set of cookes costs 85,000$
 
um... yeh, this is inarticulate, but that's what it pretty much come's down to. different gradiations in tone and color, and sharpness are the main differences noticible immediatly. glass is usually of much higher quality, and there are differences in the internal lens elements, their quality, and their placement inside the lens. i don't know much about glass, but from using rangefinders for a while i know a little bit about the broad differences in high end glass and low end glass. no comparison between the two. with cine lenses you get MUCH less distortion than you would with a photo lens- they're made for cinema cameras, where the film is usually much closer to the back element of the lens than in a 35mm slr camera (where theres a ton of space between the mirrior and the pressure plate).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top