New Arri/fuji Zooms

[jonnycom]

Very nice glass. Both 2.6 one 18-80 and one 45-250 both $20k each
also a new Master Prime 12mm

[Matt Gottshalk]

Link?

[jonnycom]

no links but got a few pics...

[Sanjin Jukic]

Probably we should thank to Michael Bravin about this ARRI/Fujinon zoom (name) deal !!???

Curious and just waiting for NAB to know which name can get brand new set of Leica's Mystery Primes !!!???

[jonnycom]

The 45-250 was sweet, I will buy one as soon as they let me. Bravin said they will only be sold with the cameras initially.

As far as the Leica Mystery Primo's they could have gone to Panavision and cut a logo deal.

Speaking of PV if they don't start selling glass and accessories soon....... how do you type the emoticon for your fingers going across your throat?

[Evin Grant]

Love that 45-200, gotta have it!

[Jeff Kilgroe]

The new Fuji zooms look great. And priced nicely too. The 18-80 is less than half the price of the Optimo 17-80... 45-200, drool.

Initially being sold only with the new cameras? REALLY? meh.....

[Nathan Garofalos]

Thats pretty bad ass...

[Tom.Wong]

are these the fastest 35 mm zooms made? or are there faster ones? Optically it's not possible to get zooms like this too much faster correct?

[Nathan Garofalos]

are these the fastest 35 mm zooms made? or are there faster ones? Optically it's not possible to get zooms like this too much faster correct?

No, there are faster zooms. The Angenieux 17- 80 T2.2 (F2).
http://www.angenieux.com/?rub=42&art=44

[Steven Parker]

Yeah, but that 45-250 showed absolutely NO breathing. NONE. Thru the whole range.

I thought the Fujinon 18-85 was sweet. I mean, it is sweet... but man, those Aluras....

[Ryan S]

are these the fastest 35 mm zooms made? or are there faster ones? Optically it's not possible to get zooms like this too much faster correct?

There's a Fujinon 18-85 T2.0, a Cooke 15-40 T2.0, a few others.

[Scott Webster]

Group buy on the 45-250 anyone?

[Vladimir Eugene]

Group buy on the 45-250 anyone?

I'm in

[Evin Grant]

Me too, but I doubt Arri/Fujinon will be in a position to supply a group buy for some time :(

[Tom.Wong]

and at 20k a pop it's actually not a bad deal, even if you get both lenses, it's still cheaper than the optimo 24-290 :)

[Scott Webster]

Me too, but I doubt Arri/Fujinon will be in a position to supply a group buy for some time :(

I expect you're right Evin. But I live in hope for a 'Mitch Gross, have I got a deal for you post!' :sifone:

[Steve Gibby]

Here's a link to an article about the lenses, with a group pic of them: http://dv.com/article/93702

Basically the article is the same as the press release that Fujinon put out about the lenses

[Scott Webster]

Hey Steve, Different glass. The lenses we are referring to are 'Alura' being sold by Arri.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=577906&postcount=3 (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=577906&postcount=3)

Seem to be a separate line to the Fujinon set you linked to.

[Steve Gibby]

Yup, different line of lenses...there should be some info somewhere. A few quick Bing searches for them turned up nothing yet.

[Mitch Gross]

I expect you're right Evin. But I live in hope for a 'Mitch Gross, have I got a deal for you post!' :sifone:

You're gonna have to give us a little time on that one.

[Evin Grant]

Mitch, any clue when these zooms will be available without an Alexa?
I need the 45-250 yesterday ;)

[Mitch Gross]

I'm sure that ARRI doesn't even know that yet. First they will see how the initial rollout with Alexa goes.

[Sanjin Jukic]

I'm sure that ARRI doesn't even know that yet. First they will see how the initial rollout with Alexa goes.

Everything is in the hands of lens maker, at this case in the hands of Fujinon similar like it is with Carl Zeiss in the case of Master Primes.

Arri just giving its additional name that helps more to market and sell faster all those lenses.

[Mitch Gross]

Hey Sanjin, I didn't realize that you had a copy of the contracts between ARRI and Fujinon. Wanna point me to the paragraph that states this?

[Matthew Duclos]

Hey Sanjin, I didn't realize that you had a copy of the contracts between ARRI and Fujinon. Wanna point me to the paragraph that states this?

lol

I have officially decided these lenses shall be called Zeinon (Zeiss-Fujinon).

[Michael Bravin]

lol

I have officially decided these lenses shall be called Zeinon (Zeiss-Fujinon).


Officially they're called Alura and we'll have to check with Sanjin for the details.

[Vladimir Eugene]

Officially they're called Alura and we'll have to check with Sanjin for the details.

Are these very different performance wise the the new line of Fujinon zooms?

[Vladimir Eugene]

18-80 T2.6 vs 18-85 T2.0 ? I know they're priced very diffently

[Michael Bravin]

Mitch, any clue when these zooms will be available without an Alexa?
I need the 45-250 yesterday ;)

18-80 June, 45-250 July. These are roughly coinciding with Alexa deliveries.

Evin, you shoulda taken the lens we had at the DGA yesterday.

