Primes vs Zooms
- Thread starter andrew00
- Start date
Barry_Green
Moderator
Excellent -- and obviously I'm talking about from 1080/24p mode, not from stills...
Be sure to re-white-balance between lens changes, that's one that always bites me when doing these comparos...
Be sure to re-white-balance between lens changes, that's one that always bites me when doing these comparos...
Was speaking to a DP yesterday here in Europe, he says he almost always uses primes for more speed and sharpness, but for dolly shots he often uses zooms, because when the tracks are laid down you often end up needing an intermediate focal length. As things are always changing on a film set you don't want to keep moving the tracks. These are the kind of practical real world situations that people forget to think about.
Last edited:
Also, can't remember if I mentioned this before, but while I agree that a softer lens would be appropriate for a situation with potential aliasing, I still would want a sharper lens for the majority of other situations. Which is why a caprock filter strikes me as a better solution for the wider lenses.
alpi69
Veteran
I don´t totally disagree. Well, usually primes are faster which in itself is an advantage you cannot neglect. But don´t forget: lenses outlast cameras by decades! I have Minolta glass from the 80s and hang onto those lenses even when I shoot Canon at the moment.
What if.....you suddenly like the cam so much and starting shooting stills more than you thought?
What if....Canon brings a cam in 6 months (heck, even 6 years) that does actually show the difference and have a better downconversion?
What if....you have client shooting "his making of pictures" with a 17-40L on a RebelXT und you shoot the film with a crappy stocklens......will he notice you are cheap?
Haven't forgotten about this. Just landed in NC and I'm in Raleigh on a job, will try to do it while I'm here and upload comparisons.
I think I'm going to switch over to the new Zeiss SLR family altogether, and quite possibly (gasp) ZE's,the Canon no manual iris set.
As much as I love my Contax, the new ones just seem to show an edge over the old ones. I can't figure out what it is!
I think I'm going to switch over to the new Zeiss SLR family altogether, and quite possibly (gasp) ZE's,the Canon no manual iris set.
As much as I love my Contax, the new ones just seem to show an edge over the old ones. I can't figure out what it is!
Barry_Green
Moderator
The ZF line is a later line than the Contax lenses and they're not the same design.
The ZF.2, as far as I understand it, is the exact same glass. The difference is in the electrical connections.
I thought about it, but ... no way could I live without the iris ring. I want these lenses to work on my Letus Ultimate, my Scarlet, my 7D, my GH1, my forthcoming XLH2 (or whatever it is) or GHX100... for me, the iris ring is a must. So much that I'm gonna spend $250 per lens to get Duclos to de-click and lube the iris ring to turn it into a pretty good representation of a true cinema iris ring...
You must be pretty sold on Canon if you're thinking of going with the ZE's... =:O
The ZF.2, as far as I understand it, is the exact same glass. The difference is in the electrical connections.
I thought about it, but ... no way could I live without the iris ring. I want these lenses to work on my Letus Ultimate, my Scarlet, my 7D, my GH1, my forthcoming XLH2 (or whatever it is) or GHX100... for me, the iris ring is a must. So much that I'm gonna spend $250 per lens to get Duclos to de-click and lube the iris ring to turn it into a pretty good representation of a true cinema iris ring...
You must be pretty sold on Canon if you're thinking of going with the ZE's... =:O
You're right about the ZF's, Barry. Right now I've got ZF's AND ZE's and I've gone back and forth between them. Not having to deal with ANY play, being able to do 1/3" stop adjustments (this is dangerous, but I'm not one-hundred percent that what I saw today on the larger monitor was accurate. I have a feeling that 1/3 increments is bad, though!!!) with just the dial and the entire camera just feeling a lot more solid is really standing out to me.
I'm the same as you are on the Iris ring, but man, dealing with adapters and their issues (infinity, play, crappy build vs expensive in bulk) is really beginning to irk me.
About de-clicking: with the ring being so small, is it necessary to de-click when you can still employ splits? Rotating the iris ring on the fly is going to be a pain in the ass, especially with an FF attached.
Oh, and yeah, I dont' think recovering an investment if I had to go the other way would be an issue.
I do LOVE my Contax Zeiss, but my eyes detect a reasonable shift in image quality between the same focal lengths on the same camera. Can't see how it's possible that the 85/1.4 C/Y Zeiss (insane lens) is THAT different from the 85/1.4 ZE Zeiss AND the 85/1.4 ZF Zeiss!
