An Examination of Cooke iPanchros. a Review.

[Timur Civan]

Cooke Panchros (http://timurcivan.blogspot.com/2011/04/examination-of-lenses-part-ii-cooke.html)

On the heels of my write up on the Varotal 18-100, i present, the Cooke Panchros....

Enjoy.

[Steven-Marc C.]

Great review, thanks !

Do they have matching front diameters ?

[Timur Civan]

most of them do.

The 18mm is 110mm, the rest are 87mm.

[Sven Seynaeve]

Thanks a lot Timur for this review. I was looking everywhere for this and couldn't find.
You did a great job on it.

[Christopher Barrett]

Nice work, Timur. I've been thinking about picking up the Duclos wide zoom to go with my Panchros. How well do those intercut?

[Timur Civan]

:) you tell me.....


http://vimeo.com/22011939

hah, in reality the Cookes are far sharper. The Duclos is cooler and a tad soft wide open.

[Evin Grant]

Have you had a chance to try them with the Optimo DPs (Rouges) I'm curious how they compare since they are both primary candidates for 3D work.

[Peter Mosiman]

This is really nice Timur. Really helpful reviews. Can't wait for the next iteration.

Cheers!

[Timur Civan]

Have you had a chance to try them with the Optimo DPs (Rouges) I'm curious how they compare since they are both primary candidates for 3D work.

I actually jsut had a chance to intercut the two.

I think the Angenieux's cut with cooke, better than the Cookes cut with Zeiss.

The angenieux's flare more, but the color and "feel" is closer.

[AnthonyFlores]

Nice review man. I had kind of given up on these based on Mark's comments about them being a bit too soft (in his opinion) for the Epic, but
you're making me reconsider.

Anthony

[Timur Civan]

Cookes too soft? interesting opinion, but i disagree. They resolve way more information than you need for the big screen. Then again, some people prefer the sterile perfection of Master Primes. I just worked MP's and they left me flat. Personal taste.

[AnthonyFlores]

Yes, but to qualify he was talking about the S4's and them perhaps not being the ideal pairing for the Epic. However, in that same thread Mark also said they did a feature on the Panchros and had nothing but great things to say about them. He's not anti-Cooke, and as you know, lenses are often largely an issue of preference.

Anthony

[Stephen Williams]

Yes, but to qualify he was talking about the S4's and them perhaps not being the ideal pairing for the Epic. However, in that same thread Mark also said they did a feature on the Panchros and had nothing but great things to say about them. He's not anti-Cooke, and as you know, lenses are often largely an issue of preference.

Anthony

A huge no of high budget Hollywood movies have been shot using S4's, seems like an odd thing to say.

[Sidney L. Plaut]

I his defence, I think he was just referring to the Epic and cookes, not cooke in general. - based on what he saw in his D.I theater, he thought they looked soft compared to UP.

[AnthonyFlores]

A huge no of high budget Hollywood movies have been shot using S4's, seems like an odd thing to say.

Well, again he acknowledged it was a matter of preference ... but not sure if samples of S4 + Epic ever got posted. Here's one post with comments:


We are just wrapping a feature on MX with the Panchros - and I have to say - I REALLY like them - they are like "baby S4s" - and on a lens projector - they are VERY similar to the S4s but much smaller and lighter - but honestly, I like sharper glass for EPIC. I would buy the 2-lens set of Rouges over 6 Cookes for EPIC - but that's just me.

I have Cookes S4s are coming back from a job in a week or so - I'll post examples of the sharpness/falloff and you can judge for yourself.

Anyway, at the end of the day -- doesn't really matter. It's splitting hairs and only people like us can really tell the difference at this level, typically not the audience.

I think many filmmakers would be pretty happy with the Epic + Cooke combination, and I'm sure OffHollywood will rent them to any DP who wants to use them together :)

Anthony

[Timur Civan]

Naturally its preference. I honestly like a softer more organic image. The hyper surreal sharpness of the MX sensor without diffusion infront of the lens is far too much information for me. I always use, as we say in NYC, "Schmutz" in front of the lens. Aka a diffusion filter.

