Angenieux 16 - 44 T 1.3

[Scott Bullock]

Hello! I hope everyone who celebrates Thanksgiving had an enjoyable one.

 

I'm wondering if anyone here has any familiarity with the Angenieux 16 - 44 lens. I purchased one recently at a pretty good price and it is in absolutely beautiful condition. It's a blistering fast T 1.3, which I suppose is its main attraction. However, here is my dilemma:

 

I was told that this lens will "cover" Super 16, but when I mounted it on my camera and had a look I seem to be getting some vignetting at the 16mm focal length, especially when the lens is focused to 5 feet or less. If it does cover Super 16 it must be one of those "just barely" scenarios that lens technicians always talk about, and it doesn't (to my eye) look to cover Super 16 nearly as well as the Angenieux 15 - 150 does. (Note: The lens hasn?t been film tested yet.)

 

Does anyone have some practical advice that they can give me with regards to this lens? It looks (again, to my eye) like it will probably be 'safe' when transferred to 16:9 video, but I'm thinking that it will vignette in the 1.66:1 aspect ratio.

 

Any comments or opinions regarding this particular lens are greatly appreciated.

[Scott Bullock]

Anyone? Somebody out there has to have used this lens, right?

 

Again, any and all responses are greatly appreciated.

[Mike Rizos]

Hi

I've considered purchacing this lens a while back, and wasn't able to find much info on it. It seems it wasn't popular at all, and there is very few of them around. Obvouisly it's main attraction is speed, and main drawback it's range. It certainly wasn't built for s16, as it came out before the format became popular.

 

This all hearsay, but here's what I found out:

The few references on the web seem to be divided on coverage. Some claim it will cover throughout, a couple of others, it will not. One equipment dealer I asked said "it will cover s16 from 25-44mm". It may well be that with variations in manufacturing some cover better than others. It may also be, just like the 16-100 Switar, that it starts covering at about 18mm. You should run some tests and share the results, I like to know myself, as I'm sure a few others are.

 

In the 16mm helpbook the lens is decribed as "unlike other Angenieux lenses this one performs very well wide open".

 

The lens sold for about $6700 in 1980, compared to $4100 for the 12-120, and $5300 for the 10-150.

 

The thread is 72mm. The Tiffen series 9 adapter is the same as the 12-120 (72m9).

 

 

.

[adam berk]

Hello! I hope everyone who celebrates Thanksgiving had an enjoyable one.

 

I'm wondering if anyone here has any familiarity with the Angenieux 16 - 44 lens. I purchased one recently at a pretty good price and it is in absolutely beautiful condition. It's a blistering fast T 1.3, which I suppose is its main attraction. However, here is my dilemma:

 

I was told that this lens will "cover" Super 16, but when I mounted it on my camera and had a look I seem to be getting some vignetting at the 16mm focal length, especially when the lens is focused to 5 feet or less. If it does cover Super 16 it must be one of those "just barely" scenarios that lens technicians always talk about, and it doesn't (to my eye) look to cover Super 16 nearly as well as the Angenieux 15 - 150 does. (Note: The lens hasn?t been film tested yet.)

 

Does anyone have some practical advice that they can give me with regards to this lens? It looks (again, to my eye) like it will probably be 'safe' when transferred to 16:9 video, but I'm thinking that it will vignette in the 1.66:1 aspect ratio.

 

Any comments or opinions regarding this particular lens are greatly appreciated.

 

 

I'd love to know your results when you get to film testing.