Parfocal Zoom Lenses under $4000?

The 24-70 is kind of interesting aside from aperture issues.
Yeah the Cooke 20-100 and RED 18-85 seem like they can certainly be found for somewhere in the $5000 zone, which is pretty much exactly what I want. The only issue is that I guess both those lenses are designed for MUCH larger sensor sizes, and because of that there's a lot of extra unnecessary glass, which means a lot of extra weight/size that I don't want. Kind of a tough call..

Forgetting about the size/weight issue of the Cooke/Red, and forgetting about the lack of Parfocal/focus marks/cinema-style of the Olympus, and just considering picture quality (sharpness, color, distortion, breathing, etc.) how do the high-end Zuiko still photo lenses compare to the mid-range cinema lenses like the Red's and vintage Cooke's like 20-100 and Angenieux zooms?
 
Last edited:
Nityananda_SCSMath said:
The 24-70 is kind of interesting aside from aperture issues.
Yeah the Cooke 20-100 and RED 18-15 seem like they can certainly be found for somewhere in the $5000 zone, which is pretty much exactly what I want. The only issue is that I guess both those lenses are designed for MUCH larger sensor sizes, and because of that there's a lot of extra unnecessary glass, which means a lot of extra weight/size that I don't want. Kind of a tough call..

Forgetting about the size/weight issue of the Cooke/Red, and forgetting about the lack of Parfocal/focus marks/cinema-style of the Olympus, and just considering picture quality (sharpness, color, distortion, breathing, etc.) how do the high-end Zuiko still photo lenses compare to the mid-range cinema lenses like the Red's and vintage Cooke's like 20-100 and Angenieux zooms?
Click to expand...

The size of a lens has to do with lots of things, but sensor size isn't necessarily the only thing.... for example, I own a Nikkor 8-lens all manual prime set... they are tiny, say two inches long- to four inches long and weight very little yet cover FF35... however my cinema primes are larger but only cover Epic 5k and S35mm. Just saying my bigger lenses have smaller projection circles, while the smaller have larger. Both cover Epic 5k, but only one does full frame... which is not a problem because the 5DmII is the only FF camera, and I don't use it ever, nor plan to. (plus they can't take PL mount very well). With that said, the bigger lenses have a longer barrel rotation, more witness marks, higher resolution and many other optical advantages for cinema.

Red Pro Primes are big, in fact about the size of Master Primes, yet nowhere near as nice, which proves there are many factors which determine a lens's size outside of coverage.

Older lenses have very distinct characteristics... if you are seriously considering an older Angeniuex or Cooke, I would test them. The flares, aberrations, and wide-open sharpness should have unique characteristics. I would also test what red has to offer. Their lenses have never impressed me, but they do have some advantages over the very old lenses... of course those advantages are sometimes 'fixing' the things I like about the older lenses, such as how easy they flare/ reduce in contrast. Something that is not always good, but can be desirable for some things.
 
Last edited:
Maybe this suggestion is a little left-field, but I've had success using existing video lenses on micro 4/3. They aren't as super sharp as the still and cinema lenses on the market, but you don't really need 10mp sharpness for 2mp video.

An ENG lens with a doubler engaged has a 4/3 image circle and can produce quite a good picture. Standard def TV on a 3 chip 2/3" sensor requires about the same lens sharpness as 1080p on a 4/3 bayer pattern sensor. Despite the warnings about CA from this kind of lens, I find it to be very subtle. Everyone has their own taste. Here's the latest one I converted to micro 4/3 mount, a Fujinon pegasus III 17-238mm f3.4 with the doubler engaged.

pegasusIII.jpg


Another, trickier option is to find a 1" CCTV lens and add extra optics to enlarge the image circle. This one below is now a 20-200mm f2.3

Fujinon20-200f23.jpg


So, useful or not, I thought I should mention that there are some real video lenses that work with micro 4/3 without too much modification.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
The size of a lens has to do with lots of things, but sensor size isn't necessarily the only thing.... for example, I own a Nikkor 8-lens all manual prime set... they are tiny, say two inches long- to four inches long and weight very little yet cover FF35... however my cinema primes are larger but only cover Epic 5k and S35mm. Just saying my bigger lenses have smaller projection circles, while the smaller have larger. Both cover Epic 5k, but only one does full frame... which is not a problem because the 5DmII is the only FF camera, and I don't use it ever, nor plan to. (plus they can't take PL mount very well). With that said, the bigger lenses have a longer barrel rotation, more witness marks, higher resolution and many other optical advantages for cinema.

Red Pro Primes are big, in fact about the size of Master Primes, yet nowhere near as nice, which proves there are many factors which determine a lens's size outside of coverage.

Older lenses have very distinct characteristics... if you are seriously considering an older Angeniuex or Cooke, I would test them. The flares, aberrations, and wide-open sharpness should have unique characteristics. I would also test what red has to offer. Their lenses have never impressed me, but they do have some advantages over the very old lenses... of course those advantages are sometimes 'fixing' the things I like about the older lenses, such as how easy they flare/ reduce in contrast. Something that is not always good, but can be desirable for some things.
Click to expand...

Had Nikons and Zeiss ZF before..would not use them again. I don't like FOCUS direction.
rather use M Mount from Voigtlander,Zeiss or Leica.
Latest RED Pro 17-50 t2.9 is well made..will be popular on non Red cameras like F3,Af100 etc..

RED primes well made and cheap and stop faster then COOKE Panchro or Zeiss CP.2
They are heavy ...2.2 to 3.5 kgs.
New 18mm T1.8 is on special "Battle Tested" for US$3000.....good bang for money.

Would not consider any Photografic Zooms for Camera Work...FULL STOP!
18-85mm T2.9 on special for US$6,000 BT.

regards
jiri
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top