I mean, pores look bad in 1080p.... they are terrifying in 5k.

[Robert Horwell]

TOO SOFT??....NOOOOOOO.....the Panchros look amazing on the MX sensor. Do not stop thinking about buying a set of these lenses based on a comment. Test them yourself, i can guarantee you will be very happy. They are pin sharp, soft is not the right word for the FEELING/ EMOTION that the panchros have, and as well all know it is largely to do with the lovely gentle fall off, and the quality and color of the optics. Cookes are not soft lenses. Let me say it again NOT SOFT. Aesthetics, semantics.......

[Antoine Fabi]

I agree,

from what i've seen so far...

SMOOTH AND RICH, BUT NOT SOFT.

Antoine

[John Fairstein]

Thank you Timur, this thread is very informative.

[Erich Ocean]

I also own the new Panchro and they are not soft. Smooth, creamy, rich, expensive looking images? Oh yeah. These are "mini S4s" and should have been named that to begin with. Well worth the money, and unlike a digital camera, glass is effectively good "forever".

[AnthonyFlores]

Would love to see an Epic + Lens test with Ultra Primes, Master Primes, Cooke 5i/S4/Pancro, Leicas, Optimos, RPP's and perhaps a few others. I'm sure this will happen at some point but would be a lot of work and some pretty expensive hardware involved in such a test. Maybe SALT Pt 2 is in order :)

Anthony

[Robert Horwell]

someone on CML is doing a test with:

Red Pro Primes
Schneider Cine Xenars
Zeiss Compact Primes
Uniq Optics Signature Series
Luma Tech Illumina S35
Cooke Panchro/i

[Timur Civan]

S4's/S5'swont cover 5k.... keep that in mind. if you want cooke look on Epic, you have to shoot panchros...

[Christopher Barrett]

S4's/S5'swont cover 5k.... keep that in mind. if you want cooke look on Epic, you have to shoot panchros...

Wow... and the Panchro/i's do? Phew. My 18mm arrived yesterday, the set is complete :)

[Paul Nordin]

someone on CML is doing a test with:

Red Pro Primes
Schneider Cine Xenars
Zeiss Compact Primes
Uniq Optics Signature Series
Luma Tech Illumina S35
Cooke Panchro/i

Do you happen to know who that might be? I must have missed the CML posting regarding this.

[Timur Civan]

The S4's 5's were designed before the epic frame was announced. They never figured a bigger frame was in the works I suppose.

The panchros, were designed after I guess.

[Sidney L. Plaut]

s4 covers "after" 14mm according to the chart posted by Dino

[Tom.Wong]

i think dino said there might have be a little bit of falloff around the edges on the 18, not sure though. but 18 and up should cover on epic, you want anything wider though you'll have to resort to other options.

[AnthonyFlores]

Well, with the volume of Epics that will be released into the wild later this year (probably over 10,000) I think it would be smart for Cooke to take the 14, 16 and 18 and redesign them slightly in order to cover Epic 5k. It's a pain in the ass, but they are going to lose so many sales (and rentals) to MP's, UP's or Leicas because those lenses fully the Epic sensor across all focal lengths.

Optimo went back and adjusted the 16-42 rouge to fully cover 5k ... if Cooke is smart they'll do the same.

Well, that's just one man's opinion :)

Anthony

[Tom.Wong]

I really don't think cooke has anything to worry about... the cooke looks is unique and highly coveted. they've been around for almost a hundred years, they'll be fine :)

[AnthonyFlores]

Tom, I'm not saying they'll go under ... you're right, they will be fine and stay in business. But what I'm saying is that for those in the market for high-end lenses -- whether purchase or rental -- the fact that the wide focal lengths won't work with what is sure to be THE hottest and most widely distributed true cinema camera in the world (Epic) is a BIG drawback. The S4's are already expensive relative to UP's and perhaps overpriced compared to Cooke's own 5i series (just slightly more for the 5's through ZGC) .... so not covering 5k at the wide end makes the S4's a total deal breaker. Same with the 5's at over $150k for the set of 8 ...

