New Zeiss Compact Primes preview...

[Evin Grant]

I had a chance to preview the new Zeiss Compact Primes this morning at Band Pro thanks to Michael Bravin.

first of all I'm not going to go into optical quality much here. This is for two reasons first off these lenses use the same glass elements and formulas as the widely reviewed and used Zeiss ZF still lenses. Secondly these will have their chance at our upcoming SALT test along with many of the other new optics coming available. What I will say is that these lenses differ from ZFs in two ways that affect their imaging...

1st, the glass elements are hand picked for quality and consistency.

2nd the lenses feature a beautiful 14 blade iris that should substantially improve bokeh and OOF object rendering.
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/ZCPiris.jpg

OK so these barrels rock!
Double sided focus scales with more witness marks than you can shake a cinetape at. Smooth consistent focus not too dampened and not too loose, with zero backlash pretty much on par with UP barrels.
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/ZCPfocus.jpg

Consistent barrel size, OD and internal focus for easy lens swaps...
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/ZCPset.jpg

And because I know you'll ask for it...

A frame grab and BTS shot. (This is from the superb 28mm T2.1, WFO at minimum focus distance)
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/OmegaZCP.jpg

[Frank Weeks]

Impressive Evin. As always, thanks for your time

[Matthew Duclos]

Who is this "Zeiss" company... Do they have any background in making lenses?:thumbsup:

[Jaime Vallés]

Those look really nice. Thanks for the preview, Evin!

Any hints as to pricing?

Also, do they focus the Nikon direction, or the cinema lens direction?

[Evin Grant]

Cinema, $40K for a set of 7.

[chuck colburn]

Look at them. They focus cinewise. This is one of the reasons they will cost you.

[jaadgy akanni]

Cinema, $40K for a set of 7.

So that's 18mm, 21mm, 25mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm...

[Evin Grant]

That's what I saw on the table.

[chuck colburn]

So that's 18mm, 21mm, 25mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm...

Nice. If they could get the 15mm that is made for the Leica M mount into the grouping it would be killer.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/zeiss-m-mount.shtml

[Michael Bravin]

Look at them. They focus cinewise. This is one of the reasons they will cost you.

These are Cine lenses in all mechanical aspects with FF35 optics from Zeiss. They are not re-worked or re-housed still lenses unless you want to be linguistically literal in that the glass elements are from a still lens design.

Thanks again Evin for your feedback

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Now these looks like great lenses!!! I will definitely be getting them for FF shoots.

[chuck colburn]

Got any pictures of them in pieces? No, really, I'm not kidding. I would like to see the guts. lol

[Zakaree Sandberg]

they look good. very professional.. but on a budget.. i like the fact that i have these same lenses for less than 5k...
im dealing with the shorter focus throw, and funky iris ring..
not to mention reverse focus.. but hey.. im happy to know that my glass is the same glass that will be used on big budget shows

[Steve Freebairn]

So Evin, would you get the RED Pro set or this set?

[jonnycom]

Did the lack of engraving seem weird? I kinda like the idea but wonder if the marks would rub off over time.

[Mike McEntire]

Do they cover FF35? Assuming so seeing as they are based on the ZF lenses.

[Zakaree Sandberg]

yes they cover ff35

[albert rudnicki]

Evin,
What was the focus throw on them?
Was it any then better the ZF?
Thanks

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Evin,
What was the focus throw on them?
Was it any then better the ZF?
Thanks

The pics are quite revealing :thumbsup:

[Evin Grant]

Evin,
What was the focus throw on them?
Was it any then better the ZF?
Thanks

WAAAAAAY better nearly 360º on all lenses.


Did the lack of engraving seem weird? I kinda like the idea but wonder if the marks would rub off over time.

Not especially, I doubt it will be a problem, they seemed hardened or enameled or something.


So Evin, would you get the RED Pro set or this set?

Horses for courses... depends on weather I go full frame or not.

[T. Glen Phelps]

Evin, are there ANY other cine style lenses (by anyone, other than Century rehoused Nikors) that cover FF35 format?

[Nils J. Nesse]

Evin, are there ANY other cine style lenses (by anyone, other than Century rehoused Nikors) that cover FF35 format?

I'm not Evin but off the top of my head

RED 300mm
Van Diemen rehoused Leicas
and probably those Olympus Zuiko rehousings sold by Stonecine

[albert rudnicki]

I strongly believe they are missing the target by $20000.
Few sets as a rental to cover ff35 will do, but not the ideal shooter/owner set.
You don't buy something because of the Name anymore; hopefully times are changing and owning a set of lenses will not be a privilege or status.

[gdv]

I'm not Evin but off the top of my head

RED 300mm
Van Diemen rehoused Leicas

For sale 10 leicas Van Diemen lenses
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=28917


and probably those Olympus Zuiko rehousings sold by Stonecine

[Lenny Manfred]

I played with them on Monday, and they sure looked sweet. I also own a Rouge, and i have the second Rouge on order, so i was very pleasantly surprised that the front element is the same size as the Rouge's, 114mm. That is a great time saver for me, and money saver too, because the expensive Chrosziel adapter i got for the Rouge will work on these also. I don't know that i would get a whole set, for me, i would prefer a partial set, just the ones T2.1 or faster, since the Rouge will cover the rest at T2.8 (one thing i did notice when comparing these to my 30-80 was that the Rouge's wide open T2.8 was a little darker than the new lenses' T2.8, which makes me think that the 2.8 on the Rouge is probably more like a 2.9, or less).

[Evin Grant]

Evin, are there ANY other cine style lenses (by anyone, other than Century rehoused Nikors) that cover FF35 format?

The rehoused 17-35 Century is actually a Canon.

The new Ruby lenses from Focus Optics (they are Nikkors though).

This is a new frontier people, the only cinema camera camera with a FF size gate was the Vista Vision, and guess what, it generally had a Nikon mount and used plain jane Nikkors with focus gears on them. I don't know enough about the Canon K35 set but the longer focal lengths might cover FF.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Thanks Evin

for a nice report and I'm sure brand new Zeiss Compact Primes rock! :head_explode:

[Florian Stadler]

The wides are too slow. Slowest lens in the set makes your lighting requirement.

[Sanjin Jukic]

The wides are too slow. Slowest lens in the set makes your lighting requirement.

The compensation:

Maybe there are all (even upcoming RED wide primes) too slow in terms of S35 high speed lenses

but upcoming Epic 5K requires bigger lens circle size than S35 that it is about FF35 image circle

and it would come with the sensor that could offer more DR (minimum 2-3 stops more) and more ISO (640).

That would be about the compensation. :head_explode:

[Evin Grant]

The wides are too slow. Slowest lens in the set makes your lighting requirement.

This is arguably true for S35, but for full frame 35 the 28mm is equivalent to an 18mm on S35 and that lens is T2.1. So it all depends on your plans.

[Rick Darge]

The rehoused 17-35 Century is actually a Canon.

The new Ruby lenses from Focus Optics (they are Nikkors though).

This is a new frontier people, the only cinema camera camera with a FF size gate was the Vista Vision, and guess what, it generally had a Nikon mount and used plain jane Nikkors with focus gears on them. I don't know enough about the Canon K35 set but the longer focal lengths might cover FF.

Canon K-35s, the 24, 35, 55 and 85 will all cover FF35. The 18mm will cover 5k, with a 34mm image circle.

[Charles Angus]

Here's a question: is PL mount equipped to cover FF35? Or is it possible that the mount will cause vignetting, as it was not designed for that format? Or perhaps cutting off of very large bokeh circles (you can see this with fast lenses on crop sensor DSLRs - a linear cutoff to large bokeh near the edge of frame).

And I would agree, the wide end is way too slow. T2-ish is about the slowest acceptable speed for a prime, IMO.

Just thinking: a bonus of this set is that now people with ZFs know what T stop their lenses are wide open...

[Curran Giddens]

Here's a question: is PL mount equipped to cover FF35? Or is it possible that the mount will cause vignetting, as it was not designed for that format?

Been wondering this myself while reading this thread. Can anyone be more specific about the FF35 coverage. Will they cover the full 6K resolution of the FF35 Epic/Scarlet with Monstro sensor using the PL mount? Also, if they don't cover the 6K Monstro with PL mount, why else would one care if a particular lens will "cover" FF35?

