Angenieux 45-120...

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I haven't been keeping up with the Angie shipping schedule -- too much pain and suffering waiting for the lenses I have on order. Anyway, is the 45-120 shipping yet? And if so, has anyone got their hands on that bad boy? I wanna know! :)

[NormLi]

I hear April...

[Josh Beadle]

Whats the diff between their "Digital" and "Film" series? Would be interested in the 16-42 but it doesn't have the EF mount or tele extender option like the 15-40 does.

[NormLi]

Digital series can only work on digital cinema cameras. It physically won't fit into film camera mounts.

Film optimos work on all cameras, both and digital.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

To add to what Norm said, the rear element on the DP lenses sits very close to the OLPF/sensor block on the digital cameras. This improves some aspects of the image, especially so for digital imagers. However, it leaves no clearance for a mechanical shutter system. So it does not work on film camera, or even digital systems that have a mechanical or mirror shutter. This is why there is no EOS mount, and why teleconverters are not compatible -- there is just no room for those to exist between the rear of the lens and the sensor within the camera.

FWIW, the two Optimo DP lenses - 16-42 and 30-80 - combined with the Duclos modded 11-16 Tokina is like the trifecta of perfect zooms for these cameras. If you have the budget and are satisfying a broader customer base with rentals, the the film-oriented zooms like the 15-40 can be a better purchase.

I'm anxious to see the 45-120, which looked amazing last year at NAB. It is designed to be used with film or digital cameras. There have been rumors of a DP series version of a bigger zoom like that, which would be most welcome. I've had a 16-42 and 30-80 on order for some time now, but I'm very tempted to cancel the 30-80 and replace it with the 45-120. Sad thing is, I used to own both the DP zooms and then sold them because I didn't feel I could justify keeping them at the time. Couldn't rent them out, etc.. Now they're all the rage and I no longer do rentals, nor need to mess with that, but have been sitting on a wait-list for nearly a year. :-(

[Josh Beadle]

Is there a problem with ray angle to the Epic sensor with either series of Angie lenses? Seems if one is designed for film then there might be a compromise with how the light strikes the sensor.

[NormLi]

To add to what Norm said, the rear element on the DP lenses sits very close to the OLPF/sensor block on the digital cameras. This improves some aspects of the image, especially so for digital imagers. However, it leaves no clearance for a mechanical shutter system. So it does not work on film camera, or even digital systems that have a mechanical or mirror shutter. This is why there is no EOS mount, and why teleconverters are not compatible -- there is just no room for those to exist between the rear of the lens and the sensor within the camera.

FWIW, the two Optimo DP lenses - 16-42 and 30-80 - combined with the Duclos modded 11-16 Tokina is like the trifecta of perfect zooms for these cameras. If you have the budget and are satisfying a broader customer base with rentals, the the film-oriented zooms like the 15-40 can be a better purchase.

I'm anxious to see the 45-120, which looked amazing last year at NAB. It is designed to be used with film or digital cameras. There have been rumors of a DP series version of a bigger zoom like that, which would be most welcome. I've had a 16-42 and 30-80 on order for some time now, but I'm very tempted to cancel the 30-80 and replace it with the 45-120. Sad thing is, I used to own both the DP zooms and then sold them because I didn't feel I could justify keeping them at the time. Couldn't rent them out, etc.. Now they're all the rage and I no longer do rentals, nor need to mess with that, but have been sitting on a wait-list for nearly a year. :-(

I don't see dropping a 30-80 or 28-76 for a 45-120 a good idea just so you have the range from 15-40 and 45-120 because I find the 28-76 or 30-80 such a great handheld range. 15-40 is often too wide for a lot of it and 45-120 is sometimes too long...but 30-80 is perfect :)

Norm

[Evin Grant]

I have the two DP zooms and they are phenomonal. The 45-120 was dool inducing and I doubt there is much difference between the film and DP versions but theoretically the DP versions should have slightly better corner performance and field illumination because of the more telecentric design. In actual use I think it's not an issue, getbwhichever version best suits your business model.

[Josh Beadle]

Fair amount of talent per square inch on this thread. I'm humbled and appreciate the input

The EF adapter, Wide Angle and Tele options are, on paper, the real enticing draw to the 15-40. That's if it all works with the MX sensor without weird results.

[Evin Grant]

If you're considering this for an Epic why would you use EF? As mounts go it's not even close to PL for rigidity, Red has done an amazing job of stabilizing it but no matter how you cut it it's a still camera mount designed for lightweight lenses/bodies. I also think you'll be disappointed putting a teleconverter on a wide zoom, in general teleconverters work best with fast aperture long primes, the Optimos are certainly sharp enough to be useable with them but the stop and resolution loss (1 or 2 T stops) are usually enough to justify a dedicated longer lens.