[Michael Bravin]

Are these very different performance wise the the new line of Fujinon zooms?

-1 stop
size
weight
cost

Let's wait till Evin can test them.

[Sanjin Jukic]

Hey Sanjin, I didn't realize that you had a copy of the contracts between ARRI and Fujinon. Wanna point me to the paragraph that states this?

Hi Mitch,

unfortunately at the moment I "lost" somewhere that contract :laugh:

but normally you don't need to be a "rocket scientist" to find out how it would look that sort of deal in details.

At the beginning Fujinon anyway had preliminary specs that were subject to change for its PL Zooms.

So if you needed affordable (zooms) they are able to make it.

At the end all it's just matter of a deal to build any of "strategic relationships".



Officially they're called Alura and we'll have to check with Sanjin for the details.

For sure Michael we get them only when they are available :laugh:

[Evin Grant]

I'm in Louisiana on a TV series right now but I'd be happy to give them a shake down if you can get them out here :) PM me Michael.

[Michael Bravin]

Hi Mitch,

unfortunately at the moment I "lost" somewhere that contract :laugh:

but normally you don't need to be a "rocket scientist" to find out how it would look that sort of deal in details.

At the beginning Fujinon anyway had preliminary specs that were subject to change for its PL Zooms.

So if you needed affordable (zooms) they are able to make it.

At the end all it's just matter of a deal to build any of "strategic relationships".




For sure Michael we get them only when they are available :laugh:



The rocket scientists know that ARRI and ZEISS worked closely in the design criteria and development as well as sales and marketing on the ARRI/ZEISS lenses, the same relationship exists with FUJINON and the ARRI/FUJINON Alura zooms. I can never understand why people dont just ask.

[Cüneyt Kaya]

any arri/fujinon primes in the pipeline?
thanks

[Sanjin Jukic]

The rocket scientists know that ARRI and ZEISS worked closely in the design criteria and development as well as sales and marketing on the ARRI/ZEISS lenses, the same relationship exists with FUJINON and the ARRI/FUJINON Alura zooms. I can never understand why people dont just ask.

Michael,

If you would ask on the Internet for that particular question then you'll get the following answer:

"While Arri manufactures and designs its own motion picture cameras, lenses are supplied by the Carl Zeiss group,

unlike its rival Panavision which manufactures both its own cameras and lenses for exclusive use with each other."

LINK>>>

Also it's well known that Schneider-Kreuznach was supplying 35mm and 16mm cine lenses for ARRI cameras.

ARRI do not and can't design cine lenses but in cooperation with several optical companies (Schneider-Kreuznach [past], Carl Zeiss [current], Fujinon [current])

ARRI made specified requests to the optical companies that were doing cine lens optical and mechanical design.

Btw, also you claimed a couple months ago that so called Mystery Primes can't be named Leica, etc...,

but now we know that thy have RED dot logo with Leica name on or something similar like my new avatar.

[Mitch Gross]

If you would ask on the Internet for that particular question then you'll get the following answer:

The problem is that you believe everything posted on the internet.

[Sanjin Jukic]

The problem is that you believe everything posted on the internet.

Mitch,

I would say it's just the opposite:

Because you believe that "I believe everything posted on the internet".

That could be a real problem here but not me.

[Tim Duran]

I never thought I would be able to add some important facts on these lenses that have not already been posted by the likes of Matt and Steve, but here's the dirt I was given right from the competing booths. Arri/Fuginon is well priced because the deal was Arri wanted to have lenses in that market price-point. To get it, their lens will not go to 5K, whereas the Fuginon does. Further, although the glass is good, according to my source, it doesn't match the Fuginon at four times the price. And of course the Fuginon is T2. This is why Fuginon agreed to co-op with ARRI, to produce a very good, but not as good, as the Rolls Royce. So what about Angenieux you ask? Angenieux is only 4K as well, but they are working on a modification that they hope to have out within the next 60 days. Along with the 5K upgrade, there is a new collar design for the 24-290. (This inut is just a token of my appreciation of all the info so many of you have showed to all use other Redusers.)

[Tim Duran]

Forgot something. I was told the Fuginon comes in at 50 lbs!!

[Jim Elias]

Forgot something. I was told the Fuginon comes in at 50 lbs!!

Fif-teen, not fif-ty :-)

http://www.fujinon.com/DigitalCinema/Product.aspx?cat=1053&id=1200

[Michael Bravin]

ARRI made specified requests to the optical companies that were doing cine lens optical and mechanical design.

This is correct...made to spec


Btw, also you claimed a couple months ago that so called Mystery Primes can't be named Leica, etc...,

I SPECIFICALLY claimed that they were not made by Leica Camera, which of course they are not. They are made by CW-Sonderoptic and branded with your Avatar :banghead:

[Sanjin Jukic]

This is correct...made to spec



I SPECIFICALLY claimed that they were not made by Leica Camera, which of course they are not. They are made by CW-Sonderoptic and branded with your Avatar :banghead:

Michael,

as you know maybe even better than me that both companies CW-Sonderoptic (http://cw-sonderoptic.de/index.html) and Leica Camera AG (http://us.leica-camera.com/home/) are owed at 96% by Dr.Andreas Kaufmann.