[Stephen Williams]

Here's a question: is PL mount equipped to cover FF35? ...

Hi,

It's way bigger than a Nikon or Canon mount, does that help?

Stephen

[Mitch Gross]

How about this:

Converted Van Dieman Leicas are in PL mount and cover FF35.
Focus Optics' converted Nikon 14-24 is in PL mount and covers FF35.
Zeiss Compact Primes are in PL mount and cover FF35.
There are other, but that should get the idea across.

It is technically possible to make PL mount lenses that cover the FF35 image circle.

[Sanjin Jukic]

You just have to take some of FF35 lenses and "if you know-how" convert them to PL.

http://www.pstechnik.de/images/img_optics-leica-apo-telyt.jpg
Leica-R APO-Telyt to PL Conversion 280mm f/2.8 and 400mm f/2.8 by P+S Technik.

"Leica-R APO-Telyt to PL Conversion

With the P+S conversion, the modular Leica APO-TELYT-R telephoto system

is now available for use on motion picture cameras having PL mounts."

More>>> (http://www.pstechnik.de/en/optics-leica.php)

[Andrew Walker]

Nice lenses but way too rich for my blood. Its kind of nice to know that my Zeiss ZF set has the same glass as a set that Zeiss is selling for $40K and I maybe spent a little over $4K for mine with the Duclos Cine-mod. Very cool that lens manufactures are thinking about FF35 now.

[Shawn Nelson]

Nice lenses but way too rich for my blood. Its kind of nice to know that my Zeiss ZF set has the same glass as a set that Zeiss is selling for $40K and I maybe spent a little over $4K for mine with the Duclos Cine-mod. Very cool that lens manufactures are thinking about FF35 now.

$40k is what this new ZF set is going for??? Sheesh, when I heard that Zeiss was slapping PL mounts and some new housings on it I thought they were contending with the <$20k crowd.

[Evin Grant]

5 lenses will be about $28.5K Shawn.

I keep saying this, glass is not the hard part, the barrels are. These barrels are kick ass and for those that have projects that require fast paced precision focus pulling day in and day out the price of those barrels is negligible. Especially if we're talking about full frame 6K photography, you need even more marks and more precise pulls and better mechanics.

[Julio Quintana]

So if you plan to go FF Epic, I assume these would be a better choice than the RED primes?

[Harry Lipnick]

So if you plan to go FF Epic, I assume these would be a better choice than the RED primes?

I believe you'd be correct. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but at least so far, I think RED has only said the RPPs are meant to cover 5K S35 (an obviously 2/3" as well.) If the RPPs also could hand FF35, though, that would be a pretty amazing achievment. I'm sure we'll have all the dirt in a few days though :thumbsup:
Peace,

-Harry

[Curran Giddens]

I believe you'd be correct. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but at least so far, I think RED has only said the RPPs are meant to cover 5K S35 (an obviously 2/3" as well.)

Looks like the RPP's will only do 4.75K on the Epic FF35.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=400691#post400691


A 32mm image circle will cover roughly 5K on Mysterium-X and 4.75K on Monstro. (5K is possible with wide formats- 2.40:1)

And these numbers depend on how much, if any, vignetting you are comfortable with...

[Andrew Walker]

$40k is what this new ZF set is going for??? Sheesh, when I heard that Zeiss was slapping PL mounts and some new housings on it I thought they were contending with the <$20k crowd.

I was referring to buying all seven in the set BTW. It just seems kind of expensive for re-housed lenses. I would rather wait to see what Red comes out with for FF35.

[Evin Grant]

Just to be clear the Compact Primes are not rehousing, they are completely ground up designed barrels using the glass and formulas from the ZFs. Rehousings use the internal mechanics as well as the optics of the original lens.

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Since they're called compact - what would you say about the sizes and weight of these lenses? How do they compare to for example SS and standards?

[Evin Grant]

I believe they weigh around two pounds. They are wider than either Supers or Standards but about the same weight as Standards. They are also shorter than UPs I think, certainly lighter.

[Zakaree Sandberg]

Since they're called compact - what would you say about the sizes and weight of these lenses? How do they compare to for example SS and standards?

dont wanna speak for the people who have seen the lenses.. but by the look of them. they look larger than standards or supers.. and slightly smaller than ultra primes (but they have maybe the same size front diameter as ultras)
yes?

[Zakaree Sandberg]

damn. evin got to it before me

[Fredrik Callinggard]

Cool thanks guys

[Pawel Achtel]

You just have to take some of FF35 lenses and "if you know-how" convert them to PL.


They (P+S Technik) may know how to convert a lens, but they seem to have difficulties in providing information (PDF link broken), price and their email bounces back with a message:

SMTP error from remote mail server after MAIL FROM:... You are a dynamic host - please use your providers mailserver to send e-mails

I wonder what the aftersales support is. Doesn't give a customer much confidence, does it? :prrr:

[Sanjin Jukic]

They (P+S Technik) may know how to convert a lens, but they seem to have difficulties in providing information (PDF link broken), price and their email bounces back with a message:

SMTP error from remote mail server after MAIL FROM:... You are a dynamic host - please use your providers mailserver to send e-mails

I wonder what the aftersales support is. Doesn't give a customer much confidence, does it? :prrr:

Pawel,

I don't work for P+S Technik and cannot tell you more about it.

Maybe at the moment of preparation for NAB the best could be to call them direct (even from Australia).

Hope this helps.

[Lenny Manfred]

talking about size and weight, the front diameter is large, but that is so they can all have the same front diameter. it is 114mm, vs. 95mm for the ultraprimes (if my memory serves me well) they seen larger than the ultras, but without having them next to each other, i think the ultras are longer. the cool thing was that they where all the same size. similar thinking to the master primes (they are noticeably smaller than the masters) or the digi-primes, which is to make them all as big as their biggest lens, even if the glass is small. some of them where very light, because the glass was very small (35 and 50 if i remember correctly). they felt really well made. after all, they are zeiss (this is not their first barbecue).

the fact that they will work for FF35 does open some new doors for them, and T3 or lower is not so awful if you remember we are talking about FF35, especially at their size. to get a faster wide lens for FF35 would require a much larger lens diameter, and it would mean a much larger and heavier lens. i guess they made the choice.

and please, stop calling them re-housed lenses. they aren't, like Evin said, they are a new design from the ground up. if they where re-housed they could even cost more. my re-housed Century 17-35 (canon) zoom was 15k, from a lens that cost new probably no more than $1,500. they charge that much to re-house when they do it right.

[Roberto Lequeux]

So the 28mm would give you the FOV or an 18mm on S35?

I guess you could pic five, and get the 28mm T2.1 , 35mm T2.1 , 50mm T2.1 , 85mm T2.1. Then I'd get the 21mm f2.8 which would be a T2.9, not that much slower... and that would cost about $28.5k?

Sounds excellent! The only FF set right now and ZFs look great. Only $8,500 more than the $5k RPP set.

But what about for a longer telephoto for nice CUs? Why are they not converting the 100mm f2? It seems they would need to. Probably something longer too.

They look fantastic, but aren't they a tad soft wide open. I can't remember what aperture it was that made the ZFs significantly sharper... f3.2 for sure, though I think f2.8 looked good and it would match the 21mm if you felt it looks ok for the wide shot... then would T1.8 at 320ISO match T2.8 at a hypothetical ISO640?

Just thinking aloud here trying to get some guidance from those who know best.

[deepc0re]

Has the prices for the individual lenses been published yet?

[Dave Blackham]

You just have to take some of FF35 lenses and "if you know-how" convert them to PL.

http://www.pstechnik.de/images/img_optics-leica-apo-telyt.jpg
Leica-R APO-Telyt to PL Conversion 280mm f/2.8 and 400mm f/2.8 by P+S Technik.

"Leica-R APO-Telyt to PL Conversion

With the P+S conversion, the modular Leica APO-TELYT-R telephoto system

is now available for use on motion picture cameras having PL mounts."

More>>> (http://www.pstechnik.de/en/optics-leica.php)

I understand P&S have stopped doing this mount change to the Leica lenses, which is a shame. However the good news is Les Bosher in the UK can remount the Leica modular lenses.

He's just put a PL mount on one of my Leica x1 Focus units for the 400mm lens and its a very good job and excellent work. I am hoping I can get other Leica lenses converted by him.