Anyways, I'm actually a fan of the "Cooke look" -- but there's no way on earth I'd choose them over Leica or Zeiss' high-end offerings given this limitation.

Just saying that creating Epic-compatible S4/5i sets is in their best interest and probably worth the investment for Cooke :)

Anthony

P.S. -- All this is to say that the Panchros are looking like a better and better deal. I'm curious ... how is the rental rate/demand on them?

[Stephen Williams]

The panchros, were designed after I guess.

I doubt it, however the 18 is the wideest so I doubt it's am issue.

[Stephen Williams]

So the options if you want the Cooke look is crop to 4K or 4.5k or shoot with a camera with a S35 sensor.


Tom, I'm not saying they'll go under ... you're right, they will be fine and stay in business. But what I'm saying is that for those in the market for high-end lenses -- whether purchase or rental -- the fact that the wide focal lengths won't work with what is sure to be THE hottest and most widely distributed true cinema camera in the world (Epic) is a BIG drawback. The S4's are already expensive relative to UP's and perhaps overpriced compared to Cooke's own 5i series (just slightly more for the 5's through ZGC) .... so not covering 5k at the wide end makes the S4's a total deal breaker. Same with the 5's at over $150k for the set of 8 ...

Anyways, I'm actually a fan of the "Cooke look" -- but there's no way on earth I'd choose them over Leica or Zeiss' high-end offerings given this limitation.


Just saying that creating Epic-compatible S4/5i sets is in their best interest and probably worth the investment for Cooke :)

Anthony

P.S. -- All this is to say that the Panchros are looking like a better and better deal. I'm curious ... how is the rental rate/demand on them?

[Timur Civan]

Tom, I'm not saying they'll go under ... you're right, they will be fine and stay in business. But what I'm saying is that for those in the market for high-end lenses -- whether purchase or rental -- the fact that the wide focal lengths won't work with what is sure to be THE hottest and most widely distributed true cinema camera in the world (Epic) is a BIG drawback. The S4's are already expensive relative to UP's and perhaps overpriced compared to Cooke's own 5i series (just slightly more for the 5's through ZGC) .... so not covering 5k at the wide end makes the S4's a total deal breaker. Same with the 5's at over $150k for the set of 8 ...

Anyways, I'm actually a fan of the "Cooke look" -- but there's no way on earth I'd choose them over Leica or Zeiss' high-end offerings given this limitation.

Just saying that creating Epic-compatible S4/5i sets is in their best interest and probably worth the investment for Cooke :)

Anthony

P.S. -- All this is to say that the Panchros are looking like a better and better deal. I'm curious ... how is the rental rate/demand on them?

I dunno man, i would take S4/5's over pretty much any lens. MP included. ( Leicas .... maybe not ;)

The MP leave me feeling flat. I look at the monitor/dalies and i dont say, WOW! I say, oh looks good. I rarely shoot wider than a 25mm anyway, so having an 18 that will cover will be just fine. Plus on the bigger chip, and 18mm looks like a 16mm on MX

[AnthonyFlores]

I dunno man, i would take S4/5's over pretty much any lens. MP included. ( Leicas .... maybe not ;)

The MP leave me feeling flat. I look at the monitor/dalies and i dont say, WOW! I say, oh looks good. I rarely shoot wider than a 25mm anyway, so having an 18 that will cover will be just fine. Plus on the bigger chip, and 18mm looks like a 16mm on MX

I agree Leicas are #1 on my list as well. But the lead time is a bit crazy now and is about to get worse :( Hopefully the package deal with the Epic is attractive. Also, I too would probably take 5i's over MP's -- which actually start at 18mm. Those are the one set of lenses I didn't get to see at NAB, which was disappointing. Btw, the people at ZGC told me a while back that the 5 series covers S35 and I'm not sure I've seen any Epic owners actually test the 18mm, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the entire 5i line cover 5k. They were developed long after the 4 series so again, it would not surprise me.

Still, they are nearly $10,000 more than the Leicas for a set of 8, unless you somehow get a discount.