Also he mentioned once I think in this video (http://www.bandpro.com/309/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=99:mysterylenses&catid=3:news-a-events&Itemid=37) that it costs him about 10 million dolars (or Euros) to develop and produce those lenses.

[Francis Demarco]

18-80 T2.6 vs 18-85 T2.0 ? I know they're priced very diffently

I tried to compare the two Fuji wide angle at the show. It may be not fare because one was on Alexa and the other on F35. They seem to be different optics. The 18-85 was more nutral and was very sharp on the F35. I would buy that lens right away if I had 85k$ in my pocket. The 18-80 was sharp but had more flare in the red. Arri was smart to have a model dressed in blue, so the red was not showing up first, but when I looked at the background I could see some red flare. Fuji may have use less glass in the Alura lenses. I would like to see how that lens matches with the Arri primes, they have a tendancy to be more blue then the Cooke primes.
The price/performance level of the 18-80 Alura is more comparable to the 18-85 Red zoom.

[Evin Grant]

I'm probably the only poster here to have actually used a prototype 18-85 fujinon on a Red. I can tell you it's an eye opening experience. I would almost say it's too sharp. As for 5K coverage, my personal opinion is that really won't be as big an issues as it's being made out to be. Once you factor in engineering space, look around and the crop factor for 16:9 or 2.40:1 you're pretty much back at S35 imaging circles. If you're a big 2:1 fan you might want to consider some wider coverage lenses but only time and a shipping Epic will be able to tell us for sure.

[Sanjin Jukic]

I'm probably the only poster here to have actually used a prototype 18-85 fujinon on a Red. I can tell you it's an eye opening experience. I would almost say it's too sharp. As for 5K coverage, my personal opinion is that really won't be as big an issues as it's being made out to be. Once you factor in engineering space, look around and the crop factor for 16:9 or 2.40:1 you're pretty much back at S35 imaging circles. If you're a big 2:1 fan you might want to consider some wider coverage lenses but only time and a shipping Epic will be able to tell us for sure.

But three are some relatively cheap photo zooms that can I pretty sure compete with a sharpness of those new Fujinons and also can cover 5K without any problem:

Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM (http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/telezoom/120-300mm.htm)

http://www.jetzone2000.com/map_pictures/lenstest_120300/img_9458_std.jpg
Shot with Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG

See more huge and crisp blow-ups in this review>>> (http://www.jetzone2000.com/5_art_lenstest_sigma120300_2.htm)

Also I'm sure that Nikon version can be converted to PL mount very easy.

[Evin Grant]

Optically many photo lenses are up to the challenge, the 14-24, 24-70 and the new 70-200 Nikkor come to mind. But they are not cinema lenses are not suitable for professional production like the new Alura lenses. The mechanics of these lenses are really where the expense is, and the time saved in production is worth every penny.

Now before I get flamed as a Hollywood snob understand that with enough time for each setup you can use almost any lens, but when you've got 2-3 cameras working 50+ setups a day on a TV show or movie your camera assistants are not going to be able to use the abbreviated focus scales of still lenses, regardless of the optics. In serious film and TV production time is money and money is everything.

[Emmanuel Cambier]

So basicaly, those lenses won't cover 5k ??

[kevin N]

Optically many photo lenses are up to the challenge, the 14-24, 24-70 and the new 70-200 Nikkor come to mind. But they are not cinema lenses are not suitable for professional production like the new Alura lenses. The mechanics of these lenses are really where the expense is, and the time saved in production is worth every penny.

Now before I get flamed as a Hollywood snob understand that with enough time for each setup you can use almost any lens, but when you've got 2-3 cameras working 50+ setups a day on a TV show or movie your camera assistants are not going to be able to use the abbreviated focus scales of still lenses, regardless of the optics. In serious film and TV production time is money and money is everything.

great comments evin. it's painful watching some movies lately with 50 percent of the shots out of focus. this might sound harsh but if the dp is shooting at 1.3 all day long, he doesn't understand how to light. lenses don't perform well wide open and focus pullers are obviously not getting the shots. (by the way, i always thought primos were made by leica in ontario, canada.)

[Evin Grant]

(by the way, i always thought primos were made by leica in ontario, canada.)

The lens elements for Primos are fabricated by ELCAN, which stands for Ernst Leitz Canada and used to be a subsidiary of Leica that made many optics for Leica cameras, industrial instruments and the military. I believe they are now part of Raytheon.

However the design and assembly of Primos are done by Panavision themselves.

[Gary Ploj]

Optically many photo lenses are up to the challenge, the 14-24, 24-70 and the new 70-200 Nikkor come to mind. But they are not cinema lenses are not suitable for professional production like the new Alura lenses. The mechanics of these lenses are really where the expense is, and the time saved in production is worth every penny.

Now before I get flamed as a Hollywood snob understand that with enough time for each setup you can use almost any lens, but when you've got 2-3 cameras working 50+ setups a day on a TV show or movie your camera assistants are not going to be able to use the abbreviated focus scales of still lenses, regardless of the optics. In serious film and TV production time is money and money is everything.

Very good point...most don't understand this.