Dave

[Evin Grant]

So the 28mm would give you the FOV or an 18mm on S35?

On full frame yes, not S35.

[Vladimir Eugene]

Sounds excellent! The only FF set right now and ZFs look great. Only $8,500 more than the $5k RPP set.


The only new FF lenses maybe. I recall a 6 lens set of Van Diemans Leica all at T1.6 for 35K Euros, which included a wide.

[Roberto Lequeux]

The only new FF lenses maybe. I recall a 6 lens set of Van Diemans Leica all at T1.6 for 35K Euros, which included a wide.

Oh... So 35k Euros ~$45k but how many lenses and which focal lengths?


On full frame yes, not S35.

Yes. For S35 coverage I would consider the RPP's, which are a bit faster and more affordable. Slated to have comparable mechanics.

We'll see which set feels best, and how they look soon enough!


would T1.8 at 320ISO match T2.8 at a hypothetical ISO640?

What would be the math to compare this?

[jaadgy akanni]

Les Bosher in the UK can remount the Leica modular lenses.
He's just put a PL mount on one of my Leica x1 Focus units for the 400mm lens and its a very good job and excellent work. I am hoping I can get other Leica lenses converted by him.
Dave

Dave can you tell how much he charged you for that? I'm really curious.

[Mike Prevette]

Les Bosher does great work. I have a Canon 400mm f2.8 he converted to PL.

[David Mullen ASC]

would T1.8 at 320ISO match T2.8 at a hypothetical ISO640?


A doubling or halving of the speed equals opening up or closing down by one stop in terms of exposure. So T/2.0 at 320 ASA is the same exposure as T/2.8 at 640 ASA.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Thank you David.

And what would be the additional stop required to make the DOF the same as S35?

[jaadgy akanni]

Thank you David.

And what would be the additional stop required to make the DOF the same as S35?
Well, wouldn't an additional stop in either direction change the exposure you're trying to match? I don't think there's a way to match Exposure and DOF with lenses of different speeds. You can only get one or the other...Am I wrong?

[Roberto Lequeux]

Well it would mean that if Mostro were rated at 640ISO you could stop down to T2.8 and be able to shoot without adding lights to something you were previously able shoot on R1 at T2 on Red One and keep the footage at 320ISO.

However, if you could bump up the ISO a bit more, and with the down conversion to 2k still get noise levels you deemed acceptable, then you could stop down further to get a deeper DOF.

My second question was to find out how much you would have to close down a FF35 lens (shooting FF35), to match the DOF that a S35 lens gives on a S35 camera. Say, you want the DOF you get on S35 at f2, what would you need to set the Iris on a FF35 camera to get the same DOF. I suppose it would be much more than f2.8.

[Roberto Lequeux]

(This is from the superb 28mm T2.1, WFO at minimum focus distance)
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/OmegaZCP.jpg

Does this mean that most of the ZF optical qualities will remain regardless of the new barrels?

I guess it would be so, since the glass is the same, however the ZF's didn't have internal focusing, at least I don't think they did since they expanded. Also the coatings would be different, plus the glass selection could be more demanding leaving the rest to go to ZF lenses. They could have changed the process a lot actually and only retained the specs making the whole manufacturing have to work with tighter tolerances...

Despite how great and so very sharp ZFs are, they did show quite a bit of CA.

Is there anything we know about or could derive from what we do know that would allow us to compare them?

[David Mullen ASC]

Well it would mean that if Mostro were rated at 640ISO you could stop down to T2.8 and be able to shoot without adding lights to something you were previously able shoot on R1 at T2 on Red One and keep the footage at 320ISO.

However, if you could bump up the ISO a bit more, and with the down conversion to 2k still get noise levels you deemed acceptable, then you could stop down further to get a deeper DOF.

My second question was to find out how much you would have to close down a FF35 lens (shooting FF35), to match the DOF that a S35 lens gives on a S35 camera. Say, you want the DOF you get on S35 at f2, what would you need to set the Iris on a FF35 camera to get the same DOF. I suppose it would be much more than f2.8.

Sure you can increase ISO ratings in order to stop down and increase DOF, at the risk of more noise, so the question will be how noisy is the system?

If you compare horizontal view only, FF35 is 36mm wide and S35 is 24mm wide, so that's a 1.5X magnification difference and also a 1.5-stop depth of field difference once you compensate in focal length to match FOV.

But in practical terms, if you are used to lighting to f/2.8 at 320 ASA and you can shoot FF35 at 640 ASA and shoot at f/4, that's better than nothing and no one is going to spot a remaining 1/2-stop difference in depth of field characteristics.

---

The ironic thing is that when anamorphic (CinemaScope) and FF35 (VistaVision) came out for movies in the 1950's, they were considered to have extra "depth" because filmmakers used them to shoot wider views -- wider-angled wider shots -- not compensate by using longer focal lengths to get the matching views on tighter shots.

[Michael Hastings]

Just to be clear the Compact Primes are not rehousing, they are completely ground up designed barrels using the glass and formulas from the ZFs. Rehousings use the internal mechanics as well as the optics of the original lens.

That's an excellent explanation. I've talked before about the RED 18-50/Sigma 18-50 and I think your description of the ground up design using glass and formulas is a more accurate representation of what was done - and an important distinction.

Given my excellent experience with the C/Y zeiss's I think people will find these compact primes an excellent option, particularly on the faster midrange lenses, and also if they are looking at full frame in their future.

[Nathan Garofalos]

http://www.zeiss.com/c125756900453232/Contents-Frame/042839dea0e28e5fc125756f003e6703

On the Zeiss site.

[Mike Prevette]

Just to clarify people seem to be getting the Zeiss ZF's and the Zeiss C/Y lenses confused. From what I've looked at the ZF's are a different beast and share some things, but take into account some of the improvements in optical design that the last 20 years has given us.

[Roberto Lequeux]

If you compare horizontal view only, FF35 is 36mm wide and S35 is 24mm wide, so that's a 1.5X magnification difference and also a 1.5-stop depth of field difference once you compensate in focal length to match FOV.

So half a stop more sounds encouraging. And I suppose for those concerned with 2.4 aspect, horizontal view is a very accurate estimation. Thank you for explaining the relation.

Say the new systems are rated at a more conservative 500ISO, and they end up being close to R1 in noise. R1's noise seems to be mostly in the bottom end I think. If all of that happened, that should put us well over the top. In the wonderful case all of that came true, most wouldn't even consider it an issue after downconversion from 5k to 2k. It might be a bit hopeful, but in my humble understanding of sensors and so on I see it as a strong possibility. Even if Mostro ended up close to R1 noise at 500ISO, the resolution should make up for an other little bit of noise reduction...


But in practical terms, if you are used to lighting to f/2.8 at 320 ASA and you can shoot FF35 at 640 ASA and shoot at f/4, that's better than nothing and no one is going to spot a remaining 1/2-stop difference in depth of field characteristics.

I am very happy to hear this. 1st ACs might complain though... right? I don't really know much about light levels... so my hypothetical analysis can't go any further... but if f2.8 was your wide open end of the spectrum and you mostly were able to shoot a little more closed down, then it might not be much of an issue.


The ironic thing is that when anamorphic (CinemaScope) and FF35 (VistaVision) came out for movies in the 1950's, they were considered to have extra "depth" because filmmakers used them to shoot wider views -- wider-angled wider shots -- not compensate by using longer focal lengths to get the matching views on tighter shots.

I see. Perhaps the longer focal lengths compensation could work for those seeking the best 4k digital projection or the best Imax prints. Though I personally do see it as a tool for real wide shots... if I can find a fast and wide FF35 lens. Perhaps the Duclos Tokina at 13mm or the Ruby Nikon at 14mm already answered that question! The tokina can go up to 11mm with a little bit of distortion, but at 13mm it seems perfect. It also offers up more MTF than R1 can handle, which should be plenty sharp for most people, even at 4k digital projection... I suppose.

I am not 100% sure how to use the calculators so this might be a bit fudged up:

13mm in S35 = 85.4° horizontal FOV
13mm in FF35 = 108.3° horizontal FOV
~21% wider FOV!!