Anthony

[Ned Wilson]

Well, with the volume of Epics that will be released into the wild later this year (probably over 10,000) I think it would be smart for Cooke to take the 14, 16 and 18 and redesign them slightly in order to cover Epic 5k. It's a pain in the ass, but they are going to lose so many sales (and rentals) to MP's, UP's or Leicas because those lenses fully the Epic sensor across all focal lengths.

Optimo went back and adjusted the 16-42 rouge to fully cover 5k ... if Cooke is smart they'll do the same.

Well, that's just one man's opinion :)

Anthony

It would definitely behoove Cooke to re-tool their wide offerings. That said, 18mm is wide and even wider at 5k. The "Cooke Look" that we all covet really shines from mid length lenses on up. So until they re-design the wides, I can always rent something else to cover my wide end. Granted that's nota perfect solution but would definitely work. In post, we can match the discrepancies. I primarily use Cookes for beauty work. I can live with using another brand for the wide.

When it comes to the Panchros, as much as I love the look of these lenses, I still find myself in tight locations having to stop down below a 2.8 to soften my backgrounds. So despite the sensitivity of the new cameras, I need that low stop option, especially for commercial beauty work.

[Robert Horwell]

If anyone is interested i will have my Epic M in a couple of weeks and will post some grabs from an 18mm panchro @ 5K.

[Tom.Wong]

If anyone is interested i will have my Epic M in a couple of weeks and will post some grabs from an 18mm panchro @ 5K.

that 18 mm panchro is mega kickass. 0 distortion, one of the best 18 mm's i've ever seen. happy shooting! can't wait to see the footage.

[Timur Civan]

The Panchro 18 is almost "weird". It does not look wide because of the lack of distortion. IT just looks natural.

[Christopher Barrett]

Totally love that 18. First thing I've shot with mine. Lighting test for the new short at T 2.9 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms9b5ZuJV5k&sns=em)

[D Fuller]

Totally love that 18. First thing I've shot with mine. Lighting test for the new short at T 2.9 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms9b5ZuJV5k&sns=em)

Holy shit, that's a good-looking lens.

[AnthonyFlores]

Totally love that 18. First thing I've shot with mine. Lighting test for the new short at T 2.9 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms9b5ZuJV5k&sns=em)

Awesome Chris! Impressive -- I know there's lighting but still, that's a relatively dim scene -- love the look.

[Billy Summers]

what ISO were you at?

[Christopher Barrett]

BTS Info... http://a6.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/230944_158146277580791_151936291535123_353250_1104 107_n.jpg

6 Dedos including 1 outside the window with Full CTB. ISO 800 WITH .9 ND.

I don't love the R1 over 1250, so I'm glad I'll have no issues with the T/2.9. I mean, it's damn good at 1250... I just like to keep it at 800.

[Peter Mosiman]

Dope look man. Quite interesting, can't wait!

[Daniel Doherty]

Christopher,

Can you tell me what those telescoping light poles are called (aside from telescoping light poles) that you have wedged between the walls and where they can be purchased? I could really use something like that.

Thank you,
Daniel

[Christopher Barrett]

Bogen Autopoles. BnH oughtta have 'em. Pretty handy.

[Daniel Doherty]

Awesome!

Thanks Chris.

[Peter Mosiman]

Awesome!

Thanks Chris.

If you put more than 5lbs or so on those auto poles if they are stretched out at all, you will have it fall on your head (been there before). I'd recommend just going with the 2x4 wall spreaders on filmtools. same price, just need to buy the lumber. way more solid and it handles more weight.

[Timur Civan]

Just got to play with my panchros on an Epic.....

Looks awesome. I have No footage, but looks awesome. Keep an eye on Vincent Laforets blog. He may post some stills.

18mm covers juuuuust fine, ;)

[Robert Horwell]

timur, when did you get your 18mm? i've been waiting since i got my panchros in october for mine.

[Timur Civan]

Got it last month.

[Robert Horwell]

when did you get your panchros?

[Ned Wilson]

Nice review man. I had kind of given up on these based on Mark's comments about them being a bit too soft (in his opinion) for the Epic, but
you're making me reconsider.

