Anyone uses the Zeiss LWZ.2 15.5-45 on Epic?

[Martin Friedrich]

Hello,
I am thinking of getting a Zeiss LWZ.2 Zoom to use on Epic (which I rent occasionally for controlled shoots) and on the C300 (which I am about to order as I do a lot of travelling/run and gun/doco style shooting and to rent an epic for those long assignments is out of budget). I really like the zoom range of the zeiss zoom compared to an Optimo DP Rouge and to have the option of an EF Mount is really great, as I could buy the C300 in EF and use all my EF stills glas on it (which I don't really like, but the ability to use some odd focal length lenses like super wides, tiltshift or 300mm+ or super fast glass sometimes comes in handy, even putting it on a 7D might be of use sometimes).

I searched the web but didn't find a lot of info on that zeiss zoom from people using it, so if anybody has some real world experience and likes to share, I would really appreciate that.

thanks,
Martin

[Alexander Ibrahim]

The LWZ.2 covers EPIC and Scarlet in at least 2:1 ... I think it vignettes slightly in 5k 16:9 at 20mm and wider.

Instead of a Canon C300, can I recommend you look at a Scarlet. Especially if you are happy with Epic.

It gives you the same rough capability as Epic, but limited to 4k 25p 16:9.

Couple it with an external recorder, like PIX 240, and you get a nice 1080p RGB recorder and RAW .R3D recording.

You can swap PL and Canon mounts, just like an Epic. Something you can't do on the C300.

Today, I just can not understand purchases of Canon C300 or Sony F3.

[Martin Friedrich]

Thank you Alexander for your contribution and believe me, I have given the Scarlet a lot of thought already. I definetly don't want to start a Red vs. Canon discussion here, but I think each camera has it's own pros and cons. And for a lot of my jobs, the ease of data handling and long lasting batteries all combined in one lightweight camera makes a lot of sense. That said, I yesterday had the chance to check out an ef mount C300 and the mount was not to my liking at all, like on the dslrs the lens has quite some play in the mount, making it not perfect for follow focus and especially wireless follow focus units with strong motors... bummer. So I didn't order it right away but will wait for the pl version and then rethink the whole Scarlet/Epic vs. C300 thing :-)

[Sebastian Winkels]

Hello,
I am thinking of getting a Zeiss LWZ.2 Zoom to use on Epic (which I rent occasionally for controlled shoots) and on the C300 (which I am about to order as I do a lot of travelling/run and gun/doco style shooting and to rent an epic for those long assignments is out of budget). I really like the zoom range of the zeiss zoom compared to an Optimo DP Rouge and to have the option of an EF Mount is really great, as I could buy the C300 in EF and use all my EF stills glas on it (which I don't really like, but the ability to use some odd focal length lenses like super wides, tiltshift or 300mm+ or super fast glass sometimes comes in handy, even putting it on a 7D might be of use sometimes).

I searched the web but didn't find a lot of info on that zeiss zoom from people using it, so if anybody has some real world experience and likes to share, I would really appreciate that.

thanks,
Martin

Hi Martin,

Unfortunatley I can't provide any experience with the LWZ.2. Sorry for that!

But I would like to know how you judge the LWZ so far in comparison to the RPZ 17-50.
I am also into doc-work and need a small setup. Therefore I went for the RPZ.
It's so light and only 10 cm long. When switching between 4k and 3k it gives you a range of about 17- 60+mm.

It can probably not hold up to the build of the Optimos or the Zeiss LW Zoom, otherwise the price difference would be plain surreal.
Did you also consider it for your work or do you think the optical quality is overall not quite top-notch-enough for full resolution/raw productions?

thanks,
Sebastian

[Martin Friedrich]

Hi Sebastian,

the reason for me to consider the Zeiss zoom its the ability to change the mount from PL to EF. If I would only use PL cameras, the RPZ would definitely be on my list as would be the Angenieux Optimo DP.
I never shot on the Zeiss LWZ, that's why I was asking. If I decide against the EF version of the C300, which could well happen, especially after I played with one the other day and quite frankly, that EF mount just doesn't feel right to me (thinking of lens motors), I might get the RPZ and a nice fast prime and still spend less than on the Zeiss...

best,
martin

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Well it should be noted that the the LWZ.2 is about $29,000.

That's a lot more than the Scarlet camera system.

In fact you can buy a Scarlet with Ti PL mount, a Red 17-50 and the Red 18-85 plus a 300mm RPP for about the same as the LWZ,

or

You could get the Scarlet with a Ti EF and a Ti PL mount and a nice set of EF lenses, including primes and zooms, plus you have the option to rent PL glass for less than the LWZ.2

Oh, and again you could buy a PIX 240. Use it in place of the 1AC's display, and use the RED EVF or LCD for the operator.

You mentioned the ease of an RGB codec for some workflows, and I agree.

I just would like that RGB codec to be a 10 bit signal in a "mastering" codec like ProRes as opposed to a crappy 8 bit highly compressed codec like the one built into the Canon C300.

Oh, and its a damn shame that the C300 has weaker EF lens support than the Epic/Scarlet.

I like the Canon just fine. If it had come out when the F3 did I'd have been more interested in it. Coming out after Scarlet though is sad, the specs are sort of ludicrous and it represents a bad value and a limited set of options.

Ultimately however its what you think will let you make better pictures.

[Matt Gottshalk]

Oh, and again you could buy a PIX 240. Use it in place of the 1AC's display, and use the RED EVF or LCD for the operator.

The Pix240 does not have the resolution or clarity to be useful by an AC.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

The Pix240 does not have the resolution or clarity to be useful by an AC.

Uh ... your 1AC's aren't actually pulling to the monitor are they?

Because that's the wrong way to do it.

A 1st AC can never be ahead of the game by pulling to the monitor ... any monitor.

Call me old fashioned ... I think that if you are shooting 4K or film you had really better be working old school as a 1st.

Tape, mark the hand wheel and pull to marks, adjust hand wheel with your eyes on the scene and the lens, not the freaking monitor.

If you are pulling to a monitor, or even setting marks by the monitor, it needs to show you the full resolution picture.

Usually at that point in the process I've handed the camera to the 1st and they can use the operator position if that suits them, or adjust the display if they wish to use the monitor from the AC position.

[Matt Gottshalk]

Uh ... your 1AC's aren't actually pulling to the monitor are they?

Because that's the wrong way to do it.

A 1st AC can never be ahead of the game by pulling to the monitor ... any monitor.

Call me old fashioned ... I think that if you are shooting 4K or film you had really better be working old school as a 1st.

Tape, mark the hand wheel and pull to marks, adjust hand wheel with your eyes on the scene and the lens, not the freaking monitor.

If you are pulling to a monitor, or even setting marks by the monitor, it needs to show you the full resolution picture.

Usually at that point in the process I've handed the camera to the 1st and they can use the operator position if that suits them, or adjust the display if they wish to use the monitor from the AC position.

No, they aren't "pulling to the monitor", but the Pix240 isn't good enough for them to even use for reference.

That's why I use the TVLogic 5.6" for that.

[Sean Porter]

Hey Martin,

I just spent some time with the LWZ.2 and found it pretty damn sharp, edge-to-edge, on the epic at 5K. Very little vignetting, here at 15.5mm:



cheers,