For what it's worth 60 Minutes does own F3's and now C300's. A friend who is a Producer with them told me the C300 was because of the internal codec and size. At the same time 60 was for years using EX1's & 3's without a ext. recorder for a lot of their field work when ENG's were not practical. I know they've rented PL zooms before for sit down interviews. If you saw their recent piece about the famous wildlife film making couple in Africa, some of that was with the C300.
F55: Sony PL lenses - kits?? RANT.
- Thread starter FilmDude
- Start date
Mitch Gross
Veteran
60 Minutes is a great client of ours and they use a variety of cameras as you indicate. 30 Rock is another mewsmagazine which shoots a lot with Sony F3 cameras we've kitted. And since you mentioned it, the couple filming lions in Africa purchased a Phantom from us early on.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
I know this is a "rant" thread, but I must point out that there a whole lot of assumptions which are not particularly valid. You think you know so much about where various optics come from and what coatings they use? Bull. On a number of lenses from various manufacturers I do in fact know where the optical designs come from, the mechanical designs, the different glass elements, the assembly of the mechanics, the different facilities for the coatings, the process for marking the barrels, etc. I will tell you that you'd be amazed by the difference between what you think you know and what is the reality in the lens manufacturing world. Here's a tidbit: Ever hear of Schott? It's a huge German-based glass company, and their products are in MOST of the lenses available today. Yes, Japanese lens makers buying elements from a German company, because Schott makes certain particular products quite well and it would not be financially sensible to get them any other way. Wanna know where one of the best coating facility is? Russia. Optics from various companies often pass through this facility. I could go on with dozens of other facts.
Sony does not have a name in cine glass. Neither does Schneider, and they're making a go at it with their Cine-Xenars. BTW, the new prime lenses from Sony are actually branded as CineAlta lenses. Cooke just took away the branding of their Panchro set, rebranding them "Mini S4".
It is incorrect to say that the new Sony lenses are the same as the previous Sony primes but in a metal housing. There are other significant differences.
Unlike almost everybody else in this thread, I have actually seen these lenses and tested them (I think one other person said he had.). You are not being fair to these lenses and they are definitely an alternative worth considering.
As for only being able to purchase in a particular set, This is a conversation we have been having with Sony. The listed sets are correct, but other options may be made available.
Sony does not have a name in cine glass. Neither does Schneider, and they're making a go at it with their Cine-Xenars. BTW, the new prime lenses from Sony are actually branded as CineAlta lenses. Cooke just took away the branding of their Panchro set, rebranding them "Mini S4".
It is incorrect to say that the new Sony lenses are the same as the previous Sony primes but in a metal housing. There are other significant differences.
Unlike almost everybody else in this thread, I have actually seen these lenses and tested them (I think one other person said he had.). You are not being fair to these lenses and they are definitely an alternative worth considering.
As for only being able to purchase in a particular set, This is a conversation we have been having with Sony. The listed sets are correct, but other options may be made available.
lasikdenver
Well-known member
Thanks for that Mitch. I have actually visited and toured Schott glass, and right next door is Zeiss which is all part of the history of how great optics were developed between these two companies many years ago. It is really fascinating watching molten glass being turned into lenses. My question is just how different are the 3 lenses that I own from Sony (35/50/85) and these new CineAlta lenses? Will they be a real "set" or do we need to start over with the better lenses? For whatever it is worth, in my limited experience, the "kit lenses" really seem quite good, and in fact are much better than using still Nikon lenses with the F3. They may have some plastic in them, but optically they are superb.
Well Mitch, as far as my rant goes here are my key points:
1) Sony doesn't have a name when it comes to glass, so at those prices who would pick them over other known brands?
2) Sony doesn't seem to have an option for a smaller 3 lens kit thats "Usable" they just have odd lenses that can't be a usable kit
3) Sony wont sell them individually. Meaning if you buy 3 lenses, you can't buy that 4th or 5th one you want to add on later.
4) Sony is very secretive as to what glass is actually in their lenses, why? Wouldn't you think letting that be known would help them? Someone on this thread before hinted at the fact that they are Zeiss glass... if so, why not have the Carl name on them like so many other brands that use Zeiss glass? Wouldn't that help their potential clients be at ease knowing its not just some glass cobbled together from the deep dark dungeon of china or Japanese still lenses?
5) Sony seems to ditch the earlier version of the lenses, how do we know they wont abandon these new lenses if they dont meet a quota? And tied to that, if that odd 3 lens kit was really made to "finish off" the original Sony 35,50,80, then wouldn't what you just said defeat the whole "kit" if their are significant differences in the new lenses other than just housings, doesn't that mean these lens can't match? And that the mixing of the old lenses and new be a bastard set and not really proper?
Any other points were being brought up by others, I am simply ranting about whats with all the locked up kits, secret glass info, and higher prices without a stay in the game.
It seems to me that everyone is hinting to the fact that the glass inside is indeed good glass, then why isn't Sony allowed to brand it as CineAlta Zeiss lenses? Just like other name brands that still use the Zeiss name within such as Arri? Is this a rights/legal issue that they are bound to?
