starcentral
Veteran
I just went through an evaluation process debating between the Zeiss ZF.2's and CP.2's and thought I would share how I went through the difficult process of deciding which route to take.
First of all the ZE/ZF.2 do share the same glass as the CP.2's however the CP.2's offer 14 blade aperture over the ZE/ZF.2 which only use 9 blades so it will make a difference in your bokeh if you care. Bokeh aside, I won't get into the obvious differences on the body housing, rotation and gear size advantages but will say there are some advantages of using lenses that have consistent throw and rotation from lens to lens. It really depends on the project.
I am currently a Nikon lens shooter on my Sony F55 and reverse focus rotation was of no real concern to me so I always considered the ZF.2's over the ZE's. I've also hired professional 1st AC's to pull focus using reverse focus lenses and it was no problem for them either. I think saying "pros won't work with Nikon lenses or that you need PL's with forward focus" is a myth. Maybe it depends.
So here's what was interesting to me when considering the ZE/ZF.2 lenses; you can actually get the Cinematic mod version of the lenes (branded CT.2) and end up with something in-between ZE/ZF.2 and CP.2.
This is where I spent the majority of my time contemplating which route to take. Incase anyone is not aware, the CT.2's are simply cinevised ZE/ZF.2 lenses so they are the same lens basically but slipped into a cine-type housing providing "most" of the benefit that you would get from a CP.2. For example a larger diameter gear and on CT.2 version II models no rotation of external barrel. Best of all they no longer look like a ZE/ZF.2 with just some slip on gear added, etc.. If looks are important to you and you want something that looks closer to a CP.2 without the price and don't mind the ZE/ZF.2 route then the CT.2 might be for you. Note however that with CT.2's you won't get more rotation like on the CP.2's.
In my evaluation I never considered Duclos mod for ZF.2's. I felt if I was going to spend any extra money on the Zeiss lenses I would rather have a housing that was more like an actual CP.2 and as mentioned earlier the version II of the Cinematics mod means the end of the barrel does not rotate with focusing which is great! Declicking of the iris is done on both mods. Me, I actually like clicking as "I can set it and forget it".
Below are some useful links you might find interesting in doing any further research:
http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/zeiss-vs-rokinon-ultrawide-shootout/
http://nofilmschool.com/2011/12/cinematics-ct-2-lenses-chinese-knockoffs/
http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/cp2vszf2/
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?70093-Zeiss-CP2-Versus-High-speed
So as for me in the end I decided to start building a set of CP.2's since the bokeh, look, and functionality of the lens was most important to me at this stage of the game. I need them a little bit for the "dog and pony shows" with bigger clients ("oh wow Chuck did you know that lens costs $4500?") and also I'm going to be doing some feature film work and the crew will appreciate the consistency from lens to lens.
So the downside to the CP.2's I'd say is the price and its actually quite dissapointing they use the same glass as the photo still lens versions. They are soft wide open and need to be stopped down for more sharpness. The upside, they are Zeiss Compact Primes with a name and quality that sells.
Here's a cost comparison of CT.2 vs Duclos vs ZF.2 I put together
I would love to hear any feedback on the Cinematics if anyone has actually worked with them, or seen them first hand.
Cheers,
First of all the ZE/ZF.2 do share the same glass as the CP.2's however the CP.2's offer 14 blade aperture over the ZE/ZF.2 which only use 9 blades so it will make a difference in your bokeh if you care. Bokeh aside, I won't get into the obvious differences on the body housing, rotation and gear size advantages but will say there are some advantages of using lenses that have consistent throw and rotation from lens to lens. It really depends on the project.
I am currently a Nikon lens shooter on my Sony F55 and reverse focus rotation was of no real concern to me so I always considered the ZF.2's over the ZE's. I've also hired professional 1st AC's to pull focus using reverse focus lenses and it was no problem for them either. I think saying "pros won't work with Nikon lenses or that you need PL's with forward focus" is a myth. Maybe it depends.
So here's what was interesting to me when considering the ZE/ZF.2 lenses; you can actually get the Cinematic mod version of the lenes (branded CT.2) and end up with something in-between ZE/ZF.2 and CP.2.
This is where I spent the majority of my time contemplating which route to take. Incase anyone is not aware, the CT.2's are simply cinevised ZE/ZF.2 lenses so they are the same lens basically but slipped into a cine-type housing providing "most" of the benefit that you would get from a CP.2. For example a larger diameter gear and on CT.2 version II models no rotation of external barrel. Best of all they no longer look like a ZE/ZF.2 with just some slip on gear added, etc.. If looks are important to you and you want something that looks closer to a CP.2 without the price and don't mind the ZE/ZF.2 route then the CT.2 might be for you. Note however that with CT.2's you won't get more rotation like on the CP.2's.
In my evaluation I never considered Duclos mod for ZF.2's. I felt if I was going to spend any extra money on the Zeiss lenses I would rather have a housing that was more like an actual CP.2 and as mentioned earlier the version II of the Cinematics mod means the end of the barrel does not rotate with focusing which is great! Declicking of the iris is done on both mods. Me, I actually like clicking as "I can set it and forget it".
Below are some useful links you might find interesting in doing any further research:
http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/zeiss-vs-rokinon-ultrawide-shootout/
http://nofilmschool.com/2011/12/cinematics-ct-2-lenses-chinese-knockoffs/
http://matthewduclos.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/cp2vszf2/
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?70093-Zeiss-CP2-Versus-High-speed
So as for me in the end I decided to start building a set of CP.2's since the bokeh, look, and functionality of the lens was most important to me at this stage of the game. I need them a little bit for the "dog and pony shows" with bigger clients ("oh wow Chuck did you know that lens costs $4500?") and also I'm going to be doing some feature film work and the crew will appreciate the consistency from lens to lens.
So the downside to the CP.2's I'd say is the price and its actually quite dissapointing they use the same glass as the photo still lens versions. They are soft wide open and need to be stopped down for more sharpness. The upside, they are Zeiss Compact Primes with a name and quality that sells.
Here's a cost comparison of CT.2 vs Duclos vs ZF.2 I put together
I would love to hear any feedback on the Cinematics if anyone has actually worked with them, or seen them first hand.
Cheers,
Last edited:
