What's your take on Zeiss Compact Primes?

[Brent .T]

Lewis
How about something like 4 RPP's & 3 CP2's and intercut them. 18, 21, 25, 28, 35, 50, 85 .
The RPP's being 18, 25, 50, 85. They all cover 5K

Total price: US $ 26,850

You could use the CP2's for steadycam , light, run 'n' gun while the RPP's keep a projects image quality high.

just a thought ....

Brent

[Rob Castiglione]

Look forward to that Tim. That is what we need a comprehensive review.

[Evin Grant]

We had a set of the original Compact Primes at SALT back in 2009 (Has it really been that long?) anyway the glass in the CP.2s is the same, here are our thoughts back then...

Me:
"The Zeiss Compacts preformed well but not extraordinary compared to the other new glass around. Although they did show nice contrast and bokeh they all had a tendency to flare in a strange star patten. They are very light though and cover the full 24x36mm still frame. It would also be nice if the wides were faster."

David Mullen:
The slight star filter effect from the Cooke S4’s iris blades was distinctive. Oddly enough, the Zeiss Compacts, which have a lot of iris blades, also had somewhat of a star filter effect, just a star with a lot more points.

Matt Duclos:
The Zeiss Compact Primes performed just as I expected. Again, considering the price, you get what you pay for. If you're looking for a set of lenses for steady cam or handheld work, consider these lenses an excellent option. Compared to the new crop of primes, these little guys are a breeze to work with. Their resolution was slightly lower than I had hoped for, but they made up for it in their contrast. Their mechanics are classic Zeiss; smooth, solid, and repeatable. Very nice fit and finish. All the lenses use the exact same outside dimensions, which is nice when you want to change focal lengths but keep the same setup. Their iris blades were almost a perfect circle at every stop. The set's variance in speed is a huge caveat. Especially the wide end at T3.5.

Matt Uhry:
Zeiss Compacts T1.5 - T3.4 Very Nice Mechanics and Markings. Disappointing performance wide open on the fast ones. Uneven color matching and flare characteristics throughout the set. They look decent at 2.8 but so does most everything else... Cover Full frame.

Brook Willard:

These lenses are a strange bunch. I don't really know what to make of them. On one hand, they're very pretty lenses that perform fairly well. On the other hand, they don't match at all. It's bizarre.

Optically, they're sharp and fairly appealing. The faster lenses are a bit of a bummer when wide open, which really makes them slower in practice. That said, because the slowest lens is T3.4... you'll need to gear your lighting package accordingly. They also aren't well color matched. That said, the iris is the sort of thing that dreams are made of.

Mechanically, they're great. It's like somebody sat on an Ultra Prime and put some blue paint on it. Some of the closer focus markings are a little random, but I'll always take too many over too few.

These lenses are like a runner in a bodybuilding competition. They're great at what they do, but we're not measuring to their strengths. I suspect that if we put them up against a bunch of VistaVision lenses, we'd absolutely love them. Their 8-perf coverage will make them very popular when the larger Epics ship. But against the other S35mm primes, their bizarre inconsistencies and steep price hurt.

So if you have 8-perf plans in the future, these lenses probably rock. If you don't... well, their strengths will be lost on you.

[Dan Kanes]

What is wrong with the 28? In the set I've used the 28 was my favorite...

[Lee Saxon]

IMO, if you want this glass, buy the ZF set from Duclos. It's just under $9K

Now that sounds about like the fair price for these things.

What is wrong with the 28? In the set I've used the 28 was my favorite...

Was this on FF35? Because in the center it's very nice, it just has AWFUL corners (which you wouldn't see on S35).

Which, come to think of it, probably explains in general why people on this cine-focused forum have had much better experiences with the CP set than I did shooting stills with the ZF set. Doh, didn't think of that.

[Lewis-M Soucy]

Wow, bit of this, bit of that... I reckon they're very good but not great then... The Duclos set is a nice option too, I wonder how it will perform on Epic although I think they cover 5K. I have a Nikon mount for my Red (the Optitek one with aperture ring, not Doug's one), but I might get stuck a while with Epic before they make a Nikon mount. I am considering the RPP of course, they're awesome but they are huge! I wish I could afford Leicas :(

[Dan Kanes]

Now that sounds about like the fair price for these things.



Was this on FF35? Because in the center it's very nice, it just has AWFUL corners (which you wouldn't see on S35).

Which, come to think of it, probably explains in general why people on this cine-focused forum have had much better experiences with the CP set than I did shooting stills with the ZF set. Doh, didn't think of that.

It was a CP at 4k 2:1

[David Baumber]

I was really close to buying a set of these CP's (so close, I had them in the checkout bin at creativevideo online store). Really pleased I read this thread first - thank you.

[Ken Willinger]

I don't love the 18 (I don't love any of them except the 21 and maybe the macro 50), but if we're gonna single one out for suckitude it should be the 28.

I've been using the 21 on a job for the last 2 weeks (I have a very strange mix and match set of lenses on this job) and like the lens very much. Been using it for a lot of handheld and the weight is great. I haven't used the others in the set.

[Timur Civan]

Been doing some testing with these lenses. They aren't bad. I have CP1's, and despite the gross mismatch of Tstops, I kinda like having an emergency 50mm T1.5 when I need it. Yes I like my cookes A LOT MORE. But I wouldn't kick these on the curb either. They are inexpensive, but fully featured ergonomic PL glass. You get what you pay for.