Anthony

They're plenty sharp. It comes down to look and function. If you love the Cooke Look, then they're a good deal. I personally wouldn't buy a prime set that doesn't go down to a 2.0. If I have to shoot at a 2.8 and above, give me two small Optimo's.

[Timur Civan]

more about price.

Where else can you get lenses that look like S4's for under 50 grand. 6 of em no less....

@ Rob,
i got em in february.

[Jiri Vrozina]

more about price.

Where else can you get lenses that look like S4's for under 50 grand. 6 of em no less....

@ Rob,
i got em in february.

Great lenses but you can NOT get the same look as S4s.....they are 2.8.....sorry

[Erich Ocean]

Great lenses but you can NOT get the same look as S4s.....they are 2.8.....sorry

Um, at 2.8 and up they look identical to S4s. I don't know about you, but I try and not shoot below 2.8, and 4 is best. When the image looks as good as a Cooke, you don't need ultra shallow DoF to bring teh pretty. :)

[Christopher Barrett]

BRING THE PRETTY!!!!!!!!!!!

[Ned Wilson]

Um, at 2.8 and up they look identical to S4s. I don't know about you, but I try and not shoot below 2.8, and 4 is best. When the image looks as good as a Cooke, you don't need ultra shallow DoF to bring teh pretty. :)

I often shoot below a 2.8 when I'm in a small location and a 2.8 plus proves too difficult tp soften the back ground adequately. I recently was in a situation with a venetian blind about 18" behind my talent's head. We had to shoot at 2.0 to soften it up so it wouldn't be distracting.

[Timur Civan]

this is trying to measure taste.

i rarely shoot wider than a 2.8 because i feel that a floating disembodied person in a mushy background looks weird. Again, personal taste.
These lenses are gorgeous at every Fstop. Especially the 18mm. Its incredible.

Here is what they can do. I shot this about 3 weeks ago. ranging between T2.8 and T5.6.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQi5757fjgs
Panchros w/ 2mm Streak filter.

[Robert Horwell]

timur, i can't watch in the UK?

[Oliver Schietinger]

Nice review and video Timur. We have a complete set of Panchro/i lenses at TCS. I love the size performance combination. Of course, if you need the stop you can either go to S4 or 5/i. The 5/i opens up a new set of applications including remarkable edge-to-edge performance.


We have a new office: 599 11th Avenue, Ground Floor @ 45th Street. Feel free to come on by

[Christopher Barrett]

Samples from the new short... almost done shooting. Various Panchros all at T/2.8

http://christopherbarrett.net/AIWR/A003_C001_0509D5_001.jpg

http://christopherbarrett.net/AIWR/A010_C017_0510H5_001.jpg

http://christopherbarrett.net/AIWR/A009_C005_0510M6_001.jpg

http://christopherbarrett.net/AIWR/A011_C007_0510K0_001.jpg

http://christopherbarrett.net/AIWR/A012_C015_0511LH_001.jpg

http://christopherbarrett.net/AIWR/clint.jpg

Yeah, I'm pretty happy with my investment ;)

[AnthonyFlores]

Awesome Chris. You can definitely tell you had a photography background before getting into Red recently -- really digging your lighting and the look of your images. Can't wait to see the film when it's done :)

[Timur Civan]

Looks great!

[Timur Civan]

timur, i can't watch in the UK?

I dont have control of the File, its on The record labels youtube page.

[Alexander Mitchell]

Timur,

Great testing BTW, thanks for posting.

Question for you... on the Sony S-Log/XDCam test, did you ever try recording a 4:2:2 10bit to ProResHQ or DNxHD codec's to compare a third option for that camera? I'm sure S-Log will still take the cake, however, love to hear how one of these two codec's did in the grading process? Definitely an upgrade from the XDCam compression.

Also, did you have any issues with the CineDeck? Just wondering...

Thanks,

Alex

[Timur Civan]

we did record to a mac tower @ 10bit 422 PROresHQ once. looked incredible. Sharper, cleaner, and more lattitude.

10bit is the way to go.