Thats everything in a nutshell, would love to hear what you think about that all
1) Sony doesn't have a name when it comes to glass, so at those prices who would pick them over other known brands?
2) Sony doesn't seem to have an option for a smaller 3 lens kit thats "Usable" they just have odd lenses that can't be a usable kit
3) Sony wont sell them individually. Meaning if you buy 3 lenses, you can't buy that 4th or 5th one you want to add on later.
4) Sony is very secretive as to what glass is actually in their lenses, why? Wouldn't you think letting that be known would help them? Someone on this thread before hinted at the fact that they are Zeiss glass... if so, why not have the Carl name on them like so many other brands that use Zeiss glass? Wouldn't that help their potential clients be at ease knowing its not just some glass cobbled together from the deep dark dungeon of china or Japanese still lenses?
5) Sony seems to ditch the earlier version of the lenses, how do we know they wont abandon these new lenses if they dont meet a quota? And tied to that, if that odd 3 lens kit was really made to "finish off" the original Sony 35,50,80, then wouldn't what you just said defeat the whole "kit" if their are significant differences in the new lenses other than just housings, doesn't that mean these lens can't match? And that the mixing of the old lenses and new be a bastard set and not really proper?
Any other points were being brought up by others, I am simply ranting about whats with all the locked up kits, secret glass info, and higher prices without a stay in the game.
It seems to me that everyone is hinting to the fact that the glass inside is indeed good glass, then why isn't Sony allowed to brand it as CineAlta Zeiss lenses? Just like other name brands that still use the Zeiss name within such as Arri? Is this a rights/legal issue that they are bound to?
Thats everything in a nutshell, would love to hear what you think about that all
Last edited:
We have no idea what the disclosure agreements are between these two companies, assuming it's even true.
Perhaps it's not in Zeiss's best interest that Sony reveal their source. Ever thiink of that?
The other thing to understand is that Zeiss is like Nike today. It's more of a brand name than a factory.
They are essentially a major player that outsources the vast majority of their products.
They pick and choose from their suppliers at will depending on the project.
A lot of what we attribute to Zeiss is simply a specific coating formula (T*), but they are a lot more than that.
Their medical division might just outweigh most of what they do for cinema.
Zeiss is all about putting together products for other companies that come to them, but that doesnt mean
they actually physically produced the lenses.
There are absolutely millions of crap cameras with the Zeiss name on the lenses. But that also doesn't mean they produced them. It just means they are badged in the same way that Pierre Cardin licensed everything from bath salts to belt buckles.
So who knows if they served merely as an advisory capacity, a designer, a clearing house, or a factory for Sony?
Once again, assuming it's even true.
Last edited:
LeavingTheCandy
Well-known member
If they are better than the first generation, they'll be great. The first ones have great optics, but are big, bulky and a bit clunky on the mechanics, but are FAR better than a still lens.
I've shot them up against RedPro Primes and I couldn't see a difference. It would not surprise me one bit if they came outta the same facility.
rogar-Shock(DBG):
I've shot them up against RedPro Primes and I couldn't see a difference. It would not surprise me one bit if they came outta the same facility.
rogar-Shock(DBG):Morton Molyneux
Active member
LeavingTheCandy
Well-known member
Let's all rejoice in some good quality options that will surely equate to consumer advantage! The top-tier cine-glass manufacturers are watching the caboose from the gravy-train sail off into the sunset. Heck, I suspect that even Rokinon glass is satisfactory for a majority of shoots, speculating that they'll mostly be viewed on the web.
legrevedotcom
Veteran
How do you know they wont sell the lenses individually.... cvp.co.uk have actually listed all the lenses seperately AND... the 3-set you can buy is 35, 50, 85mm....
Just thought I'd mention that, since a lot of you have been ranting about the 3-set.
http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/index.php?t=product/sony_scl-pk3||2ff
Don't mind the photo.... read the item description.
And look... Proav.co.uk also offers the 35, 50, and 85mm kit:
http://www.proav.co.uk/Sony-SCL-PK3-F-PL-Mount-Lens-Kit/p32062.aspx
Last edited:
Mitch Gross
Veteran
1. Sony is looking to establish a name in this area. Sony certainly has a name in other product categories. They don't have to be cheaper to gain entry, they just need to make quality product.
2 & 3. The initial kits announced are one thing, but that does not mean that it is the end of the story. They are not stupid. They are absolutely listening and if it makes sense to sell the lenses differently then they will do so.
4. I guess you did not understand my previous post. You do not "know" what is inside the glass from Zeiss, Cooke, Angenieux, Leica, etc. You may think you do, but you do not. When the tsunami hit Japan it set back the manufacture of lenses in Europe as well. Why? Because elements can come from various manufacturers all over. A couple of years ago I had a client damage a particularly expensive special piece of optics which would cost many thousands of dollars to replace. When we opened up the lens to get at the chipped element, we found a Canon part number inked on the side and replaced it for a couple of hundred bucks. Who designs a lens, who makes the various components, who's coatings are used, who builds the mechanics, and who does the final assembly are all questions to which YOU DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. A CineAlta Prime is just as much Sony's as another brand's lens may be theirs.
