C300: Sharp Primes

Eric Coughlin

Eric Coughlin

Veteran
I'm starting to think about buying some sharp primes, as most of my lenses are zooms. I like images sharp. Right now I've got a few Canon L zooms, the Sigma 18-35, Tokina 11-20, and a few old Nikkor primes.

What should I get?

Here are some options I'm considering...

Canon L-series primes
Canon CN-e primes
Sigma Art Primes
Zeiss primes
Zeiss CP-2's
Schneider cinema lenses

Are cinema lenses sharper than their photographic lens counterparts? I could also use the geared focus for Steadicam work with a wireless follow focus and various other applications that cinema lens mechanics are good for, so if I went that route it wouldn't just be for better image quality.

Then again, for the price of one cinema lens, I could buy a full set of photo lens primes, so perhaps if I want cinema lenses, I should buy photo ones first and buy the cinema ones later.


Since I already have mostly Canon glass, should I stick with that and go with Canon L-series and/or CN-es? I've heard some people say that color matching between Sigma Art, Canon, Nikon, etc., is difficult or impossible, while I've never noticed it being an issue in my experience, but perhaps I'm just not adept enough at noticing the color differences. What do you think about color matching between different lens manufacturers?
 
Last edited:
Sigma 50mm 1.4 ART is the sharpest prime I've ever owned.

Planning on picking up the Canon 35mm 1.4L II, which is getting pretty fantastic reviews as one of the sharpest 'L' lenses ever made.
 
Is the Canon 35 L II said to be much better than the Sigma 35 Art?

I used to own the Canon 35 L I, but sold it as I was rarely using it after I got the Sigma 18-35. I meant to test the two next to each other, but never did, though I do sort of feel like the Canon prime was sharper. It worked out that I sold my Canon 35 L I, because I got a good price for it and shortly after I sold it the version II became available.

I'm also kind of curious; if the CN-e's use the same glass as the L-series as I've heard some say, would the design of for example the 35mm be the same as the version I or version II of the l-series?
 
Last edited:
You know...I owned the Sigma 35mm ART too and absolutely loved it. Sharp as heck. But when I needed to go wider, I purchased the 18-35mm and sold the 35mm as well. All of these lenses are very sharp and it's an apples to oranges kind of thing for pixel peepers, but some of the reviews I read (derived from a photography perspective) conclude the 35mm II is a bit sharper than the Sigma 35mm ART.

The AF is supposed to be blazing fast on the Canon, which would definitely be better than the Sigma (IMO).

Speaking of the AF, just wanted to mention that if technological advancements surrounding AF did not exist, all of my lenses would be cinema lenses. Having an iris gear/ring just makes life much easier.

But with cameras like the C300 Mark II, 1DX Mark II, A6300...I will take the AF over the manual control because it's so useful in many situations.

Sony's new 85mm 1.4 GM lens offers the best of both worlds, and I wish Canon would start making 'L' lenses with manual aperture control and blazing fast AF.
 
I think it depends on where you're at and where are you going in your career. If you're going up and pushing forward, it might be a good time to invest in a set of cinema lenses. It's also not just about sharpness. Build qaulity, color matching and reliable marks are really important if you're working on sets where you have an AC. If you're one man banding it and you're where you want to be, I think dslr lenses are sometimes better, especially with more cameras utilizing auto focus.

I picked up the sigma 18-35mm 1.8 for just that reason, the AF works pretty great paired with the C300mk2. I was ready to retire my 16-35mm 2.8 until I discovered how completely different the color on the sigma is when I'm shooting two cameras. So I will most likely pickup sigma's next fast zoom for my run and gun shoots and then pickup the wide cine zoom to pair with my 30-105mm cine zoom for my bigger shoots. I rank scaleability as very important when it comes to owning a kit.


A few things I know about your options:
- Canon CNE primes, very sharp, nice warm skin tones, I work with them often, they're clean/fast/sharp modern lenses, I think they lack character, but I make up for it with filtration.
- Zeiss CP2's, not as fast or sharp as the CNE's, but zeiss color (much cooler than canon)
- Schneider, I've heard great things, interchangeable mounts, fit on full frame, not as fast as the Canons, and they're heavier
- DSLR lens options, frustrating to work with when using matte boxes/follow focus etc, great for run and gun.
 
I have the Canon CN-E primes and love them. Beautiful lenses. Skin tones are gorgeous. The only real drawback is that they are only available in EF mount, unless you want to send them to Duclos to be converted to PL and spend a few grand each for the conversion in addition to $4k-$5K for each lens.

In my opinion, the only thing the the CP2's have over the Canons are that you can freely swap the mounts after they've been properly shimmed.

Zeiss primes(UltraPrimes and MasterPrimes) are only PL mount and about $14k-$15K each for Ultra's and over $20K each for Master's. And you'll probably be on a waiting list, because they're usually built to order. I knew guys on 6-12 month waits for them.

I've heard nothing but good things about the Schneider v3 Xenars. Very under rated lenses. But so are the CN-E's. I think money wise, the Xenar's and Cooke mini s4i's are all about the same, $7k-$8K each. The Xenar's are the only ones you can get in EF mount, though.

As far as superior sharpness over still lenses, I wouldn't worry about that. A lot of what you're paying for is mechanics and usability. If you haven't read it already, check out this sticky: Article: Why We Need Cinema Lenses
 
I own the Sigma 18-35mm and I rent the Canon CN-Es a lot and I've never had an issue with them matching. If I could afford it I would pick up a set of the CN-E lenses. There only draw back for me is the lack of variety i.e. they need something in the 18-21mm range and maybe a 40mm and 65mm.

As for sharpness, the lenses today are almost too sharp. The Canon L, Sigma ART, CP2, CN-E are all crazy sharp, sharper then you need. A lot of us use filters to cut down the sharpness of these lenses.
 
OP - if you're considering cinema lenses, also take a look at the Rokinon Xeens and the Tokina Cinema line.

The Xeens got a bad rep from the start but I rented the 85mm and loved it. The build quality is pretty nice and rings are super smooth. I don't think they have been too successful so I'm just waiting for those prices to drop everyday.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1171033-REG/rokinon_xn85_c_xeen_85mm_t1_5_lens.html

If that doesn't happen, I may consider the Tokina 50-135mm.

It's gigantic, but being parfocal is nice.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1118984-REG/tokina_tc_535c_50_135mm_t3_0_cinema_for.html

All of the other cinema lenses mentioned are more than likely better than both of these choices, but these are some alternative options for lower budgets. There are the regular Rokinon and Rokinon DS cinema lenses as well.

In the grand scheme of things, almost every lens gets pretty sharp when it's stopped down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top