Thanks for your posts David! (please let me know if I am way off track anywhere) :)

[Evin Grant]

Just to clarify people seem to be getting the Zeiss ZF's and the Zeiss C/Y lenses confused. From what I've looked at the ZF's are a different beast and share some things, but take into account some of the improvements in optical design that the last 20 years has given us.

The only difference is the coatings.

[Pawel Achtel]

Interesting comparison between CP, UP and MPs on Zeiss website in the FAQ section:

http://www.zeiss.com/C125756900453232/ContentsWWWIntern/B984D96F381F07FBC12575820044C5D7#q3

[albert rudnicki]

Pawel
They say what they want to say on their website.
What's funny is the resolution +++ on MPs and + on CPs
That, I don't get.

[Nick Gardner]

The only difference is the coatings.

Where did you hear that, and why on earth would the coatings be any different?

Cheers,

Nick

[Mike Prevette]

Everything I've read has said that they are slightly different. Cosina has changed a great deal in the last 20 years. And if what they say about the 100mm being modeled after things learned on the Master/Ultra primes I don't see how they could be the same. I'd have to dig up some old c/y spec sheets and compare the diagrams.

( should preface this with the fact the 50mm's 85mm and 100mm are planar designs that have been around in some cases since the late 1890's in some form or another)

Take a look at these speck sheets for the current Contax 85mm 1.4 and the ZF The optical groups are very different.

http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/assets/pdf/Planar1.4_85_e_09-09-02.pdf

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/Planar_1-4_85_ZFen/$File/P1_4_85ZF_EN.pdf

[David Mullen ASC]

So out of all of these new PL-mount lenses coming out, only the Zeiss Compact Primes cover FF35 (36mm x 24mm)?

[Deanan]

Everything I've read has said that they are slightly different. Cosina has changed a great deal in the last 20 years.


I'd completely forgotten that the Zeiss ZF/ZM's are made by Cosina in Japan.

[Mike Prevette]

As well as all the modern Voigtlander rangefinder/SLR lenses. They hands down build the best must unique optics out there. Mr. Kobayashi is a lens nut, much like Jim. In fact I think they might have bought and sold cameras to each other in the past.

[Deanan]

As well as all the modern Voigtlander rangefinder/SLR lenses.


Yeah, I own a few Voightlanders. Great price for what you get.

[Nathan Garofalos]

So out of all of these new PL-mount lenses coming out, only the Zeiss Compact Primes cover FF35 (36mm x 24mm)?

As far as I know these are the only ones, but there may be others... The new Cooke lenses are said to be "equally suitable for shooting film and digital images up to and beyond a 4K resolution pipeline." So that may be another option.

http://www.cookeoptics.com/cooke.nsf/products/panchro.html

[Greg M]

So out of all of these new PL-mount lenses coming out, only the Zeiss Compact Primes cover FF35 (36mm x 24mm)?

So are the Red Pro Primes not FF35?

[david farland]

So are the Red Pro Primes not FF35?


FAQs- New RED Pro Prime set.

1. RPPs are "RED-centric", which means that the light path is optimized for maximum resolution and consistent illumination, with minimum breathing for the Mysterium sensor family. Patent Pending.
2. T-stop range is 1.8-22.
3. Image diagonal- > 32mm.
4. Extra low dispersion (ELD), Super Low Dispersion (SLD) and anomalous dispersion glass for maximum chromatic aberration correction.
5. Center resolution is greater than 100 (lines pairs/mm). Edge (5K) is greater than 63 (lines pairs/mm). (You will see Wed. how much greater)
6. Close focus from lens front (from sensor) is:
25mm- 4" (12")
35mm- 4" (12")
50mm- 6" (12")
85mm- 18" (24")
100mm- 24" (30")
7. High relative illumination from center to edge of field (5K).
8. Uniform Spectral correction to accommodate any light source.
9. Internal Focus and Unit Focus designs.
10. Consistent 110mm front diameter.
11. RPPs will work with film cameras.

Full Specification Matrix to be posted on Wed.

Jim

Only the Red 300mm covers FF35 frame.

D

[Evin Grant]

So out of all of these new PL-mount lenses coming out, only the Zeiss Compact Primes cover FF35 (36mm x 24mm)?
Yes, they are the only cinema specific set.



Take a look at these speck sheets for the current Contax 85mm 1.4 and the ZF The optical groups are very different.

http://www.contaxcameras.co.uk/assets/pdf/Planar1.4_85_e_09-09-02.pdf

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/Planar_1-4_85_ZFen/$File/P1_4_85ZF_EN.pdf

The ZF is based on the MF 85mm f1.4 Contax which is not the same as the Contax "N" autofocus design.

Contax MF
http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/zeiss_85mm1-4.jpg
Zeiss ZF
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/ZF85formula.jpg


Where did you hear that, and why on earth would the coatings be any different? Cheers, Nick

When ZFs were first announced the product literature had dome details about coating technology derived from the Master Primes which helped reduce flaring. ghosting and made them more color matched than previous lenses. I know the 100mm is a new design but the others are taken whole hog from the Contax line.

[Nicholas Shields]

At the risk of sounding sarcastic, is the mere inclusion of the Zeiss name make the re-housing of still lenses at a cost of approx. $35K make these lenses desirable? I am well aware of the Zeiss quality but these lenses are relatively slow when compared to the other offerings are they not?

[Evin Grant]

These lenses do not cost $35K because of the name alone. The mechanics are superb. The kind of mechanics you only get from hand assembled, cinema grade manufacturing and tolerances not attainable in mass production (except by Red). The speed of these lenses may seem an issue for S35mm photography but for full frame cinematography it's no issue because the 28mm (which is 16mm in S35) is a T2.1.

[Roberto Lequeux]

the 28mm (which is 16mm in S35) is a T2.1.

I thought it was FF35 25mm = S35 18mm

[rod bradley]

I believe Roberto is right, and Evin had a dislexic lens moment -- we're talking field of view, I believe.

[Ariana]

I'd completely forgotten that the Zeiss ZF/ZM's are made by Cosina in Japan.

So the CompactPrimes are made in Germany but use the ZFs which are made in Japan?

[Evin Grant]

I thought it was FF35 25mm = S35 18mm

I'm talking compared to the Red One active horizontal angle of view.
True S35 would be 16mm=26mm, 18mm=30mm.


So the CompactPrimes are made in Germany but use the ZFs which are made in Japan?

I believe the Compact primes are made in Germany but the Optical elements themselves still come from Japan, but are hand selected for quality and consistency.

[Phil Jordan]

I believe the Compact primes are made in Germany but the Optical elements themselves still come from Japan, but are hand selected for quality and consistency.

This sounds like marketing to me. I'll bet they throw away the bad ones, right? 1st they are German Zeiss lenses. Then it comes out the optics are made by Cosina in Japan. Then Zeiss publishes that they are not as good as UP's or MP's. The story gets weaker by the minute.

[Roberto Lequeux]

I'm talking compared to the Red One active horizontal angle of view.
True S35 would be 16mm=26mm, 18mm=30mm.

Oh, cool, thanks for posting this.

What about Mysterium-X 5k? And will 4k on M-X be true S35?

I would love to know exact numbers.


This sounds like marketing to me. I'll bet they throw away the bad ones, right?

I suppose Zeiss ZF manual still DLSR lenses will continue to be produced. They may get better coatings now..?

[Grady Wilson]

I believe the Compact primes are made in Germany but the Optical elements themselves still come from Japan, but are hand selected for quality and consistency.

This would not surprise me if Germany was looking to Japan for optics, and If that is true good for them for having the balls to swallow their ego.
Japanese optics are clearly long past what the Germans are capable of.

Someone said it earlier, but the whole "Made in Germany" marketing speak really holds no value anymore.

[Evin Grant]

Japanese optics are clearly long past what the Germans are capable of.


In general I agree with you, that said I'd take any Leica lens over just about any other optic on the planet... but at what price?

[David Mullen ASC]

Oh, cool, thanks for posting this.

What about Mysterium-X 5k? And will 4k on M-X be true S35?

I would love to know exact numbers.


I'm not sure why you need exact numbers for cameras that don't exist yet, but it's basic math if you know the dimensions.

S35 is 24mm wide. FF35 is 36mm wide. Divide 36 by 24 and you get 1.5, the magnification factor for conversion.

So to match FOV, you'd use a 27mm lens on a FF35 camera to match an 18mm on a Super-35 camera.

