PDA

View Full Version : Carl Zeiss 2/50 ZE



Belief Pictures
05-06-2012, 02:24 PM
Hey,

What are your thoughts about this lens?

Chris

Belief Pictures
05-06-2012, 02:31 PM
I found this at B&H Pro Video at: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/666445-REG/Zeiss_1762_851_50mm_f_2_0_Makro_Planar_ZE.html

randyman
05-06-2012, 02:53 PM
I've got the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4', and I love it. However, on the BMC it will act like a longer lens... About 115mm or so.

The Zeiss 25mm or 28mm will bring you closer to the behavior of a "normal" lens... I plan on picking up the 28mm.

The Zeiss ZE lenses are a dream to work with...

Belief Pictures
05-06-2012, 05:42 PM
You recommend them?

StephenM
05-06-2012, 05:47 PM
I have a set of Zeiss's. Highly recommend them. Can't wait for the new 15mm to arrive. I use the ZF.2s, but visually the ZEs are identical.

randyman
05-06-2012, 06:08 PM
Can't wait for the new 15mm to arrive.

I wish I had the finances for that 15mm! It will be particularly well suited for the BMC.

Chris, if you're not familiar with Zeiss gear, they have attributes that go beyond their ability to resolve. They are incredibly well-machined, weighty hunks of solid metal and glass that move as though they're oil-damped. They can be pricey, but if you get your hands on one, I promise you'll devote energy to figuring out how to get more. I would rather have one Zeiss lens than two or three of almost anyone else's. (And given their prices, that can indeed be the reality of a Zeiss habit.)

It's very much worth your while to find a retailer or photographer that will let you get a feel for what these lenses really are; that direct contact could have a great effect on your purchasing plans. If there's no one in your area, perhaps you could test one or two by renting by mail.

StephenM
05-06-2012, 08:50 PM
Chris, if you're in Southern California, you are welcome to come by and try mine out.

Belief Pictures
05-08-2012, 07:04 PM
Nope I am in Canada.

pcenginefx
05-08-2012, 11:38 PM
I echo randyman's comments about Zeiss - I sold off my Canon 50mm 1.2L for the Zeiss 50mm 2.0 ZF.2 to use on my NEX-FS100 and totally love the lens. Built like a tank and 100% solid. I don't have the $$$ either to buy the new 15mm, but am seriously looking at the Zeiss 25mm as my 50mm(ish) general purpose prime.

Steve Madsen
05-09-2012, 06:33 AM
I have the ZF version. Assuming the ZE is identical, a word of caution - it has a macro oriented focus throw...so of the delightful 300+ degree throw, 80-90% of that is up to 70cm. I wish I'd've known that before buying.

Agree with all of the positive things stated here re build, smooth focus, image...and it's almost faultless wide open. Not often you can say that about a stills lens.

billy yahoo
05-09-2012, 06:06 PM
how about the zeiss 21mm ZE? Do you think it will show distortion? Will it be able to throw a soft focus at when wide open ( 2.8 ) ? I have this lens and am thinking of selling to get the ZE 25mm F2 instead.

StephenM
05-09-2012, 06:11 PM
Assuming you are talking about DOF, the sensor size only affects the crop of the image, not the image itself. If you've got the lens now, just take a shot at f/2.8 and see if like what you see.

billy yahoo
05-10-2012, 11:39 AM
ok thanks, that makes sense. does anyone know which lens is sharper when shot with wide open aperture between the Zeiss ZE 21mm and 25mm? I cant find any comparisons online.

randyman
05-10-2012, 12:07 PM
Offhand, I can't tell you anything about the 21mm. However, I did compare the 25mm and the 28mm.

One thing I remember is that the 28mm has floating elements, which help in delivering (as Zeiss says) "razor-sharp closeups." The 25mm is *not* optimized for closeups, which led me to plan to get the 28mm in the future as a "normal" lens instead of the 25mm, despite the longer focal length.

I'm seeing great reviews of the 21mm, but it is substantially more expensive than the 28mm, and .8 stops slower. If you have the funds, though, it looks like a fantastic lens. Ken Rockwell called it the best 21mm he'd ever seen.

laco
05-10-2012, 12:15 PM
I'm seeing great reviews of the 21mm, but it is substantially more expensive than the 28mm, and .8 stops slower. If you have the funds, though, it looks like a fantastic lens. Ken Rockwell called it the best 21mm he'd ever seen.

Well, you mean, 1 whole stop slower?:)

Anway, the 21mm is one of the sharpest wide angle lenses that covers full frame. Both the 25mm and the 28mm is a bit softer, but it is only visible in pictures.
But if you can let 3mm go, go with the Canon 24mm 1.4 II
And..ZE lenses are always a bit softer, than Canon L primes. Some people even like them because of this.

StephenH
05-15-2012, 03:48 AM
Given the size of the sensor that you will be putting these lens on I don't think you will see much softness from the outer edge. Remember these are full 35mm diameter coverage. If I remember about 42mm diameter.

Stand corrected; Diameter of image field = 43mm (1.69").

iunknown
05-15-2012, 01:58 PM
What about autofocus, isn't that going to be an important consideration on the BMC?

HDkilledfilm.
05-15-2012, 02:34 PM
In feature fiction work I think most people never use auto focus... because of the nature of this camera (The size of it's files due to RAW) I'd imagine almost no one will be using these cameras to shoot events or things of that nature where long recording times and run and gun auto focus would be a huge plus... I think Barry Green put it best when he said that this camera is able to do those things, it just seems like there are better choices if that type of shooting is what your trying to do.

mhood
05-15-2012, 03:13 PM
because of the nature of this camera (The size of it's files due to RAW) I'd imagine almost no one will be using these cameras to shoot events

I (and I imagine many others) will use ProResHQ much more than RAW. Gearing up for a RAW workflow doesn't seem trivial. Just Resolve will require a new computer for me. ProResHQ however imports into CS5 like a dream...I'm good to go from day one.

HDkilledfilm.
05-15-2012, 04:02 PM
So you plan on using this camera for live events? If your saying you do indeed plan on shooting live events then why use this camera instead of one with more of an ENG form factor? Just wondering what everyone is planning on using this for. I may be wrong, but the highlight of this camera for me is the ability to shoot RAW and have 13 stops of DR. I guess that could be usefull in a doc situation where you plan on spending a ton of time in post, but if your trying to shoot live events in my exp I want to shoot as close to the final look as I can knowing that there is usually very little turn around time in post on broadcast work. And just to put it out there, prorez422hq is not a small wrapper by any means, the last three features I've edited have all been in that codec and none of them was under 40TB of data. This camera may cause many people headaches in post if they don't factor in the HUGE file sizes and the storage and media management they will require when shooting with it. I've even thought of how I will try and manage my data injest amounts on shoots by shooting inserts and close ups with my GH2 to save storage space. Because even after you shoot and BACK UP, you've still got to have enough space to edit and render with.

mhood
05-15-2012, 04:22 PM
I'm shooting talking heads for corporate purposes and find 3 hours on a 250GB SSD that costs roughly what the correct 16GB CF cards for my 7D did a few years ago a bargain. I don't understand the monoscopic view of the BMC that refuses to accept the validity of non-RAW recording for other than film making purposes. As I understand it, I'll enjoy the same 13 stops of DR with ProResHQ that you will with RAW, that it will import into CS5 on my laptop and that it is five times smaller. Excuse me for finding those features compelling for endeavors other than independent film making.

Please forgive me for derailing the thread.

HDkilledfilm.
05-15-2012, 04:26 PM
I'm not trying to have an online arguement, just trying to see what people are planning on doing with the camera. Sorry if you took that the wrong way. I never said that you won't have the 13 stops, just that it might be overkill in a talking heads situation IM(Humble)HO.

Kevin Marshall
05-15-2012, 04:56 PM
And just to put it out there, prorez422hq is not a small wrapper by any means, the last three features I've edited have all been in that codec and none of them was under 40TB of data.

40TB? That's about 530 hours of 1080p ProRes 422HQ. The low-budget feature I'm DITing on now will probably just nudge over 12TB, and that's including 5K RAW files and 1080p ProRes transcodes for about 30 hours of footage. I don't think narrative features will be a huge storage drain in ProRes - doco features, though, I could imagine accumulating more space.

HDkilledfilm.
05-15-2012, 05:11 PM
Right, and it depends on your shooting ratio and how redundant you are in post as well as your VFX work. I don't think everyone will hit 40TB on a feature, but when you shoot 5 cams all the time... Well, you get a lot of footage. That's why I wonder what peope will be using this cam for, I'm going to use it for wides, VFX shots and other things I need the detail for.

mhood
05-15-2012, 05:12 PM
it might be overkill in a talking heads situation IM(Humble)HO.

For $3K, I can afford a little overkill.

HDkilledfilm.
05-15-2012, 05:46 PM
I see your point, but that's 3k for body only, no ssd drives, no rig, no ff, no lenses etc... Even if you cheap it on those things it's going to cost more like 5-6g's to get a working rig. If you have all those things waiting from your 7D rig then it sill might come down to what the Prorez wrapper will be recording, if you have a super flat image that you have to spend time in post on to process then the time aspect of things becomes a factor. I see why not having to transcode h264 to prorez will do for you time wise, trust me I do, but if you have to make it up in render time then it may be about the same amount of time spent overall, just in a different area. Also the BMDCC doesn't have all the little things on it that a traditional video camera will, no histogram, built in nd filters, etc... I wonder what perceptive difference there will be between a gh1 or a gh2 and the BMCC in a well controled sit down interview situation. I'm not trying to say it won't have it's advantages as it should resolve more than those camera's on paper, but to the human eye may be a different story... Especially if your using nice glass like the 50mm Zeiss this thread is supposed to be about before I had a hand in hijacking it. Good glass won't go down in value either... But a camera? Just a thought.

mhood
05-15-2012, 06:02 PM
I *think* I have the peripherals pretty well covered with my 7D kit (exception being the SSD drives but I consider them a real bargain). Of course, John is the only person that I have read who has actually recorded something with the camera so every conclusion I make is pure speculation. I do plan to add a few lenses (Tokina 11-16 and Canon EF-S 17-55) and a 77mm FaderND that fits. I just may end up shooting 709 unless I can develop some quick presets in PPro CS5. I do lots of location green screen work and the 7D is depressing...I "speculate" the BMC will take my keying to a much better place. And yes, good glass doesn't seem to depreciate and cameras seem to be nothing more than soup du jour.

HDkilledfilm.
05-15-2012, 06:09 PM
See that makes sense to me, buy the BMDCC knowing it can do what your 7D does, but with the ability to shoot VFX stuff with it as well.

mhood
05-15-2012, 06:22 PM
And if little old me can compete with much larger shops and their C300s, my evil plan will achieve fruition ;-)

Barry Green
05-16-2012, 12:41 AM
What about autofocus, isn't that going to be an important consideration on the BMC?
Will the BMC even support autofocus? As of the NAB prototype it sure didn't, IIRC, and I don't know if they have plans to support it or not.