5. Who said the original three lenses were discontinued? They are still available for purchase with an F3. And how do you define "matching"? Color, contrast, resolving at the center, resolving at the corners, chromatic aberration, geometry, flaring, veiling, telecentricity ... I could go on and on, but the point is that one can choose to supplement the three current lenses with a limited set of the new primes for a greater range of focal lengths. Sony did that as a convenience to their customers.
This is where I said that there were a whole bunch of suppositions being made that are not necessarily true. You don't know what I know, and I am not allowed to say certain things. And there are tons of things that I do not know that Sony employees do. So no one should go about making declarative statements unless they are the ones in the truly knowledgable position to do so. But then again this is the internet ...
Thank you so much for your time to address all of that, I think that helps put me (and others) at ease about the lenses, and maybe just waiting to see what ends up happening in the long run. If the street price is right and the options are there, maybe they will end up being a hot selling item like CP.2's
Wish this kind of info was sent out to the world, this way we can stop worrying about buying brands that "producers like" and just be able to purchase what I like.
MPB
Well-known member
with respect, Mitch, you can't play both sides of that fence. not at the same time, anyway. if Sony want to play their cards that close to the chest, divulging as little info as necessary, as late as possible, they can expect that folks will resort to speculation in the absence of a clearly stated plan. the speculation gets pretty annoying after a while, especially when one is looking carefully for accurate information. but Sony is happy to pay out information in a trickle, then go in a direction most never saw coming.
it is avoidable.
We all know what the real issue here is:
Sony sold the three kit lenses for $5500 or so (bundled- I know)
So now you expect them to sell three more for the same price. But not plastic !!!!!! But the same price!!!!
Sorry mateys- ain't gonna happen!!!!!!
If anything- Sonys mistake was to come out with the three $5500 lens set. Attempt to answer the market demand for cheap PL primes.
What they found out is that "cheap" and "PL" don't mix. On many levels
Now you guys zeroed in on it and won't let go...
The rest is just beating around the bushes. Entitlement- it's how I would describe this thread in one word...
How about this for a rant?
I figured this thread is a good place for it since it has rant in the title...:happy:
Sony sold the three kit lenses for $5500 or so (bundled- I know)
So now you expect them to sell three more for the same price. But not plastic !!!!!! But the same price!!!!
Sorry mateys- ain't gonna happen!!!!!!
If anything- Sonys mistake was to come out with the three $5500 lens set. Attempt to answer the market demand for cheap PL primes.
What they found out is that "cheap" and "PL" don't mix. On many levels
Now you guys zeroed in on it and won't let go...
The rest is just beating around the bushes. Entitlement- it's how I would describe this thread in one word...
How about this for a rant?
I figured this thread is a good place for it since it has rant in the title...:happy:
lasikdenver
Well-known member
they could sell 3 more "plastic" ones for the same price and I would buy them...the thing is that I get a much better image with the Sony kit PL lenses than I do with Nikon lenses with an adapter. It is not bad with the 17-35 2.8 zoom. I do get great images with the 11-16 Tokina, so happy to have adapter for that, but I have gone back to using the kit primes almost exclusively. I am sure that very expensive PL glass might be better, but I doubt very much in image quality. I find the focus and the aperture movement smooth on these lenses, and will probably buy a more expensive completer set of the new lenses but the plastic does not bother me (they actually have a fair amount of metal on them as well).
Last edited:
Mitch Gross
Veteran
Every company will withhold information -- they have to in order to stay in business. People making gueses and stating them as facts is wrong, and it doesn't matter if I have some "secret knowledge" or not. I can refute info based on what is either published public knowledge or experience from my years in the business. Believe me I didn't need any special insight from Sony to try to clarify things here.
If you don't know, ask. Don't state that black must be white and then complain about it.
LeavingTheCandy
Well-known member
Mitch has some good/valid points. Why would/should Sony divulge their manufacturing secrets or sources? To the best of my knowledge, Red has never done so about their Pro Primes, yet people fall in line like zombies on crack to get them, even though they are HUGE/HEAVY and have optics no better than the first-gen Sony glass. (I've tested them side by side).
I am with Lasik that they are far better than still glass. I sold mine for speeds, but not sure I made the right choice (other than my investment may hold-up better).
I am with Lasik that they are far better than still glass. I sold mine for speeds, but not sure I made the right choice (other than my investment may hold-up better).
MPB
Well-known member
i'm sorry, maybe i should have explained myself further. i understand that Sony withholds information. and i understand that people speculate and get it wrong. i understand that if asked regarding certain subjects, you could tell us, but you'd have to kill us.
this is the situation. sometimes asking gets answers. in this context, it's frequently the exception. with a lack of information, people can only speculate. many will get quite carried away in trying to discern what direction a company like Sony will go, especially when those people are invested in that direction.
maybe Sony (and others) needs to be this secretive, maybe they don't. the point is that they are, and this makes it very difficult in this market to know how to plan one's work and business over the course of even a single year. we can't state that folks have all the information they need to make informed decisions about their equipment purchases, and then complain when they end up guessing because they don't.
Last edited: