FS7: Zeiss Milvus

Ben Scott said:
Milvus 21mm ordered. Anyone wanna buy a Contax 18mm and/or 135mm f2.8? :)
Click to expand...

I shall be very interested to see some 4k grabs S35 and FF so I can compare it to my Nikkor 20mm which is sharp but does have some small coma issues. I think the Milvus 21mm could be the next lens I buy as I'd love really decent sharp well behaved wide.
 
Ben Scott said:
Milvus 21mm ordered. Anyone wanna buy a Contax 18mm and/or 135mm f2.8? :)
Click to expand...


So did you order the ZF or ZE version?

I've gotten past the name "Milvus" but I'm still struggling to get past the compromise that has to be made between reverse focus direction or no infinitely variable iris. That is why the Sony GM 85mm appeals to me: right-way focus ( which reviews say has a lovely action for being electronic ) and a nice big fat iris ring. Oh, and an eleven blade iris. Plus no adapter needed since it is e-mount. I'm coming around to the idea of e-mount glass. I just wish someone would develop some sort of ring for e-mount that tightens the lens ( or lens adapter ) against the camera body so as to eliminate any possibility of wiggle.

Don't take this the wrong way, but using precision engineered German optics through the flocking on some Chinese adapter really doesn't make much sense. That said, I do it all the time and am seriously considering picking up the Milvus or an Otus.
 
Nirv said:
I shall be very interested to see some 4k grabs S35 and FF so I can compare it to my Nikkor 20mm which is sharp but does have some small coma issues. I think the Milvus 21mm could be the next lens I buy as I'd love really decent sharp well behaved wide.
Click to expand...

The 21mm is an absolute gem, fantastic piece of glass, one of my favourite wide-angles of all time. I'm onto my second 21mm (in CP.2 form) at the moment, and it still manages to hang with my CZ.2 zooms - which is pretty remarkable really.

A purchase I can't see anyone regretting.
 
JPNola said:
So did you order the ZF or ZE version?

I've gotten past the name "Milvus" but I'm still struggling to get past the compromise that has to be made between reverse focus direction or no infinitely variable iris. That is why the Sony GM 85mm appeals to me: right-way focus ( which reviews say has a lovely action for being electronic ) and a nice big fat iris ring. Oh, and an eleven blade iris. Plus no adapter needed since it is e-mount. I'm coming around to the idea of e-mount glass. I just wish someone would develop some sort of ring for e-mount that tightens the lens ( or lens adapter ) against the camera body so as to eliminate any possibility of wiggle.

Don't take this the wrong way, but using precision engineered German optics through the flocking on some Chinese adapter really doesn't make much sense. That said, I do it all the time and am seriously considering picking up the Milvus or an Otus.
Click to expand...


ZE Version. Correct focusing direction far more important to me. If you can't live without manual iris OR correct direction of focus too then the Contax Zeiss line were made for you :)

Fly by Wire focus is an absolute no-no for video. I really doubt any professional shooter (as opposed to a photographer who does a bit of video) would say it is fine to use in a professional environment. The only one I'd contemplate is a Zeiss Batis and that would be for AF on a gimbal so I wouldn't be touching it.

I have zero wiggle.
 
JPNola said:
That is why the Sony GM 85mm appeals to me: right-way focus ( which reviews say has a lovely action for being electronic ) and a nice big fat iris ring. Oh, and an eleven blade iris. Plus no adapter needed since it is e-mount. I'm coming around to the idea of e-mount glass.
Click to expand...

I've rented the 85mm and 24-70mm multiple times now, and really like both of them. Focusing manually seemed fine to me, but I'm one to adapt to any lens as long as there is no heavy delay.

The AF on the A6300 with them and the overall quality is just superb. I think they are lenses anyone would like right away as soon as they had one in their hands. (I wish the 24-70mm had an iris ring...would have definitely bought it by now.)
 
stokstad said:
Actually I dont use lens gears. I use the FF on this system:

http://www.swedishchameleon.com/collections/rigs-shoulder-support-kits/products/sc4-large

Maybe looks like a bad design but has worked very well for me thus far.

Would be awsome to know if the focusring slides forward/backward when rolling on the milvus line :)
Click to expand...


I remember that system from years back when I first got a Scarlet. Still don't see how it can have less slack or backlash than a geared system but it's cool it works for you.

Can't speak for the Milvus but the Otus has the nicest focus ring I have ever used and would work well with a belt I imagine. Or as well as they can.
 
For those concerned about focusing the wrong direction, it's possible to get a follow focus that can be reversed, especially a lot of the wireless ones.

For me, it's more important to have manual iris, as the strobing caused when changing iris on the camera will ruin a shot, and it also slows you down. You can't change that but you can learn to focus the other way, or use a FF unit.
 
As a sidenote the whole system is pretty cool with the FS7 and the whole "add weight to the back or dont have a balanced camera". I can basicly put that stick with a belt on my back and the camera sits on my shoulder. Dont use it all the time but if I know Im gonna be standing with the camera on my shoulder shooting for a long time it works well. They guy who made it used to live near me and hes a nice guy :) /Back on track
 
Ben Scott said:
Fly by Wire focus is an absolute no-no for video. I really doubt any professional shooter (as opposed to a photographer who does a bit of video) would say it is fine to use in a professional environment.
Click to expand...

Couldn't the same be said for stepped non-mechanical iris control / lack of infinitely variable iris? You know...like the lens you just purchased for use in a professional environment? Fly by wire focus a no-no but fly by wire iris is okay? Even though it limits you to incremental stops?

The times are a' changing and changing rapidly. It was once said that AF had no place on a professional film / video shoot. I'm old enough to have been around when it was said that no AC worth his salt pulls focus from a monitor. But today most AC's on feature films pull focus from the monitor. I've even seen AC's who stand at a monitor with their head under a shroud and pull focus exclusively from a monitor.
 
David Kudell said:
For those concerned about focusing the wrong direction, it's possible to get a follow focus that can be reversed, especially a lot of the wireless ones.

For me, it's more important to have manual iris, as the strobing caused when changing iris on the camera will ruin a shot, and it also slows you down. You can't change that but you can learn to focus the other way, or use a FF unit.
Click to expand...


Fair point, although some cameras have a much nicer and smoother electronic iris mechanism than others. To cut a long story short I thought about how often I ride exposure during a take. Almost never. Made my decision based on that. Whereas correct direction focusing of gear that might be shared out on set or rented be used with a wireless FF by an AC who doesn't have time to remap stuff backwards etc..
 
JPNola said:
Couldn't the same be said for stepped non-mechanical iris control / lack of infinitely variable iris? You know...like the lens you just purchased for use in a professional environment? Fly by wire focus a no-no but fly by wire iris is okay? Even though it limits you to incremental stops?

The times are a' changing and changing rapidly. It was once said that AF had no place on a professional film / video shoot. I'm old enough to have been around when it was said that no AC worth his salt pulls focus from a monitor. But today most AC's on feature films pull focus from the monitor. I've even seen AC's who stand at a monitor with their head under a shroud and pull focus exclusively from a monitor.
Click to expand...


Manual control of fly by wire focus is not the same as electronic control of electronic iris.

Focus by wire if you're controlling focus electronically is a different story.
 
I am weighing those same considerations. As far as adjusting exposure during a take, lately I have been using natural light as a source and in that scenario I often end up having to ride the exposure as the exterior light goes from full sun to clouded. And then there are the interviews conducted outside. Riding iris is a must for those. But these days people are okay with stepped exposure changes. And I imagine that the steps with the Milvus are subtle.

fyi- someone has a Milvus 50mm for sale for $900 on the Red forum:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?147170-Zeiss-Milvus-50mm-w-follow-focus-ring
 
Ben Scott said:
Manual control of fly by wire focus is not the same as electronic control of electronic iris.

