Lens Design, Cine-style lens vs HD video lens vs Photo lens

J

jin08611

Active member
Hey guys

I have this question about the lens design.

what is the difference between Cine-style lens and video lens and photo lens....

for example Cooke 50mm T2, Canon EF 50 1.4F, Canon FJ Prime 55mm

I do know that the Canon FJ is for 2/3 and cooke is for movie film with warm tone and canon EF is for photos. but the price differece is huge between the three lens. I am just wondering why is Cooke so much more money in design comparsion to EF 50 [which in my opinion is very sharp and color sati. lens] and Canon FJ prime....

thank you for help

jin
 
Well, at some point Barry Green will chime in and give the correct answer, but until then I'll take a shot at it...

From what I understand it has to do with resolving power. Since a video camera (SD) doesn't record nearly as much detail (resolution) as a film camera does, the lens doesn't have to reslolve as much info. However for film, you would need a camera with a much higher resolving power. As far as digital cameras go, I use the same lenses on my D1X as I do on my F4 because that's how they're designed to be used, but the D1X doesn't have nearly the resolution of film and as a result, part of the resolving power of the lens is, I believe, wasted when shooting film.

Barry?????

Matt
 
the lens of a "L" lens from EF prime canon should produce about 80lps to 90 lps at center which is almost the same as Zeiss prime. the cost is so big of different between the two. even the difference between Canon Cine Prime Lens to the EF Lens is big differece on price. I am wondering is any differece in production cost or fouce machinary that might be add to the cost? I do know one is IF and one is not other thing I might missing? thank you for explaining!

thank you

jin
 
MattC said:
Well, at some point Barry Green will chime in and give the correct answer, but until then I'll take a shot at it...

From what I understand it has to do with resolving power. Since a video camera (SD) doesn't record nearly as much detail (resolution) as a film camera does, the lens doesn't have to reslolve as much info. However for film, you would need a camera with a much higher resolving power. As far as digital cameras go, I use the same lenses on my D1X as I do on my F4 because that's how they're designed to be used, but the D1X doesn't have nearly the resolution of film and as a result, part of the resolving power of the lens is, I believe, wasted when shooting film.

Barry?????

Matt
Click to expand...


From my understanding, the opposite is true... in the film world at least.

A small sensor requires sharper lenses, whereas a larger format requres less sharp lenses.

Pictures from small formats (or sensors) require "blowing up" more so than large formats. An 8x10 format camera provides very sharp 8x10 pictures, because there's very little blowing up needed. A 35 mm format requires a much sharper lens, as the image must be blown up many times to an 8x10 photo.

Check the resolution charts of various lenses at photodo.com. The good 35mm lenses outresolve the good medium format lenses.... the latter being famous Hasselblads.

Keep in mind that only the latest dslrs (12 megapixels) are only now catching up with the resolving power of a good 35 mm lens. A 3 megapixel dslr will not provide a better picture with a better lens.

The lens for a 1/3 sensor must outresolve the lens on a 35mm sensor to give a similar picture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top