CP.2's / Sony Cinealta 6-Lens Kit / XEEN's

CP.2's / Sony Cinealta 6-Lens Kit / XEEN's

  • Zeiss CP.2 set

    Votes: 8 34.8%

  • Sony CineAlta Lenses

    Votes: 10 43.5%

  • Samyang XEEN lenses

    Votes: 2 8.7%

  • some other budget cine lenses

    Votes: 2 8.7%

  • better save up for Master Primes or Cooke S5's

    Votes: 1 4.3%
  • Total voters
    23
stefanhuberfilms

stefanhuberfilms

Veteran
Hi everyone,

I somehow feel that i want to invest in some "real" glass in the near future. The Budget would allow for used CP.2's, the Sony Cinealta lenses or maybe the new XEEN Series from Samyang.

The set i'm looking at should be in the ballpark of the following focal lengths: 18 - 24 - 35 - 50 - 85 + 100 or 135 (optional)

Is anybody able to compare these lenses? To me, the CP2 seem rather slow, the cinealtas seem rather heavy and the xeen lenses seem like they've not proven themselves long enough in the hands of professionals to be able say anything about them... Thoughts?

I would like to rent these lenses out as well here and there - so from a rental point of view - which lenses would you rent for a job?
Any other suggestions for a decent "budget" prime lens setup?

Any advice is greatly appreciated!
 
It is worth considering that the CPs cover full frame.. this will have a cost in speed, but also may or may not be an attribute you would value.

FF coverage compromises design at the wide end. Im not sure the Tstop of the Xeen wides

Personally to me a set of lenses does not include a slow wide, usually wide require faster lenses as lights need to be further back and Tstop wider to minimise DOF

I would therefore suggest that Sony are the ones.

Id also check minimum focus distances.

S
 
Last edited:
Xeen seem to tint footage green.

Zeiss CP.2's (I own full set) are cold and sharp but that's not a bad thing it you gel your lights, use filtration and color your footage. Also there are super speed versions of the 35, 50 and 85 at T1.5 which I have and are my favourite to use from my whole set. Then the rest I have at T2.9 which maybe I'll switch out for T2.1 but at those real wide apertures do you need real fast apertures or will T2.9 do? Also the Zeiss have switchable lens mounts so you can go EF or PL, and maybe even rent them out to people who don't want to buy a set. With the 114mm front you can check cheesycam who's now 3D printing a clip on front filter holder for drop in filters and this is also really cool to have as an option.

The Sony's are quite large (I hope you've actually seen them in person, man they are massive) and the rear element if it matters to you won't fit in some DSLR camera's adapter to PL… incase you were ever thinking to use them that way.

Not to show any bias to the CP'2, 99% of the time my F55 camera is sporting Nikon zooms or Nikon primes. Smaller, versatile, cheap if I break one, and great for budget clients.

Maybe I would ask you why you think you need PL lenses? Is it to impress clients, or for their real benefit which really has to do with faster work on sets but then will you be working with 1st, 2nd & 3rd AC's, etc.. ?? If you don't have the crew to benefit from some of the speed PL offers on a set then why get them?

You might want to consider the ZF.2 version instead. They are "probably" the same glass but Zeiss says they are not. And the ZF's have less aperture so the bokeh is nicer on the CP'2 but does that matter?

A lot of questions to consider I suppose.

cheers mate,
 
Im assuming the 'go PL' question has been answered.

PL (long throw) IMO only really work with a puller and someone to lug them about, not to mention the appropriate grip package, big tripod head and the like.


Dennis Im not sure what your 'set' consists of.

With my DP hat on I would want consistent Ttop and probably the set to start a 16 or 18 as a minimum really

Even the Sony 'set' dont have a wide enough start point to qualify as a set.

One assumes these lenses are part of a production where one is not self directing but providing the shots the director requires.. and fast and to do that IMO you are hanging your ar5e out without a 16 (honestly you want a 11-16 on set too!)

