Old School Angenieux 25-250

Joe Taylor · January 14, 2009

I have an opportunity to buy an older Angenieux 25-250 (10 x 25 T2.) This is not the Angenieux 25-250 HR but a much smaller and older unit. Everything about the lens is tip-top with pristine glass.

Can anybody tell me anything about this lens or how it would behave on a RED ONE?

Charlie Peich · January 14, 2009

I have an opportunity to buy an older Angenieux 25-250 (10 x 25 T2.) This is not the Angenieux 25-250 HR but a much smaller and older unit.

Joe,

The older/smaller 25-250 was a f/3.2 T3.9, not T2.

Stephen Williams · January 14, 2009

Joe,

The older/smaller 25-250 was a f/3.2 T3.9, not T2.

Hi.

I would run away and let the lens RIP, unless you want to work around T8. It should be very very cheap.

Stephen

Joe Taylor · January 15, 2009

It is indeed 3.9. T2 is the model number, as in "Type 2."

And the lens is cheap, as in free. It is a gift.

Saul Rodgar · January 15, 2009

I know someone who has one of those. Not the sharpest or best Angie glass there is. But for RED, it could look really nice, you never know. And for free . . .

Chris Keth · January 17, 2009

Well, being free you might as well take it and see how it does. You might find it nice as a special effect lens or something. They are terribly soft for general use, though.

andres victorero · January 26, 2009

I think that is a good lens for "antique look" maybe you don´t need any diffuser filter ;)

Is the lens of some ext shots of Barry Lyndon

Boris Belay · February 24, 2009

I think that is a good lens for "antique look" maybe you don´t need any diffuser filter ;)
Is the lens of some ext shots of Barry Lyndon

IS the lens for many, many films made throughout the 70's ! Come on, guys, this is a classic lens -- definitely not as sharp as something made recently and costing many, many thousand $, but I don't think that was the question, was it ?

A better approach, in my opinion, is how old is the lens (but for that, you have to have done a bit of research in these old and dusty door-stoppers they called Professional Motion Cinematography Equipment back in the last glacial age of cinema, you know, 30 years ago). Since that lens was such a classic, it was made over a couple of decades, and Angénieux glass and mechanics did improve over the period, so a later one is probably better. Here is a rough idea of dates by serial # that I've come up with so far : serials in the 120's go back to the very early 70's, the 130's are mid-70's, and 140's are late 70's or early 80's. This applies to all Angenieux lenses, no matter the type, format, etc.

So if it's in good shape and within the later range of these serials, it's probably decent and worth the price (!), and if you're after a film-look on your HD set-up, you'll probably be happy that this lens does not resolve as well as Angé's new HD lenses. Give it try, and if you're not happy with it, send me a personal message and I'll get it off of your hands !

Enjoy your shoots and stay away from the scarecrows ;-)

Michael Panfeld · February 24, 2009

Someone did a test on the RED and posted over at reduser. It looked very very good. Nice creamy organic look. Its the second one on this page: http://www.bealecorner.org/red/

Oh and thanks for the info on the serial numbers.

Michael Panfeld · February 25, 2009

I've got a question: If you had to choose between an old school Angie 25-250 (say with a serial # in the 120s) and an old school Cooke 25-250 (T4.0, i.e., the MkI edition), which I believe would put these lenses at a similar vintage, which one would you prefer? This would be for use on a Red or similar camera.

And thanks, yes I know that newer versions are much sharper, keep dust out better, yadda yadda.

Thanks in advance.