Of course, the recorded RED sensor area in 4K mode isn't 24mm wide, it's more like 22mm wide. And we don't know what area of the FF35 sensor will get recorded in different modes either, given that there's a certain amount of "lookaround" area allotted from the sensor not used in the recording. So even if the FF35 sensor is 36mm wide, perhaps you're recording 34mm, who knows.

When we all learn the dimensions of 4K on the Mysterium-X sensor, we can figure it all out -- though I thought the Mysterium-X was the same size and pixel dimensions of the Mysterium sensor. Same goes for the Monstro sensor, we need to know the actual dimensions of the recorded areas to be perfectly precise in these calculations -- though I don't know why it matters.

Unless you shoot with a zoom lens, it doesn't do you a lot of good to know the exact focal length for matching field of view of the math gives you a figure like, I don't know, 55.5mm let's say -- you're still probably going to reach for a 50mm lens, whatever is closest.

I don't really understand the need for a lot of conversion calculation -- you get a set of prime lenses from wide-angle to telephoto and you compose a shot with them. You don't make conversions from one format to another -- it's a meaningless waste of mental effort. If you are shooting in Super-35, you're probably going to get a prime lens set that starts at an 18mm and maybe goes to 100mm. So if you are shooting in FF35, you're probably going to get a prime lens set that starts at a 27mm and goes to a 150mm. And so what if it's not exactly a match in FOV to the equivalent lenses in Super-35? So what if your math says you need a 68mm and all you can get is a 75mm prime? You line up the shot with your 75mm prime.

Once you start shooting a movie, you learn what the FOV of your lens set is and you never make conversion calculations again.

So what's the point in all of these precise conversion calculations??? Why can't general ones be enough to work with?

The only reason I can see for the need for exact focal length figures is if you are using one of those storyboard / set building programs where you have to input a lot of figures before you can fly the camera around in 3D, whatever. And even then, you can input approximate figures for now, change them when you get more precise figures.

[Grady Wilson]

In general I agree with you, that said I'd take any Leica lens over just about any other optic on the planet... but at what price?

Hate to break it to you man, but alot of Leica lenses are made in Japan by Kyocera, old Minolta, and even Sigma.

You gotta be careful when you bring up Leica now adays. the M lenses are like no other, but currently, 90% of product that carries a Leica badge now is manufactured in Japan, specially given the relationship with Panasonic.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Hate to break it to you man, but alot of Leica lenses are made in Japan by Kyocera, old Minolta, and even Sigma.

You gotta be careful when you bring up Leica now adays. the M lenses are like no other, but currently, 90% of product that carries a Leica badge now is manufactured in Japan, specially given the relationship with Panasonic.

Let you know that first that Leica professional lenses are all Made in Germany (Solms), then some of them were Made in Canada (Elcan) and some of Leica consumer lenses still are Made in Japan (a deal with Panasonic).

[Grady Wilson]

Let you know that first that Leica professional lenses are all Made in Germany (Solms), then some of them were Made in Canada (Elcan) and some of Leica consumer lenses still are Made in Japan (a deal with Panasonic).

Almost True. Most of the Vario-Elmarit-R zooms are made in Japan. And a few of the other R lenses.. not just the consumer stuff my friend Sanjin.

[Ariana]

Almost True. Most of the Vario-Elmarit-R zooms are made in Japan. And a few of the other R lenses.. not just the consumer stuff my friend Sanjin.


It doesn't matter how great their lenses are if Leica is continuously sinking into further and further debt. How's super special 50th editions cameras can they keep making to keep things afloat while they struggle to make a marginally competitive digital camera.

While their older lenses rocked, their newer lenses have gotten less and less interesting.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Made in Japan doesn't mean anything bad if you say Leica, for example I have

the newest Leica D-Lux 4 compact point & shoot photo camera and it is PERFECT.

[Ariana]

Made in Japan doesn't mean anything bad if you say Leica, for example I have

the newest Leica D-Lux 4 compact point & shoot photo camera and it is PERFECT.


Why does the Dlux4 cost almost twice as much as the Panasonic DMC-LX3?
The D-Lux is a Panasonic with a panasonic lens designed by leica although I've heard that they don't do much of the lens design for those cameras.

[Grady Wilson]

It doesn't matter how great their lenses are if Leica is continuously sinking into further and further debt. How's super special 50th editions cameras can they keep making to keep things afloat while they struggle to make a marginally competitive digital camera.

While their older lenses rocked, their newer lenses have gotten less and less interesting.

Didnt they just re-release the M8 as the same as before but with a coat of white paint?

[Roberto Lequeux]

David, once I know as much as you do I will probably stop asking so many questions... well that is likely not true. One of the main reasons to ask all this stuff is to learn about how it all works, things you already know.

I have shot quite a bit, certainly nowhere as much as you, but I've never reached for a calculator. IMO everything of value in this craft is measurable by intangibles anyway. Whether you rationalize some, or a lot of it, in the end it is still all based on the feelings evoked by the sum of the parts. I am very aware of this.

Still, I realize I must be annoying to some, perhaps not you, I can only hope. But even if that were the case, I can't change who I am. I can only hope that my incessant questioning isn't misconstrued into something else, hopefully at least not something negative. All it is is a relentless hunger for knowledge.

Granted, some of it might not seem useful enough for the time I spend trying to figure it out. But that is only measurable taking into consideration where I am coming from and where I am ultimately headed, universe willing. Just know that there is much more gathered than simple math.

On a more specific note, my upcoming project may or may not have enough budget -among other things- for replicating interiors where pivotal scenes take place. This has me concerned with making sure I will cover my wide end. Finally, we will be shooting while all this new gear is brand spanking new still, and in high demand. So I am talking with people who will have it available, making sure I will have access to everything we will need without having to break the bank.

I am just trying to be as prepared as possible... I would not want my first feature to fail in part due to unpreparedness. I wouldn't forgive myself, now should investors. But luckily that is not going to happen (other than the healthy amount of Murphy's).

While my posts may be simple hammering questions to people of a certain mastery, little questions slowly chiseling away at one boulder out of a whole mountain of pertinent information... I am also picking up a lot of other valuable information.

Thanks to these and many other threads, and generous people like you, I am constantly gaining knowledge. Though there is also conversations, books and -above all- experience.

Anyhow... thanks for your patience, and sorry if I test it a little too often.


If you are shooting in Super-35, you're probably going to get a prime lens set that starts at an 18mm and maybe goes to 100mm. So if you are shooting in FF35, you're probably going to get a prime lens set that starts at a 27mm and goes to a 150mm.

Thanks! So it seems that the Zeiss set already covers the wide end quite well for FF35 with the 21mm being a T2.1, but I wonder if they will make the 100mm soon? And when we may see something in the 150mm range...

Personally I think we will end up mostly shooting Misterium-X 5k for 2.4, but you never know, a lot can change from here to winter.

[Evin Grant]

leica really needs someone like Les Zellan to swoop in and shake up the culture a but.
They did have an american CEO come in for a while but it ended disastrously, he was a big box store CEO and didn't get the Leica draw. If leics went down the same path that Zeiss has and started releasing lenses for 3rd party DSLs they'd be back on top in no time. I was talking M lenses BTW, although I do have a Panasonic LX3 that takes extremely Leica like photos with it's Japanese Summicron lens.

[Sanjin Jukic]

It doesn't matter how great their lenses are if Leica is continuously sinking into further and further debt. How's super special 50th editions cameras can they keep making to keep things afloat while they struggle to make a marginally competitive digital camera.

While their older lenses rocked, their newer lenses have gotten less and less interesting.

Ariana,

you are totally misinformed about the newest Leica lenses.

If you cannot get them and try it out, then you could read and learn more about them here:

TAO of LEICA>>> (http://www.imx.nl/photo/)

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

All I see, except of the super marketing bla bla, is the typical ZF problems that I see in my lenses... There is no way to put 30K euros for a lens like that... I prefer the Elites or the Lomos or the RRP's... to put on the table numbers like that when I can with 7K euros to have either the P+S conversion or the dulcos with less... there is no point to pay the extra 25K for just the mechanics and have the same quality as the stills...

If they use the same design in the 50mm F1.4 and the 85mm F1.4, then this are the worst lenses I have ever used... especially the 50mm F1.4 is totally trash... for me is weird that they don't use the two macro 50mm F2 and the 100mm F2 which they are a real benchmark!

If they want me (and others) they have to sell below 12K euro's... yes they are Zeiss, but they aren't alone... and we can measure and understand better...

There is no market for products that carrying heavy names like ARRI or ZEISS when the product doesn't perform as the competition does... No way to pay the premium just to see the logo ARRI/Zeiss... they are not selling in the fashion market, we are professionals... we are not stupid.

If RRP's do perform, then I'm with Jim...

[Ariana]

Ariana,

you are totally misinformed about the newest Leica lenses.

If you cannot get them and try it out, then you could read and learn more about them here:

TAO of LEICA>>> (http://www.imx.nl/photo/)


I'm a leica shooter from the late 70s and in addition to all my father's leicas from the 40s-90s, I have a ton of leica gear all the way up to the recent lenses. I have Puts' book and bought lenses he's recommended but only to realize his reviews are biased and narrowly focused.

Frankly, the problem with the more recent lenses is that they cater to tweaks like Erwin Puts and optimize the lenses for technical analysis.
Any lens that Puts praises highly is usually the lens that produces the ugliest pictures.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Ouch... I didn't see that. Thanks for pointing it out Evangelos. But could these be pictures from a set in development?

How do you correct for CA? Is it something you can do with coatings or do you need to change the lens elements, placement, serious stuff...?

I guess most if not all would take 4.5k 2:1 or 5k 2.4 with no CA over 6k 16:9.

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

Ouch... I didn't see that. Thanks for pointing it out Evangelos. But could these be pictures from a set in development?

How do you correct for CA? Is it something you can do with coatings or do you need to change the lens elements, placement, serious stuff...?

I guess most if not all would take 4.5k 2:1 or 5k 2.4 with no CA over 6k 16:9.

Unfortunately only serious staff...

The 50mm 1.5 is the worst lens ever... only past F2.8 1/2 is workable with acceptable level of CA... the 25 the same the 85 the same...

Why the didn't use the macros? cheap thinking...

so for me they are a no go...

[Evin Grant]

That's no worse than I've seen from S4s and at least it's lateral CA (blue/yellow) which is quite easily corrected in post. The S4s have crazy purple fringing on chrome and it's impossible to process out.

example...
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/S4ca.jpg

[Sanjin Jukic]

I'm a leica shooter from the late 70s and in addition to all my father's leicas from the 40s-90s, I have a ton of leica gear all the way up to the recent lenses. I have Puts' book and bought lenses he's recommended but only to realize his reviews are biased and narrowly focused.

Frankly, the problem with the more recent lenses is that they cater to tweaks like Erwin Puts and optimize the lenses for technical analysis.
Any lens that Puts praises highly is usually the lens that produces the ugliest pictures.

Ariana,

would be nice that you show and share with us here your test(s) or any of those "ugly" Leica pictures that you've talking about.

Here below there are a couple of pictures and short clips shot with several Leica-R and Leica-M lenses on RED1.

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/Leica_NoctiluxF095_01.jpg
Leica Noctilux - M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH on RED1

Download here "quick & dirty" test footage shot with Leica Noctilux - M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH on RED1all time wide open @ f/0.95>>> (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/Noctilux095_720p02H264.mov)

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/IMS_Leica24mmf2-8_02.jpg
Belvedere Schloss (Palace) in Vienna shot with Leica-R 24mm f/2.8 on RED1.

Download 2K "quick and dirty" test example shot with Leica-R 24mm f/2.8 on RED1 here>>>> (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/IMS_Belvedere_01.mov)

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/IMS_RED_LeicaSummicron-M90mm_01.jpg
Leica Summicron-M 90mm f/2 on RED1

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/IMS_RED_LeicaSummicron-M90mm_02.jpg
Leica Summicron-M 90mm f/2 on RED1

Download here "quick & dirty" test example shot with Leica Summicron-M 90mm f/2 on RED1>>> (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/IMS_RED_LeicaSummicronM90F2_2.mov)

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

That's no worse than I've seen from S4s and at least it's lateral CA (blue/yellow) which is quite easily corrected in post. The S4s have crazy purple fringing on chrome and it's impossible to process out.

example...
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/S4ca.jpg

That's why I prefer the Leica R lenses which they have character and no CA anywhere... ohh and they cost half of what the compacts do...

Sorry I can't buy the concept that a still lens set cost is 5K euros and the same in a CineStyle housing is X6... I could pay x2, but this is outrageous...

And its not only Letaral CA... is heavy flare, very bad bokeh (Vaseline look), crazy fringing that makes you to shoot at F4 most of the time... so please I can't understand the hype...

[Evin Grant]

I try to be as impartial as possible when reviewing these lenses, that being said I have always maintained that the good Nikon MF glass is every bit as good if not better than the ZFs. The ZF barrels are a little nicer for cinema (The CPs way better) but optically the ZFs are only on par with other top line still glass, hell, I'd take the Nikon 85mm 1.4 over the ZF any day and especially the new Nano coat f2.8 zooms (14-24 & 24-70) they even take the Optimos to school!

[Roberto Lequeux]

But if you are working on an big project you can't justify risking money on wonderful glass with short focus throws.

I am very exited for the Noctilux clip to finish downloading, Belvedere Schloss Palace looks a million times better than it did when shot with the super sharp Canon 10mm-??mm zoom. Leica lenses do look gorgeous.

Evin, I like the idea of being able to get a great deal and know that I need to do a little correction here and there. Bu wouldn't you agree that when RPPs promise to have zero CA and all the other numbers, that it will be hard not to go with them?

Unless of course come NAB I don't see a single posts talking about character, feeling, and other higher class of adjectives...

Either way, Evangelos, you might agree that a "better" image in 5 takes is not the same as a "great" image in 2.

[Jamon Lewis]

Sajin is it the same mount for the Leica "M" & "R" lenses?

[David W. Jones]

Different mount.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Sajin is it the same mount for the Leica "M" & "R" lenses?

No there are two different mounts, one for Leica-M (register 27.80mm) and another for Leica-R (register 47.00mm) lenses.

Register = distance flange to film or sensor plane>>> (http://www.markerink.org/WJM/HTML/mounts.htm)

Have a look at the pictures below:

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/Leica_IMSmounts_01.JPG
Leica-M mount on the left and Leica-R mount on the right side of the picture.

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/Leica_IMSmounts_02.JPG
Leica-M mount on the left and Leica-R mount on the right side of the picture.

[Roberto Lequeux]

I had seen that 0.95 Leica a long time ago.

Why can't someone grab all the best lenses and put them in Cine barrels?

Has Leica ever put out cine lenses?

Can't Zeiss copy their FF35 stuff?

What gives?

[Sanjin Jukic]

I had seen that 0.95 Leica a long time ago.



Have you ever seen the older test with Noctilux f/1.0 Made in Canada

LINK>>> (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/Leica_Noctilux_50mm_f(1)_720p_h264.mov)

[Jamon Lewis]

Thanx Sanjin... What's the highest resolution you can get from each, what format are they? If you had to choose "M" or "R" which would you choose or is there any difference besides the mount? I love Leica lenses, they have such character....

[Georg]

I'm not too much into "RED" and my last post disappeared, so here's a second try to correct some statements made here and to open your eyes to a different perspective:

The Zeiss ZF-lenses are not the most advanced designs Zeiss is known for, because they were designed to sell at lower prices and to be manufactured by Cosina (no complex CNC-grinded asphericals...). I'm not sure how well they will perform but optical performances depends also on tolerances and manufacturing. As far as I know, they share lens design, but they manufacture the lens-elements themselves. The Apo/Asph designs by Leica set the standard quality-wise in 35mm-photography, over the past 2 decades they developed new technologies and designs and they're all manufactured in Solms by Leica.
Japanese lenses are not longer sold under the Leica-brand (Sanjin's 24mm R was a Minolta-design and one of the weakest performers in the R-System) and the Varios of the last decade were also Leica-designs and manufactured by Leica (70-180, 2,8/35-70, 28-90, 21-35). Leica also invests more money into the development of their S-System than any MF-manufacturer before - which has nothing to do with the quesitonable strategy to offer Leica-branded Panasonic-cameras...