Relights for wide shots are not fast so that stop counts if you don't want to be rejigging the lights rig. There are no speedboosters in PL to get you width or speed.

You can see the 'set' thing going on on the Cooke website.. The Minis are just enough..
http://www.cookeoptics.com/l/minis4.html (18 T2.8)
and the S4 are the real deal
http://www.cookeoptics.com/l/s4i.html (12 T2)

S
 
Yep with my DP hat on I would want better lenses than any of these, that goes without saying. But for many looking at budget lenses it's going to be cost vs compromise period. Let's not fool anyone.

My set currently (but subject to changes) consists of 15, 21, 25 all T2.9, then 35, 50, 85 at T1.5. I will switch out the 21 or 25 and end up with a 135.

I have a Tokina 11-16 too but rarely ever use it. I think once on a steadicam gig.

Like I said, you chose between full set, partial set, the list goes on and on.

Honestly look at the Canon PL's. Forget any of these on your list. They are really nice. I've used the PL zooms and amazing to operate....

Cheers
 
Well that is an endless debate.. Im pretty much on the side of getting the tools for the job or making do with really cheap stuff (nikkors :) )

For example fuiji rumours a 20-120 zoom for half the price of the cabrio and canon.

Im pretty sure it is just not wide enough.. so $12g for something that doesnt quite work or rent when you can. Blag when you cant?

Same story with the lights im testing at the moment, the (1080 at the time) F5, the too heavy (at the time) Red whatever..

S
 
Last edited:
Hi Stefan,

Exciting news! I'm assuming you have given this a lot of thought and that you have rented some cinema glass to try out in the working scenarios within which you are looking to use them. Not easy to rent Sonys, but Zeiss and Canon should be relatively easy to get your hands on your part of the world.

I I find the quality of the images between nikkors and Zeiss cine glass a matter of taste. However, where the Zeiss, or any other quality cine glass really shines is that the focus marks will be precise and the throw will be long and consistent. This is really key when trying to do dolly moves where focusing on a static subject while the camera moves. I used to bang my head against the wall trying to do complicated focus pulls with the nikkors, because the focus was not linear so I would have to slow down and speed up my focus pull at seemingly random points. This led to wasted time in the form of extra takes or beyond normal focus markings and corresponding markings on dolly tracks. But with proper cine glass I can now do these moves with ease!! In my experience, this means the difference between a 3-1 shooting ratio and a 9-1 shooting ratio. Of course, you should take this with a grain of salt, since I am not a master DP so your mileage (kilometerage) may vary.

As others have said, the Zeiss is sharp and cold. I like this look, but not for everything. But again, these qualities can be dealt with just fine with filtration and cto on lights. What I like about the CP.2s is that they are light for cine glass. This is great for handheld or steadicam. However, since I don't rent equipment, I am looking to actually switch to the Sonys. After testing, I find the natural look of the Sonys more pleasing for the work I like to do, and more consistency across the set. The Zeiss CP2s have some weak links across the set. Also, I like the constant T2 across the set on the Sonys. T2 is fast enough for me, since T1.5 is not often gonna make-or break a shot for me. I can denoise or light for that difference. Also, I do t often shoot below 25mm. I have the capability to go 18mm with my nikkors, but I never do. So for me, 20mm is just fine. However, 15mm and wider is really key for some people so you should keep that in mind.

But, to open up the conversation, you might be interested in the GL-Optics Sigma Art zooms. Sigma is rumored to launch a 50-100mm Art zoom, which will surely be cinevised by GL-optics. The 18-35 is pretty affordable, it is parfocal and has 300° focus throw. Now, these GL-optics may not rent as well as the Zeiss or Canons, but they seem to work really well. I should say that they have not launched yet so you should wait and see about that. They also have a Leica R set that is cinevised and those lenses are awesome!! I love that look!

Lastly, may I ask which camera you want to use cine lenses with? And what type of work you might be looking to do with this new glass?
 
Stefan, out of those three options, I would throw my vote fairly strongly behind the Zeisses for a number of reasons.

Firstly, a set of cinema lenses (even entry level ones) is a considerable investment. And therefore one that needs to pay dividends for a long time. That means lenses that work and that can keep on working, due to the availability of parts, and access to reliable servicing and repair. The CP.2s offer that. The Sonys or the Xeens? Who knows.

I'm sure it's probably possible to find a lens tech somewhere who can service and collimate your lenses for you periodically, but how easy will that be with the Xeens and the Sonys (which very few rentals houses hold in stock)? I don't know the answer, but you'd want to before putting down your hard-earned.

The Sonys I'd be particularly worried about because they've been so heavily discounted (firesale pricing really) so shortly after their release, it seems hard to imagine that they haven't been a total disaster for Sony, and will be discontinued as soon as existing stock has been sold off. Parts and servicing for discontinued lenses from a manufacturer who doesn't make any similar products - is a genuine concern.

In the Xeen's favour, you have a couple of things - cheap pricing, and a constant T/1.5 across the range (down to the 24mm lens - which is a usable wide, though not wide enough for tight spaces), the widest Xeen is a 14mm T/3.1, which is plenty wide, but slower than the wider CP.2s. The CP.2s top out at a 25mm T/2 for a fast wide - which is a great lens, but 25mm isn't always quite wide enough (though I'd argue that for wide exterior shots at night time, when you need your exposure to go as far as possible - moving back a few meters with a 25mm isn't quite as big a deal as not having enough room in a tight interior, and lighting a tight interior to a decent exposure isn't a big deal with fast sensors these days).

In the Sony's favour you have a consistent T/2 across the range, right down to a 20mm T/2 (which is wide enough for everything but extreme situations). That's really appealing, and neither of the other options can match this. However the Sonys are extremely large and heavy, they're almost as bad as Red Pro Primes on that front.

The only thing I think you can really hold against the CP.2s are those slow wide-angle lenses, the 15mm T/2.9 and the 21mm T/2.9 - except that it's hard to hold anything much against those two lenses, because they're two of the strongest performers in the range. If you want a constant T/2.1 from 25mm to 135mm? You can have that. If you want superspeed lenses, well you can get three of them at least (35mm, 50mm, 85mm); if you want a macro lens, they have that too. They're lightweight, they all cover a vistavision sensor, they all have interchangable mounts (E, F, EF, MFT, PL). The glass has a gorgeous look (cool and crunchy), the mechanics are superb, they're a known quantity in the marketplace, and they have gorgeous bokeh (even better than the Ultra Primes thanks to the 14-blade apertures in the CP.2s).

So yeah, at the end of the day, the primary advantage I'd say that the Sonys and Xeens offer are their 20mm T/2 and 24mm T/1.4 wide angle lenses. Beyond those? There really isn't much, as the CP.2s can match them lens for lens everywhere else.

Now granted, I'm a sucker for the 'Zeiss Look', so that biases me a little in the direction of ze Germans. However, it's the long-term aspects of cinema lens ownership that I think you want to give good hard thought to Stefan, and then make your decision from there.
 
if I was splurging out on PL lenses then I'd go for Sony CineAltas, as with their price drop they offer tremendous bang for buck.
And they have much better coverage of focal lengths than Xeen.

Pair it with a Tokina 11-16mm (or 11-20mm maybe if possible), and you have everything you need there for most shoots.

Their biggest downside is... size :-/

However... I do agree with the other comments, do you really need to get PL lenses? A set of Nikon AF-D or Carl Zeiss ZF.2 or Rokinon Cine DS or Sigma ART in Nikon F mount, would all go a long way. Then rent anything which is needed outside that.

http://ironfilm.co.nz/rokinon-cine-lenses/
 
stefanhuberfilms said:
I would like to rent these lenses out as well here and there - so from a rental point of view - which lenses would you rent for a job?
Any advice is greatly appreciated!
Click to expand...