Focus by wire if you're controlling focus electronically is a different story.
Click to expand...

True, but electronic controlled iris is a compromise from mechanical controlled iris. You'd rather the Milvus ZE have a manually controlled mechanical iris, I am certain. [ I suppose that even "electronic iris" lenses still have a "mechanical iris". That is, there are still iris blades and the exposure is being controlled via a physical process. So, in that light, the Milvus ZE has an electronically controlled mechanical iris. ]

What is your impression of the Celere HS's? Did you see that they offer the ability to place nets on the back of the lens? And they will soon offer the HS's in an uncoated version. The buzz is that you are essentially getting Cooke Mini S4's for substantially less cost. But faster than the Mini S4's. Abel Cine lists the Celere HS's at around $4200 each. I really like the compact size and the build quality is said to be top notch. I found that the diameter of the CP.2's / Xeens / Canon Cn e / Sony CineAltas is too large for convenient hand pulling of focus. The size of the Celeres seems just right and they tick all the boxes. Granted, they are unlikely to have the IQ of the Milvus / Otus line or the lack of CA. But are the Milvus and Otus TOO sharp and only going to make video look more like video / less like film? Seems odd to seek out super sharp glass only to end up putting softening filters in front of it.
 
Yes, it's a compromise. As using anything other than a Master Prime or set of Summicrons Cs is. Manually focusing with a fly by wire lens is a compromise too much for me. Controlling the iris electronically is something I can put up with and with other systems (Red with Foolcontrol) can be nice and precise.

No, the Otus is not 'too sharp' and in no way makes things look 'video.

Re the Celeres, I really hope they are wonderful, but at the margins they must be operating at the first thing to fall by the wayside will be QC. Canon and Zeiss won't put a 7/10 lens out of the door but I doubt very much Celere could afford to chuck those ones in the bin.
 
Don't know if its accurate but I read somewhere that the Celeres used Rockinon glass elements implying they would be rehoused Xeens. In any case its hard to believe doubt the quality would like a Cooke, but they do look interesting.
Incidentally I made a similar bet as Ben that since I couldn't get everything I wanted in still glass- manual iris, focus, focus direction and IS, the least important to me was manual iris though it bothers me not to have it. IS was important enough to me to go with the backwards focusing Tamron 24-70 . Hate the compromises but love the steadiness, the IQ and the speed.
 
Lenilenapi said:
Don't know if its accurate but I read somewhere that the Celeres used Rockinon glass elements implying they would be rehoused Xeens. In any case its hard to believe doubt the quality would like a Cooke, but they do look interesting.
Incidentally I made a similar bet as Ben that since I couldn't get everything I wanted in still glass- manual iris, focus, focus direction and IS, the least important to me was manual iris though it bothers me not to have it. IS was important enough to me to go with the backwards focusing Tamron 24-70 . Hate the compromises but love the steadiness, the IQ and the speed.
Click to expand...


Like the Red Pro zooms the origins of the Celeres is clouded in mystery. Word is that they are part rehouse / part original manufacturing. Whatever they are I think they have the form-factor and build quality down right- consistent front diameter, manual iris and focus that are both the "correct" direction, same weight across the range.


It's so easy to find fault with any make of lens- Cooke Mini S4's have the angular bokeh and don't cover FF, the Otus has been criticized for having onion-ring bokeh, the Xenon's bashed for their CA, XEENs bashed for, well, just about everything. The Milvus does appear to be the most bang for the buck. Some have said it is like getting master primes for a fraction of the cost. That may well be overstatement, but to even be mentioned by seasoned DP's as comparable to the master primes is high praise indeed.

Thank you to all for sharing your valuable insights, experiences, and opinions.
 
That's the Otus, not the Milvus. I've never heard the Milvus mentioned in the same sentence as a Master Prime.

But yes, on a static frame most glass can do a job. It's only where you need to rely on mechanics or repeatability of moves or changes that the cream rises to the top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top