"Made in Germany" (just like "Swiss Made" for example) is not about the country itself, it's about a certain philosophy in design and manufacturing which propably later led into a certain mentality.
But basically it's a well-developed infrastructure, a long-history of engineering and very strict environmental & social principles/laws and a special educational system (below academic grades you'll have to learn a certain "practical" and specialized job usually in the company for over 3 years).
It may seem inflexible and expensive, but it simply "promotes" long-sighted thinking. You cut costs on ergonomic working conditions -> you'll loose a well-trained (you invested into his education in your company) worker because of backpain paid by insurance you've paid for. You cannot use workers for simple work-tasks instead you're investing into extensive machines/automation...

Some "German" companies became multinational cooperations (shareholder-value driven) and used their good name to sell "not-so-German"-quality (mostly made in Eastern Europe or Asia) but back on-topic (lenses) to companies like Carl Zeiss, Leica or Arri which are more typical "German":

The Carl Zeiss Foundation owns 100% of the Carl Zeiss AG and Schott AG. It's huge and invests several hundred million Euros into new technologies every year. It's the world-market-leader for many optical devices, not just cine-lenses but also lithographic equipment, they just invested a half billion $ into a new facility in Oberkochen.
The small town Oberkochen is basically Zeiss with several thousand employees, highly-trained with experience over many decades and also contains cine-lens manufacturing in the most advanced facility for lenses worldwide.
Carl Zeiss was once focused on Jena, a town in East Germany. But the Russians destroyed the remained infrastructure, took machines and invested barely anything over the last fourty years after WW2 - in the last two decades, the government and also Zeiss tried to reestablish Jena and the other parts of East Germany, but it still isn't on par with the western side. So be careful about Russian lenses, I've experienced their thinking about investing, technology and quality, working conditions myself...
It's also the machines, tools, measurement and mechanical engineering overall that's coming from Germany.
The Master Primes are a good example for "Made in Germany" / "German Engineering" and they set the standard for photographic lenses, their manufacturing, technology and optical quality is second to none.

I don't know if this is also true to the new compact series, but Carl Zeiss is more than just a brand name, making good cine-lenses is a very demanding task only very few companies in the world are capable of and it's not a coincidence that besides the two "legends" Zeiss and Leica, many smaller optical companies are coming from the same country. We also know very little about the "Rebel"-primes by IBE, it's just a small company from Germany only known for industrial lenses till know (and not Schott or Schneider) but it would simply make very little sense to trick customers with underperforming stuff "made in Germany", there are other places in this world to do that....

In the end, you'll have to find out for yourself, but manufacturing quality, especially lenses is not as easy as todays business-people try to sell it...
Be careful about all the new brands trying to sell you "innovative", "ground-breaking", "revolutionary" lens-sets for "just" a few ten thousand dollars...

[david farland]

Cheers Georg,
thanks for your well constructed summary of German lens manufacturers...very much appreciated.

D

[Curran Giddens]

Thanks Georg!

well written and very informative.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Thanks Georg for your explanation about German made lenses...

BTW, I did one more "quick & dirty" short footage test to show how 50 years old Carl Zeiss lens is still making a beautiful images today on RED1.

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/CarlZeisOlympia180mm01.JPG
Shot with legendary Carl Zeiss Jena Olympia Sonnar 180mm (Nikon F mount) on RED1.

http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/IMS-_Zeiss_Olympia_180mm_02.jpg
Legendary Carl Zeiss Jena Olympia Sonnar 180mm (Nikon F mount).

Download "quick & dirty" test footage shot with legendary Carl Zeiss Jena Olympia Sonnar 180mm (Nikon F mount) on RED1>>> (http://homepage.mac.com/sanjinjukic/RED/CarlZeissOlympia180mm01.mov)


Thanx Sanjin... What's the highest resolution you can get from each, what format are they? If you had to choose "M" or "R" which would you choose or is there any difference besides the mount? I love Leica lenses, they have such character....

Jamon,

if I understood your question well then Leica-R and Leica-M are both FF35 that means can deliver very high resolution within that film or sensor size frame (36mmx24mm).

[Mike Prevette]

"don't feed the troll"

Back on topic please.

[Phil Jordan]

The Germans can't compete anymore on price for the same quality. Why did Zeiss go to Cosina to make Zeiss lenses? If Zeiss goes to Japan it makes sense that the rest of us would to.

[Evin Grant]

Of course Japan is now turning to China and Thailand because even their own labor pool is too expensive to compete.

[chuck colburn]

Have you ever seen the older test with Noctilux f/1.0 Made in Canada

LINK>>> (http://www.purgatorymagazine.com/_downloads/lenstests/Leica_Noctilux_50mm_f(1)_720p_h264.mov)

There was also an 85 and 55m f1.2 made by Zeiss in Germany for the Contax mount. Somewhat rare and pricy but alot cheaper then "Speed" cine lenses.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Contax-85mm-1-2-Planar-Lens-50-Years-Edt-50-f1-2-Zeiss_W0QQitemZ250394946455QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCame ra_Lenses?hash=item250394946455&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C 240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%

http://cgi.ebay.com/CONTAX-Planar-55mm-F1-2-Limited-lens-Super-Rare-Mint_W0QQitemZ270376291125QQcmdZViewItemQQptZCamer a_Lenses?hash=item270376291125&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C 240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A

[David Mullen ASC]

Why can't someone grab all the best lenses and put them in Cine barrels?

Has Leica ever put out cine lenses?


Panavision Primo lenses are made from Leica glass.

Conversion of still lenses to cinema lenses is expensive per unit -- it's not the same thing as changing the mount out. There have been companies like Optex and Century Precision Optics that have been converting still camera lenses for years, but usually I just hear about Canons, sometimes Nikons, being converted for some reason. Maybe because Zeiss already makes cinema lenses.

[David Mullen ASC]

I have shot quite a bit, certainly nowhere as much as you, but I've never reached for a calculator.

Maybe you should... :) I keep one next to the computer. The conversions are very simple IF you have the specs, but as I said, it requires knowing the recorded areas of the sensors, not the sensor size itself. But since most prime lens sets come in jumps of focal lengths, rough calculations are usually good enough, that and experience -- i.e. it depends on what you are most used to shooting. If you shoot 35mm cine all the time, you know what an 18mm looks and feels like, so you can imagine getting the same look with a 27mm lens on a FF35 camera.

Yes, when planning a feature, it's always hard to know if you need a certain super wide-angle or telephoto. I put them on my rental package, generally only to have to drop them when the budget gets cut. But since I shoot with rented equipment, if I find that the director likes to use something wider than 18mm, like a 16mm, then I adjust the package, maybe dropping a lens at the other end of the scale to compensate. Or I plan on picking up those rarely-used focal lengths on the day only.

With a still camera, you can shoot location photos with certain focal lengths and get a sense of what is needed.

Though personally, I find that 18mm and wider in the 35mm cine formats is distinctively "wide-angle" so it becomes a stylistic decision to use them. I'd rather not put on a super wide-angle lens just to get a wide shot in a room because it looks distorted, unless that's part of the look of the project. Truth is that I favor the middle focal lengths whenever possible, they may be "boring" but they look natural and unforced.

After a day of shooting on a feature, the director and DP get a good sense of what each lens is giving them in terms of view and look.

[david farland]

"don't feed the troll"
Back on topic please.

It's not the trolls that annoy me.... but the breathtaking ignorance of the faithful!

D

[Roberto Lequeux]

Maybe you should... :)

Aghhg... you are making me dizzy David! :beer:

That's what I will have a good DP for. I wouldn't trust myself to remember equations, not when my head is filled with story points and so on. I just need to understand your craft enough to be able to have the most productive exchange possible in order to be able to tell the story to its fullest while moving at a good pace.


If you shoot 35mm cine all the time, you know what an 18mm looks and feels like, so you can imagine getting the same look with a 27mm lens on a FF35 camera.

Yes, this is why I am trying to ingest as much clips and grabs as possible. The more second nature focal lengths become the better. I always noticed the effect focal lengths have on the feel of a shot. It is not just about the composition, movement and placement of the camera, and there is also the all important eyeline... and it is all about the sum of the parts, though really it all comes down to the contrast. Contrast between the rest of the shots in the scene, directly related scenes, and ultimately also with un-related scenes.

I keep saying to myself that everything is about contrast.


With a still camera, you can shoot location photos with certain focal lengths and get a sense of what is needed.