Oh man... and the Close Focus on the 28/2 and 21/2.8... Talk about insane compositions coupled with awesome image quality. Yikes!
Please do expound on this Kholi.
I keep reading the new Zeiss lenses just aren't quite as good as the old Contax. Someone should do a comparison. Anyone? Anyone?
I have no idea why people are saying that they aren't as good as the old ones.
The three major Zeiss C/Y Primes are: 21/2.8, 28/2, 85/1.4
I have the 85/1.4 C/Y, 85/1.4 ZF and 85/1.4 ZE and I'm pretty much sold on the 85/1.4 ZE. The image looks insane on the LCD and furthermore on a large HD television. The C/Y isn't bad by any means, it actually has a lower contrast look naturally which may be the reason why the ZE appears to be "sharper".
Regardless, my eyes and another set of trained eyes saw the same things immediately. The ZE just looked better to the both of us. So, I've been using the ZE and ZF set, only turning to the Zeiss C/Y for Telephoto focal lengths (135 and 180, the latter of which is one of my favs)
I'm still gonna start a larger Zeiss thread, just haven't had the chance yet.
The three major Zeiss C/Y Primes are: 21/2.8, 28/2, 85/1.4
I have the 85/1.4 C/Y, 85/1.4 ZF and 85/1.4 ZE and I'm pretty much sold on the 85/1.4 ZE. The image looks insane on the LCD and furthermore on a large HD television. The C/Y isn't bad by any means, it actually has a lower contrast look naturally which may be the reason why the ZE appears to be "sharper".
Regardless, my eyes and another set of trained eyes saw the same things immediately. The ZE just looked better to the both of us. So, I've been using the ZE and ZF set, only turning to the Zeiss C/Y for Telephoto focal lengths (135 and 180, the latter of which is one of my favs)
I'm still gonna start a larger Zeiss thread, just haven't had the chance yet.
Looks like the newer ZF.2 series, with electronics, is going to be 15-20% more expensive than the original ZF series. Or is that just because BandH photo shows the list price on pre-order?
I highly doubt they'll keep two ZF series for Nikons concurrently in the manufacturing pipeline since the ZF.2's just add metadata info for the camera.
Myself, I'm quite happy with my Nikon AIS F2 set. It may be not as contrasty as Zeiss, but looks great to me, and there's many ways to build in contrast in a scene i.e. lighting.
I highly doubt they'll keep two ZF series for Nikons concurrently in the manufacturing pipeline since the ZF.2's just add metadata info for the camera.
Myself, I'm quite happy with my Nikon AIS F2 set. It may be not as contrasty as Zeiss, but looks great to me, and there's many ways to build in contrast in a scene i.e. lighting.
Barry_Green
Moderator
B&H quotes list price, as does everyone else. I've never seen a retailer offer them for a penny off list.
I finally broke down and started buying 'em when I figured out a way to get a bit of a discount; using a combination of Bing, ebay, paypal, buy-it-now, and ebay bucks, you can get a net 10% off.
I finally broke down and started buying 'em when I figured out a way to get a bit of a discount; using a combination of Bing, ebay, paypal, buy-it-now, and ebay bucks, you can get a net 10% off.
Barry, that's hell thrifty. Plus, I think you can deduct it from your taxes and if not you should talk to your accountant.
I bought all my Nikon speeds from KEH, ex+ condition paid over $2K, but I can deduct it from my taxes since 2/3 of the time I get paid 1099 contractor wages for camera work, so it's like getting a further discount.
I bought all my Nikon speeds from KEH, ex+ condition paid over $2K, but I can deduct it from my taxes since 2/3 of the time I get paid 1099 contractor wages for camera work, so it's like getting a further discount.
I have 3 Zeiss C/Y lenses: 35mm f1.4 / 50mm f1.4 / 85mm f1.4
I had all the aperture levers removed, because the mark 2's electronic plate blocks them.
I have found that they are no sharper than Canon's L lenses. However, the similarity of their coatings between them, the uniformity of their sizes, the longer throw and the stiffness of the barrels I find much more helpful with a follow focus and I appreciate the extra stop of speed with the 35mm. Much prefer the zeiss 35mm on my Steadicam Merlin, sometimes the canon wouldn't hold the focus I set and it's much too bulky a lens.