If it were me, and I was considering purchasing a set of lenses with the intent on earning rental income, I would first poll my local perspective client base on their rental preference. As well as what your local market will support.
 
Starcentral / Dennis mentioned the Zeiss ZF lenses which I've heard quite a few people recommend looking at - based on your needs of course. Along those lines I would offer up the new(ish) Zeiss Milvus line; I may be mistaken but I believe they are based off the older ZF lenses. I shot with a set of rented Milvus not too long ago and they produce a nice image to my eye. Plenty sharp and I shot wide open the whole time on a Speedbooster. The build quality is very nice and solid - especially coming from typical stills glass.

All that said, I have to admit I have been eyeballing the Xeen lenses; I'm drawn to the more cine style lenses but I have not shot with the Xeens so I can't speak for the image. Where I'm located and the type of work I do I can't always rent so I need to own the majority of my gear and the Xeens would be pushing my lens budget to the max. I've considered just getting a set of the Milvus but man....those 114mm fronts and gears of the cine lenses are tempting.
 
If you end up deciding not to pursue it as a "rental" business, I would go with whatever is cheap and fits the bill for your needs.

I just shot a series of TV commercials for a very big national brand food company and used two old Nikon 50mm f1.4 and 35mm f2 lenses. I used them on my Sony F55 and a Blackmagic Pocketcam. The clients were so happy with the images on set, they want me to start shooting their product stills now... and to be honest it was the lighting that made the biggest different not the lenses. These days I'm also investing more in digital post filters and coming up with great combination of filters and settings to yield unique looks.

Before I ended up buying a set of CP.2's I actually strongly considered these modded lenses by CineMatics which are essentially ZF lenses rehoused in pretty looking barrels with gear rings. Looks fancy in front of clients, they are still Zeiss brand, and you get gear rings built in. Compared to the CP's you still don't get full rotation on the barrel and it's short on aperture blades - but then again as mentioned I just shot some commercials with old Nikons... how bad can they be?

http://www.pchood.com/index.php?route=product/category&path=45_65

1-500x500.jpg
 
Last edited:
We own a set of the Sony cinema primes. They are beautiful lenses and for the price a great buy. They are heavy.
We use them on our F5's. The F5 almost seems like the perfect size camera for these lenses.

With that said one set of lenses is never the perfect solution. We also use a bunch of EF glass on our F5's, A7s II, and C100. The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 is an amazing lens. We also have an AbelCine HDx35 II for one of our F5's so we can mount ENG 2/3" lenses. This was a great low cost options for adding a servo zoom lens with a range much longer than a Cabrio or Canon.
 
Gents, please excuse my late reply - had a lot of work to finish lately - and thanks for all the answers and great thoughts!

The "why" question came up - i feel i need "proper" lenses because i like everything to be streamlined on set and at some point in my future as a filmmaker, i'd want to film properly with a puller, at least on the big jobs. EDIT: Also, as rafael mentioned, for some moves, even the cine-samyang throws are not consistent and long enough, making smooth pulls on a dolly a mess - sometimes.

For the rest, my samyang set would be good enough i would think - now after reading your thoughts, i would think it would make sense to finish building my normal nikon-cine-samyang set for the work i'm doing most.

On the other hand i could get a really, really good deal on a used cinealta set... i mean really good :-S.

EDIT: For renting, people would rent zeiss the most here i would think - CONTRA: most people drive to munich anyway to rent their gear, as they usually need bigger lights and some heavy grip equipment and such anyway - and such lights i can not offer. PRO: as there is no one really that rent's out cine lenses directly in our region i would still think it would make sense to offer a set and see how it goes, and for that purpose, i would think that most people would be satisfied with the cinealta's - still, FF coverage may get a big bonus in the future so hmmmmm.....

cheers!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top