Yes, I am planning on doing this. It will be so much fun. I've been up there twice now for scouting and other production related things. I will need to go up there again, and again, and I'll try to get myself a DSLR with a FF35 sensor. I'll take my time and figure out the math for to crop accordingly, for 5k once those numbers are out. Then I thought about edit a photo and opening it up on the camera's screen so I can mark it with tape as close as possible.


Though personally, I find that 18mm and wider in the 35mm cine formats is distinctively "wide-angle" so it becomes a stylistic decision to use them. I'd rather not put on a super wide-angle lens just to get a wide shot in a room because it looks distorted, unless that's part of the look of the project. Truth is that I favor the middle focal lengths whenever possible, they may be "boring" but they look natural and unforced.

I am very concerned with this, however it may work very well for those pivotal scenes. This is one of the things I am eager to discuss with a DP once we lock one in. We will still have the issue of making it look natural in a few smaller scenes, early in the story where "things" haven't happened yet and all should be "normal".

So even if we were able to shoot 6k FF35, we would still need a BIG living room, or at least one set in a sound stage. Once built we would have the freedom of moving walls and ceiling for the other scene happening in the same room.

I am very grateful for you patience and everyone else's. I hope you can understand now why I am so unrelenting. I feel that the more I discuss with DPs the more efficient I will become as a director.

That said... I did not know Primos had Leica glass! that makes sense... Panavision's ideology lines up with that perfectly. Too bad nobody else has done it... could it be that they have a non-compete contract preventing Leica from providing glass to other companies?

[Sanjin Jukic]

It's not the trolls that annoy me.... but the breathtaking ignorance of the faithful!

D

"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions.

Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you, too,

can become great."

Mark Twain

[Roberto Lequeux]

While I agree that the thread is a bit off topic, I also believe that discussion of FF35 alternatives in not far off subject. After all this is the first real Cine solution available for FF35. That makes this the first discussion where DSLR lenses can be "put to the test".

Maybe if the pictures were not embedded and he only posted links it wouldn't feel so bad?

:grouphug:

[Sanjin Jukic]

"If you are going through hell, keep going." :sifone:

- Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

[Jamon Lewis]

It's not the trolls that annoy me.... but the breathtaking ignorance of the faithful!

D

Who is this directed to?

[Sanjin Jukic]

"A man can't be too careful in the choice of his enemies." :rofl:

- Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)

[David Rasberry]

Hate to break it to you man, but alot of Leica lenses are made in Japan by Kyocera, old Minolta, and even Sigma.

You gotta be careful when you bring up Leica now adays. the M lenses are like no other, but currently, 90% of product that carries a Leica badge now is manufactured in Japan, specially given the relationship with Panasonic.


Let you know that first that Leica professional lenses are all Made in Germany (Solms), then some of them were Made in Canada (Elcan) and some of Leica consumer lenses still are Made in Japan (a deal with Panasonic).

Cosina apparently bought Leica in 2001. Do they still own them? They may be producing the Panasonic/Leica series.

[Sanjin Jukic]

"Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names." :nads:

- John F. Kennedy (1917-1963)

[david farland]

Who is this directed to?

don't worry, not you....anyone who ignores Georg's common sense statements and buys on hype, not critical technical analysis!

D

[Jamon Lewis]

:thumbsup:

[Roberto Lequeux]

So would a lot of you agree that this might be a last minute way to throw something into the game before too much of NAB09 money gets spent?

[Evin Grant]

You mean the Compact Primes? No. I believe that Zeiss saw a ripe market for prime lenses below the cost of their current products and created a set the best way they could.
I know for a fact they made prototypes using the Super Speed lens formulas but without lead the glass just didn't have the necessary quality to make it work. Designing from the ground up certainly was an option but would probably have put the price back into the UP range. So this is the compromise, and I think it's a valid one because the new cameras with full frame sensors will need cinema barreled lenses.
But these lenses are by no means "Thrown" at anything.

[Roberto Lequeux]

I see. It makes sense the way you put it Evin. Thanks. Just to clarify, by no means do I consider the compacts "thrown together". CA or not there are decades of knowledge put into them.

So this type of CA visible on the 28mm, which is supposed to be one of their better lenses... how manageable is it?

I've tried correcting CA in Photoshop various times, but I just grab the dials and move them while taking a close look at what they do under tons of magnification. Some times it works and it goes away almost completely, some times there is no dial that can make it go away.

Also, I remember that faster non-macro 50mm shot which showed insane amounts of CA, but I would seem with T2.1 that they are using the glass from the "slower" macro 50mm which is a different beast.

[Evin Grant]

Here's a 5 min fix I did in photoshop...
http://www.evingrant.com/pics/CAfix.jpg

I used two tools (no painting) just the lateral CA fix in the lens correction filter and a very narrow range global desaturation of the slight purple tone. The blue in the rest of the watch was not affected. I'm not an AE guy but I think both of these tools are available in CS4.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Slick as a whistle. Not perfect but I guess you can get it 100% clean with a little more time.
If only RED Cine had them built in so you could fix them right there. Could it be automated or would the settings need to be applied on a shot by shot basis?

[Evin Grant]

You would do this in your DI or FX pass. You would not want the rendering overhead on all your frames because the vast majority wouldn't suffer from any CA at all.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Yes, the program wouldn't have a way to detect this.

Technically, could they be fixed with the same settings or would they have to be done one by one anyway?

[Evin Grant]

Really depends on the shot, the lens and the CA.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Yea, I guess each prime would give you different CA and zooms would do the same. Thanks Evin.

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

Here's a 5 min fix I did in photoshop...

I used two tools (no painting) just the lateral CA fix in the lens correction filter and a very narrow range global desaturation of the slight purple tone. The blue in the rest of the watch was not affected. I'm not an AE guy but I think both of these tools are available in CS4.

Ervin why, on god sakes, you thing that anyone would buy a 40K lens set and expect to clean on every shoot CA with after effect?

The lenses are good for low cost (below 12K) but with 40K I can buy two RED Pro sets... or I can buy the Optars or much better the 1.3 Elites MKIII which they are beautiful... ask Weirdcrew for that... they are like Cookes S4... Or even to make a set of the anamorphic Elites...

In the Zeiss set the bad ones are 25mm, 50mm, 85mm... so if you see that CA with 28mm which is quite decent, then with the others you have to stop down to F4 to be JUST acceptable...

To much arrogance, with this market mix, is a recipe to corporate suicide...

This applies for ARRI, Cooke, P+S, Zeiss, Sony, Fujinon etc...

Ervin, nothing personal...

[Matthew Duclos]

So would a lot of you agree that this might be a last minute way to throw something into the game before too much of NAB09 money gets spent?

They saw what I was doing to their ZF lenses and wanted to take a crack at it.
Except, they went the whole nine yards. Good for them.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Everyone is after you Duclos... what's next after the Tokina? Have you posted a pic and grabs?

aha... I guess you have :)

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

Shouldn't you guys sleeping at this hour? its almost three o'clock in the morning in LA...

To much hype from NAB I guess...

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I was teching a low budget feature last week that was using the ZFs. They are plenty sharp and since the finish is monochrome what little CA there is will be pretty hard to pick out even if you're looking for it.

The bottom line is that the lens market is in serious upheaval and Zeiss is trying to adapt and survive. I share the perception that the compact primes are a tough value proposition - will the Zeiss name and the terrific ergonomics be enough to justify their cost? Maybe, but how much of the market lives in that middle ground? Low budget indies and owner/ops might flinch at the cost and the folks that rent will likely stay with the higher end UPs, MPs, S4s, Optimos, etc.

The real wild card is the RPPs. If they are as good as advertised (particularly WFO where the grip package starved indies find themselves far too often), if Jim can undercut on price and deliver in quantity then the Red Pro Primes should clean house - Zeiss prestige notwithstanding.

[Blair S. Paulsen]

(snip)
Ervin, nothing personal...

ERRRR, I think its Evin.

BTW, do you pronounce your name Evan-jealous?

I kid, I kid. :beer:

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

ERRRR, I think its Evin.

BTW, do you pronounce your name Evan-jealous?

I kid, I kid. :beer:

Thats a good one... :) hahaha... nothing to jealous about...:thumbsup: for lens am a client...

I totally agree with you... am a bit more straight and bland...