I am not surprised that the newer Zeiss lenses are sharper, more contrasty and have a nicer bokeh, but when I think these old lenses were made so long ago and they still stand up against L glass, I'm not too unhappy.
Personally I do not understand why the Chinese are not rehousing primes for PL (especially the Zeiss's) because when the Scarlet/Red style cameras really hit (meaning the other manufacturers as well), everyone will be looking for a longer throw and the glass will be impossible to rent. Panavision's response is only the tip of the iceberg. All the rental houses will be facing policy questions as the market begins to shift.
I had all the aperture levers removed, because the mark 2's electronic plate blocks them.
I have found that they are no sharper than Canon's L lenses. However, the similarity of their coatings between them, the uniformity of their sizes, the longer throw and the stiffness of the barrels I find much more helpful with a follow focus and I appreciate the extra stop of speed with the 35mm. Much prefer the zeiss 35mm on my Steadicam Merlin, sometimes the canon wouldn't hold the focus I set and it's much too bulky a lens.
I am not surprised that the newer Zeiss lenses are sharper, more contrasty and have a nicer bokeh, but when I think these old lenses were made so long ago and they still stand up against L glass, I'm not too unhappy.
Personally I do not understand why the Chinese are not rehousing primes for PL (especially the Zeiss's) because when the Scarlet/Red style cameras really hit (meaning the other manufacturers as well), everyone will be looking for a longer throw and the glass will be impossible to rent. Panavision's response is only the tip of the iceberg. All the rental houses will be facing policy questions as the market begins to shift.
I am a professional photographer and I prefer primes. I sold every zoom lens I owned with the exception of my Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 which is a fantastic zoom. I prefer fast primes, even when working with studio lights. They just tend to be sharper because they dont need as many elements in the glass.
I got that exact Tamron about a week ago. It is definitely a great piece of glass. I find it goes toe to toe with my Contax Zeiss primes.
This is becoming the Zeiss thread 
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)
Maybe I made a mistake and should have gotten ZE's but I didn't know about them this summer. I notice that the focus goes in the "right" direction in the pictures of ZE lenses. Can you confirm that?
Is the focus throw and feel on your 85mm ZE as good as the 85mm ZF?
I guess I can always pick them up next year, what with the Scarlet/Epic having the Canon EF electronic mounts, it's almost worth losing the aperture ring for a proper focus direction and not having to use a reversing gear.
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)Maybe I made a mistake and should have gotten ZE's but I didn't know about them this summer. I notice that the focus goes in the "right" direction in the pictures of ZE lenses. Can you confirm that?
Is the focus throw and feel on your 85mm ZE as good as the 85mm ZF?
I guess I can always pick them up next year, what with the Scarlet/Epic having the Canon EF electronic mounts, it's almost worth losing the aperture ring for a proper focus direction and not having to use a reversing gear.
raymondluo
Well-known member
I own three C/Y primes but the question of focal length has been bugging me. Regardless I've decided to sell my 'incomplete' set (missing cheap but excellent 50mm) to get a two focal length style for my 5D MarkII, 28mm + 58mm Rokkor.
I like the idea of shooting with only two focal lengths and I think the 28 + 58 gives a unique and (i think) versatile perspective. I am however undecided on what prime to get for the 28mm or if i should get a 35 instead. Has to match the characteristics of the 58mm though. Anyone?
I am going to regret not following various famous cinematographers that seem to prefer a 35mm + 85mm combination. But so be it, I have plan.
Get another cheap 50/58mm Rokkor, put it on a GH1 for a B-roll telephoto and viola. With the prices dropping so rapidly I reckon sometime early next year we'll all be buying 'just for fun'.
(That said having a photo-hobbyist brother helps, he's got a 24-70 zoom and an 85mm 1.2 canon)
I like the idea of shooting with only two focal lengths and I think the 28 + 58 gives a unique and (i think) versatile perspective. I am however undecided on what prime to get for the 28mm or if i should get a 35 instead. Has to match the characteristics of the 58mm though. Anyone?
I am going to regret not following various famous cinematographers that seem to prefer a 35mm + 85mm combination. But so be it, I have plan.
Get another cheap 50/58mm Rokkor, put it on a GH1 for a B-roll telephoto and viola. With the prices dropping so rapidly I reckon sometime early next year we'll all be buying 'just for fun'.
(That said having a photo-hobbyist brother helps, he's got a 24-70 zoom and an 85mm 1.2 canon)
Last edited: