Zeiss 10-100mm T3 T* Quality and coverage

[JCorben]

Hello, please I'm searching information about this zeiss zoom: 10-100mm 2.8 T3 T* coatin version.

 

1. I heard that is better than the non coating version but, how much much sharper is than other zooms (Angenieux...)?? The money difference with 10-100 T2 is high... Does the difference in money worth?

 

2. I heard too that the 10-100 NOT T* (the older version) not covers Super16 frame at all,

This is true for the T* coated 10-100 T3 too?? I'm confusing with the T3.0 coverage and the T3.3..

 

Thank you for read me...

More thanks again if you can help me.

 

Jose

[Tim Carroll]

Hello, please I'm searching information about this zeiss zoom: 10-100mm 2.8 T3 T* coatin version.

 

1. I heard that is better than the non coating version but, how much much sharper is than other zooms (Angenieux...)?? The money difference with 10-100 T2 is high... Does the difference in money worth?

 

2. I heard too that the 10-100 NOT T* (the older version) not covers Super16 frame at all,

This is true for the T* coated 10-100 T3 too?? I'm confusing with the T3.0 coverage and the T3.3..

 

Thank you for read me...

More thanks again if you can help me.

 

Jose

 

Jose,

 

All those lenses are decades old, so it is difficult to say how good one is compared to another as much of it comes down to individual lenses and what condition they are in. To get a general idea of the different lenses, you can take a look at the web site below that shows clips shot with the Zeiss 10-100 T* T3.1 lens, the Angenieux 12-120 T2.2 lens, and the Zeiss 10-100 T2 lens.

 

Lens Comparison

 

But again, that test shows the difference between the three lenses I happen to have for that test, not all Zeiss and Angenieux lenses will be the same.

 

As a rule of thumb, the Angenieux 12-120 T2.2 lens is the lowest quality as far as sharpness goes, though I have seen one from time to time that was very sharp. The next step up in quality was the Zeiss 10-100 T3.1 without the T* coating. The next step up in quality was the Zeiss 10-100 T3.1 with the T* coating. And the best quality lens of the ones you listed above is the Zeiss 10-100 T2 lens.

 

None of the lenses listed here will cover Super 16. The Zeiss lenses will vignette below about 32mm on the zoom scale, and I am not sure how badly the Angenieux will vignette, but I know it will not cover the Super 16 frame. There is a conversion for the Zeiss 10-100 T2 lens that converts it to a 12-120 T2.4 lens and the converted lens will cover Super 16. There used to be a conversion for the Zeiss 10-100 T3.1 lenses, but I do not believe it is made anymore. And I do not know of a conversion for the Angenieux lens.

 

Hope that helps,

-Tim

[Brian Drysdale]

It's sharper than the Angenieux zooms of the period. The main advantage the T2 10-100 has over the T3 is the speed difference, I wouldn't say there's much overall difference in the sharpness once stopped down (at least with the lenses I owned). You used to be able to get a rear adapter to convert the T3 to Super 16, just as you can the T2, although you're losing more light on an already slow lens. You might be able to use the unmodified T3 at longer focal lengths on Super 16, I've never tried it

 

The triangular flare is a characteristic of the T3. However, I rather liked that you could focus down to a metre at 10mm without vignetting, whereas on the T2 you were limited to 5ft. Both lenses breathe when focusing.

Edited February 15, 2008 by Brian Drysdale

[JCorben]

Thank you very much for your informations Tim and Brian!

 

I saw your footage examples and your web long time ago, Tim. I think it's a really good info for begginers like me.. congratulations.

 

Regards

 

Jose

[timHealy]

It's sharper than the Angenieux zooms of the period. The main advantage the T2 10-100 has over the T3 is the speed difference, I wouldn't say there's much overall difference in the sharpness once stopped down (at least with the lenses I owned). You used to be able to get a rear adapter to convert the T3 to Super 16, just as you can the T2, although you're losing more light on an already slow lens. You might be able to use the unmodified T3 at longer focal lengths on Super 16, I've never tried it

 

The triangular flare is a characteristic of the T3. However, I rather liked that you could focus down to a metre at 10mm without vignetting, whereas on the T2 you were limited to 5ft. Both lenses breathe when focusing.

 

I own a T2 Mark II and it a great lens with pros and cons. The Mark 2 T2 had a larger front element at 87mm. I think the T3 had an 80mm so vignetting was more of a problem. I am not sure if the first version of the T2 had an 80 or 87mm front element.

 

But as a work horse lens the Mark 2 T2 is a great all around lens to use covering a wide range of zoom. However its weakest points are the breathing, vignetting when focused under 5 feet at 10mm, and it's close focus distances. Now the barrel's shortest hatch mark says 5 feet, but you can focus under 5 feet to maybe 3 or 3.5 and vignetting is only a problem at the wider end of the lens. One feature that does try and make up for the longish close focus issue is that it has a macro feature where one can easily shoot the label or a prescription bottle for example.

 

And just for clarification the lens is really a T1.8 not a T2 so one can get a little more out of it.

 

I would stay away from the T3 versions and try to get a Mark II T1.8 if you can.

