Minus how heavy they are.. RED PRIMES ROCK!
both lens sets are pretty good. both lenses lack enough focus distance markings. RPP is way sharper and more aspherical. Cp.2 are nice a tad softer as you open up.
You also need to think about the availability of the red primes in the future if you intend buying more than just the 85mm.
I use my 17-35 with my cp.2's all the time. The red zoom is softer than the zeiss' but is still a great lens for the money. The red primes are great visually but a little heavy for my current jobs which have involved a lot of one man travel jobs.
Everyone has an opinion on which lens is "best" but it really comes down to the kind of work that you are doing. I own a set of CP.2's but commonly rent other lenses.
A 17-35 and an 85mm will serve you well for many jobs.
Another vote for the CP.2s here, RPPs are super sharp, but I prefer the 'look', size and mechanics/markings of the Zeiss penses by a fair margin.
Unless you really need that extra stop of light from 25mm downwards, I'd go with the CP.2.
--I own the CP2s and have used the RPPs.. I am a fan of the Zeiss look and feel even the the RPPs are sweet!
--I also like the ability to put the Canon mount on my CP2s so I can use them with my canon glass. Can't do that with the RPPs
--The RPPs are not any sharper in any test I have ever seen but they are great lenses.
--The RPPs are heavy!
--whoever said the CP2s breath more must have had a bad set, id love to see a shot where they breath
--Your best investment is to go rent or borrow both sets and test yourself! Everything has is pros and cons.
Glass is for life!
--best set: 21mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm. I've rented the set out so many times that they have paid for themselves 4x over in the 2 years I've had them.. They just came back from th set of the new Michael Bay Movie pain and gain.
I find that the CP2s are a major let down if you are used to cine lenses. They flare easily, and not attractively, they are very soft wide open, and they generally look flat and milky. The flat and milky can be fixed to a degree in post, but they have ungodly ugly veiling flare if there is anything bright in the frame.
On the up side, they are mechanically very nice, and have an excellent focus scale. They are also small and light.
I would take a quality set of lomos or a set of old manual nikons over the cp2s. I would think you could get a set of Ziess standards for almost the same price as you would pay for a set of cp2s.
The old T* coating on Super Speeds, Standard Speeds, Hasselblads and Contax glass is quite pretty.
The truth is...CP2s are STILLS GLASS. You may want to consider cinemodded ZFs or Contax Glass. Optically, they are so similar.
Last edited by Nick Morrison; 06-26-2012 at 07:34 PM.
I would say Zeiss CP.2 all day everyday. My university has both the RPP set (1st gen) and the Zeiss CP.2's that we just got in last summer, so I've used both and can compare both in a real world scenario.
Zeiss CP.2's have a much nicer bokeh and better overall colour reproduction than the RPP set. There's something about the Zeiss that I can't quite put my finger on, but nonetheless the image it produces just seems of better quality than the RPP's.
RPP's are heavier and generally less handheld friendly (I love doing handheld stuff), and their image has a bigger variance throughout the whole set versus the CP.2's.
I can't comment on RPP breathing but CP.2's have zero breathing from what I've experienced with them. Zeiss also has interchangable mounts... something which the RPP don't have.
All I can say from real world situations where I have to make pretty pictures for clients that are paying me is that CP2s make me do more work, and compromise my shots and artistic vision to get what I consider professional results.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|