 

Someone was doing a Super 16 upgrade of this lens making it a 12 to 120 T 2.2 I recall but I think that was Optex and they went out of business. I don't know if someone else is doing so.

 

Best

 

Tim

[Francis Kuhn]

And just for clarification the lens is really a T1.8 not a T2 so one can get a little more out of it.

 

 

Tim

 

Hi Tim,

 

I'm pretty sure the Zeiss you're talking about actually is a T2. It is a little confusing because the lens is marked on the front with 1.8, which is the f-stop. I believe the difference is that the f-stop number represents light transmission based on the optical formula; the t-stop is the actual light transmitted. The Zeiss 10-100 t3 is marked on the front as an f2.8 lens but only opens to t3.1 on the aperture ring. Another example are the Zeiss Super Speeds which are marked f1.2 but only open to t1.3 on the aperture ring.

 

-Fran

[Brian Drysdale]

I own a T2 Mark II and it a great lens with pros and cons. The Mark 2 T2 had a larger front element at 87mm. I think the T3 had an 80mm so vignetting was more of a problem. I am not sure if the first version of the T2 had an 80 or 87mm front element.

 

Best

 

Tim

 

 

I had a Mark 1 T2, which had a 80mm front, the T3 had a step up ring for my 80 mm 3" x3" L/W clip on matte box and from memory it could be 75mm (or 72mm).

 

I don't recall any noticeable vignetting on my T3, but it was the first thing you noticed on the Mark 1 T2.

 

 

Abakus now directly supply the Super 16 converters.

 

http://www.abakus-scientific.com/Format_Converters.htm

[timHealy]

Hi Tim,

 

I'm pretty sure the Zeiss you're talking about actually is a T2. It is a little confusing because the lens is marked on the front with 1.8, which is the f-stop. I believe the difference is that the f-stop number represents light transmission based on the optical formula; the t-stop is the actual light transmitted. The Zeiss 10-100 t3 is marked on the front as an f2.8 lens but only opens to t3.1 on the aperture ring. Another example are the Zeiss Super Speeds which are marked f1.2 but only open to t1.3 on the aperture ring.

 

-Fran

 

Hey Fran,

 

It seems as though the hash mark always goes slightly past the 2 when I try and open up all the way so I always assumed that point was 1.8. It doesn't go all the way past the number 2, but goes just past the center of the printed 2. That is why I thought I had 1.8 available.

 

Best

 

Tim

[timHealy]

I had a Mark 1 T2, which had a 80mm front, the T3 had a step up ring for my 80 mm 3" x3" L/W clip on matte box and from memory it could be 75mm (or 72mm).

 

I don't recall any noticeable vignetting on my T3, but it was the first thing you noticed on the Mark 1 T2.

 

 

Abakus now directly supply the Super 16 converters.

 

http://www.abakus-scientific.com/Format_Converters.htm

 

Thanks Brian. Good to know.

 

Best

 

Tim

[Francis Kuhn]

Hey Fran,

 

It seems as though the hash mark always goes slightly past the 2 when I try and open up all the way so I always assumed that point was 1.8. It doesn't go all the way past the number 2, but goes just past the center of the printed 2. That is why I thought I had 1.8 available.

 

Best

 

Tim

 

Good point, Tim. Most of the cine lenses I have do the same thing. My Super Speeds will open past the 1.3 mark, but I don't know if they actually gather any more light beyond the maximum marked aperture. I know most lenses will also focus past the infinity mark. I've been told this is to allow for slight mechanical variances in the hardware that might otherwise prevent infinity focus.

 

-Fran

[Luke Fowler]

does anyone know if these lenses work on ARRI ST? with bayonet fitting? 
It says ONLY FOR ARRI SR on the back of the lens...

thanks!

[Brian Drysdale]

There is a plunger type device for the internal light meter on the SR, which would probably need to be deactivated at the back of the lens. I used my Zeiss zooms with an Arri bayonet adapter onto an Aaton and a CP16, but unless there's a clearance issue with the Arri ST mirror, it should fit with a mod.

Edited December 13, 2023 by Brian Drysdale

[Kevo Muiro]

I've used the ZEISS 10-100 T*3 on my ARRI SB for over 20 years now. It just required removing the dark gray "For SR2 Only" spacer on the back. This is a great lens for the ARRI SB. Combined with an Angenieux 5.9mm T*2, it's the ultimate b-roll, action, sports, automotive lens. 

[Dom Jaeger]

I just came across this stunning little film by Josh Headley shot on an Arri 16S with a Zeiss 10-100 and and Angenieux 5.7. 

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I recall this zoom as being fairly sharp (compared to the 12-120mm Ang. that we all used at CalArts) but it breathes quite a bit and it trombones as you rack focus so it's hard to use with a mattebox on rods, you have to mount the lens shade / filter holder directly on the lens or else give yourself a lot of breathing room with the mattebox, maybe create some bellows or black cloth to cover the gap.

[Brian Drysdale]

The other operational matter is that the zoom works in the opposite direction to other lenses. You quickly get used to it, but something to be aware of when switching zooms.

Breathing was an issue with 16mm zooms of the period, Cooke promoted the lack of breathing of the Varokinetal in it's advertising.

Edited September 7 by Brian Drysdale